JSG wrote: You like that phrase "fundamental transformation" a lot, don't you? I think you're reading too much into the flag.
Personally, I think there are more important things to discuss -- issues that actually affect me.
Just google the phrase and you'll see where PS got it. It's a parroting talking point. There is no proof to PS's claims, just a desperate hope that if PS repeats something enough, everyone will start believing it's true.
GWB signs an actual flag in violation of the US Flag Code, but we aren't hearing a peep about that. Just shows that this is about a hatred of President Obama and nothing else.
You are right, there are way more important things to discuss.
When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter
Soulshiner wrote: GWB signs an actual flag in violation of the US Flag Code, but we aren't hearing a peep about that. Just shows that this is about a hatred of President Obama and nothing else.
If you were listening, you would have heard some very loud peeps from lots of conservatives about what a freakin idiot Bush was being when he signed that flag.
But it's a whole lot better for your dismissal to imagine that conservatives ignored it, so you keep chugging along in your delusion.
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Soulshiner wrote: GWB signs an actual flag in violation of the US Flag Code, but we aren't hearing a peep about that. Just shows that this is about a hatred of President Obama and nothing else.
If you were listening, you would have heard some very loud peeps from lots of conservatives about what a freakin idiot Bush was being when he signed that flag.
But it's a whole lot better for your dismissal to imagine that conservatives ignored it, so you keep chugging along in your delusion.
Just went through this entire thread and the ONLY peep from a conservative on this thread about the signing of the flag is this:
"I can understand someone wanting a flag autographed by POTUS - even a flag autographed by the current one."
Other than that, a whole lot of silence, talk about delusional...
When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter
Soulshiner wrote: Just went through this entire thread and the ONLY peep from a conservative on this thread about the signing of the flag is this:
"I can understand someone wanting a flag autographed by POTUS - even a flag autographed by the current one."
Other than that, a whole lot of silence, talk about delusional...
This thread?!?!?! you went through this thread for reaction to an incident back in 2003? :rofl
I just went through this thread, and nobody said anything about Obama's failure to put his hand to his heart during the presentation of the flag either - since you didn't say anything about it, you must support it, right?
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Photo-fish wrote: What do you think of the LGBT movement using this flag?
The flag takes Old Glory, removes a very important part of it and substitutes another symbol in its place.
I've taken issue in the past with that one as well fish - precisely for the same reason. I've taken issue with the ecology flag for precisely the same reasons. All of them are alterations of the flag of the union.
If you wish to have a flag to represent yourself, then do not alter the flag of the union for that purpose. The flag of the union has symbolism and meaning which should not be altered for any purpose, is that so hard to understand?
How many take issue with the "Stars and Bars" flag solely because of its symbolism of a divided nation, or its perceived attachment to slavery and racism? Flying that flag is offensive to many, is it not? Is voicing that displeasure also expected to be withheld? How about flying a the flag of fascist Germany - is that freedom of expression to be tolerated without voicing opposition to having it flown? What if the Communist Party USA were to alter Old Glory and substitute a hammer and sickle for the field of stars while retaining all else. Would all of you equally say that there is no meaning to be found in that substitution?
archer wrote: When your original outrage falls flat.....try a few imaginary/what if outrages. Way to go PS, now you are tilting at nonexistent windmills.
So how do you feel about the topic...putting the president's face on the American flag?
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
archer wrote: When your original outrage falls flat.....try a few imaginary/what if outrages. Way to go PS, now you are tilting at nonexistent windmills.
Are you in favor of politicians putting their face on a flag?
I'm not in favor of any politician putting their face on a flag. These people are supposed to be public servants? Are they forgetting they are "serving as president", not King?
Too bad future generations aren't here to see all the great things we are spending their $$ on!!
:rofl
