I just don't say them when I say the pledge.
Posted by PwapVt at June 29, 2006 04:08 AMImpeach the chimp!
Posted by at June 29, 2006 05:25 AMTo say the Republicans (and Bushco) are out of touch is kinda' like saying the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
Posted by Christopher at June 29, 2006 05:40 AMU.S., allies set deadline for Iran nuke talks
Russian official says G-8 nations expect a response by July 5
BREAKING NEWS
MSNBC News Services
Updated: 18 minutes ago
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ever have a salesman tell you he's got a deal for you and you have until the end of the day to make a decision? What was your reaction? Maybe keep the goddamned thing, I don't deal under that kind of bullshit pressure tactic. It's human nature. Think the Iranians are any different?
Why don't the Repugs vote on the serious issues affecting the American people like placing St Ronnie's head on Mt. Rushmore. Isn't it time??
Posted by red_neck_repub at June 29, 2006 06:10 AMI have problems with saying the whole pledge, just not the 'Under God' part.
I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of AmericaThe flag? A pile of cloth? Now commonly dyed, sewn, and packaged in China? Over my cold, dead ass.
and to the Republic for which it stands,No problems here.
one Nation under God,Pfft. yeah right.
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.That I'll sign to.
I bleed red, white and blue. It's just in different shades.
Posted by idiosynchronic at June 29, 2006 06:13 AMll t bvs yr llgnc ls lswhr.
[Editor: ignore=off]When does the Congress recess??? The sooner these clowns get out of Washington and onto the campaign trail so that they can quit this nonsensical kabuki dance of setting up votes for their re-election campaigns... the better...
Posted by leftymn at June 29, 2006 06:31 AMEroding democracy by attacking the press
Posted by Joseph at June 29, 2006 06:37 AMBendito - does your attention span allow you to actually compose more than one sentence with the help of a spam generator?
Posted by idiosynchronic at June 29, 2006 06:48 AMidio: As some of you know I lean conservative on most issues but I happen to agree with liberals here about the "under god" part of the pledge. though I think you got it wrong when disagreeing with the verse "I pledge to the flag". What else would you use in that verse? Who are you pledging to? I hope you don't say the government. The USA flag is the symbol of the USA, so you're pledge is to the country as a whole.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 06:51 AMMaybe we should be allowed to say "under Buddah, yaweh, mohammed, hermes, etc"
Who's god?
I agree with idio. Actually the whole idea of saying a pledge kind of gives me the creeps. It's one thing to be elected to office and pledge to uphold the constitution, but to have little kids pledging allegience is just weird and creepy.
About the court stripping--I pretty much think court-stripping is always a bad idea.
Posted by CG at June 29, 2006 06:57 AMhow about
"I pledge allegiance to the republic for which the flag stands, one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all"
i know it doesn't have the idolatry benito is so fond of, but there you are.
Posted by at June 29, 2006 07:03 AMthat was me
Posted by benjoya at June 29, 2006 07:04 AMI might be biased because I've said it so many times as a child but it just doesn't sound right. But where you're going isn't bad though I think you need "United States of America" somewhere in there.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 07:09 AMHow about pledging allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America?
I don't really have any problem with school kids saying the pledge. It fosters a civic attachment to the nation. Obviously pledging allegiance 'to the flag' is intended metaphorically. A concept seemingly lost on todays inhabitants of conservative wingnutia. The intent being to pledge allegiance to the country.
As for under God one need simply observe that it was 'inserted' into the original pledge during the height of the red scare as a reaction to the godless commies. An undeniable bit of political propagandizing.
Posted by snark at June 29, 2006 07:17 AMAll to obvious your allegiance lies elsewhere.
And yours is up your ass.
Posted by Christopher at June 29, 2006 07:21 AMYou got yourself a deal, Snark. Call your congressman and tell him we're ready to draw something up.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 07:27 AMYou got yourself a deal, Snark.
Again, I don't really have a problem with 'to the flag'. I understand that it's a metaphor and I see no need to change it. I also don't see a need to 'protect the flag'. It's a symbol. I think actual veneration of a physical flag is stupid and antithetical to everything American, not to mention Christian. Can you say idolatry?
I think 'under God' should be removed from the pledge. There's no reason for it to be there.
Posted by snark at June 29, 2006 07:56 AMI've never burned a flag. I'll never burn a flag, unless I'm using said flag in desperation to put out a life-threatening conflagration. I cannot envision that scenario occurring.
I will, however, burn a motherfucking flag on the Capitol steps if these cocksucking free-speech haters keep jacking this shit.
Posted by God Of War at June 29, 2006 08:05 AMYou, me, and snark sound like we're having a barbeque if this stupid Amendment makes it past the Senate.
I think we should invite all the friends we can muster.
Posted by idiosynchronic at June 29, 2006 08:19 AMAll to obvious your allegiance lies elsewhere.
I always abstain from the pledge. Words, said in unison with other robots, don't do much for me. The ideals, not the symbols, of the Constitution and the Bill of rights have meaning. Your allegiance is to a pack of criminals who should be incarcerated. Your type is easy to find. It's the same search you do for roaches in a kitchen. Turn off the lights so no one can see you and you come out.
Posted by phidipides at June 29, 2006 08:20 AMFlag Burning: I agree that we shouldn't ban it and its a form of speech but the people that burn flags in public should at least get some type of disturbing the peace (minor misdemeanor)charge. Not for burning the flag but for burning anything on the streets. I doubt anyone can just set fire to stuff in the street UNLESS it's a flag. Which makes no sense whatsoever to me.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 08:26 AMI agree, snark. I think back in the olden days, allegience to a flag was kind of a military term, since in battle, the only way to find your side was by the flags above the fray. Ships would also sail under a certain "flag" in certain waters, to prevent being shot at. Oaths of allegience to warlords or kings were done publicly so everyone knew where everyone else stood.
The pledge is just an archaic ritual hearkening back to those times. It comforts some people to say it, with or without gods, but nowadays it means nothing really, since our citizenship is determined the day we're born. The emphasis on it all now is purely political from the rightwing nutjobs to pump up nationalistic fervor.
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 08:28 AMI doubt anyone can just set fire to stuff in the street UNLESS it's a flag. Which makes no sense whatsoever to me.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 08:26 AM
*****
Arson and public nuisance laws apply to burning ANYTHING, you dumb fuck.
Posted by God Of War at June 29, 2006 09:02 AMI don't really have any problem with school kids saying the pledge. It fosters a civic attachment to the nation.
On the one hand, it's good for school kids to say it because they may not learn it otherwise. On the other hand, for me it didn't foster civic attachment, but it did make me feel like it was something that only children do, and now when I see adults do it (like at the start of each day in Congress) it kind of makes me laugh that grownups are actually saying this. That's how deeply it was ingrained in me that this was something for kids to do. And at that time, it was meaningless to me.
As for under God, I don't like it, but I think it only hurts us (liberals) to make a fuss over it.
Posted by CG at June 29, 2006 09:05 AMWow God of War. Did you know your name makes me shiver? I'm sure you did because you're probably a pimply faced kid taking a timeout from your PS2 and you're trying to make up for it with your neatass name. Anyway, what I said and you should have gotten it from the comment, is that people that burn flags don't get into ANY trouble. It's like they don't have to even live by the law.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 09:09 AMWell, looks like the troll found a playmate - I call this a dead thread!
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 09:16 AMwhat I said...is that people that burn flags don't get into ANY trouble
Are you familiar with a case where someone burned a flag in a place with a public nuisance ordinances that would cover such a thing and they were not subject to the law?.
Maybe you could cite such an instance?
Posted by snark at June 29, 2006 09:41 AMAnyway, what I said and you should have gotten it from the comment, is that people that burn flags don't get into ANY trouble. It's like they don't have to even live by the law.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 09:09 AM
*****
Go burn a flag, or anything else, on government property and report back to us what happens, you shiteating sped.
Posted by God Of War at June 29, 2006 09:48 AMDoes Ebay have any of those Bush-autographed American flags that he signs and gives out at his loyalty rallies? I have no desire to burn a flag but for one of those I might make an exception.
Posted by Cordury Joe at June 29, 2006 09:57 AMOh I apologize Snark, I'm not versed in what they actually do with flag burners but my point is that there shouldn't be a ban. Just that the person should get some type of midemeanor charge for dist the peace. If they do it on private property there should be no crime. What exactly are you for? No punishment at all?
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 10:37 AMI thought the flag burning distraction was over with. Why is anyone but the troll discussing it anymore? If I were ever to care about burning the flag, it would be the one the troll uses to wrap himself in. Sigh, then it would surely be illegal. But finally the subject would be interesting.
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 10:47 AMOh I apologize Snark, I'm not versed in what they actually do with flag burners...
So why did you claim that nothing happens to them?
What you wrote;
what I said...is that people that burn flags don't get into ANY trouble
Just more crap out of your ass.
What exactly are you for? No punishment at all?
Did I indicate that somewhere in my response? Can't you just stop making shit up?
Posted by snark at June 29, 2006 11:26 AMi grew up during ww2 before under god was added / the original way to say the pledge was to raise your right arm with hand outstretched to the flag as you recite "I pledge allegiance to the flag" (point to the flag) then place hand over your heart / but gosh darn those dang nazis used that arm salute to hitler so we had to drop it and then those dang godless commies lurked around so we had to make sure they knew we were god-fearing folks
after the 9th court decided Under God was unconstitutional all the Congresmen ran outside and practically shouted Under God when they recited the pledge
instead of the pledge of allegiance school children should recite the Bill of Rights
I'm with Katherine and the Bill of Rights.
snark, did you see the troll in the next thread tell p-dippy to "stop the sweeping generalizations" and in the next sentence say p-dippy was the reason the Dems will never win an election again? The poor troll is unable to reason at all. I believe he's on crack, or meth, you know those righties and their penchant for drugs.
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 11:39 AMcoyote: I didn't even bring up the subject. Between you and me coyote, i really enjoy face to face debating much more than this avenue. There always seems to be a little more respect when I'm standing right in front of someone.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 11:40 AMSnark: I assumed since the Republicans were trying to get a ban that people weren't getting into trouble at all now. But you're right, most of them do. And my question was really a question. I was being sincere trying to understand your opinion is all.
Coyote: what my point with Phid is that everytime someone has a differing view i'm a Neo-con. Which I was called. I am moderate on alot of issues so my personal opinion is that if you guys can't even try to understand me, not a extreme conservative by any means then there seems to be no hope.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 11:46 AMI assumed since the Republicans were trying to get a ban that people weren't getting into trouble at all now.
You need to pay better attention. This ha nothing to do with people getting away with breaking laws. The republicans want to ban flag burning because that's what they think they need to do to be 'good American patriots'. Conveying some sanctified status upon a piece of cloth makes them feel like they're fulfilling their civic duty. Forget about all the other TRULY important stuff they could be doing to help their fellow citizens. It's all about the appearance of being a patriotic American. Just window dressing.
If people burn flags, or anything else for that matter, in a public place where such actions are a violation of a lawful ordinance they should be subject to the penalties associated with such a violation. Why is that so hard to understand?
Posted by snark at June 29, 2006 12:27 PMSnark I disagree with the Rep trying to get a ban. I agree with the second part of your argument so i don't know why you said "Why is that so hard to understand?" I know this may be shocking to you but most Conservatives won't disagree with you on EVERYTHING.
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 12:50 PMif you guys can't even try to understand me,
See, here is the ultimate problem. You assume we want to understand you. We don't. We already know what you are, and how you think. You assume we are interested in your opinion. We're not. We know what your opinion is. Basically, the only reason why you're not banned today is because you've pretended to be civil. You're not. You're just another liberal hating, contrary, uninformed, america hating, POS, neocon ball licker. We're only conversing with you at all because we just love to laugh at your arrogant stupidity. Do you understand me? Because I HAVE to MAKE you UNDERSTAND MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME!!! Ha! That was my imitation of you, stamping your feet like the WATB that you are.
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 12:56 PMSounds like you're the idiot. This is a quote from Steve Soto:
"Despite how it looks at times, I don't expect or want folks to agree with me, and we have folks from the other side of the aisle that comment on the site. TLC isn't supposed to be an echo chamber (like some of the large center-left sites), nor do I want it to be."
Hopefully one day sane liberals will realize that people like you drag them down. Hey man, my shit doesn't smell so good but your shit fucking stinks!
Posted by Reasonable at June 29, 2006 01:05 PMIn 1892 Francis Bellamy, Baptist minister and Christian Socialist wrote the pledge for the public schools quadricennial celebration of Columbus Day. He was forced out of the church for preaching for middle class utopia, and is currently rolling over in his grave.
The first time I heard or used profanity was when the Knights of Columbus forced God into the pledge, and my class was told they would have to learn it over again.
Leaving God out makes the pledge all-inclusive and more powerful. Francis had it right, and the K.O.C. suckers had it wrong.
Posted by TIKI AL at June 29, 2006 01:25 PMYou're just pissed because you were exposed for the LOSER that you are. Steve's quote applies to me as well.
Get used to it, honey. You're a loser.
Posted by iamcoyote at June 29, 2006 01:28 PMPledge of Allegance, flag burning? What's next, Mom and apple pie? This is just so much bullshit.
Posted by Judith at June 29, 2006 04:53 PM