66% of U.S. senators just shat on the First Amendment

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Better burn 'em while you still can...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/washington/27cnd-flag.html?hp&ex=1151467200&en=3caeb149d9e60823&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:07 (nineteen years ago)

um, the amendment failed

j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

um, by one vote (66 to 34).

Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:13 (nineteen years ago)

close only counts in horseshoes

j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:15 (nineteen years ago)

i wonder what greatest hit the gop will turn to next to go 'no no, don't get outraged over immigration, get outraged over this plz' next.

j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:16 (nineteen years ago)

Welfare Reform, Slight Return

milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:18 (nineteen years ago)

"Welfare mothers rolling on dubs."

milo z (mlp), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, the demagogery these last few weeks has been painfully transparent.

100% CHAMPS with a Yes! Attitude. (Austin, Still), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

Orrin Hatch:

"I think this is getting to where they are not going to be able to escape the wrath of the voters."

Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:23 (nineteen years ago)

this fucking country

gear (gear), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:27 (nineteen years ago)

alot of the anti-immigration talk has either taken the guise of or alternately bearded welfare reform talk, there was a meme awhile back of this rant from a 'firefighter' (of course) ranting about going into these illegal immigrants homes with bigscreen tvs where they'd been living on welfare for ten years which begged all sorts of questions most esp 'when were these 10 years exactly? cuz obv not post-96 right?'. none of these seem to have really gained much traction yet, probably due to grassroots right not being fooled into taking their eye off the ball as much as any efforts from the dems or the (roffle) grassroots left.

yeah that hatch quote cracked me up, the anti-judiciary stuff in it was particularly disgusting though.

j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:33 (nineteen years ago)

close only counts in horseshoes
otm

these votes are so deliberate that one-away-from-passing means little, especially with an issue that is so totally and only a public relations issue, like this.

lf (lfam), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:41 (nineteen years ago)

but yeah, that 'jurist' is basically a political epithet at this point is scary. i think that it will ease up a bit after the next general election because i think that it is going to be a landslide, one way or the other, and then our elected representatives won't need to scapegoat 'unelected jurists' in a desperate attempt to build credibility.

lf (lfam), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

i wonder what greatest hit the gop will turn to next to go 'no no, don't get outraged over immigration, get outraged over this plz' next.

I'm goin' with the dark horse: absentee fathers' rights

Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:20 (nineteen years ago)

There's something about the legislative branch attacking the judicial that seems like a vote of no confidence in themselves: "Nobody elected these people! They were just, umm, appointed by an executive branch quite often controlled by our party, and confirmed by the very legislature in which we serve! Where do we get off!"

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:20 (nineteen years ago)

this fucking country x1000

hilarious: the smear ads running right now here in Montana -- "Senator (I FORGOT HIS NAME) thinks that flag-burning is a right. CAN YOU FUCKING BELIEVE THAT????"

gbx (skowly), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:31 (nineteen years ago)

How did Hillary vote?

milo z (mlp), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:35 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00189

She voted agin', along with

NAYs ---34
Akaka (D-HI)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Wyden (D-OR)

kingfish du lac (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:40 (nineteen years ago)

She voted "no."

It's true that one away from passing doesn't mean it was necessarily close.

dar1a g (daria g), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:45 (nineteen years ago)

good thing three republicans have balls

gear (gear), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:49 (nineteen years ago)

There's something about the legislative branch attacking the judicial that seems like a vote of no confidence in themselves: "Nobody elected these people! They were just, umm, appointed by an executive branch quite often controlled by our party, and confirmed by the very legislature in which we serve! Where do we get off!"

yes, they seem to be forgetting that "unelected" really means "confirmed by us."

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:31 (nineteen years ago)

i wonder what greatest hit the gop will turn to next to go 'no no, don't get outraged over immigration, get outraged over this plz' next.

vote for us, or else!

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

"or else"

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

Senator Hatch said the amendment would "restore the constitution to what it was before unelected jurists changed it five to four." He went on to say, "Five lawyers decided 48 states were wrong."

Um ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orrin_Hatch#Education

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:36 (nineteen years ago)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/YoungHatch.jpg

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:38 (nineteen years ago)

orrin kinda looks like our jon williams!

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:38 (nineteen years ago)

Elected lawyers aren't the problem though -- it's those damned UNelected lawyers that the elected ones appoint.

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 01:41 (nineteen years ago)

Burning a flag should be a public expression of patriotism in response to this bullshit.

Several men with bullhorns burning multiple flags all day long as they repeatedly state:

"In our country, we are proud to be free! We so free that we can proudly and publicly demonstrate what it means to be a free American citizen by burning the very symbol of our freedom, if we so choose. By burning the flag, we proudly display our freedom. We do not burn the flag because we hate it, but because we love what it represents. Because our great country is beyond idol worship and state-imposed tyranny, we are free to do this. In other countries they don't have this freedom. In other countries, people live in fear and subservience to their flag BECAUSE OF WHAT THEIR FLAG REPRESENTS! Our flag does not represent fear and subservience. Our flag does not represent slavery and silence! Our flag represents FREEDOM AND LIBERTY! Free speech is the first and last right of all Americans! Let us now proudly exercise that right!"

> lights flag <
> cheers

John E. Smoke (Uri Frendimein), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:15 (nineteen years ago)

It's bullshit, of course, but it would be funny to turn it into a big issue that republicans would feel the need to get behind. How can they claim it is hate speech if the dude says he's burning the flag because he loves it?

John E. Smoke (Uri Frendimein), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:19 (nineteen years ago)

That's a really good idea. I've burned an American flag before, and I'm not even American! Everyone should burn the flag.

Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:24 (nineteen years ago)

Turn it into a memorable slogan:
"If you love America, burn your flag!"
"The flag burns for your freedom!"

Etc.

If you drill the idea into people's heads enough, it will catch on and even morons will dig it. Imagine lighting up the flag on July 4th! Makes perfect sense!

John E. Smoke (Uri Frendimein), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:28 (nineteen years ago)

i burned dozens of flags in the boy scouts

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:28 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.futurama-madhouse.com.ar/grabs/4acv05/405-37.jpg

Trayce (trayce), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:29 (nineteen years ago)

Man, where do you people get a futurama scene of everything so quickly? Is there a scene for every occasion or something?

John E. Smoke (Uri Frendimein), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:32 (nineteen years ago)

It's not "you people," it's just Trayce! I think she finds the desired DVD & uploads the stillframes herself...while at work. Sure, why not.

Abbott (Abbott), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:23 (nineteen years ago)

=) I get them off the net actually, I just know where to look.

Call it a running joke of mine, I know I overdo it. But in this case it was pretty specific actually though: that pic is an episode where Zoidberg eats the flag on Freedom Day, and everyone wants his guts for garters, even though the point Zoidberg was making was that he was free to eat the flag on Earth. Same idea as "burn the flag because you're free to do so".

Trayce (trayce), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:25 (nineteen years ago)

i burned dozens of flags in the boy scouts

Good point...I hope this ammendment had bylaws detailing when/how to respectfully burn the flag, as well as an initiative for all to learn and practice that triangle fold, and how to correctly fellate the stars & stripes ("fer chisesakes, at least don't use your teeth").

Abbott (Abbott), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:27 (nineteen years ago)

Aw, Trayce, I love knowing I can count on SOMEONE to post a photo of Frye with a turkey on his head. Or sailors on the moon. or a slurm factory. These things add a needed gravity to the discourse.

Abbott (Abbott), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:28 (nineteen years ago)

Heh.

Trayce (trayce), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:29 (nineteen years ago)

"good thing three republicans have balls"

considering that 14 democrats were in favour. i can sympathise (grudgingly) with those in tight seats, like SD, LA or AR, but what's with dayton from minnesota(who's not running again) or dianne feinstein from CA?

derrick (derrick), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:43 (nineteen years ago)

lfam otm

Werner Herzog Netflix Quine (ex machina), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 03:54 (nineteen years ago)

meanwhile more worrying (to me at least) shitting on the first amendment - do them crosswords while you can!

j blount (papa la bas), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 05:58 (nineteen years ago)

mccain voted for this shit? let's not hear another word about his "integrity" for a while, mmkay?

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 06:23 (nineteen years ago)

Dayton might as well be a Republican, in Minnesota terms, because he's from a rich family and tried for ages to get on the Senate. Eventually MN caved to his spend. But yeah Feinstein WTF.

suzy (suzy), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 06:33 (nineteen years ago)

if we're gonna make it illegal to burn the us flag, can we make it mandatory to burn the confederate flag?

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 07:57 (nineteen years ago)

All this flag-burning will play havoc with global warming. HAVE YOU PEOPLE NO CARE??

Earwig oh! (Mark C), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 08:10 (nineteen years ago)

Don't you realize global warming is mostly due to all these liberals burning flags all the time?

Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 14:19 (nineteen years ago)

i thought you lot didn't believe in global warming! flip-floppers!

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

Don't these weakass senators know that there are countries where burning the national flag actually dissolves the government and makes the populace descend into chaos? Burning the American flag is a show of strength because you can look around and see that everything's still working.

Plus you have to symbolically torch the thing every once in a while so that it can get some new life like a phoenix. I'll want to symbolically burn one and raise a fresh flag after this administration is over.

business up front, party entrance at side door (mike h.), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 14:50 (nineteen years ago)

The best thing about the Freedom Day episode of Futurama was when Bender (wearing a "cow catcher") crushes some poor girl's ankle:

GIRL: You broke my ankle!
BENDER: Freedom.

you can email me if you wish to challenge the truth (nickalicious), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

freedom from x

lf (lfam), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

i think that we need an amendment banning wiping yer ass with the constitution. then again, just about all of the congress (as well as the executive and judicial branches) would be in jail if such a thing passed.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 19:03 (nineteen years ago)

feinstein is disgusting. I vote against her in every primary in the hope that the rest of the state's democrats will wake up. sadly she's going to be there until she dies.

kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 19:11 (nineteen years ago)

It's not like Mitch McConnell to have not signed on this, wtf Mitch?

you can email me if you wish to challenge the truth (nickalicious), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)

This story caught my eye. I was really suprised that Mitch McConnell voted against this bill. The line from the Ex-Miss America kind of cracked me up, but she seems like a complete and total fake.


McConnell takes heat on flag issue
SENATOR KEY VOTE ON BURNING AMENDMENT
By Janet Patton
HERALD-LEADER WASHINGTON BUREAU
POLL: Do you support a Constitutional amendmnet banning flag burning
WASHINGTON - Proponents of a constitutional ban on flag burning threw two baseball heroes, one Miss America, dozens of veterans and the Senate leadership at Sen. Mitch McConnell and fence-sitters yesterday in what is expected to be a very close vote later this month.

At a Flag Day press conference outside Senate offices, bill sponsor Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said his Senate Joint Resolution 12 stands a good chance of being the first flag-burning ban to pass the Senate. The legislation passed the House easily a year ago. Thirty-eight states would have to ratify the amendment before it became law.

"We have the votes, if some of these people do not pull back," Hatch said.

Counting his 59 co-sponsors, Hatch will need seven votes to get the two-thirds majority necessary for a constitutional amendment. Seven of the remaining senators have, at times, voted for versions of the amendment, but there is no guarantee they will do so when Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist calls for a vote in the last week of June.

McConnell, the Senate majority whip, could be sitting on a crucial "yes" vote, but he has cited free-speech concerns in explaining why he does not support a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning.

"Sen. McConnell remains committed to protecting the constitutional freedoms enshrined in the First Amendment," said Robert Steurer, a spokesman for McConnell, who did not attend yesterday's press conference, in a statement.

Miss America 2000 Heather French Henry of Kentucky, who has made veterans affairs her platform, implored McConnell at the press conference yesterday "to help protect our flag."

She was accompanied by her husband, Dr. Steve Henry, Kentucky's lieutenant governor under Paul Patton. Steve Henry may run for governor as a Democrat in 2007.

He said privately that McConnell "believes in protecting the flag," but that he wants to do so with statutes, which, Henry said, could be overturned. "We want to lean on Senator McConnell; he could be a deciding vote on whether or not this passes," Henry said.

When it comes down to the vote, Henry said, "McConnell could be the 67 or the 34."

To demonstrate the kind of desecration the bill would address, baseball Hall of Famer Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., introduced at the press conference Rick Monday, who as a Chicago Cubs outfielder in 1976 snatched a flag from two protesters who were about to burn it in the Dodger Stadium outfield.

Yesterday, Monday displayed that faded but unmarred flag.

"Rick snatched the flag right from under their noses to thunderous applause. The crowd burst into God Bless America. It was arguably one of the greatest moments in the game," Bunning said.

Later in the morning, a group of veterans opposed to the amendment protested, according to a release from the Veterans Defending the Bill of Rights. They were joined by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., according to the release.

"Amending the Constitution to limit Americans' freedom of speech is a misguided and dangerous use of the time and resources of Congress," Keith Kreul, past national commander of the American Legion, said in the release. "Members of the Senate should be fighting for real veterans' issues, not symbolic attacks on the Constitution."

Earl Nash (earlnash), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 22:36 (nineteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.