Apr 21 2008
Why The Flag Pin Really Does Matter
While Barack Obama’s supporters are gnashing teeth trying to figure out how many conspirators there were at the ABC debate, one thing stands out as the biggest problem they had and the biggest issue they’re losing on; the flag pin. Now, before you turn away and go back to trolling myspace for SWF’s, hear me out.
The flag pin is significant, and tremendously so, but not in the way everyone is making it out to be. We have to follow along here, for a bit, just so the flag pin can be put in its proper context.
1. Barack Obama doesn’t like putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem.
When the photo above reached the public last year, many people thought it was a joke or a bit of Photoshop trickery. How could a Presidential candidate not put his hand over his heart during the anthem? People were shocked and dismissed the photo until it was proven that the photo was indeed true. To the criticism he received, Obama’s campaign responded…
“Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn’t. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous.”
Indeed, sometimes he does, and sometimes he doesn’t. Inside Edition was provided a few examples of him indeed placing his hand over his heart and singing, so he can’t fein ignorance on it. Instead, he follows the custom and gives the flag and the anthem their due respect when he feels like it. I don’t know about you, but when I’m at a sporting event and the anthem is played, my hat comes off, I stand, and my hand goes over my heart. Not “sometimes” or “when I feel like it” or “if I’m in the mood.” Every single time, without a shadow of a doubt and without fail.
And I’m not running for President.
2. Barack Obama coddles his racist anti-American reverend.
For years, Barack Obama attended a church where Reverend Jeremiah Wright professed his anti-American bigotry. Obama, at first, claimed he had never heard such things, despite having been at that same church every single Sunday for over twenty years. Then he claimed that he had heard those things, but he could never leave his church. Then, he claimed that the remarks were taken out of context. Then he claimed one could no more easily walk away from their church than they could walk away from their skin color. Finally, he disowned Wright from his campaign, despite a speech many people called historic in which he justified nearly every word of Wright’s sermons (the ones he didn’t, as stated earlier, even hear). Charles Krauthammer disassembled him for it:
Obama condemns such statements as wrong and divisive, then frames the next question: “There will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?”But that is not the question. The question is, why didn’t he leave that church? Why didn’t he leave —- why doesn’t he leave even today —- a pastor who thundered not once but three times from the pulpit (on a DVD the church proudly sells), “God damn America”? Obama’s 5,000-word speech, fawned over as a great meditation on race, is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction.
His defense rests on two propositions: (a) moral equivalence and (b) white guilt.
(a) Moral equivalence. Sure, says Obama, there’s Wright, but at the other “end of the spectrum” there’s Geraldine Ferraro, opponents of affirmative action and Obama’s own white grandmother, “who once confessed her fear of black men … and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.” But did she shout them in a crowded theater to incite, enrage and poison others?
(b) White guilt. Obama’s purpose in the speech was to put Wright’s outrages in context. By context, Obama means history. And by history, he means the history of white racism. Obama says, “We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country,” and then does precisely that. And what lies at the end of his recital of the long train of white racial assaults from slavery to employment discrimination? Jeremiah Wright, of course.
This contextual analysis of Wright’s venom, this extenuation of black hate speech as a product of white racism, is not new. It’s the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance. That’s why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination.
After Barack Obama gave this historic “it isn’t really that important” justification speech, his lackeys in the media went on full spin control. Instead of condemning the overt racism of Wright, we heard that his explanation of white evil in the world were taken out of context (despite all the DVD recordings of Wright’s speech being removed from the church’s website. Why remove all of them if it was merely a context issue?) and then the spin went into overdrive with Bill Maher proving there isn’t a liberal glass of Kool Aid he can’t fit into his mouth (particularly since he never shuts it):
When Barack Obama didn’t hear Reverend Wright say those awful things about America, he still should have rushed the stage, smite Reverend Wright with the cross, and left the church. If there’s anything the right wing can agree on, it’s that. And that gays are going hell, right after they suck them off in the airport bathroom.
But it raises an obvious question, one that I haven’t heard asked, which is strange because it’s so obvious: If you leave a church when the head of the church says bad things about America, what do you do when your church hierarchy is caught up in a systematic and decades-long sex abuse scandal? And did I mention the people being sexually abused were children? Hundreds of them?
How about when the head of that church, or Pope, associated with and promoted members of the clergy who not only facilitated the sexual abuse and rape of hundreds and hundreds of children, but engaged in a decades-long cover-up of those crimes?
Reverend Wright associated with Farrakhan. The Pope works with Cardinal Law. Which is worse? Isn’t it the man who shuffled “priests” like Shanley and Geoghan and many others from parish to parish with the full knowledge of their crimes, and then claimed he had no idea?
No, and here’s why.
Barack Obama gave over twenty thousand dollars to the church that Reverend Wright spewed his hatred from last year; a church that incidentally gave Louis Farrakhan an award, and in the speech said that his views on racism are “helpful and honest.”
Barack Obama called Reverend Wright his spiritual mentor on numerous occasions. He invited him into his home and broke bread with him. The man was more than a reverend, but a friend of the family.
Barack Obama justified, in a tortured and painful way, the words of Wright, as taken out of context, misunderstood, and mudslinging.
Barack Obama said nothing about Wright until he couldn’t avoid the issue and his allies in the media stopped ignoring the issue.
So, what does that have to do with Catholics?
Despite Obama’s complacency with the racism he, his wife, and his two children sat in front of for all these years, he didn’t speak out. When the church scandal broke out, despite the ineptitude of the church in doing the right thing, many Catholics pushed the church to do the right thing. While Obama’s awakening was forced by political pressure from outside and the potential death of his campaign, Catholics were outraged and active once the scandal came out. Did they defend their church? Of course, as one would be expected to do, but the calls for priests to resign came from inside the church and from outraged parishioners who, to this day are still enraged, offended, and embarrassed by the incident. Wright’s parishioners defend him, his church, and despite the overwhelming and repetitive racism displayed by he and his church, his remarks including remarks that said the white man created HIV to destroy the black man. Every interview with parishioners from his church that I’ve seen not only defended his remarks, but went as far as to say they were true and white people just don’t understand.
Obama calls Wright his spiritual advisor, checks with him before making a major decision, and quoted him numerous times in his last book. The average Catholic I know barely makes mass once a week, and most have never had a priest in their home at all (myself included). I won’t even get into how many of them use birth control, don’t care about gays and gay marriage, and don’t care about abortion as much as the church. If, however, the Catholic church started claiming non Catholics were the cause of evil in the world and poisoned people with diseases, I reckon people might take a different stance on the church.
Finally, Obama has called Wright a friend on numerous occasions. As much as I respect my priests for their spiritual guidance, I’ve never called one a friend, never written a book based on their teachings, and never donated $20,000 to them.
So no, Bill. Catholics don’t need to leave the church just so there’s parody between Barack Obama and the racist Anti-American Reverend he loves so much. I found it interesting that Maher picked Catholics, again, for the target of his vitriol, and yet didn’t really examine the issue of Obama’s Reverend at all, especially considering on the liberal scale of severity, nothing is higher than racism (although you could make a case for homophobia).
3. Barack Obama’s association with Bill Ayers.
Who is Bill Ayers?
According to his memoir, Ayers became radicalized at the University of Michigan where he became involved in the New Left and the SDS. Ayers joined the Weatherman group in 1969, but went underground with several associates after the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion in 1970, in which three members (Ted Gold, Terry Robbins, and Diana Oughton, who was Ayers’s girlfriend at the time) were killed while constructing a bomb. While underground, he and fellow member Bernardine Dohrn married and had two children, Zayd and Malik. They were purged from the group in the mid-1970s, and turned themselves in to the authorities in 1981. All charges against him were dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct during the long search for the fugitives. They later became legal guardians of Chesa Boudin, the son of former Weathermen David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin, after his parents were arrested for their part in the Brinks Robbery of 1981.
In 2001, Ayers published Fugitive Days: A Memoir. Ayers’s interview with the New York Times about his book was published, by historical coincidence, on September 11, 2001, and opens with his statement, “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” Ayers later explained that by “no regrets” he meant that he didn’t regret his efforts to oppose the Vietnam War, and that “we didn’t do enough” meant that efforts to stop the war were obviously inadequate as it dragged on for a decade; the two statements were not intended to elide into a wish they had set more bombs. The interview also includes his reaction (in his book) to Emile De Antonio’s 1976 documentary film about the Weathermen: “He was ‘embarrassed by the arrogance, the solipsism, the absolute certainty that we and we alone knew the way. The rigidity and the narcissism.” New Politics reviewer Jesse Lemisch has contrasted Ayers’s recollections with those of other Weathermen and has alleged serious factual errors. Ayers, in the foreward to his book, states it was written as his personal memories and impressions over time, not a scholarly research project. His history occasionally surfaces, as when he was asked not to attend a progressive educators’ conference in the fall of 2006 on the basis that the organizers did not want to risk an association with his past.
So what does this have to do with Barack Obama? Well, this man that Obama “barely knows” along with another member of the WU Bernadine Dohrn worked on a foundation with him, hosted a fundraiser for him that raised thousands of dollars, and have had numerous meetings with him over the years. The Obama campaign has chosen to whitewash the former radical as “a respected educator.”
People change over time, and while there’s no evidence that Ayers ever planted a bomb himself, he’s unapologetic for his membership in the WU, and as mentioned above he thinks they should’ve planted more. If you want to read more about these domestic terrorists that Barack Obama so freely associates himself with and who are unrepentant for their crimes, feel free to read more at Wikipedia.
John McCain rightfully went after him on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and despite the Obama campaign’s tepid response and moral equivalence (they compared a bombing conspirator to US Senator Tom Coburn, and of course called McCain’s pointing out of the ties with Ayers a “smear”), the fact remains that he remains friendly with an admitted member of a domestic terrorism organization. His defense that it happened when he was eight years old doesn’t hold water. I wouldn’t hang out with Lee Harvey Oswald (were he still alive) or throw back a beer with Ted Kennedy and both of them did their killing long before I was born.
4. Obama belittles midwesterners as bitter.
(buckle found here)Quite possibly the biggest misstep of his campaign, and the first one that seems to be causing some damage, is his assertion that midwestern people are bitter over the economy, and because of it are clinging to God and guns. Here’s Obama saying as much in his own words.
In essence he claims that in the absence of jobs, those dopey Pennsylvanians have “clung” to God, Guns, Xenophobia, etc. Just a bunch of dumb mid-westerners clutching rifles in their suburban homes and praying the big evil black man doesn’t win the presidency. The tone used (specifically the word clinging) is an excellent example of his disdain. Notice he didn’t use the word “seek” or “turn to,” he used the word “cling” which implies that religion, guns, etc., were old-fashioned things that were running away from them along with their jobs. Obama has, in essence, looked down his nose at those silly religious racist gun nuts he sees all of flyover country as.”
So what the hell does this have to do with flag pins, you ask?
Take the four examples above. In every case, Barack Obama has associated himself with people who hate this country, hate white people, hate the government, and even at times has shown his own elitist tendencies. While everyone was having a smooth-talk-induced orgasm over his speech on “race relations,” many people completely ignored the justifications he gave for Reverend Wright, and missed the subtle racism of the speech itself.
So anyway, back to the flag pins. Many have called the issue of “flag pins” a plant, and a plot to question Barack Obama’s patriotism. In essence, he has refused to wear one at any time ever because he believes it’s shallow and emblematic of the kind of shallow patriotism he believes lead us into the war in Iraq.
The fact remains, though, that the flag pin is a symbol, and it’s a symbol of the very flag that flies above every school, library, and government building. It’s unifying symbol behind which people who respect it feel great pride in this great country we live in. Barack Obama has expressed his disdain for the symbolism of this country through his associations and through his actions and when given a chance again and again, he chose to make the flag and the symbols of this country the issue he took a stand against.
Imagine that.
Taken by itself, the Obama campaign would have a point. The flag pin issue is a non-starter, and probably one designed more to trip him up than to prove a point, but when taken in context of his continual slaps, disrespect, and disdain, you have to wonder if the flag pin is the holy water to his vampirism. The baking soda to his acid. All he would have to do to diffuse the situation is stop being so stubborn and put a pin on. It’s a custom. A symbol. And it’s one that means a lot to a great many people in this country.
His refusal to wear one, while at the same time speaking down to flyover country and continuing to associate with those that outwardly and unapologetically hate this country says a lot more about him than any flowery speech he’ll give in the coming weeks, and despite his constant assertions in his speeches about American exceptionalism and his love for this country because it is the only country in the world where his story could be a reality, he really doesn’t like those pesky lower-class folks who salute the flag, have a gun in their home, and pray to God. No, they cling to that because they don’t know any better. Barack, on the other hand, knows better. He’s smarter than you are.
Just ask him. He’ll tell you.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:25 pm
So…what? Are you saying that he hates America?
You’ve provided his tenuous connections to radicals to prove that he is what? An elitist? Show me an American president who has not displayed hints of elitism. Why, Vinny, does this matter?
This rant -everything you have written in this post- is what is wrong with our politics.
For the first 53 minutes of a 2 hour debate, the conversation focused on tabloid issues -like this! The war in Iraq could not have been discussed? The imperiled economy could not have been discussed? Health Care could not have been discussed? Social Security could not have been discussed? Terrorism could not have been discussed? Education could not have been discussed? Gun laws could not have been discussed? Gay marriage could not have been discussed? Equal rights could not have been discussed? The Supreme Court could not have been discussed? NAFTA could not have been discussed? Immigration could not have been discussed? Debt relief/foreign aid to third world countries could not have been discussed? Agricultural subsidies could not have been discussed? Abortion could not have been discussed? Foreign policy could not have been discussed? The state of VA hospitals could not have been discussed?
We could have listened to the candidates explain their positions and plans for resolving any one of these issues. Instead, we listened to George Snuffleupagus’ and Charlie Gibson’s tries to play ‘gotcha’ with the candidates. The worst part is that some people actually give a shit about flag pins and Bill Ayers.
MY GOD! WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY!! SHAME on these journalists for pushing that type of discussion. SHAME on those who are complicit in this conversation while REAL issues that affect REAL people go unaddressed!
Again, Vinny, how does his flag pin matter? How do Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright matter? If Obama is elected, how will these issues matter?
April 21st, 2008 at 1:40 pm
I just told you how it matters…
Is it guilt by association? Maybe, but let’s think of it. How many racists (Wright) or domestic terrorists (Ayers and his wife) would he have to associate with for you to wonder how much would Obama have to associate with before you started thinking, “Hey, maybe he isn’t as distant from these folks as he would like us to believe?”
As for the other issues, this isn’t the first debate, and they’ve been discussed ad nauseum. Obama’s associations, friends, and his disdain for this country’s customs and traditions are definitely interesting in the context of picking a president.
For a guy who doesn’t agree with these folks, he has a way of finding them and bringing them into his inner circle.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Ehh…it’s still tenuous. Obama’s literary and legislative record hold more water than this ‘guilt by association’ argument. As a native Idahoan, many of my close friends are, unfortunately, racist conservatives. I abhor their beliefs, but I will never reject their friendship because of their ideologies.
Still, though, none of this matters. These are cosmetic issues. I want to know what a candidate stands for. I want to know what a candidate plans to do about health care or the economy or the war in Iraq. That is what matters. These are issues which should be discussed at FULL length. It’s a travesty that anyone should know more about Bittergate than about REAL issues.
April 21st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Obama doesn’t address real issues. And these issues are important. As someone in public office, you need to be aware of who you consort with. And if the person he seeks out for spiritual guidance is making these racist comments, yeah, he should have said something or left. He only addressed the issue after being FORCED to, not because he saw anything wrong with things. I went to my wife’s synagogue, and the soon as the rabbi said something that offended me, I knew I couldn’t stay. If someone says something offensive, you cannot sit there and not take notice. You can’t willingly go there for years and years and act like you didn’t know.
And as Vinny said, I could not meet and spend any time whatsoever with Mark David Chapman, or any of those murderes, no matter what. And this radical shows no remorse. So yeah, he should have been more careful about who he surrounds himself with.
I stand up when the anthem is played. Every single time. I can be in the middle of dinner, and if it comes on, I stop, stand up, put my hand over my heart and listen. I don’t expect that of everyone, but yeah, I sort of expect that from presidential candidates. They should know better than to say “when I feel like it”. It’s about showing respect for the country. As president you should have that 100% of the time. Can you imagine him acting like that if he was president? What kind of example is that!!!
Meet the new politics… worse than the old politics.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Heh, if that works for you. I’d rather hear a discussion about the increasingly troubled economy than one regarding his hand placement during the singing of the national anthem.
I mean, I don’t know, it just seems like the economy is a little more….uhhh….real. At the end of a day when Obama didn’t wear a flag pin or refused to place his hand on his chest during the anthem, I know that I’ll still sleep well. It’s just not the sort of issue that raises my blood pressure (I don’t know. Maybe I hate America…?). Now, at the end of a day when my neigboors’ homes and my home have just been forclosed upon, my student loans are in default and I was on the losing end of a 10,000 person layoff, I think my sleep might be troubled…
But hey, maybe I’m just another confused liberal. Maybe, If I place my hand real firm-like on my chest during the national anthem, sport an american flag pin, and recite the constitution on a daily basis, things will get better!!!
Also, Rye, I’m NOT doubting your patriotism, but does standing up during the naitonal anthem make you a good American?
April 21st, 2008 at 4:36 pm
It’s not about being a “good American,” it’s about your respect for the customs of your country, and he obviously has very litte of it.
It’s the kind of “I’m too high class for that kind of crap” stuff that I wouldn’t want in a President. They all discuss the other issues, but my question still stands…
How many of these folks would you be allowed to associate with before your judgment is called into question?
April 21st, 2008 at 6:37 pm
There you go. ‘Respect for the customs of your country.’
I don’t think that he’s displaying some type of elitism through this. Surely there’s nothing wrong or even Un-American about disagreeing with your country’s traditions. And, surely, tradition isn’t inherently good. What about the American customs of racism, ruthless expansion, imperialism and slavery? None of those customs are/were good. To me, that’s what makes America so great. We are not a static society. We can change our collective attitudes and the customs we honor without jeopardizing our identity.
But, you see, that’s really a non-issue. How do flag pins personally affect you? How does the anthem code of conduct affect the American public as a whole?
The Economy, Iraq….yeah, they’ve discussed it, but not enough, as far as I’m concerned. They have yet to debate the finer points of their proposals (and even the general points of some issues). Maybe it’s because they spend too much time on this stupid stupid shit….
Finally, Vinny, the answer to your last question is 46.
April 21st, 2008 at 8:52 pm
I see right through Obama, but my view is not common, nor is it the default right now. Especially in the tech industry.
I think it’s because I’m from the Chicago area, and he strikes me as an above-average workman Illinois politician, but not much else. He’s got problems all over the place, but I think much of his support is unwilling to look honestly at the situation. He represents too much redemption to too many people for it to matter.
He’s probably not a bad guy. I would play poker with him, and we would probably throw down a few beers and hit a cigar out behind the VFW. But not only am I generally skeptical of political hero figures (see: entire Kennedy lineage), I also see someone with huge political weaknesses that is in for a rude awakening in a general election.
April 22nd, 2008 at 11:17 am
While tradition may not be inherently good, traditions aren’t necessarily inherently bad either. That’s a weak argument.
See now you’re just being irritating for the sake of being irritating. Standing up during the anthem doesn’t make you a good person. No one is saying that the troubles in the world will go away by placing your hand over your heart. You’re just being inflammatory because you always want an argument.
How about this… in the army, you have to salute the flag, you have to salute officers, there are things you have to do. As a politician, it may not be written in stone, but there is a code of conduct with respect to the flag.
You don’t have to have a flag in your yard to be patriotic. But if you don’t show the proper respect for the flag, the symbol of our country, you are making a statement, even if the statement is that you don’t care enough to make the effort. As someone running for office, Obama should be well aware of the traditions and code of conduct for the flag. He should know that not saluting is making a statement. You can’t claim ignorance at that stage. And to knowingly not salute yet to ask for the presidency? WTF?
Sure there are important things to debate. Obama could have said “I apologize, I was wrong not to speak out sooner against the wrongs within my church”, so they could get onto the other issues. But he’s not capable of admiting any wrong, nor is he capable of dealing with anyone insinuating that he as done anything wrong. He gets offended by it, and he better be ready for that and a whole lot more if he gets the nom. Or is he hoping that reps will ignore those issues? Really?!
Maybe you would be able to deal with the sort of president that won’t salute our flag, but I’m not ok with it. The flag is a symbol of our country. If he won’t show respect for it, then how can he expect other countries to show respect for us? Maybe the flag means nothing to you, but it means a lot to me and to a lot of other Americans. I don’t think that Americans have changed their collective feelings on this matter. We still teach our kids to say the pledge of allegiance every day, and that’s a good thing. It reminds us that we are more than just individuals able to do whatever we damn well please, we are part of something greater. We are one nation indivisible, rallied around our country and our flag.
April 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
How? I’ve noticed that people who dislike Obama often speak in generalities…
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I believe the topic of this post is (as the title suggests) the fact that Obama chooses to show respect for this country only when he feels like it and Vinny gives several reasons to support that thesis. The flag is THE symbol of this country and SHOULD be respected by all within its borders, especially someone who’s trying so damn hard to LEAD it.
I’d be willing to bet that the same “bitter” people he chose to mention in that speech are the very same ones who DO respect the flag and are probably quite offended at his apparent indifference to it.
Every American deserves to know what each candidate’s position is on all those topics you mentioned, Patrick, as they are all valid but not one of them is the topic of this post. That’s why they weren’t addressed.
But knowing Vinny, they will be. Just wait.
April 22nd, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Other countries won’t respect us if we don’t salute the flag?
You’re kidding, right?
What I’m saying about tradition, is that, in the end, customs aren’t any more significant than what they represent. Like Obama, I happen to dislike the idea of wearing a flag pin. I agree that it is a cheap display of patriotism. I think wearing a flag pin sends the wrong message and, in the end, is actually harmful -but that’s a separate discussion.
April 22nd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
To the people they matter to, they are, and to someone who’s trying desperately to prove he isn’t an elitist “better than you” guy, that’s a major failing.
Let me try a different tack. If customs aren’t important, why would a guy who’s a terrible bowler show up at a bowling alley, and bowl a 37 for 7 frames and then walk away. It isn’t because he likes bowling, but because white midwesterners LOVE it. That custom, he’s fine with. Eating a cheese steak in Philly and shopping at the Italian market, he’s fine with.
Wearing a flag pin, however, is just too much for him to take.
Doesn’t that sit as odd with anyone? He seems to value every custom BUT that one?
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:53 pm
See, that’s a good way of putting it, Vin.
And no, I’m not kidding. If our own president won’t respect the symbol of our country, if our own president won’t salute it, it shows a lack of respect. It’s part of our culture. It’s what people do. It’s just like you look like an ass if you don’t thank your grandparents for sending you a birthday gift. Maybe you feel you don’t have to, but you’ll be viewed as an ass. We got mocked with Clinton because of his interest in interns, we got mocked for Bush and his WMD’s… but this… not saluting the flag, I’m sorry, it is unpatriotic. And that just sticks in my craw.
The flag is the one thing that should be able to unite us, reps and dems. In hard times we can look to that flag and know that we all believe in what that flag symbolizes. After September 11th, that flag was comforting to many, and it might haved seemed like an empty, cheap display of patriotism, but that flag helped people cope. It reminded us that we all stood as one, and though we had our differences, we were lucky to live in America. And that because we live in America, there are those that would try to strike at us. And maybe some of that has worn off in the past couple of years, but it should not have worn off. And the president should be the one leading the charge, motivating us, leading us. If he shows a lack of respect for the flag it sends a bad message.
This isn’t even an issue that should have ever come up. Frankly, he’s a stupid man for not doing it. Like Vin said about the bowling and cheese steak… he’ll pander to them, but he won’t recognize the significance of the flag enough to just salute it? And whatever you think of the flag pin, saluting the flag is NOT a cheap display of patriotism. And when you are an elected official and running for the office of the president, if you don’t salute, you look like an ass. If you’re running for president, you’d better damn well eat apple pie and salute the flag of these united states.
April 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Yeah, but not placing his hand on his heart during the anthem or not wearing a flag pin doesn’t mean he doesn’t salute the flag…
April 22nd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
That’s like saying drinking a beer doesn’t mean he drinks beer.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:10 am
Absolutely not. You can salute anything in a million different ways. Look up the definition of ’salute.’
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:59 am
Stop it.
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:22 am
I guess I just don’t get it. Either way, your candidate made a good showing last night!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Am I the only one who doesn’t think this country should be respected at all? We do terrible things and just sweep them under the rug like people are expendable… so sad.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Well, Sarah, that’s one (not completely inaccurate) way to look at it. Vinny will probably shit his pants when he reads this, but have you read Howard Zinn’s The Peoples History? Check it out if you like feeling ashamed…
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Hell’s no, Patrick! I agree! We should hate our country! Every inch of it! And we should burn flags and end the Bushitler regime!
Viva la revolucion!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm
YES!!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Life is pain. Anyone that tells you otherwise is trying to sell something.
It’s amazing the amount of people who think that life is all flowers and sunshine. Two people can barely live together in a house in most instances without fighting and arguing. Just look to your own life, and you’ll see it, people that you can’t deal with, people that you argue with. It’s human nature. Nations just do it on a grander scale, and should we really expect anything different?
Once you can get along with every single person you meet, you can explain it to the rest of us and find a way for us to all adhere to your guidlines. Then once all of the US can get along, we can try to explain it to other countries. Maybe then we’ll have the pretty little world that the hippies all talked about.
Hell, we can’t even park around the holidays without getting into fistfights. As much as I respect John Lennon, he was wrong… all you need is not love, because love couldn’t keep the Beatles together. In a decade of peace and love, of which they were premier proponents, they didn’t even make it out of the sixties. That should tell you something right there.
Reality check, most hippies sold out once they realize that their vision was immature and impractical.
Sure we do crappy things. If you’re so against it, go and run for office. Make a difference that way. Change the world. But by living here and not respecting the country, you’re just as much to blame as Obama is for stickin’ around his church. If you really think there is a better country out there, then you should be living there. If you recognize that though we may not be perfect, we are indeed as good as it gets, then fine stick around.
Sorry if I offend you at all, but people risk their lives to protect this country. They do so because they want to. They volunteer for it so we can continue to live in this great country. If you really feel this country doesn’t deserve respect then why are you here?
Sure, we do a lot of crappy things, but hey, so has every one of us as individuals. Sure, a lot of moments in American history leave me feeling ashamed, but do you think there is a country out there that has even a fairly clean slate in their history? Maybe, possibly Israel. Start learning Hebrew.
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
“If you recognize that though we may not be perfect, we are indeed as good as it gets, then fine stick around.”
No, no, no, no. I think that the foundation of this nation and the people of this country are, indeed, the best in the world. I do think, though, that we, as a country, need to improve the way we treat each other and the way we conduct ourselves in the international arena. That’s part of what being a liberal is all about. I think that, regardless of how advanced we think we are and no matter the grand illusions we maintain of ourselves, we can always do better. It is blind patriotism and complacency which are harmful to America, not critique.
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
On that, we 100% agree.
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:07 pm
I agree whole heartedly. I’m fine with critique. Unlike Sarah, I just think we warrant respect as well. And blindly following any group or institution without question is almost always a bad thing.
See, I guess we can all get along
April 24th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Thanks for laying it out, Vinny. I am not a McCain fan, and not a Clinton fan, but Obama is a racist, anti-American douche-chill so I will most likely not be voting this year (first time ever). Maybe I will write in ‘Bill Clinton’. Slick Willy may have been a lying SOB, but I felt that everyone knew the score. With Obama, I feel like it will be a long, long time before his legions of fans recognize what he is. Maybe they should read your post?
April 25th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Funny… I just watched the snippet (though I had seen the debate live)… wtf… what kind of an answer was that? Question: Why won’t you wear the pin Answer: I treat veterans well.
Speakin’ of Slick Willy, this guy thinks he’s Slick Willy’s Second Coming!
April 25th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Not to beat a dead horse, or anything, but what kind of question was this:
“Senator Obama, do you think Reverend Wright loves this country as much as you do?”
I wonder how much money, productivity, and brain cells, overall, were wasted with that one… Once again, bravo, ABC!!!
April 25th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Well, that is a dumb question… but I do think that addressing his relationship with the pastor was warranted. The “does he love the country like you do” is bad. The correct answer is “Your honor, I object, calls for speculation on the part of the witness”.
June 4th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Patrick,
People like you in this country scare the hell out of me. While being currently active in the military, I know it would be absolutely devastating to many of us if Obama were to win the presedential race. You’re defending a man who shows no patriotism or love for his country and supports proven racists(Wright)/members of former extremist-terrorist groups? Look at the “BIG PICTURE”…Look at his MORAL CHARACTER… Look at his BELIEFS and his overall CHARACTER… This holds so much weight…. And people like you just seem to overlook these major issues and babble about useless B.S. Is that a person you want as our president? At least have someone in there that has a love and respect for our country, I mean, this is our President….. Barrack Hussein Obama? Sounds like a good one!!!!!!!
June 5th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Oh. The ‘people like you’ argument. Well played, sir.
Your post indicates your own racist tendencies and it illustrates some serious intellectual deficiencies.
I mean, really, dude, did you just try to interject the ‘Hussein’ factor?
Ugh… You’re an idiot.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Yeah, I agree mentioning “hussein” is not a good argument at all (and does indicate possible racist tendencies), though it does speak to public opinion (not mine, but probably a significant portion of Americans). However the other arguments; supporting racists, his moral character, those are good points.
And I’m fine with the “people like you” comment. He’s not setting you aside because of your race or religion. He’s just saying “people who think like you”. Which I understand. I am scared of all the democrats that backed Obama in the first place. I really am.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
But, really, man? Why should you be scared of a fellow American with a differing opinion? Be realistic.