h1

Phony Flag Flap Fixation

April 27, 2008

If you won’t vote for Obama because he doesn’t wear a flag pin, what does that say about you?

I only ask, because it seems that Obama had to address this issue one more time* on Friday.  With everything that’s going on in this country, whether it’s the economy, Iraq, energy, health care, or anything else, I can’t believe that someone would actually bring this up as a dealbreaker. 

*The media obviously feels this is important to people, as this is the story they gleaned from the Kokomo town hall.

 

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

34 comments

  1. It says that you are bitter, and cling to such things as guns and religion; and don’t vote based upon the important issues we all face as Americans.
    Wait, haven’t I heard that somewhere before?


  2. If you won’t vote for Obama because he doesn’t wear a flag pin, what does that say about you?

    You have a dose of common sense and are much smarter than the average American hating lefty…

    But that’s nothing to brag about.


  3. Hey Tex, let’s play a game. It’s called “Spot The Flag Pin”. We’ll start here.


  4. The republic party is so detested right now that they’re clinging to flag pins to make themselves look like they like America and because they’ve worn out the yellow ribbon magnet patriotism already. Yeah, yeah, those who will not vote for Obama because he’s not wearing his flag pin are those who would vote for George Bush, you know, the guy who SIGNED AN AMERICAN FLAG WITH A BLACK PERMANENT MAGIC MARKER.

    Hypocrites? Yep! Dumbasses? Yep! Complete assholes? Yep!

    I could care less if Obama is wearing a flag pin or not. Why? Because it doesn’t matter and there is nothing in our laws or in our Constitution that says we have to.


  5. Hey Tex, let’s play a game. It’s called “Spot The Flag Pin”. We’ll start here.
    by ChenZhen April 27, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Okay! I like to play games!


  6. Tex-

    Re: that toon. Ya know, there’s a big difference between saying that wearing it is unpatriotic (which he didn’t say) and saying that wearing it doesn’t necessarily make you a patriot (which he did say). He doesn’t believe in wrapping oneself in the flag, and feels that actions speak louder than simply putting a pin on your suit. To me, the fact that people would make a big deal out of it means that the fad really has become a prop and they are falling for this notion that patriotism is nothing more than wearing a pin. Kinda sad.

    Anyway, back to our game. I’m wondering if you’re bothered by the fact that Reagan wasn’t wearing a pin there, and if you have a theory as to why.


  7. Chen,

    Anyway, back to our game. I’m wondering if you’re bothered by the fact that Reagan wasn’t wearing a pin there, and if you have a theory as to why.

    In all seriousness? I think the flag lapel pin is a bunch of hogwash. There are a zillion reasons not to vote for this effete candidate and fraud. In fact, he is the worst candidate for President I have witnessed in my lifetime – and you have to sink pretty low after Al Gore.

    But the refusal of wearing of the flag on the lapel is not one of them. I don’t wear one on my suit. I agree with you on this one – it’s a ruse used as a convenient scapegoat for debate when we ought to be debating why this guy and his American hating wife are so pathetic.

    Clever on your party’s part to keep it issue deflecting on the real reasons not to vote for the man. The Republicans should let it die.


  8. Seriously though the lapel pin and Obama is a deeper issue. He uses a logic path for his resistance to wear one.That’s his right. One could question the genuine nature of all the others that have adopted it as uniform. It’s sad people have reduced the flag to the same level as the various ribbons.Hell those things you could run a successful blog on showcasing the different ones and various causes thereof.As for the Reagan pic. That’s an official photo using the flag as a background. I have an official Obama picture that uses the Capitol.If it’s only an image thing in this “game” I score Reagan pro country and BO pro government. I don’t imagine that is the point of the game though.


  9. Tex-

    Clever on your party’s part to keep it issue deflecting on the real reasons not to vote for the man. The Republicans should let it die.

    Huh? As I touched on here in the post, it’s the media that’s keeping it in the spotlight it would seem. After all, Obama must have said a lot at that town hall, but the only thing this story focused on was the flag thing. Interesting theory though.

    in2thefray-

    My guess is that it’s a simple matter of a fad (as I mentioned upthread). It’d be interesting to see when the flag pins started showing up.


  10. Chen,

    Huh? As I touched on here in the post, it’s the media that’s keeping it in the spotlight it would seem.

    What? Have you lost your mind here? Are you not the blog owner? Is it not you that authored this thread called “Phony Flag Flap Fixation?”

    Chen, I like you. You’re a nice guy; confused but a nice guy. I don’t think you’re near as flexible in your thinking as you would like us to believe, however. And sometimes you seem to have this great divide in your neurons from one moment to the next. If I don’t parrot your words, I’m off topic. If I go into greater detail, you seem confused. If I add to, you get confused.

    Though I will never understand the way liberals think, I am beginning to understand why liberals such as yourself struggle so outside of academia, fashion and design, entertainment, and a few ancillary things.

    You’re wrong on virtually every issue, history has shown as such, and yet you pat yourself on the back for you ingenuity.

    Frankly, your track record is horrific. I can not think of one thing modern day liberalism has given us that is worthy of America’s greatness.


  11. Tex-

    What? Have you lost your mind here? Are you not the blog owner? Is it not you that authored this thread called “Phony Flag Flap Fixation?”

    LOL Yea, ’cause with my massive audience, my bringing it up as a topic of discussion here in the Chamber is equivalent to “keeping it in the spotlight” in the same manner as ABC.

    Frankly, your track record is horrific. I can not think of one thing modern day liberalism has given us that is worthy of America’s greatness.

    I’d love to cite examples, but what is “modern day”? The last 10 years, or 50, or what?


  12. Since what I consider left-wing, American-hating, military-hating, secular progressive, neo-pagan crap has only had a real stage since Jimmah Carter, let’s start after the Vietnam War. We can work are way back, if need be.


  13. “Frankly, your track record is horrific. I can not think of one thing modern day liberalism has given us that is worthy of America’s greatness.”

    We make kind of funny movies. The comedies, I mean. Although I’m sure you feel the same about the non-comedies, too. So we’re funnier. And better looking, too.

    But on a serious note, I don’t know about liberals being anti-military. You’re disrespecting all those liberals who have actually served in the military. I also don’t hate America. It’s a weird thing to say, dude.


  14. Tex-

    Since what I consider left-wing, American-hating, military-hating, secular progressive, neo-pagan crap has only had a real stage since Jimmah Carter, let’s start after the Vietnam War. We can work are way back, if need be.

    LOL. That doesn’t give me a lot to work with there, as I’m cornered into trying to cite an example that meets your definition being whatever a “American-hater” is, but I’ll try: It proves that America is great because one can theoretically fit that definition and not be thrown in prison or worse. That proof may be classified as a contribution, I suppose.

    But since you mentioned “secular progressive”, I thought I’d point out a relevant root word: progress. As in, women can now vote, blacks can marry whites, etc. With no progress, most of those things that makes modern America great wouldn’t exist. Who put men on the moon? I’m not sure you can make the argument that NASA is a bastion of religious conservatives.


  15. Chen,

    LOL. Give me any example and don’t worry about the secular part, though I may use it against you soon enough. Let me show you how disconnected you are:

    Women could vote in 1920, not 1976. Jack Johnson, black heavyweight champion of the world, was married to white woman around the turn of the century.

    And NASA, that bastion of secularists, was basically built by the military and until recently, almost all astronaunts were trained pilots. Now am I to believe this is your definition of a liberal? Let’s see:

    December 24, 1968, the spacecraft Apollo VIII, carrying James A. Lovell, William Anders and Frank Borman became the first manned vehicle to circle the moon. The three orbited the earth’s satellite 10 times before firing their engines to head home. At their closest approach, they “skimmed” just sixty-nine miles above the desolate, gray surface.

    During their ninth orbit, the astronauts sent photographs back to earth, describing their awe at the bleakness of the moon and the beauty of the earth.

    In his autobiography Countdown, Frank Borman later wrote, “There was one more impression we wanted to transmit: our feeling of closeness to the Creator of all things. This was Christmas Eve, December 24, 1968, and I handed Jim and Bill their lines from the Holy Scriptures.”

    About six weeks before launch, a NASA official had called Borman. Noting that the crew would be circling the earth on Christmas Eve, he said, “We figure more people will be listening to your voice than that of any man in history. So we want you to say something appropriate.”

    Bill Anders read Genesis 1:1-4. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, ‘Let there be light:’ and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.”

    Jim Lovell took the next four verses. “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And God said, ‘Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.’ And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.”

    Frank Borman finished with, “And God said, ‘Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear’: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas: and God saw that it was good.”

    Yes General, a facility made up of many secular progressives…


  16. You’re disrespecting all those liberals who have actually served in the military. I also don’t hate America. It’s a weird thing to say, dude.

    Fair enough. It was meant as a generalization of General Chen’s crowd. Joe Lieberman would be a perfect example of a good liberal – but he’s not secular.


  17. Gotcha.


  18. Gotcha.

    by blogoprofundo April 28, 2008 at 9:58 pm

    Kinda…:(


  19. Tex-

    For the record, bans on interracial marriage finally ended in 1967.

    And I’m not talking about the astronauts. I’m talking about the scientists who put men on the moon. You know, the engineers, physicists… mathematicians. The types of people who believe in things like evolution and the big bang theory.

    Incidentally, since you bring up pilots, one could also make the argument that it’s these same types of people who create the aircraft, tanks, smart bombs etc. that compose the military might that I’m sure you revere. The next time you see a picture of an F-117, take a second to think about the people who drew it up on the drawing board, engineered it, and built it. In fact, from a military perspective, one can make the argument that America is kept free less by the grunts on the ground and more by the nerds in the lab coats. Scientists, Tex. A secular mindset.


  20. Tex-

    For the record, bans on interracial marriage finally ended in 1967.

    Perhaps from a legal standpoint. Sodomy was just removed from the books two years ago as felony. You going to tell me homosexuality has just been “mainstreamed” for only the last 2-3 years? Interracial marriage in America has been happening for at least 150 years Chen. What do I get if I prove that fact? A Chenzhen medal?

    General, let me explain something I’ve only recently discovered. You’re incredibly naive – so is much of your crowd. If you think people wearing lab coats are predominantly secular and progressive, evolutionists and academia inclusively, you’re not only naive – you’re dumb. Why don’t you take a little trip there in Minnesota to one of the fine medical communities made up of people in lab coats and ask them. Start with pharmaceuticals made up of organic chemists wearing lab coats. Now remember, pharmaceuticals like big oil, are joined at the hip with the Republican party. At least, that’s what your ilk has been bitching about for 30 years.

    As far as science, why debate? I really don’t mean this to come across as arrogant but I could shoot you down in a minute – and that would be from the dawn of science history. Give me an open forum and I will do so. Feel free to bring who you want. Not just the last 40 years. Let me mention a few names of Christian scientists: Newton, Copernicus, Da Vinci, Faraday, Mendel, Pasteur… would you like me to go on?

    But to end this, I’ll use your example of NASA. In fact, your example makes my case for what is wrong with modern liberalism and how shallow it really is.

    In 1969, we put the first man on the moon. In 10 years, we overcame a late start and blew right past the Soviet Union as the predominant space community. NASA was a very conservative, very tight group of scientists, engineers and military, mostly made up of of politically and spiritually conservative types. It’s a matter of historical record and you can feel free to look that up. You’ll find that to be fact if you’re honest.

    However, during the 70’s, “progressive” gov’t became more actively involved and NASA quickly became a bloated bureaucracy no longer capable of leading the world’s scientific community.

    Consider, in 1972 we were using the “shuttle” as the next generation of manned space flight. In 2008, we we were using the “shuttle” as the next generation of manned space flight. And you think that’s advancement?

    There’s your “progressive” politics at work.


  21. You’re raising the “Christian scientist” flag again?
    Tex, everybody in the times and places these men lived in was “Christian”.
    Kind of similar to calling America a “Christian” nation.


  22. Kurt-everyone was Christian for good reasons (they’d be punished otherwise) but that didn’t require them to write books of theology, like Newton. Mendel was a monk, for heaven’s sake. Plus, the fact that there are or are not Christian scientists proves nothing.

    But the broader point here is that religion is not de facto political, and is fully compatible with big chuncks of science (medicine, agricultural, engineering, chemistry, etc.)

    Progressivism as such really should have nothing to say about religion. It’s only certain (empirically false) forms of secularism (namely, people get less religious as they get richer/smarter) that would lead you to think that. Progressivism implies that social institutions (including capitalism at times)crystalize injustice of all kinds. The government is capable and has the power to work against that injustice. The Church may be one of those institutions but the seperation clause keeps the government from doing anything about it.


  23. Let me add on last thing-people were Christian back then not just because they’d get punk’d if they weren’t. If you read their works, they seriously believed it.


  24. Thank you blogoprofundo,

    Well stated – couldn’t have said that better myself.

    And if Kurt would note, he would notice that it wasn’t me who raised or said anything of “religion” until challenged other than using the word ‘secular’ which is now part of the common slang in reference to ‘progressives’.

    But I’m very comfortable debating theology (Christian) or the speculation called evolution if Kurt so desires…

    However, General Chen might have a heart attack though – for once I would agree that would be way off topic from a flag pin. The only issue that I can think of off the top of my head in which I agree with both Chen and Obama (scary stuff).


  25. Oh, one last thing for Chen. I call myself a Christian and I believe in the big bang. Do you think most Christians don’t?

    If so, you’ve been watching too much Bill Moyer and that awful Bill Maher. You’ll find Chen Christians are some of the most educated and brightest people America has to offer. This myth in the MSM we’re all a bunch of dummies is laughable. My church is chock full of scientists, lawyers, doctors, PHDs and the like. They’re just not secular.


  26. I won’t vote for Obama, but it has nothing to do with the idiotic flag pin thing. I won’t vote for him because of his views on taxes, the war on terror, foreign policy in general, his extreme views on abortion, and others.


  27. Chen,

    Few reasonable souls would argue that colleges, for the most part, have become bastions of liberal academics. It’s there strong suit. Here’s an example of your progressive party and its corresponding results in full view:

    http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php?id=wWwv6kBkcTbYktwbjrJkskjtdhknjqvf

    You’re brighter than this…jump of the sinking ship.


  28. of/off above. Sorry about the typo. Probably one of many.


  29. The flag pin doesn’t bother me. I’d have to say that the biggest reason I would never vote for Sen. Obama is that he’s a lousy bowler. I mean, how can we take a President seriously if he can’t bowl?


  30. “Few reasonable souls would argue that colleges, for the most part, have become bastions of liberal academics.” I’d agree with that. However, I think you probably meant to stick a ‘not’ in there somewhere, at which point I wouldn’t really agree.

    Nonetheless, as is obvious to me anyway, academics (as in professors) aren’t the ones running the university as a business, nor are they responsible for the increase in prestige that comes along with a college degree (which dilutes the pool) or the diminishing quality of the HS graduate. Or the huge demographic bubble which has increased the number of HS graduates.

    Notice also that these trends are duplicated, for the most part, in HS.


  31. Our system of higher education is not compatible with our democratic pretenses, nor the economy as it is today. That has little to do with the political views of the professors, I think.

    As for things that progressives have done since Carter, well I think you’re asking too much. I’m not interested in utopian progressivism. The goal isn’t to create the perfect status quo. The goal is to make sure that the status quo, as it is now, allows for equal treatment of all people within the system. Hardworking Americans going bankrupt due to high price of diabetes care ought to be deeply offensive (it’s very common, compared to other industrial nations.) Massive incarceration of black folks demonstrates that the rules need to be tweaked. That’s progressivism to me, and is compatible with free-market economics (where applicable) as well as big-time government intervention (where advisable.) And I think we’ve made progressive in this regard, thanks to the efforts of both Republicans and Democrats.


  32. Blogo,

    Hardworking Americans going bankrupt due to high price of diabetes care ought to be deeply offensive (it’s very common, compared to other industrial nations.) Massive incarceration of black folks demonstrates that the rules need to be tweaked.

    Type I Diabetes, yes. Type II, more common and usually self-induced, no. I feel no obligation for subsidizing poor lifestyle choices. The issue is not as simple as people would like to make it. And subsidized health care is not free enterprise at work – in fact, just the opposite.

    Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps blacks have higher incarceration rates because they simply commit more crime per capita? Say, the inner cities as example perhaps?

    Ironic you would use that as a model. Here is an textbook case of good intent gone bad implemented under a false premise. You have 70% illegitimacy rates and family units gone by the wayside, thinking the gov’t subsidizing housing and welfare an adequate substitute, and this is what you get from utopian progression. A disaster…

    The very same thing will happen to healthcare, social security and medicaid if we are not careful.


  33. Tex-

    General, let me explain something I’ve only recently discovered. You’re incredibly naive – so is much of your crowd. If you think people wearing lab coats are predominantly secular and progressive, evolutionists and academia inclusively, you’re not only naive – you’re dumb. Why don’t you take a little trip there in Minnesota to one of the fine medical communities made up of people in lab coats and ask them. Start with pharmaceuticals made up of organic chemists wearing lab coats. Now remember, pharmaceuticals like big oil, are joined at the hip with the Republican party. At least, that’s what your ilk has been bitching about for 30 years.

    I’m not sure that made any sense. “Joined at the hip” would refer to the influence of lobbyists and corporate greed, or at least I’ve always thought. Not necessarily any kind of ideological or religious tie there.

    But yes, I live in Minnesota, and last time I checked it was pretty secular progressive.

    As far as science, why debate? I really don’t mean this to come across as arrogant but I could shoot you down in a minute – and that would be from the dawn of science history. Give me an open forum and I will do so. Feel free to bring who you want. Not just the last 40 years. Let me mention a few names of Christian scientists: Newton, Copernicus, Da Vinci, Faraday, Mendel, Pasteur… would you like me to go on?

    You kind of scoffed at me bringing up women’s lib, and now you want to take a stroll through the centuries, when people were literally locked up if they didn’t profess their faith? Speaking of that (and since you brought up Copernicus), do you remember what Galileo got locked up for? I dunno, maybe I just have a poor understanding what secular means. I just know that when they built those F-117’s, they didn’t turn to God to find out how to build them, they turned to academia.

    Anyway, since we seem to be in agreement on the flag pin thing, perhaps I should make a new thread. This is kind of interesting though.


  34. Ironic you must revert back to the 17th century to persecute the church as example. Reminds me of the secularists who must revert to the Crusades to support their argument. By the way, Galileo never lost his faith because of the ignorance of the church, did he?

    Turn to academia for help building the F-117? I can hardly wait to pass to my brother-in-law who works for Lockheed what you just wrote. He’ll …. a brick.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: