Flag Burning Amendment Fails!

[Mr.Conley]

The Senate vote fell 1 short of meeting the 67 yes votes required for the amendment to pass Congress and go on to the states.

 

[Annie]

The Senate vote fell 1 short of meeting the 67 yes votes required for the amendment to pass Congress and go on to the states.

Sorry, but good. This is not something we need an amendment for. Do I think someone burning our flag is an idiot? Yes. Thank him for pointing that out to me, I'll be sure to ignor whatever it is he's ragging about.

Another nonsensical plea to the conservative base, though one that seemed to stand a chance of going through.

We are strong enough to deal with the moonbats, they don't frighten me nearly as much as those that appear sane, like Murtha.

 

[dmp]

I'm quite sure it would have been one of those 'feel-good-non-enforcable' type bills, right?

 

[Annie]

I'm quite sure it would have been one of those 'feel-good-non-enforcable' type bills, right?

I doubt they were going to jail someone for burning the flag or waving a tattered one or sitting on a chair with the flag decorating it.

So a constitutional amendment that would result in fines? I don't think that is where we want to go.

 

[Mr. P]

It's sad it only failed by 1 vote.

 

[Annie]

It's sad it only failed by 1 vote.

The media has been saying for days, it would pass or fail by 1 vote. I am a very patriotic person. I'd have plenty to say if I saw the flag being abused. However, I don't think a constitutional amendment is the way to deal with this.

An ass kicking, I can see that. (I couldn't do it, but I can understand it.)
A real mouthing off to the asshats, sure. That I could accomplish.
Being hauled in by the cops for disturbing the peace, sure. Nothing will probably come of it, but heh, it inconveinences them.

But not an amendment.

 

[Mr. P]

The media has been saying for days, it would pass or fail by 1 vote. I am a very patriotic person. I'd have plenty to say if I saw the flag being abused. However, I don't think a constitutional amendment is the way to deal with this.

An ass kicking, I can see that. (I couldn't do it, but I can understand it.)
A real mouthing off to the asshats, sure. That I could accomplish.
Being hauled in by the cops for disturbing the peace, sure. Nothing will probably come of it, but heh, it inconveinences them.

But not an amendment.

I agree.I'm shocked it was only one vote. Time to clean house. Senate too.

 

[5stringJeff]

Flag burning should be a crime, with penalties of "severe beatings" enforceable by vigilante groups only.

 

[007]

I agree.I'm shocked it was only one vote. Time to clean house. Senate too.

November should be very interesting.

 

[Gunny]

November should be very interesting.

November is going to be really SCARY. All the disgruntled conservatives are fragmenting which leaves the door open for the Dems. It's EXACTLY how Clinton got into office. If we're looking for "The 90s Part Deux," it's on the horizon.

As I recall, Congress was as ineffective and gridlocked then as now.

 

[Annie]

November is going to be really SCARY. All the disgruntled conservatives are fragmenting which leaves the door open for the Dems. It's EXACTLY how Clinton got into office. If we're looking for "The 90s Part Deux," it's on the horizon.

As I recall, Congress was as ineffective and gridlocked then as now.

Gunny, I really think the split in the GOP is being caused by the administration. Not dealing with immigration; throwing out that 'gay marriage amendment'; now the flag amendment. How ignorant do they take conservatives for? BTW, have you noticed that while gave condolences to the Russians for the killing of their diplomats, he's yet to say anything publically about our two soldiers that were kidnapped, tortured, beheaded, and otherwise mutilated.

Add the pork projects that both sides of the aisle are indulging in, where is the alternative other than a 3rd party? :coffee3:

 

[jillian]

Gunny, I really think the split in the GOP is being caused by the administration. Not dealing with immigration; throwing out that 'gay marriage amendment'; now the flag amendment. How ignorant do they take conservatives for? BTW, have you noticed that while gave condolences to the Russians for the killing of their diplomats, he's yet to say anything publically about our two soldiers that were kidnapped, tortured, beheaded, and otherwise mutilated.

Add the pork projects that both sides of the aisle are indulging in, where is the alternative other than a 3rd party? :coffee3:

I don't agree with all of your statement, but I agree with much of it. And you certainly raise good points. I think part of the problem is that the admin emphasizes wedge issues which, by their nature, divide people, and not only along party lines.

As for the next presidential election, seems to me that both parties go to the extreme left and extreme right during the primary season, so some very good democrats and republicans could never get past that hurdle. Giuliani comes to mind on the republican side, Joe Biden on the democratic. I do, however, think that although someone like Giuliani could never run the anti-choice gauntlet, he could certainly be a credible third-party candidate, warts and all. Could be interesting, or at least elevate the debate and keep people on their toes.

 

[Gunny]

Gunny, I really think the split in the GOP is being caused by the administration. Not dealing with immigration; throwing out that 'gay marriage amendment'; now the flag amendment. How ignorant do they take conservatives for? BTW, have you noticed that while gave condolences to the Russians for the killing of their diplomats, he's yet to say anything publically about our two soldiers that were kidnapped, tortured, beheaded, and otherwise mutilated.

Add the pork projects that both sides of the aisle are indulging in, where is the alternative other than a 3rd party? :coffee3:

We don't realy disagree. We empowered the Republicans to make a change; yet, they STILL act as though they are the minority. I have yet to see them wield the power we gave them and just tell the Dems to STFU and sit down.

I can agree with Bush's initial attempts at bipartisanship, but the Dems just threw them back in his face and went on the attack. The Republicans have basically been bluffed into inaction.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have just gotten more shrill and extremist as time has gone on. The only thing they have done well is play their hand. They have run a very effective bluff.

Time to call the hand. If the Republicans don't call the bluff, they'll be gone by people wanting the same thing they did when they put them in power ... change. Not the Right nro the left, but the moderates in the middle who will vote either way ... and they ARE the difference.

There is no viable third party, and the only bipartisanship you EVER see in this country is when one tries to pop up. The Dems and Republicans are them thick as thieves in ensuring it is dismantled as quickly as possible.

 

[Gunny]

I don't agree with all of your statement, but I agree with much of it. And you certainly raise good points. I think part of the problem is that the admin emphasizes wedge issues which, by their nature, divide people, and not only along party lines.

As for the next presidential election, seems to me that both parties go to the extreme left and extreme right during the primary season, so some very good democrats and republicans could never get past that hurdle. Giuliani comes to mind on the republican side, Joe Biden on the democratic. I do, however, think that although someone like Giuliani could never run the anti-choice gauntlet, he could certainly be a credible third-party candidate, warts and all. Could be interesting, or at least elevate the debate and keep people on their toes.

I'll vote Libertarian before I will Dem. Dem's have proven themselves completely unworthy of positions of leadership in this Nation, and are doing nothing to change that well-earned reputation.

 

[jillian]

I'll vote Libertarian before I will Dem. Dem's have proven themselves completely unworthy of positions of leadership in this Nation, and are doing nothing to change that well-earned reputation.

I feel that way about the current crop of republicans. interestingly enough, so do most republicans I know. :cof:

 

[Mr. P]

I feel that way about the current crop of republicans. interestingly enough, so do most republicans I know. :cof:

DON'T GLOAT you hippy liberal tree hugger!!!

 

[jillian]

We don't realy disagree. We empowered the Republicans to make a change; yet, they STILL act as though they are the minority. I have yet to see them wield the power we gave them and just tell the Dems to STFU and sit down.

I can agree with Bush's initial attempts at bipartisanship, but the Dems just threw them back in his face and went on the attack. The Republicans have basically been bluffed into inaction.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have just gotten more shrill and extremist as time has gone on. The only thing they have done well is play their hand. They have run a very effective bluff.

Time to call the hand. If the Republicans don't call the bluff, they'll be gone by people wanting the same thing they did when they put them in power ... change. Not the Right nro the left, but the moderates in the middle who will vote either way ... and they ARE the difference.

There is no viable third party, and the only bipartisanship you EVER see in this country is when one tries to pop up. The Dems and Republicans are them thick as thieves in ensuring it is dismantled as quickly as possible.

The Republicans I know voted for fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and no estate tax. They didn't want anyone mucking around with the far religious right or neo-cons. The big joke is Bush's platform, originally, was isolationism and "compassionate conservativism". lol...

Just out of curiousity, what efforts at bi-partisanship do you think Bush ever made? Cause none of us ever saw any.

 

[Gunny]

The Republicans I know voted for fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and no estate tax. They didn't want anyone mucking around with the far religious right or neo-cons. The big joke is Bush's platform, originally, was isolationism and "compassionate conservativism". lol...

Just out of curiousity, what efforts at bi-partisanship do you think Bush ever made? Cause none of us ever saw any.

But of course YOU didn't see anything. You were too busy accusing Bush of stealing an election from the Dem who tried to.

However, I will leave you to your own homework. Seems only you Dems can't remember Bush's attempts at bipartisanship. They were only the main focus on his administration prior to 9/11.

Most Republicans I know voted Republicans because they are Republicans. Most conservatives and moderates I know voted Republican because the thought of another four years under a Dem President was nauseating.

 

[jillian]

DON'T GLOAT you hippy liberal tree hugger!!!

Heh! Now you sound like my dad.

 

[Gunny]

I feel that way about the current crop of republicans. interestingly enough, so do most republicans I know. :cof:

Seems you know some mighty fickle Republicans. Odd how they seem to agree with you. Think I'll call "bullshit" on that one.

Lest anyone forgets, the Republicans at least stand for something. The Dems stand for nothing except being against anything conservatives are for.