Thread: History of the Flag Pin (Obama)

Originally Posted by LetsTalk

This is one of the BIGGEST BULL issue there is.

I can see why you think so, after reading your posts. But of course I think you're wrong about many, many things, so it follows that a man of your worldview would be incompatible with mine.

Dalem and Bluesman,

Flag pins? Really? So everyone not wearing one is not a patriot?

You simply do not comprehend what dalem and I think, and why. It follows that you would utterly misinterpret our vision of patriotism is, and why Obama's is the antithesis of that. So, continuing down the line, when you post something as ludicrous as that sentence, I can give you enough slack to kind of understand how you make such a stupid mistake as to think that's what we're going on about. You're just not smart enough to really know what we know. That's all, and I'll let you off the hook for it.

I find these statements VERY insulting and angering. As someone that loves his country and does not wear one all the time, I find this issue none-sense. So are the majority of Americans that do not wear one most of the time unpatriotic? Are they all of the sudden a requirement for all politicians 100% of the time. What is next, do we all need to tattoo the flag on our foreheads.

Likewise, I don't wear one at all, either; I don't even own one. But I don't think my country is the root of all evil, either, and I'd probably have gone to prison if I were ever in attendance when somebody that has enjoyed the benefits of the freedom and security provided by far, far better men whose memories were insulted by being called slavemasters, and what they fought and died for was explicitly condemned by a foul creature shrieking 'God DAMN America!' from his pulpit. Because I likely would've tried to break his jaw.

See, what you simply do not get is that the PIN is of absolutely no importance at all. I attach no importance to it, just as you see not to, either. BUT...you manifest your love of country in different ways, and dalem and I can spot the contempt dripping from one's words and deeds, and if he does or does NOT wear a $3 pin, he doesn't fool us. You can buy whatever he's selling, at your option.

This is nothing else than a "wag the tail" type of an issue, lets not talk about the economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, Infrastructure, Education, health care, ...

Again, it ain't the pin...he doesn't fool US when he wears it, but we note when he does NOT.

I got an idea lets copy the French and Turks and start talking about head scarfs in schools and government buildings, now that is a real issue.

That's not even a good snark, boy. Work on it. Until then, try to understand, if you're capable, what 'love of country' means. Personally, I think you never will, because if you don't understand by now, you never will, no matter what you choose to put across your chest.

Originally Posted by LetsTalk

Dalem and Bluesman,

Flag pins? Really? So everyone not wearing one is not a patriot? I find these statements VERY insulting and angering.

Go ahead and be insulted and angry at me - I never made a claim about flag pins and patriotism. What I did state at the time was that Obama's answer to the question of why he didn't wear one was indicative of his arrogance, poor political acumen, and teenager angst.

But it's all moot now right, because Dear Obama now wears one. So whereas 6 months ago it was "false" patriotism to wear one, now it's not. Unless he's willing to accept his own label of "false patriot".

-dale

Just to follow-up briefly on Michael’s guest-post from yesterday, Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) new-found opposition to Roe v. Wade is rather remarkable, even for him.

In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.” He explained that overturning Roe would force “women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.” Yesterday, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a conservative, McCain said the opposite.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You’re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.

MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn’t advanced in the six years he’s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn’t done?

MCCAIN: I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support…. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.

The old McCain didn’t want an amendment and didn’t want Roe overturned. The new McCain completely disagrees with the old McCain.

It’s worth noting that politicians’ opinions on abortion can, and often do, “evolve” over time. Dick Gephardt and Al Gore, for example, both opposed abortion rights before eventually becoming pro-choice. With this in mind, McCain’s unexpected shift may simply reflect yet another pol whose thinking has changed over time.

Or, far more likely, McCain is once again abandoning any pretense of consistency and integrity, and is now willing to say literally anything to win.

Let’s return, once again, to McCain’s flourishing flip-flop list, which is now a Top 11 list.

* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell’s debate coach.)

* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.

* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.

* McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.

* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.

* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won’t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.

* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.

* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.

* And now he’s both for and against overturning Roe v. Wade.

It’s not exactly a newsflash that McCain is veering ridiculously to the right in a rather shameless attempt to reinvent himself, but Dems should take advantage of the situation and help establish the narrative now. Despite his rather embarrassing record of late, we still have major media figures telling the public that “no one would accuse McCain of equivocating on anything.”

Now is the time to begin characterizing McCain — accurately — as a man with no principle beliefs. Dems should not only criticize McCain’s constantly evolving opinions on nearly everything, they should openly mock him for it now, so that the storyline becomes second nature (like the GOP did with “serial exaggerator” Al Gore).

The nation is seeing McCain 2.0, and we like the old one better

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9111.html

McCain will still win!

Originally Posted by dalem

Speak volumes, don't they?

Self-identifying Republicans are happier with themselves, their country, their families, their lives, and their jobs. This naturally gives them confidence.

Self-identifying Democrats are whiney b*tches who feel guilty about their lives, their money, their gender, their history, and their country. All of these characteristics naturally make them extemely vulnerable to stupid things like reading foreign terrorists their "rights", nose jobs, pet psychiatry, and "global warming".

-dale

Rant On…………

Talk about whiney B*tches, I am sick and tired of statements like these made too often by self-righteous, self-identifying Republicans.

Republicans do not and never have held exclusive sway over love of country or patriotism, but isn’t it funny how so many card carrying arch Republicans like Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich and Dick Cheney that have never served a day in the armed forces have the unmitigated audacity and gall to besmirch and call into question the patriotism of other Americans due to their party affiliation.

For every fruit bar, tree hugging, extreme leftist whack job that calls themselves a Democrat there are a equal number of uber-fascist, bigoted redneck fundamentalists whose strict adherence to the doctrine and dogma of the ultra right wing of the Republican party make them incapable of independent thought or action.

Radio and television personalities like Rush Limbaugh and his mindless mob of ignorant and boorish dittoheads and Bill O’Reilly and his cadre of Republican "traditionalists" have effectively set-back reasoned political discourse 10 years.

Wearing a flag pin on one’s lapel does not make one patriotic nor does criticizing one’s government or leaders make one unpatriotic. Least we forget it is our right of free and unbridled speech that makes this country great. So while it pains me sometimes to hear what people have to say on various topics I am proud to have had some small part in defending those freedoms.

Rant Off……….