That's interesting. You think maybe that's why Obama is now choosing to show flags behind him when he speaks? You think maybe he somehow feels intimidated to do so? It seems that on some occasions now Obama is choosing to salute the flag. I wonder. Is this being forced? Is it just wanting to get votes? Makes you think...dosen't it!
Obama's true color and Rev. Wright
- Thread starter Musketeer
- Start date
That's interesting. You think maybe that's why Obama is now choosing to show flags behind him when he speaks? You think maybe he somehow feels intimidated to do so? It seems that on some occasions now Obama is choosing to salute the flag. I wonder. Is this being forced? Is it just wanting to get votes? Makes you think...dosen't it!
I'm pretty sure we can find plenty of instances in the past where he's given speeches or other addresses with the flag behind him.
Also consider that maybe it's the venue that chose to puts the flags up. According to the articles he was
so most likely the NCC in Philly already has the flags up. Not wearing a flag pin is a bit different than asking people hosting him to take their flags down.
Or maybe he's done it plenty of times in the past and will do so plenty of times in the future and it just so happened that people are making a big deal over one instance where he was photographed not saluting. In fact, aside from that one picture, how many times can people say he has decided to not salute the flag? Does anyone have pictures of him refusing to do so at other times? Hell, maybe it's 50/50. Maybe he salutes only 25% of the time. Maybe he salutes 99% of the time. Maybe only when it's convenient but we can't base our assumptions on what shows up in the newspapers because those are only fraction of his daily life and career.
Yes, let's argue about whether Obamassiah salutes the flag, and ignore the sleazy deals with Rezko, the hate filled, race huckstering church he attended for 20 years and claims not to have noticed, or rubbing elbows with Weather Underground terrorists. There ya go, the Obamapologists have you asking the wrong questions again.
Not a chance. the flags were there because the Obama team thought it would help convey the message of the day.
I doubt 99%. At least not the time he is in his church. I kinda get the feeling that his congregation is not into wearing or saluting the US flag. Maybe that's where his habit of not wearing & saluting comes from?
Just good ole common sense. No candidate makes an important nation wide address without evaluating the stage setting.
Obama staffers getting the flag stage ready.
http://michellemalkin.com/
TacticalDefense1911
New member
Yet you sit here day in, day out bitching about everyone elses viewpoints that do not align with yours...I find that, um...hypocritical.
Gosh that's a great quote. Old Saul had a way with words for sure, no wonder he was such a popular guy.
Of course the Angel of Light is the first revolutionary in the xtian mythos. He's preceded by several Babylonian and Egyptian deities.
But for sure Old Nick should get some props for revolting against the ultimate in unyielding authority.
Obama, his preacher, the English language, and Patriotism
(but not in that order)
The English language is a wonderful means of communicating ideas, and has advantages over some other languages in that English, when properly used does not rely as much on the listener or reader needing to infer ideas and details from words not used. Many other languages rely heavily on this, getting much of the intended meaning from the context of the words as well as the words themselves. English does this to a degree as well, but not as much as some other languages.
One drawback to our English language is that when we do rely on context, or when we do not choose our words with precision, two people can read the same words, and reach two widely different interpretations. And that is part of the argument over the Pledge of Allegiance.
Like nearly everyone of my generation, I grew up reciting the Pledge every morning in school. I learned the words, and thought I understood them, but they had little real meaning to me for many years. As I got older, and more thoughtful, I cane to realize that the words of the Pledge did have a real and important meaning, if understood the way I came to understand them.
Each of us has a legally protected right to our own beliefs and opinions, and I am not asking any of you out there to change yours, only to consider how I understand the Pledge, and why I feel the way I do. For those who find some of the wording objectionable, my opinion is that you are not reading it the way I do. Arguments and reasons why certain parts of the Pledge are objectionable have been made, but the way I see it, I don't see any valid basis for them. I don't care who wrote the Pledge, or who had it modified, or even why, as I don't see any way any agenda could be promoted, if you understand the words the way I do.
I pledge allegiance (not obedience, we are pledging to be allies, not slaves)
To the Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands (not the government of our republic, or the people in it, or their policies, just the idea of our republican form of government)
One Nation, under God (and here many are having issues, but my opinion is that these words are a description of our nation, and we are not pledging anything to this line, it is simply a description. A clearer phrasing would have been "One Nation which is under God". And (like it or not,) since the overwhelming majority of Americans profess a belief in some form of Diety, and those religions all profess that God's laws come before man's laws, it is accurate to describe our nation as one which is "under God".
With Liberty and Justice for All (again, a description, this time of the ideals we hold for our nation. Not the absolute way it is, because, after all we are fallible mortals, but the way we wish, and strive for it to be.)
So, we pledge to be Allies of our flag and our system of government. Nothing more. All the rest is padding without any meaning to our pledge. I do not understand how anyone who desires to live in the US could object to that. After all, the flag is just a symbol, neither good or bad, and our system of government allows each of us to disagree, agree, object, hate, love,support, or even actively work against the administrators of our government and their policies, provided you do not cross the line into physical violence. That is our "freedom of speech", and we all use it to some degree daily. If you are not OK with that concept, you really ought to find some other part of the world, one where the people are more in line with your views.
Obama's Preacher (I do love the sound of that!
) Has upset a lot of folks with his sermons as currently being shown on the Internet and other sources. I can understand the origin of his anger, but I do deplore the words he choose to express his ideals. It truly conveys the impression of intolerance and racism, which doesn't play well with most of us. I think his main problem is communication, after all, saying America (meaning all of us) are responsible for the "sins" of our fathers is a flawed concept for modern times. We are certain responsible for admitting that these things did happen, WE didn't make them happen, or at least I didn't, and I don't think you did either. The good reverend has every right to be as angry and upset as he wishes, but only at those truly responsible for his percieved injuries, not at America, the ideal, or even America, the people. We are constantly told we should not hate the Japanese people for what was done in WWI, or the Germans, for what some German people did, or the Russians for what the communists did, how can it be right to hate America for what some americans did? I don' think it is.
And on the placing the hand on the heart as the flag passes by (giving the salute), while it may not be required by law or ordinance, it is custom, it is proper, and it is just good manners. We each have the right to abstain, should we so choose, but again, I have to wonder why? Not following our custom, shows only bad manners, as it appears rude. Not doint it as a sign of protest? Fine. But what are you protesting, really? Our flag, which has a long and honorable history? Or the actions and decisions of certain individuals with which you disagree? If only done for personal satisfaction, fine. But if done as a public protest, it loses a lot when people don't understand what and why. Simply not saluting (or standing) doesn't put across any message, other than you are being rude (or stupid). Obama can make a political statement by not doing it, provided it is explained. When private citizens don't do it, there is no explanation for the rest of us, and so it reflects badly on those who choose to protest this way.
To put it another way, if I am upset with something the President or Congress has done (or proposes to do), I will curse them, maybe even burn (or shoot) their pictures, but I won't burn our flag, just because scoundrels operate under, or hide behind our flag, doesn't mean the flag, or our system is at fault. Flawed, perhaps, but what isn't? Flawed, yes, as everthing done by man is to some degree, but responsible? No. At least, that's how I see it.
(but not in that order)
The English language is a wonderful means of communicating ideas, and has advantages over some other languages in that English, when properly used does not rely as much on the listener or reader needing to infer ideas and details from words not used. Many other languages rely heavily on this, getting much of the intended meaning from the context of the words as well as the words themselves. English does this to a degree as well, but not as much as some other languages.
One drawback to our English language is that when we do rely on context, or when we do not choose our words with precision, two people can read the same words, and reach two widely different interpretations. And that is part of the argument over the Pledge of Allegiance.
Like nearly everyone of my generation, I grew up reciting the Pledge every morning in school. I learned the words, and thought I understood them, but they had little real meaning to me for many years. As I got older, and more thoughtful, I cane to realize that the words of the Pledge did have a real and important meaning, if understood the way I came to understand them.
Each of us has a legally protected right to our own beliefs and opinions, and I am not asking any of you out there to change yours, only to consider how I understand the Pledge, and why I feel the way I do. For those who find some of the wording objectionable, my opinion is that you are not reading it the way I do. Arguments and reasons why certain parts of the Pledge are objectionable have been made, but the way I see it, I don't see any valid basis for them. I don't care who wrote the Pledge, or who had it modified, or even why, as I don't see any way any agenda could be promoted, if you understand the words the way I do.
I pledge allegiance (not obedience, we are pledging to be allies, not slaves)
To the Flag, and to the Republic for which it stands (not the government of our republic, or the people in it, or their policies, just the idea of our republican form of government)
One Nation, under God (and here many are having issues, but my opinion is that these words are a description of our nation, and we are not pledging anything to this line, it is simply a description. A clearer phrasing would have been "One Nation which is under God". And (like it or not,) since the overwhelming majority of Americans profess a belief in some form of Diety, and those religions all profess that God's laws come before man's laws, it is accurate to describe our nation as one which is "under God".
With Liberty and Justice for All (again, a description, this time of the ideals we hold for our nation. Not the absolute way it is, because, after all we are fallible mortals, but the way we wish, and strive for it to be.)
So, we pledge to be Allies of our flag and our system of government. Nothing more. All the rest is padding without any meaning to our pledge. I do not understand how anyone who desires to live in the US could object to that. After all, the flag is just a symbol, neither good or bad, and our system of government allows each of us to disagree, agree, object, hate, love,support, or even actively work against the administrators of our government and their policies, provided you do not cross the line into physical violence. That is our "freedom of speech", and we all use it to some degree daily. If you are not OK with that concept, you really ought to find some other part of the world, one where the people are more in line with your views.
Obama's Preacher (I do love the sound of that!
) Has upset a lot of folks with his sermons as currently being shown on the Internet and other sources. I can understand the origin of his anger, but I do deplore the words he choose to express his ideals. It truly conveys the impression of intolerance and racism, which doesn't play well with most of us. I think his main problem is communication, after all, saying America (meaning all of us) are responsible for the "sins" of our fathers is a flawed concept for modern times. We are certain responsible for admitting that these things did happen, WE didn't make them happen, or at least I didn't, and I don't think you did either. The good reverend has every right to be as angry and upset as he wishes, but only at those truly responsible for his percieved injuries, not at America, the ideal, or even America, the people. We are constantly told we should not hate the Japanese people for what was done in WWI, or the Germans, for what some German people did, or the Russians for what the communists did, how can it be right to hate America for what some americans did? I don' think it is.And on the placing the hand on the heart as the flag passes by (giving the salute), while it may not be required by law or ordinance, it is custom, it is proper, and it is just good manners. We each have the right to abstain, should we so choose, but again, I have to wonder why? Not following our custom, shows only bad manners, as it appears rude. Not doint it as a sign of protest? Fine. But what are you protesting, really? Our flag, which has a long and honorable history? Or the actions and decisions of certain individuals with which you disagree? If only done for personal satisfaction, fine. But if done as a public protest, it loses a lot when people don't understand what and why. Simply not saluting (or standing) doesn't put across any message, other than you are being rude (or stupid). Obama can make a political statement by not doing it, provided it is explained. When private citizens don't do it, there is no explanation for the rest of us, and so it reflects badly on those who choose to protest this way.
To put it another way, if I am upset with something the President or Congress has done (or proposes to do), I will curse them, maybe even burn (or shoot) their pictures, but I won't burn our flag, just because scoundrels operate under, or hide behind our flag, doesn't mean the flag, or our system is at fault. Flawed, perhaps, but what isn't? Flawed, yes, as everthing done by man is to some degree, but responsible? No. At least, that's how I see it.
I did this kinda out of order, sorry. 
Goes both ways.
It is not honorable to relocate indigenous people out of convenience. It is not honorable to preach freedom from colonial rule all the while allowing the ownership of slaves. It is not honorable to preach a nation run "by the people" while depriving half the population from having the right to vote because their reproductive organs are on the inside. It is not honorable to send kids of different colors to different schools. It is not honorable to imprison citizens for being of Japanese descent.
There are many honorable aspects of America's history but it is far from stainless and there are just as many dishonorable ones to speak of.
So yeah, some people choose to protest against a number of the not-so-honorable aspects of this country's past but it's not why I don't recite the pledge or put my hand on my heart. And refusing to do those things in no way makes me less of an American than you or anyone else in this thread.
When you see others protesting by not saluting do you make the effort to find out what they're protesting or do you just assume they're being rude? I don't suppose you'd expect or appreciate them coming up to you and everyone else that saw them in order to explain their decision.
I may disagree but damn good post, dude.
Agreed, but...
It's not just the sins of our fathers. A lot of people that committed such sins against him and people of his generation are still alive today, some of them still sitting members of Congress or in other powerful positions.
Well I tend to disagree with both the idea that it is and certainly the idea that it should be. I don't believe this country is a nation which under god regardless of what the people of this nation believe. I don't believe what those people believe is real so I'm not going to concede to the idea that this is a country under something that I don't believe exists. That pledge, to be taken seriously as a pledge, requires me to acknowledge something I don't believe is true. If I'm dishonest about one aspect of a pledge that I make I nullify the entire thing.
This argument gets lamer every time it's spoken. If you don't like gun control or universal health care or any other liberal ideal then maybe you should move somewhere that is more in line with your views.
Goes both ways.
Customs of cultures always change. This is one that some, including myself, believe should change.
I'm sorry, what?? If you mean the flag itself I don't see how a symbol by itself can have an honorable history but if you mean the nation it represents - and I'm assuming you do, sorry if I misunderstood - then I don't know what version of history you've been reading but the catalyst for this thread and controversial issue is the flat out fact that this country does not have an honorable history.
It is not honorable to relocate indigenous people out of convenience. It is not honorable to preach freedom from colonial rule all the while allowing the ownership of slaves. It is not honorable to preach a nation run "by the people" while depriving half the population from having the right to vote because their reproductive organs are on the inside. It is not honorable to send kids of different colors to different schools. It is not honorable to imprison citizens for being of Japanese descent.
There are many honorable aspects of America's history but it is far from stainless and there are just as many dishonorable ones to speak of.
So yeah, some people choose to protest against a number of the not-so-honorable aspects of this country's past but it's not why I don't recite the pledge or put my hand on my heart. And refusing to do those things in no way makes me less of an American than you or anyone else in this thread.
Well, Obama did explain his but I have no obligation to explain my reasons to anyone at all. I don't have to care what you think of why I do or don't do certain things. I don't have to care what you or anyone else thinks of me for those things. If I'm protesting something I'll make it a point that people know what I'm protesting.
When you see others protesting by not saluting do you make the effort to find out what they're protesting or do you just assume they're being rude? I don't suppose you'd expect or appreciate them coming up to you and everyone else that saw them in order to explain their decision.
Now that is certainly a form of obvious protest. I don't think I'd ever get to the point of burning the flag but I'm sure glad we still have the right to do so.
But it doesn't preclude the idea that the system is at fault and that flag represents, among other things, that system.
Rock on.
I may disagree but damn good post, dude.Wildalaska
Moderator
Who cares? What business is it of yours? This is America, I can stand on my head and spit nickels if I want. I got the natural, god given clear intent of the constitution constitutional right to bellow the Internationale when some fat chick is mangling Keys hymm to martial gallantry.
And rude? How about making me stand for the anthem in a two bit minor leauge hockey game so I dont have to be abused by troglodytes who think the only thing that makes em American is to stand when a plagiarized English beer drinking song is sung badly? Thats rude.....
WildmrfeedomofspeechAlaska TM
So it's rude because it's a kind of protest you don't like? Is there any kind of protest you don't find rude?
What exactly are our guns for? Violent protest. It's pretty rude to take up arms against the government yet we still support it if the situation ever comes to that.
Although I do understand that different people have different definitions on what is and isn't "rude". There's no standard for it so again, I don't really care if you find it "rude" that I disagree with the pledge and I'd bet others don't care you find it rude that they won't salute. As you said a few posts ago, "good manners" escapes some. The simple fact is that "good manners" are not universal and can mean different things.
TacticalDefense1911
New member
I think that what is trying to be said is that there is a general acceptance of what you do when the pledge is said. Putting your hand over your heart and saying the pledge is the accepted thing to do. Its what I do; its what many do. To do otherwise is outside the norm and will be viewed in a dim light by many, for better or worse. Fortunately this country still gives you the freedom to be "outside" the norm which is what separates us from many other countries.
Wasnt this thread about Obama's true colors...?!?
Wasnt this thread about Obama's true colors...?!?
Well again, it doesn't matter one bit what light others view it. Being outside the norm is abnormal, but it's certainly not wrong and it's certainly not un-American.
Fewer and fewer, though. Pretty much the entire first world allows that freedom.
Indeed it was and my point still stands. His decision to not salute the flag in no way makes him less respectful of America than you or anyone that does salute the flag.