• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Chicago's Mancow on Flag Burning

9

954

Guest
Chicago's Mancow has an interesting perspective flag burning.

There shouldn't be a law against flag burning.

But it should be legal for him to kick your ass if you do so.

My sentiments exactly.

You can hear this clip on Foxnews.com. Go to Free Video/Opinion/Mancow.

Why isn't he in the Illinois congressional delegation?

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
* Randi Rhodes, before she became famous

* History of WGMA
</P>
 
> Why isn't he in the Illinois congressional delegation?

Good question! Just more uncommon (and good) sense from Mancow!<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
 
> > Why isn't he in the Illinois congressional delegation?
>
> Good question! Just more uncommon (and good) sense from
> Mancow!

Our veterans did not die for a flag or a symbol of the USA

They died for we the people. The people, not a symbol. That's something a lot of people seem to forget these days. Human lives are far more important than several pieces of canvas sewn together.

A crucifix in a jar of urine is disgusting, but does not change Christianity. Someone burning the flag may piss you off, but it will not change America.

Anything can be made into a symbol of something. But interpretation of that symbol is still open to each individual beholder and that's how we should leave it. Our veterans didn't fight for the symbols of America, they fought for the people back home and their happiness. The flag may symbolize us, but it is not us.

To me, this right wing babble in the Senate about flag burning is as selfish and gratuitous a waste of American taxpayer dollars as any godless commie pinko liberal out there when we have MUCH more important things here at home we need to be spending our money on.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Seattle Hempfest, August 20-21, Myrtle Edwards Park, http://www.hempfest.org/

[email protected]


</P>
 
> To me, this right wing babble in the Senate about flag
> burning is as selfish and gratuitous a waste of American
> taxpayer dollars as any godless commie pinko liberal out
> there when we have MUCH more important things here at home
> we need to be spending our money on.

I think flag burning should be legal (as long as it's not someone else's.)
Helps us identify the idiots.

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
* Randi Rhodes, before she became famous

* History of WGMA
</P>
 
> Chicago's Mancow has an interesting perspective flag
> burning.
>
> There shouldn't be a law against flag burning.
>
> But it should be legal for him to kick your ass if you do
> so.
>
> My sentiments exactly.
>
> You can hear this clip on Foxnews.com. Go to Free
> Video/Opinion/Mancow.
>
> Why isn't he in the Illinois congressional delegation?
>
> 73s from 954
>

Its recommended to dispose a flag (with respect) by burning it....so what do you do with all those tattered flags.....John Stewart had a ball with that bit of irony.....

With all the things that need attention in the US, is this the best the GOP can do....? Im afraid Mr. Cow won't impress his potential constituents by spouting off about something that just isnt priority right now......besides didnt the GOP and Bush 1 do this ridiculous arguement already.....?
 
"To me, this right wing babble in the Senate about flag burning is as selfish and gratuitous a waste of American taxpayer dollars as any godless commie pinko liberal out there when we have MUCH more important things here at home we need to be spending our money on."

I know of no other way to interpret this grandstanding except to agree with you that it's a gratuitous waste of time. Senate grandstanding is hardly unprecedented, though. Don't forget that we were recently treated to hearings on Steroids in Baseball. Now there is a burning issue that keeps me awake at night.

I agree that some 1st Amendment cleaning up might be in order since "free speech" rights have "evolved" so far. Remember that it was decided back in 1991 that the nude dancers at The Kitty Kat Lounge, Inc. of South Bend, Indiana were actually excercising their "freedom of expression", not just getting naked as those of us not sufficiently nuanced in Constitutional law thought. (BARNES v. GLEN THEATRE, INC., 501 U.S. 560) But to write a constitutional amendment narrowly aimed at flags? You can bet your ass that the day that passes, some group of protesters will mark its passage by going out and pissing on a US Army uniform or other symbol of patriotism.

There is a very practical reason to oppose an anti-flag burning amendment: It will cause more flag burning! Flag burning is pretty much a juvenile attention-getting device for those who like to see themselves as rebellious. Well, hell. How rebellious can it be to do something that's not even illegal! Congress to the rescue. If they were to succeed in passing this turkey of an amendment, these attention-seekers will then have an opportunity to burn a flag (but not until they have first sent out press releases) and then have the chance to be led away to jail in handcuffs protecting their First Amendment Rightsin full view of the cameras.

I propose that Congress instead, pass a resolution in favor of Motherhood and Apple Pie. It will require the same amount of political courage and do a lot less damage.
<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
 
> "To me, this right wing babble in the Senate about flag
> burning is as selfish and gratuitous a waste of American
> taxpayer dollars as any godless commie pinko liberal out
> there when we have MUCH more important things here at home
> we need to be spending our money on."
>
> I know of no other way to interpret this grandstanding
> except to agree with you that it's a gratuitous waste of
> time. Senate grandstanding is hardly unprecedented, though.
> Don't forget that we were recently treated to hearings on
> Steroids in Baseball. Now there is a burning issue that
> keeps me awake at night.
>
> I agree that some 1st Amendment cleaning up might be in
> order since "free speech" rights have "evolved" so far.
> Remember that it was decided back in 1991 that the nude
> dancers at The Kitty Kat Lounge, Inc. of South Bend, Indiana
> were actually excercising their "freedom of expression", not
> just getting naked as those of us not sufficiently nuanced
> in Constitutional law thought. (BARNES v. GLEN THEATRE,
> INC., 501 U.S. 560) But to write a constitutional amendment
> narrowly aimed at flags? You can bet your ass that the day
> that passes, some group of protesters will mark its passage
> by going out and pissing on a US Army uniform or other
> symbol of patriotism.

You can see that throughout American history into Prohibition and the Drug War. It's well intentioned, but in a nation that cherishes it's personal liberty over someone else's idea of a "moral" lifestyle, it's impossible to enforce.
>
> There is a very practical reason to oppose an anti-flag
> burning amendment: It will cause more flag burning! Flag
> burning is pretty much a juvenile attention-getting device
> for those who like to see themselves as rebellious. Well,
> hell. How rebellious can it be to do something that's not
> even illegal! Congress to the rescue. If they were to
> succeed in passing this turkey of an amendment, these
> attention-seekers will then have an opportunity to burn a
> flag (but not until they have first sent out press releases)
> and then have the chance to be led away to jail in handcuffs
> protecting their First Amendment Rightsin full view of the
> cameras.

It's like obscenity on the radio. Hard to define, but you know it when you hear it. But we can't rely on Congress to be babysitters. That's not their job. Their job is to represent US, not their religion, not corporate America, but the people in their respective states and districts. And what people are really concerned about is the lack of jobs and health care, the rising homeless issue and the tied-in mental health crisis. These are things we see every day, but no one can afford or want to do anything about.
>
> I propose that Congress instead, pass a resolution in favor
> of Motherhood and Apple Pie. It will require the same amount
> of political courage and do a lot less damage.

LOL! SHHHH! Don't give 'em any more ideas......
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Seattle Hempfest, August 20-21, Myrtle Edwards Park, http://www.hempfest.org/

[email protected]


</P>
 
> there when we have MUCH more important things here at home
> we need to be spending our money on."

There's nothing new or original about that. Here's a regional example:

How 'bout in south Florida, where two (maybe three) successive owners of the Florida Marlins have whined to city and county commissioners and state legislators and the gov himself about how they can't make enough money without a new stadium paid for by the government. And (some of) the airholes in the bureaucracy support it. (Who cares?)

This is while it is common knowledge that the schools are lousy, the roads are unsafe, and security at the airports and seaports are dangerously inadequate.

Since when is it the business of government to provide a place of business for zillionaires?

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
July 2005 Radio News
June 2005 Radio News</P>
 
Ah...yet another carefully crafted marketing ploy from our Republican friends in Congress: how better to frame your Democratic opponent in the 2006 elections than to say they think it's OK to burn a flag (i.e. they voted against the amendment)?

Watch and see...someone'll use it.
 
Please explain how this relates to what Mancow said.

> Ah...yet another carefully crafted marketing ploy from our
> Republican friends in Congress: how better to frame your
> Democratic opponent in the 2006 elections than to say they
> think it's OK to burn a flag (i.e. they voted against the
> amendment)?
>
> Watch and see...someone'll use it.

Is Mancow a Democrat?

Besides, burning a flag is healthier than burning a cigarette.
(Unless Mancow sees you, that is.)

73s from 954
<P ID="signature">______________
July 2005 Radio News
June 2005 Radio News</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom