Support
Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
Free Speech Is Free Speech Is Free Speech: We Don't Get To Choose!
Sorry, but this is just stupid. Burning an American flag, while offensive to many (including me), is obviously a protected expression of a political opinion, and the idea that it should be illegal is illogical, irrational, and just plain embarrassing.
All in for Senator Steve Daines as he proposes an Amendment for a strong BAN on burning our American Flag. A no brainer!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 15, 2019
"We had to destroy the village to save it" is not wise public policy. A vibrant public square, in which all ideas are fair game for criticism, but none are prohibited, is the best way to convince the body politic that free markets and limited government and freedom of expression and religion are absolutely the pinnacle of political philosophy. Limiting speech from one side of the debate eases the way for exactly the same thing from the other side when they return to power.
Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)Posted by: mallfly the Peach of the MSM at June 16, 2019 02:42 PM (ZqRa6)
2
Exactly so
Posted by: Traveling Man&&&& at June 16, 2019 02:44 PM (6HQop)
3
Workers at Volkswagen's plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, have voted against forming a union.
A win would have offered the United Auto Workers its first fully organized, foreign-owned auto assembly plant in the traditionally anti-union South.
Workers at Volkswagen's plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, have voted against forming a union.
A win would have offered the United Auto Workers its first fully organized, foreign-owned auto assembly plant in the traditionally anti-union South.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 02:44 PM (aKsyK)
4
Is it possible he's trolling the left by trying to get them to advocate for free speech?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
5
hiya
Posted by: JT at June 16, 2019 02:46 PM (JvvIt)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 02:46 PM (aKsyK)
7
So now we get to see the left come out and defend "offensive speech", to stay on the opposite side of Trump?
(but only THEIR offensive and/or anti-American speech is allowed, will be their spin, I suppose)
(but only THEIR offensive and/or anti-American speech is allowed, will be their spin, I suppose)
Posted by: illiniwek at June 16, 2019 02:47 PM (Cus5s)
8
Flag burning ain't speech - it's an action!
I can't kick my neighbor's dog or kid and claim it's free speech.
Leftist judge was wrong as heck.
I can't kick my neighbor's dog or kid and claim it's free speech.
Leftist judge was wrong as heck.
Posted by: Sibyl S at June 16, 2019 02:48 PM (N7aHX)
Posted by: Jukin the Deplorable and Profoundly Unserious at June 16, 2019 02:50 PM (pw+jk)
10
It's an incitement and profanity . Both which are not protected speech. They are not burning the flag as political speech. They burn the flag for the same purpose as someone intends when they spit on you. It's not setting forth a political position that allows a rebuttal. Further I never understood the logic that burning the flag is political speech. It's a physical action . Same illogical basis that giving money to politicians is speech.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:52 PM (2DOZq)
11
That video always makes me smile.
Posted by: NativeNH at June 16, 2019 02:52 PM (dtRY5)
Posted by: Bea Arthur's Dick at June 16, 2019 02:52 PM (jWe5r)
13
I just want to have my punching out the guy burning the flag be free speech.
Posted by: teh Wind at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (iccf2)
14
I agree 100%, CBD.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (A2Uq6)
15
Is it legal to burn currency?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (2DOZq)
16
Hmm. Any Ghey Pride flags been burned? What would the reaction be?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:55 PM (/dN1M)
17
Uh, the Boy Scouts used to dispose of worn out US flags by burning. That way, the flag would never be used as a rag or in a similarly disrespectful fashion.
Posted by: chuckR at June 16, 2019 02:55 PM (bRvKP)
18
Is burning a cigarette free speech?
Posted by: Sjg at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (gDSJf)
19
Is it legal to burn currency?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation
----
No, it isn't, because not your property. It's only on loan.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation
----
No, it isn't, because not your property. It's only on loan.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (/dN1M)
20
4 Is it possible he's trolling the left by trying to get them to advocate for free speech?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
You have to wonder. He's a master at heightening the contradictions in leftist positions.
Then again, maybe he's just striking a pose to appeal to patriotic types who haven't thought this through.
Or maybe he's just quacking like Chiang.
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
You have to wonder. He's a master at heightening the contradictions in leftist positions.
Then again, maybe he's just striking a pose to appeal to patriotic types who haven't thought this through.
Or maybe he's just quacking like Chiang.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (A2Uq6)
21
It's an incitement and profanity .
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:52 PM (2DOZq)
It is neither. It is obviously political discourse.
Who is being incited to do what? And how can the burning of a symbol be obscene.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:52 PM (2DOZq)
It is neither. It is obviously political discourse.
Who is being incited to do what? And how can the burning of a symbol be obscene.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (wYseH)
22
19 Is it legal to burn currency?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation
----
No, it isn't, because not your property. It's only on loan.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (/dN1M)
Is it legal to burn a cross on your property?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation
----
No, it isn't, because not your property. It's only on loan.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (/dN1M)
Is it legal to burn a cross on your property?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:57 PM (2DOZq)
23
16 Hmm. Any Ghey Pride flags been burned? What would the reaction be?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:55 PM (/dN1M)
I wondered the same thing. I'd love to see someone do that.
Also the UN flag.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:55 PM (/dN1M)
I wondered the same thing. I'd love to see someone do that.
Also the UN flag.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 02:57 PM (A2Uq6)
24
The proper way to handle this is to make flag burning an affirmative defense for simple assualt.
Posted by: Jean at June 16, 2019 02:57 PM (7WozP)
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
26
I guess he could have stayed out of this, but I think he genuinely loves this flag and all it stands for
Posted by: It's me donna at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (O2RFr)
27
Uh, the Boy Scouts used to dispose of worn out US flags by burning. That way, the flag would never be used as a rag or in a similarly disrespectful fashion.
Posted by: chuckR
-------
They still conduct 'Retirement' ceremonies. They take care of mine, about once a year, after they become frayed.
Posted by: chuckR
-------
They still conduct 'Retirement' ceremonies. They take care of mine, about once a year, after they become frayed.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (/dN1M)
28
Is it possible he's trolling the left by trying to get them to advocate for free speech?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
That is a very interesting question. I doubt it, but I certainly hope that I am wrong.
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
That is a very interesting question. I doubt it, but I certainly hope that I am wrong.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (wYseH)
29
burning the Koran or drawing Muhammad ... also protected, except you may have to live in hiding from the imported jihadists.
Last time someone tried to make a public spectacle of burning a koran, or putting it in a toilet ... all hell broke out against them. But "piss Christ" gets public funding as brave art/speech. (cuz one in history has ever trashed Christianity before /s)
Last time someone tried to make a public spectacle of burning a koran, or putting it in a toilet ... all hell broke out against them. But "piss Christ" gets public funding as brave art/speech. (cuz one in history has ever trashed Christianity before /s)
Posted by: illiniwek at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (Cus5s)
30
A flag burner is sawing on a branch he is standing on. Maybe he's dumb, maybe he's an anarchist.
Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (Nz4oZ)
31
I'm fine either way. An amendment is so limited in scope and so difficult to pass that ratifying one to protect the flag poses no danger to free speech generally. I'm also fine is one is not passed. But there's no parallel with the left's behavior, which tries to punish and forbid speech it does not like without doing the hard work of securing a constitutional amendment (because the left could not secure one).
Posted by: bear with asymmetrical balls at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (H5knJ)
32
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:56 PM (wYseH)
I say it is. I guess we're at a stand off.
I say it is. I guess we're at a stand off.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (Wx/+I)
34
no one in history ... not "one"
Posted by: illiniwek at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (Cus5s)
35
See cross burning
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
Also protected speech. Just don't burn it on my lawn or I will shoot you.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
Also protected speech. Just don't burn it on my lawn or I will shoot you.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (wYseH)
36
Try wearing a MAGA hat
Posted by: It's me donna at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (O2RFr)
37
28 Is it possible he's trolling the left by trying to get them to advocate for free speech?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
That is a very interesting question. I doubt it, but I certainly hope that I am wrong.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (wYseH)
The thing is, they probably aren't sure themselves. He's played the rope-a-dope on them so many times now that I bet they're leery of wading in without some careful consideration.
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM (tKktY)
That is a very interesting question. I doubt it, but I certainly hope that I am wrong.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (wYseH)
The thing is, they probably aren't sure themselves. He's played the rope-a-dope on them so many times now that I bet they're leery of wading in without some careful consideration.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (A2Uq6)
38
From the US Flag Code: (k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.
Posted by: Ironwood at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (n5L++)
39
35 See cross burning
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
Also protected speech. Just don't burn it on my lawn or I will shoot you.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (wYseH)
No it's not. The Supreme Court ruled that states can ban cross burnings.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:58 PM (2DOZq)
Also protected speech. Just don't burn it on my lawn or I will shoot you.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 02:59 PM (wYseH)
No it's not. The Supreme Court ruled that states can ban cross burnings.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (2DOZq)
40
No law should be created to impinge on free speech, even symbolic speech. Besides, you can just track down the commie bastard and beat the shit out of him later.
Posted by: Anonymous White Male at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (m79Dg)
41
Burning the flag isn't speech. It's action. It's also incitement to violence, which is never protected by the first amendment.
Posted by: Ernst Schreiber at June 16, 2019 03:01 PM (F8/jl)
42
38 From the US Flag Code: (k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.
That's it... The flag burners are just going by the US flag code
That's it... The flag burners are just going by the US flag code
Posted by: It's me donna at June 16, 2019 03:01 PM (O2RFr)
43
The Supreme Court ruled that states can ban cross burnings.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (2DOZq)
They struck down a Virginia law outlawing it. That's all I could find at short notice.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (2DOZq)
They struck down a Virginia law outlawing it. That's all I could find at short notice.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:02 PM (wYseH)
44
From the US Flag Code: (k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.
Posted by: Ironwood
----------
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Posted by: Ironwood
----------
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:02 PM (Ou6XS)
45
Actually, they struck down part of the law. They left standing the part where its intent is to intimidate, or something like that.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:03 PM (wYseH)
46
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So didja set him on fire ?
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So didja set him on fire ?
Posted by: JT at June 16, 2019 03:04 PM (JvvIt)
47
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (2DOZq)
And all of a sudden the SCOTUS is the arbiter of all? How about abortion? You on board with Roe vs. Wade?
And all of a sudden the SCOTUS is the arbiter of all? How about abortion? You on board with Roe vs. Wade?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:05 PM (wYseH)
48
re 3: Sen Sanders has (several times actually) proposed a bill to (a) eliminate the secret ballot needed to certify the union as the workers' official representative and (b) eliminate right to work laws
a true friend of the working man
a true friend of the working man
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of the MSM at June 16, 2019 03:05 PM (ZqRa6)
49
Agreed. Trump needs to forget about these stupid showboating amendments and start doing something about actual violations on our free speech by big tech.
Posted by: Dan Smoot's Apprentice at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (H8QX8)
50
I hate it when Trump gets sucked into stupid shit like this.
I've gotten used to him Trumping into a meaningless popular position.
It'll gain more votes than it loses and even if something happens it's irrelevant to any of the current Nation Ending Crises.
I've gotten used to him Trumping into a meaningless popular position.
It'll gain more votes than it loses and even if something happens it's irrelevant to any of the current Nation Ending Crises.
Posted by: DaveA at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (FhXTo)
51
I'm not going to look into it, but somehow, burning a cross never made any sense to me, using *any* reasoning.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (/dN1M)
52
I thought we were against hate speech....
Posted by: Uncle Pinochet's Heli Tours at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (Ayk4B)
53
47 Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:00 PM (2DOZq)
And all of a sudden the SCOTUS is the arbiter of all? How about abortion? You on board with Roe vs. Wade?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:05 PM (wYseH)
Aw because I disagree with you you have to bring up a disgusting illogical comparison that had nothing to do with my point about flag burning as an incitement. I'm done with you.
And all of a sudden the SCOTUS is the arbiter of all? How about abortion? You on board with Roe vs. Wade?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:05 PM (wYseH)
Aw because I disagree with you you have to bring up a disgusting illogical comparison that had nothing to do with my point about flag burning as an incitement. I'm done with you.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:07 PM (2DOZq)
54
Part of me agrees with you, CBD.
The other part of me says the culture war is total war. You either fight to win or you don't.
The other part of me says the culture war is total war. You either fight to win or you don't.
Posted by: FireHorse at June 16, 2019 03:07 PM (ta49A)
55
a noose or burning cross near a black person ... has that been ruled "hate speech" and illegal? It would surely get a student expelled (but they are all faked). But would it count as "provocation" if the black target punched the KKK burner or noose placer?
idk, but judges would at least be sympathetic, but a flag burner in front of a Trump crowd, or at a Vet's memorial service ... would not count as provocation, is my guess.
Oberlin maybe moved us toward slander against white people not being legal, or at least not being civilly protected. (I'm not clear on the difference, but I think Oberlin lady did not break a law, but committed a tort, allowing civil action?)
idk, but judges would at least be sympathetic, but a flag burner in front of a Trump crowd, or at a Vet's memorial service ... would not count as provocation, is my guess.
Oberlin maybe moved us toward slander against white people not being legal, or at least not being civilly protected. (I'm not clear on the difference, but I think Oberlin lady did not break a law, but committed a tort, allowing civil action?)
Posted by: illiniwek at June 16, 2019 03:09 PM (Cus5s)
56
the Boy Scouts used to dispose of worn out US flags by burning
There were so many for a few years post 9/11 that the local library had a specific disposal bin.
There were so many for a few years post 9/11 that the local library had a specific disposal bin.
Posted by: DaveA at June 16, 2019 03:09 PM (FhXTo)
57
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So didja set him on fire ?
Posted by: JT
---------
It brought into question his Fire Building Merit Badge.
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So didja set him on fire ?
Posted by: JT
---------
It brought into question his Fire Building Merit Badge.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:09 PM (/dN1M)
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:10 PM (/dN1M)
59
Have OSHA or some other agency declare flags must be made from fireproof material. Problem solved.
Posted by: Weasel at June 16, 2019 03:10 PM (MVjcR)
60
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So he didn't get the chemistry merit badge, obviously.
Posted by: Mike Hammer
So he didn't get the chemistry merit badge, obviously.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 03:10 PM (A2Uq6)
61
First - I feel no duty to respect the "free speech" rights of others who not only do not respect or acknowledge mine, but are actively suppressing mine. Reciprocity is a thing.
Second - at what point does this cease to be speech, political or otherwise, but instead a display of cultural dominance and intimidation of an alien culture over ours? Especially since said culture holds values diametrically opposed to ours? Including the subject of basic rights?
There is a principle I keep going back to, one where you apply rules appropriate to the behavior displayed. It applies in trade among nations and in what a nation expects of those within its borders. You can't treat barbarians and mortal enemies the same as loyal citizens. It just does not work. One would think this would be obvious by now, but I guess there's a reason I'm used to disappointment.
Second - at what point does this cease to be speech, political or otherwise, but instead a display of cultural dominance and intimidation of an alien culture over ours? Especially since said culture holds values diametrically opposed to ours? Including the subject of basic rights?
There is a principle I keep going back to, one where you apply rules appropriate to the behavior displayed. It applies in trade among nations and in what a nation expects of those within its borders. You can't treat barbarians and mortal enemies the same as loyal citizens. It just does not work. One would think this would be obvious by now, but I guess there's a reason I'm used to disappointment.
Posted by: Brother Cavil at June 16, 2019 03:10 PM (lLeln)
62
One of the scouts in the local troop complained that burning a nylon flag would produce toxic pollution.
Tell him it identifies as being cotton.
Tell him it identifies as being cotton.
Posted by: Bert G at June 16, 2019 03:11 PM (OMsf+)
63
Oberlin maybe moved us toward slander against white people not being legal, or at least not being civilly protected. (I'm not clear on the difference, but I think Oberlin lady harridan did not break a law, but committed a tort, allowing civil action?)
Posted by: illiniwek
----------
Edited
Posted by: illiniwek
----------
Edited
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:11 PM (/dN1M)
64
The Supreme Court discovered that burning the flag was speech in the 60's. At that time, most types of "disrespect" of the US flag were illegal because of state laws.
I used to agree with this decision, because some kinds of conduct are in fact "speech" for first amendment purposes. More recently, however, I have come to realize that this decision is actually part of an overall attack on nationalism and patriotism. This act is actually closer to spitting in someone's face than it is to speech.
I used to agree with this decision, because some kinds of conduct are in fact "speech" for first amendment purposes. More recently, however, I have come to realize that this decision is actually part of an overall attack on nationalism and patriotism. This act is actually closer to spitting in someone's face than it is to speech.
Posted by: RecklessDisregard at June 16, 2019 03:12 PM (sb5kE)
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:12 PM (/dN1M)
66
51
I'm not going to look into it, but somehow, burning a cross never made any sense to me, using *any* reasoning.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (/dN1M)
+++I have never understood the significance of burning a cross, either. What is it supposed to imply?
I'm not going to look into it, but somehow, burning a cross never made any sense to me, using *any* reasoning.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at June 16, 2019 03:06 PM (/dN1M)
+++I have never understood the significance of burning a cross, either. What is it supposed to imply?
Posted by: washrivergal at June 16, 2019 03:13 PM (Kcf2u)
67
Rick Monday is a war criminal who violated the free speech rights of red-blooded patriotic American citizens!
Posted by: Cuckshed Courier at June 16, 2019 03:15 PM (gDSJf)
68
I have never understood the significance of burning a cross, either. What is it supposed to imply?
Posted by: washrivergal
Dumbness ?
Posted by: washrivergal
Dumbness ?
Posted by: JT at June 16, 2019 03:15 PM (JvvIt)
69
Aw because I disagree with you you have to bring up a
disgusting illogical comparison that had nothing to do with my point
about flag burning as an incitement. I'm done with you.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:07 PM (2DOZq)
You cited the Supreme Court as the final word. I asked whether you also accept their abortion decision. I think that is a reasonable question, but please, run off in a huff.
disgusting illogical comparison that had nothing to do with my point
about flag burning as an incitement. I'm done with you.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:07 PM (2DOZq)
You cited the Supreme Court as the final word. I asked whether you also accept their abortion decision. I think that is a reasonable question, but please, run off in a huff.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:15 PM (wYseH)
70
Chinese woman almost stomps turtle eggs in Florida, horrendous felony. American killing a human being at 8 months gestation, meh.
Posted by: Bernie sanders at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (QLZK6)
71
Can I burn a rainbow flag and not have my life destroyed in the process?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (nWmg2)
72
And all of a sudden the SCOTUS is the arbiter of all? How about abortion? You on board with Roe vs. Wade?
IIRC, (and I'm not looking it up), it was Thomas who was at the forefront of saying oh no cross burning is different. I give him some deference there.
IIRC, (and I'm not looking it up), it was Thomas who was at the forefront of saying oh no cross burning is different. I give him some deference there.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at June 16, 2019 03:17 PM (fuK7c)
73
i'm probably an outlier here, but burn the flag, fine. but I expect another persons actions to defend it also free speech .
Posted by: willow at June 16, 2019 03:17 PM (r/xAU)
74
IIRC, the Brandenburg doctrine says that even incitement is protected unless there's an imminent danger of violence. It's been the free speech doctrine for nearly 50 years and I think it's a good one.
IIRC, the Brandenburg doctrine says that even incitement is protected unless there's an imminent danger of violence. It's been the free speech doctrine for nearly 50 years and I think it's a good one.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 16, 2019 03:18 PM (Wx/+I)
75
Yeah, I hate to see the flag getting burned -- it's a childish tantrum -- but this is America and we don't bestow magical properties to icons. It's the idea that is sacred.
Let the idiots burn the flag and reveal themselves, so we'll know.
Let the idiots burn the flag and reveal themselves, so we'll know.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 03:18 PM (kQs4Y)
76
Chinese woman almost stomps turtle eggs in Florida, horrendous felony.
Posted by: Bernie sanders at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (QLZK6)
Her actions are protected speech!
Posted by: Bernie sanders at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (QLZK6)
Her actions are protected speech!
Posted by: Flag Burner Logic at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (tVQUs)
77
How about that dumbass Senator propose an Amendment to abolish the income tax, or repeal the NFA or reciprocity for CCW's.
You know, something useful instead of the nonsense of an 8 year old.
You know, something useful instead of the nonsense of an 8 year old.
Posted by: Hairyback Guy at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (Z+IKu)
78
Cross burning as a Klan hate symbol was actually taken from the movie Birth of a Nation. I think cross burning goes all the way back to Medieval times.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (2DOZq)
79
4 Is it possible he's trolling the left by trying to get them to advocate for free speech?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM
I am wondering the same thing.
Considering the Left thinks that burning alphabet soup mafia flags and Islamic country flags is "hate speech", maybe he's setting them up to consider the burning of the American flag as "hate speech" as well.
Or, if they are going to deny that burning the American flag is hate speech, then, to be consistent, they have to deny that burning any other flag is "hate speech" as well. The alphabet soup mafia flag is a political flag, so burning it should be protected political speech, correct?
Posted by: windbag at June 16, 2019 02:45 PM
I am wondering the same thing.
Considering the Left thinks that burning alphabet soup mafia flags and Islamic country flags is "hate speech", maybe he's setting them up to consider the burning of the American flag as "hate speech" as well.
Or, if they are going to deny that burning the American flag is hate speech, then, to be consistent, they have to deny that burning any other flag is "hate speech" as well. The alphabet soup mafia flag is a political flag, so burning it should be protected political speech, correct?
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (7A4qQ)
80
I absolutely agree that burning the flag is protected speech. However, arguing that point is, shall we say, unattractive to most people. Watch as all the dem nominees will now defend burning the flag. If Trump is fer it, they're agin it. Whether he did it on purpose or not doesn't matter.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (gC2IV)
81
Chinese woman almost stomps turtle eggs in Florida, horrendous felony. American killing a human being at 8 months gestation, meh.
Posted by: Bernie sanders at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (QLZK6)
Little known fact (I think): calling someone a turtle egg is an arch insult in Mandarin. Kind of like calling someone an SOB, but much worse. Fighting words, IIRC.
Posted by: Bernie sanders at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (QLZK6)
Little known fact (I think): calling someone a turtle egg is an arch insult in Mandarin. Kind of like calling someone an SOB, but much worse. Fighting words, IIRC.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 03:21 PM (A2Uq6)
82
Meanwhile, try to draw a picture of Mohammed and our government will recruit terrorists to attempt to kill you so they can film it.
Posted by: Sjg at June 16, 2019 03:21 PM (gDSJf)
83
But OUR speech is already being infringed. Perhaps it's time to start taking control of it back.
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at June 16, 2019 03:21 PM (ABuva)
84
Got to go do some stupid shit, so snob hour is over !!
Posted by: REDACTED at June 16, 2019 03:21 PM (DPjeO)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:21 PM (wYseH)
86
Whatever happened to just simply beating the shit out of people doing stuff you don't like?
Posted by: Weasel at June 16, 2019 03:22 PM (MVjcR)
87
Forget the Balanced Budget Amendment, I'd be happy with the Budget Amendment, where we have to pass one every year.
Forget the Balanced Budget Amendment, I'd be happy with the Budget Amendment, where we have to pass one every year.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh at June 16, 2019 03:22 PM (Wx/+I)
88
Let the idiots burn the flag and reveal themselves, so we'll know.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 03:18 PM (kQs4Y)
===
This exactly the right formula, and also why I try not to be too reactive when I encounter anti semitism and other leftist b.s. I want these fools to feel comfortable disclosing their lunacy so I can tell who is who.
Let the idiots burn the flag and reveal themselves, so we'll know.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 03:18 PM (kQs4Y)
===
This exactly the right formula, and also why I try not to be too reactive when I encounter anti semitism and other leftist b.s. I want these fools to feel comfortable disclosing their lunacy so I can tell who is who.
Posted by: San Franpsycho at June 16, 2019 03:22 PM (EZebt)
89
Burn a rainbow flag, and while you are at it, burn a Mexican flag too. Celebrate the burning diversity of free speech.
Posted by: Delurking Cynic at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (z2xIo)
90
Burning the flag should be perfectly legal.
As should be me beating the ever loving fuck out of the person who burned it. Because I'm triggered because members of my family died horrible deaths for that flag and the good that it represents.
Isn't that how this works?
As should be me beating the ever loving fuck out of the person who burned it. Because I'm triggered because members of my family died horrible deaths for that flag and the good that it represents.
Isn't that how this works?
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (7cCNF)
91
I remember an Obama rally before he was elected potus.
There were dozens of barrels full of discarded American flags, lying on the ground, everywhere.
Sad.
There were dozens of barrels full of discarded American flags, lying on the ground, everywhere.
Sad.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (w7KSn)
92
Considering the Left thinks that burning alphabet soup mafia flags and Islamic country flags is "hate speech", maybe he's setting them up to consider the burning of the American flag as "hate speech" as well.
Or, if they are going to deny that burning the American flag is hate speech, then, to be consistent, they have to deny that burning any other flag is "hate speech" as well. The alphabet soup mafia flag is a political flag, so burning it should be protected political speech, correct?
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (7A4qQ)
You have to wonder, and I certainly did when I first read his statement, which puts the question to the Reds: which way to jump?
Either way, they're in an awkward position. They either have to agree with Trump - which they are loath to do - or disagree, in which case they have to protect burning rainbow flags, ISIS flags, etc. (If they're to be consistent, which is not usually something they worry about.)
Or, if they are going to deny that burning the American flag is hate speech, then, to be consistent, they have to deny that burning any other flag is "hate speech" as well. The alphabet soup mafia flag is a political flag, so burning it should be protected political speech, correct?
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at June 16, 2019 03:20 PM (7A4qQ)
You have to wonder, and I certainly did when I first read his statement, which puts the question to the Reds: which way to jump?
Either way, they're in an awkward position. They either have to agree with Trump - which they are loath to do - or disagree, in which case they have to protect burning rainbow flags, ISIS flags, etc. (If they're to be consistent, which is not usually something they worry about.)
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 03:24 PM (A2Uq6)
93
Can you burn flag burners? Uh, legally?
Posted by: TF2 Pyro at June 16, 2019 03:26 PM (U69PR)
94
The flag burning debate is a quaint notion from decades ago....meanwhile Antifa is mauling people who they Think may be opposed to them --with 0, , zip, nada repercussions.
War has been declared and the flag burning debate seems to be .....sort of not the highest priority given the context and reality of the Real War the Left has declared against non-communists.
War has been declared and the flag burning debate seems to be .....sort of not the highest priority given the context and reality of the Real War the Left has declared against non-communists.
Posted by: Voter theater. at June 16, 2019 03:26 PM (ftvGY)
95
Isn't that how this works?
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (7cCNF)
No, it really doesn't. The flag is a symbol of something. If some asshat wants to burn the flag, and by extension, insult that which it represents, let him.
He is taking a political stance that you find antithetical to all that you believe. But it is his political philosophy, and it does not rise to a behavior that requires a physical response.
If he burned it on your lawn that would be very, very different.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (7cCNF)
No, it really doesn't. The flag is a symbol of something. If some asshat wants to burn the flag, and by extension, insult that which it represents, let him.
He is taking a political stance that you find antithetical to all that you believe. But it is his political philosophy, and it does not rise to a behavior that requires a physical response.
If he burned it on your lawn that would be very, very different.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (wYseH)
96
Novel idea: Constitution protects (and I quote) "freedom of speech" followed by "or of the press" and if they MEANT freedom of expression then "of the press" is unnecessary. Printed word and spoke word. Freedom of speech has been warped by the Courts into "freedom of expression," let's make the words mean what the words say. Just for kicks.
Posted by: pmike at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (qHOwR)
97
The rule proposed--no restrictions on speech, such as flag burning--is nice.
But that's not the world we are living in.
The leftist are banning our speech left and right--because they know we won't do the same.
Until we ban their speech in double measure, they won't stop.
But that's not the world we are living in.
The leftist are banning our speech left and right--because they know we won't do the same.
Until we ban their speech in double measure, they won't stop.
Posted by: RoyalOil, Vicroy Canadian Territories at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (k81AA)
98
following the clip of the player saving the flag in the youtube queue is kurt gibson's walk-off homer to win game 1 of the 1988 world series for the dodgers. i've seen the clip before but never noticed that as he rounds the bases on two gimpy legs, gibson never touches second base!
never noticed that.
never noticed that.
Posted by: musical jolly chimp at June 16, 2019 03:28 PM (Pg+x7)
99
... check it out at the 8:40 mark of the video.
Posted by: musical jolly chimp at June 16, 2019 03:30 PM (Pg+x7)
100
I won't mention his name but a Que Klux Klan-er once explained to Howard Stern that they don't burn the cross, they light it because Jesus is the light of the world.
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of the MSM at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (ZqRa6)
101
If he burned it on your lawn that would be very, very different.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (wYseH)
Why?
You say you would gun someone down on your lawn that exercises "protected speech" of cross burning. Tell me, would you gun someone down that burned an American Flag on your lawn? If not, why?
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (wYseH)
Why?
You say you would gun someone down on your lawn that exercises "protected speech" of cross burning. Tell me, would you gun someone down that burned an American Flag on your lawn? If not, why?
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
102
Some of you act like desecration of the flag has been part of free speech protection forever. How did we ever survive before th 80's?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (2DOZq)
103
Trump has a hilarious short video pinned at the top of his twitter feed.
Posted by: lin-duh at June 16, 2019 03:32 PM (UUBmN)
104
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
A bit of hyperbole on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
But my property rights trump his free speech rights.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
A bit of hyperbole on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
But my property rights trump his free speech rights.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:32 PM (wYseH)
105
i find the idea of people burning the flag in protest to be abhorrent. if this country sucks so much, GTFO.
however, it is protected speech, assuming you're not creating a fire hazard when you do it, and, if that's the most coherent and cogent argument you have, your position sucks, and you know it.
however, it is protected speech, assuming you're not creating a fire hazard when you do it, and, if that's the most coherent and cogent argument you have, your position sucks, and you know it.
Posted by: redc1c4 at June 16, 2019 03:32 PM (DW6U4)
106
Meh, my senator. Afraid Bullock will jump in and give him a run for his money. So, the flag amendment play. Like running the ol dipsy doodle!
He's not stupid. Really.
He's not stupid. Really.
Posted by: Tu abuela tambien at June 16, 2019 03:33 PM (efMXe)
107
There was some asshole Red diaper baby artist who made an American flag mosaic on the museum floor that you had to walk over just to enter the room. I sort of loped over and around it as best I could. After some outcry they later had paper mats that you could place on the floor so you wouldn't step directly on the flag.
It's not desecration in my mind, but I was pissed that the option was taken away from me by some little pinko shit and his museum enablers.
It's not desecration in my mind, but I was pissed that the option was taken away from me by some little pinko shit and his museum enablers.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 03:33 PM (kQs4Y)
108
I don't think Trump is trolling but I think he and the senator both know that Dems in the House will talk about their hatred for the flag and how it so so represents tyranny.
I personally think it would be better to propose required burning of the rainbow flags. Just for kicks.
I personally think it would be better to propose required burning of the rainbow flags. Just for kicks.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 16, 2019 03:33 PM (r+sAi)
109
If the act of burning a flag is protected speech, why isn't the act of assaulting the person burning the flag protected speech, as a way to defend the symbol?
Or just limit it to me grabbing the flag from them to prevent the burning? Also protected? Why not?
Or just limit it to me grabbing the flag from them to prevent the burning? Also protected? Why not?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:34 PM (nWmg2)
110
Some of you act like desecration of the flag has been part of free speech protection forever. How did we ever survive before th 80's?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (2DOZq)
Agreed; the only people advocating burning the U.S. are American-hating, Commie scumbags. The same people that say burning the U.S. flag is totes OK will go ape$h!t if you burn a rainbow flag.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (2DOZq)
Agreed; the only people advocating burning the U.S. are American-hating, Commie scumbags. The same people that say burning the U.S. flag is totes OK will go ape$h!t if you burn a rainbow flag.
Posted by: Retired Buckeye Cop is now an engineer at June 16, 2019 03:34 PM (5Yee7)
111
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
---
i could be wrong, but, as i understand things, it is in Texas.
your safest bet is to stay off other people's property, especially if'n you're acting the fool.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
---
i could be wrong, but, as i understand things, it is in Texas.
your safest bet is to stay off other people's property, especially if'n you're acting the fool.
Posted by: redc1c4 at June 16, 2019 03:34 PM (DW6U4)
112
Forget the Balanced Budget Amendment, I'd be happy with the Budget Amendment, where we have to pass one every year.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh
Yeah, it's hard to balance something that doesn't exist.
Forget the Balanced Budget Amendment, I'd be happy with the Budget Amendment, where we have to pass one every year.
Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh
Yeah, it's hard to balance something that doesn't exist.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 03:35 PM (aKsyK)
113
An interesting angle on the (still possible) Trump impeachment:
If impeached, Trump would be given the opportunity to defend himself, call witnesses, subpoena papers, declassify.
Could be entertaining.
If impeached, Trump would be given the opportunity to defend himself, call witnesses, subpoena papers, declassify.
Could be entertaining.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:35 PM (w7KSn)
114
Failure Theater stuff. But then they all get to pat themselves on the back for saving 'Murica and get rubes to send them $25.
Posted by: Lurking Lurker at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (FiUMj)
115
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:32 PM (wYseH)
Then you're going to jail, son, because property doesn't trump life, especially on your front lawn. Or else I could gun down a car thief in the process of stealing my ride.
And answer the question - would you gun someone down for burning the US flag on your property also?
Then you're going to jail, son, because property doesn't trump life, especially on your front lawn. Or else I could gun down a car thief in the process of stealing my ride.
And answer the question - would you gun someone down for burning the US flag on your property also?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (nWmg2)
Posted by: Skip at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (BbGew)
117
113 An interesting angle on the (still possible) Trump impeachment:
If impeached, Trump would be given the opportunity to defend himself, call witnesses, subpoena papers, declassify.
Could be entertaining.
---
Yeah, do they really want to give him this bully pulpit?
Granted, it may not be broadcast on every frickin' channel like the Nixon impeachment hearings (not that I remember those, being but 29 *shifty eyes*) or the Clinton follies.
If impeached, Trump would be given the opportunity to defend himself, call witnesses, subpoena papers, declassify.
Could be entertaining.
---
Yeah, do they really want to give him this bully pulpit?
Granted, it may not be broadcast on every frickin' channel like the Nixon impeachment hearings (not that I remember those, being but 29 *shifty eyes*) or the Clinton follies.
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (kQs4Y)
118
Printed word and spoke word. Freedom of speech has been warped by the Courts into "freedom of expression," let's make the words mean what the words say. Just for kicks.
So, just verbal speech and text printed on paper would be protected? And not, for example, transmitting text electronically?
So, just verbal speech and text printed on paper would be protected? And not, for example, transmitting text electronically?
Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (qc+VF)
119
The Senate does not impeach.
The Senates either convicts, or not.
The Senates either convicts, or not.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (w7KSn)
120
Maybe this has happened, but I know it was at least suggested once, that only USA flags made in the USA could be sold in the USA.
Its an exception to my economic principles, but I like it.
Its an exception to my economic principles, but I like it.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 16, 2019 03:39 PM (r+sAi)
121
they don't burn the cross, they light it because Jesus is the light of the world.
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of the MSM
Just use LED lights.
they don't burn the cross, they light it because Jesus is the light of the world.
Posted by: mallfly the Peach of the MSM
Just use LED lights.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 03:40 PM (aKsyK)
122
All of us down at the Brattleboro (aka Obammaboro, Vt) Women's, Gay, Lesbian, and Trans-Gender Reproductive Health Clinic wants to wish Presdent Obana a Happy Farthers Day. We miss you and still love you....
Posted by: Mary Clogginstien from Obamaboro, VT and Prood of it !!! at June 16, 2019 03:40 PM (qM84C)
123
Maybe this has happened, but I know it was at least suggested once, that only USA flags made in the USA could be sold in the USA.
Its an exception to my economic principles, but I like it.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk
-----
Not sure about this but I'll only but US flags made in the USA on principle.
Its an exception to my economic principles, but I like it.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk
-----
Not sure about this but I'll only but US flags made in the USA on principle.
Posted by: lin-duh at June 16, 2019 03:41 PM (UUBmN)
124
118 Printed word and spoke word. Freedom of speech has been warped by the Courts into "freedom of expression," let's make the words mean what the words say. Just for kicks.
So, just verbal speech and text printed on paper would be protected? And not, for example, transmitting text electronically?
Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (qc+VF)
IIRC it wasn't until the 30's that the SC found that displaying a 'symbol' or non-speech was actually protected by the 1st as free speech and that it wasn't until the 80's that the SC found that State's desecration laws were unconstitutional and flag burning was protected as free speech.
So, just verbal speech and text printed on paper would be protected? And not, for example, transmitting text electronically?
Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at June 16, 2019 03:38 PM (qc+VF)
IIRC it wasn't until the 30's that the SC found that displaying a 'symbol' or non-speech was actually protected by the 1st as free speech and that it wasn't until the 80's that the SC found that State's desecration laws were unconstitutional and flag burning was protected as free speech.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:41 PM (2DOZq)
125
I'm in the checkout line and the cashier looks like RBG and moves as quickly.
Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 16, 2019 03:42 PM (Nz4oZ)
126
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
---
i could be wrong, but, as i understand things, it is in Texas.
Not as a general rule, but under certain circumstances it could be a factor.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:31 PM (nWmg2)
---
i could be wrong, but, as i understand things, it is in Texas.
Not as a general rule, but under certain circumstances it could be a factor.
Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at June 16, 2019 03:42 PM (qc+VF)
127
115 not unless I was 100% sure I could dispose of the body and without 1 witness, but even then would burn in Hell for eternity.
But never rule anything out.
But never rule anything out.
Posted by: Skip at June 16, 2019 03:43 PM (BbGew)
128
15 Is it legal to burn currency?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (2DOZq)
If you have any you want to burn, just hand it to me and I'll take it someplace private and burn it for you. I promise.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (2DOZq)
If you have any you want to burn, just hand it to me and I'll take it someplace private and burn it for you. I promise.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 03:43 PM (V2Yro)
129
115 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:32 PM (wYseH)
Then you're going to jail, son, because property doesn't trump life, especially on your front lawn. Or else I could gun down a car thief in the process of stealing my ride.
And answer the question - would you gun someone down for burning the US flag on your property also?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (nWmg2)
As someone already pointed out, in Texas you can shoot someone stealing your car or someone stealing a TV out of your neighbors house.
Then you're going to jail, son, because property doesn't trump life, especially on your front lawn. Or else I could gun down a car thief in the process of stealing my ride.
And answer the question - would you gun someone down for burning the US flag on your property also?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (nWmg2)
As someone already pointed out, in Texas you can shoot someone stealing your car or someone stealing a TV out of your neighbors house.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:43 PM (2DOZq)
130
And answer the question - would you gun someone down for burning the US flag on your property also?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (nWmg2)
First look up the word "hyperbole."
And the answer is, no. Of course not. Unless he also threatens me in other ways that would allow me to use lethal force. But a punch in the nose? Sure.
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:36 PM (nWmg2)
First look up the word "hyperbole."
And the answer is, no. Of course not. Unless he also threatens me in other ways that would allow me to use lethal force. But a punch in the nose? Sure.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:44 PM (wYseH)
131
IIRC, in Texas a man shot a couple of burglars who were robbing his neighbor's home. Killed them.
Not even in his own yard, the burglars were in his neighbor's yard.
Texas didn't prosecute.
Not even in his own yard, the burglars were in his neighbor's yard.
Texas didn't prosecute.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:44 PM (w7KSn)
132
128 15 Is it legal to burn currency?
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (2DOZq)
If you have any you want to burn, just hand it to me and I'll take it someplace private and burn it for you. I promise.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 03:43 PM (V2Yro)
I light my cigars with hundred dollar bills. White privilege don't ya know.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 02:54 PM (2DOZq)
If you have any you want to burn, just hand it to me and I'll take it someplace private and burn it for you. I promise.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 03:43 PM (V2Yro)
I light my cigars with hundred dollar bills. White privilege don't ya know.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:45 PM (2DOZq)
133
"impeachment"... who can take any of this seriously, when we've just had the spectacle of reportedly mature adults, the eminences gris of our polity, take to the airwaves and declare trump committed treason when he speculated that he would probably look at some dirt on an opponent from a foreign source and probably give it to the f.b.i.?
it's all so far beyond absurd as to make it ridiculous.
it's all so far beyond absurd as to make it ridiculous.
Posted by: musical jolly chimp at June 16, 2019 03:45 PM (Pg+x7)
134
Little known fact (I think): calling someone a turtle egg is an arch insult in Mandarin. Kind of like calling someone an SOB, but much worse. Fighting words, IIRC.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara
"Dew neh log moh".
Means something horrible in one of the Chinese languages. Learned that from Noble House by James Clavell.
Used it once when I was in a room full of Chinese co-workers who were rudely speaking Chinese to shield their conversation from me.
Most of them got the fucking point and switched to English.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara
"Dew neh log moh".
Means something horrible in one of the Chinese languages. Learned that from Noble House by James Clavell.
Used it once when I was in a room full of Chinese co-workers who were rudely speaking Chinese to shield their conversation from me.
Most of them got the fucking point and switched to English.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:46 PM (7cCNF)
135
Or else I could gun down a car thief in the process of stealing my ride. "
Simple trespass doesn't justify deadly force, but in Texas, if someone is attempting to steal your property (including a car) you ARE allowed to use deadly force to stop the thief.
So yes, as long as you're in Texas you can gun down a car thief who's in the process of stealing your ride. Important qualification - you have to catch him IN THE PROCESS of doing it, not before, and definitely not after.
Simple trespass doesn't justify deadly force, but in Texas, if someone is attempting to steal your property (including a car) you ARE allowed to use deadly force to stop the thief.
So yes, as long as you're in Texas you can gun down a car thief who's in the process of stealing your ride. Important qualification - you have to catch him IN THE PROCESS of doing it, not before, and definitely not after.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 03:46 PM (V2Yro)
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:46 PM (w7KSn)
137
Trespass ain't legal grounds for killin'.
Perhaps. But it certainly moves you from passerby category to target.
Perhaps. But it certainly moves you from passerby category to target.
Posted by: Diogenes at June 16, 2019 03:46 PM (axyOa)
138
Burn a Mexican flag in LA or a rainbow flag in SF and you probably will end up dead.
Anywhere else and at the very least expect to be hounded for the rest of your life and your employer harassed until you lose your job.
So de facto bans on burning certain flags already exist.
And once again we're left one rule for the leftists and another for the rest of society.
Anywhere else and at the very least expect to be hounded for the rest of your life and your employer harassed until you lose your job.
So de facto bans on burning certain flags already exist.
And once again we're left one rule for the leftists and another for the rest of society.
Posted by: Sjg at June 16, 2019 03:47 PM (gDSJf)
139
The discovery on a Trump impeachment would be Christmas.
Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 16, 2019 03:48 PM (Nz4oZ)
140
I opposed flag burning because, as much as I hate it, they are the canary in a coal mine. Take away their rights and ours are next.
But that Canary died a few years ago. When I can wear a MAGA hat in public without fear of being assaulted, I'll support flag burning again.
But that Canary died a few years ago. When I can wear a MAGA hat in public without fear of being assaulted, I'll support flag burning again.
Posted by: Fen at June 16, 2019 03:51 PM (e1Z/d)
141
139 The discovery on a Trump impeachment would be Christmas.
Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 16, 2019 03:48 PM (Nz4oZ)
-----------
Which is why Chuck and Nancy want all the trappings of impeachment without, ya know, the actual impeachment.
Posted by: BourbonChicken at June 16, 2019 03:48 PM (Nz4oZ)
-----------
Which is why Chuck and Nancy want all the trappings of impeachment without, ya know, the actual impeachment.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 16, 2019 03:51 PM (gC2IV)
142
I also have no faith that all GOP senators would not vote to remove Trump from office.
I can think of at least a dozen yes votes off the top of my head.
I can think of at least a dozen yes votes off the top of my head.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:52 PM (w7KSn)
143
A flag burning amendment would be a silly thing to waste political capital on. I'm far more concerned with the blacklisting of an entire political movement by Big Tech.
Posted by: Liberty at June 16, 2019 03:53 PM (NhVBT)
144
Which is why Chuck and Nancy want all the trappings of impeachment without, ya know, the actual impeachment.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 16, 2019 03:51 PM (gC2IV)
But it's a dangerous game. They risk "Impeachment Fatigue," which I think is already happening.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at June 16, 2019 03:51 PM (gC2IV)
But it's a dangerous game. They risk "Impeachment Fatigue," which I think is already happening.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:53 PM (wYseH)
145
Isn't that how this works?
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (7cCNF)
No, it really doesn't. The flag is a symbol of something. If some asshat wants to burn the flag, and by extension, insult that which it represents, let him.
He is taking a political stance that you find antithetical to all that you believe. But it is his political philosophy, and it does not rise to a behavior that requires a physical response.
If he burned it on your lawn that would be very, very different.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (wYseH)
Your analysis may be correct from a legal decisions handed down perspective, but from my view, burning a flag where I can see it is not a political act but rather a personal attack akin to spitting on my face. To which I may respond accordingly.
Insults/attacks are generally viewed from the perspective of the person insulted/attacked, not from the attacker's point of view.
That said, I am willing to accept the consequences of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:23 PM (7cCNF)
No, it really doesn't. The flag is a symbol of something. If some asshat wants to burn the flag, and by extension, insult that which it represents, let him.
He is taking a political stance that you find antithetical to all that you believe. But it is his political philosophy, and it does not rise to a behavior that requires a physical response.
If he burned it on your lawn that would be very, very different.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:27 PM (wYseH)
Your analysis may be correct from a legal decisions handed down perspective, but from my view, burning a flag where I can see it is not a political act but rather a personal attack akin to spitting on my face. To which I may respond accordingly.
Insults/attacks are generally viewed from the perspective of the person insulted/attacked, not from the attacker's point of view.
That said, I am willing to accept the consequences of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:55 PM (7cCNF)
146
IIRC, in Texas a man shot a couple of burglars who were robbing his neighbor's home. Killed them.
Not even in his own yard, the burglars were in his neighbor's yard.
Texas didn't prosecute.
This is true but people tend to over-generalize a single set of circumstances into a broad principle. Having too much faith in that broad principle can leave you at a lot of risk. Again, in general, TX law is not "shoot anybody doing anything wrong and get away with it." The specific set of circumstances in any given instance matter a lot.
Not even in his own yard, the burglars were in his neighbor's yard.
Texas didn't prosecute.
This is true but people tend to over-generalize a single set of circumstances into a broad principle. Having too much faith in that broad principle can leave you at a lot of risk. Again, in general, TX law is not "shoot anybody doing anything wrong and get away with it." The specific set of circumstances in any given instance matter a lot.
Posted by: Bob the Bilderberg at June 16, 2019 03:56 PM (qc+VF)
147
So de facto bans on burning certain flags already exist.
And once again we're left one rule for the leftists and another for the rest of society.
Posted by: Sjg at June 16, 2019 03:47 PM
Yep. And the same thing goes for *actual* speech.
Leftists can give speeches anywhere they want in this country, from radical left-wing conferences to college campuses without consequence.
But should any conservative dare plan to give a speech anywhere, it will be shut down just by the mere *threat* of violence by Leftists. The local police or security would declare a public threat and cancel the speech, instead of work to protect the conservative speaker's right to free speech.
This is the world in which we live.
And once again we're left one rule for the leftists and another for the rest of society.
Posted by: Sjg at June 16, 2019 03:47 PM
Yep. And the same thing goes for *actual* speech.
Leftists can give speeches anywhere they want in this country, from radical left-wing conferences to college campuses without consequence.
But should any conservative dare plan to give a speech anywhere, it will be shut down just by the mere *threat* of violence by Leftists. The local police or security would declare a public threat and cancel the speech, instead of work to protect the conservative speaker's right to free speech.
This is the world in which we live.
Posted by: Clyde Shelton at June 16, 2019 03:56 PM (7A4qQ)
148
71 Can I burn a rainbow flag and not have my life destroyed in the process?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (nWmg2)
Now that brings up a good point - if we REALLY wanted to stop flag burnings we need to encourage a wave of burnings of Rainbow Flags and Mexican Flags, and then when the left goes apoplectic we can all compromise on NO FLAGS OF ANY KIND GET BURNED. Because Incitement.
Failing that, I say make it a law that every time an American flag gets burned, Mexican, Canadian, and Rainbow flags must be burned with it. If flag burning isn't "incitement", then why would anyone mind?
Posted by: SaltyDonnie at June 16, 2019 03:16 PM (nWmg2)
Now that brings up a good point - if we REALLY wanted to stop flag burnings we need to encourage a wave of burnings of Rainbow Flags and Mexican Flags, and then when the left goes apoplectic we can all compromise on NO FLAGS OF ANY KIND GET BURNED. Because Incitement.
Failing that, I say make it a law that every time an American flag gets burned, Mexican, Canadian, and Rainbow flags must be burned with it. If flag burning isn't "incitement", then why would anyone mind?
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 03:56 PM (V2Yro)
149
That said, I am willing to accept the consequences
of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's
another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that
always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:55 PM (7cCNF)
You won't get an argument from me.
of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's
another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that
always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 03:55 PM (7cCNF)
You won't get an argument from me.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 03:57 PM (wYseH)
150
The neighbor called in the burglary to 911, described the whole thing.
Then he told the dispatcher he was going to stop them.
He put the phone down.
And then he definitely stopped them, while she listened.
I was suitably impressed with that case.
Then he told the dispatcher he was going to stop them.
He put the phone down.
And then he definitely stopped them, while she listened.
I was suitably impressed with that case.
Posted by: navybrat, sometime commentater at June 16, 2019 03:58 PM (w7KSn)
151
Call it the Cocksucker Flag, not the r**nbow flag.
Call it the Cocksucker Flag, not the r**nbow flag.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 03:58 PM (+YYCN)
152
I'd prefer that someone take the Left's premise of 'Hate Speech Is Not Protected Speech!' to SCOTUS and end their little fantasy.
Posted by: Mr. Peebles at June 16, 2019 03:59 PM (oVJmc)
153
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
154
Driving in a certain town with a Sunk New Dawn guy in it and 2 sidewalk crossings were painted in the 6-color rainbow. I was like: what is this, a fag crossing?
Right downtown, too.
Right downtown, too.
Posted by: Some chick in Tejas I guess at June 16, 2019 04:01 PM (gou4q)
155
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
Oh yes.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
Oh yes.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 16, 2019 04:01 PM (wYseH)
156
What? I missed this thread entirely. I just left a comment on the last thread and noticed that it was the first comment in half an hour.
I just now saw that the Food Thread is up. Aargh.
I just now saw that the Food Thread is up. Aargh.
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 04:02 PM (sdi6R)
157
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
Make it illegal to cover your face under ANY circumstances. We might as well get the Muslims in on the fun.
Andto get it passed, call it the "anti-KKK law." Dare the Reds to oppose it.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
Make it illegal to cover your face under ANY circumstances. We might as well get the Muslims in on the fun.
Andto get it passed, call it the "anti-KKK law." Dare the Reds to oppose it.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 04:03 PM (A2Uq6)
158
Banks have banned BASEBALL CAPS in their lobbies for, what, decades, now?
Banks have banned BASEBALL CAPS in their lobbies for, what, decades, now?
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:03 PM (+YYCN)
159
Food thread i sup!
Posted by: All Hail Eris, She-Wolf of the 'Ettes 'Ettes at June 16, 2019 04:03 PM (kQs4Y)
160
So my communist governor ordered rainbow flags to be flown on state offices yesterday for the remainder of the month. First time in the entire history of the state of Michigan.
What do you think would happen to me if I went to a state owned parking lot and burned a rainbow flag while chanting "No fags in my state".
And I don't mean by some Antifa idiot. I mean by my own state government? If a state of Michigan employee refused to partake in celebrate the gays month , what would happen to them? if they refuse to have little rainbow flags plastered on the window at the DMV or whatever else nonsense the commie state governor and her AG have come up with?
What do you think would happen to me if I went to a state owned parking lot and burned a rainbow flag while chanting "No fags in my state".
And I don't mean by some Antifa idiot. I mean by my own state government? If a state of Michigan employee refused to partake in celebrate the gays month , what would happen to them? if they refuse to have little rainbow flags plastered on the window at the DMV or whatever else nonsense the commie state governor and her AG have come up with?
Posted by: Jen the original at June 16, 2019 04:07 PM (0D4Y/)
161
Banks have banned BASEBALL CAPS in their lobbies for, what, decades, now?
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics
The banks I go to have signs on the door saying no hoodies, sunglasses or masks. Never saw a sign about no baseball caps.
Banks have banned BASEBALL CAPS in their lobbies for, what, decades, now?
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics
The banks I go to have signs on the door saying no hoodies, sunglasses or masks. Never saw a sign about no baseball caps.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 04:08 PM (aKsyK)
162
I looked up the case where the neighbor shot 2 burglars - it was more nuanced than we remember. (the Joe Horn case) First, it was established that actually were on HIS lawn when he shot them - Joe Horn had ordered the 2 men to surrender, with his gun aimed at them, and instead they approached him (he said he believed they were going to attack him) Next, his case was taken to the Grand Jury - but the Grand Jury refused to indict. Pasadena, Texas, 2007.
It reminds me of the shopping mall case in Dallas a few years back. A guy chased his girlfriend into a shopping mall and shot her dead, then ran out, got in his car, and attempted to escape. Another man, who had witnessed the murder, saw him trying to flee, and as he drove by, the 2nd man unloaded a .44 magnum through the drivers door. The perp managed to drive away before dying of loss of blood a few minutes later.
There was no good legal justification for the bystanders shooting, and he was arrested - but the grand jury refused to indict, and he walked away free.
It reminds me of the shopping mall case in Dallas a few years back. A guy chased his girlfriend into a shopping mall and shot her dead, then ran out, got in his car, and attempted to escape. Another man, who had witnessed the murder, saw him trying to flee, and as he drove by, the 2nd man unloaded a .44 magnum through the drivers door. The perp managed to drive away before dying of loss of blood a few minutes later.
There was no good legal justification for the bystanders shooting, and he was arrested - but the grand jury refused to indict, and he walked away free.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 04:08 PM (V2Yro)
163
Maybe it's a No Hats ban I'm thinking of. The sign asks you to remove all hats.
Maybe it's a No Hats ban I'm thinking of. The sign asks you to remove all hats.
Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:10 PM (+YYCN)
164
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.
Posted by: Soothsayer's
In my humble opinion a masked person in the street carrying any kind of weapon meets the definition of homo sacer and may be treated accordingly.
Posted by: Soothsayer's
In my humble opinion a masked person in the street carrying any kind of weapon meets the definition of homo sacer and may be treated accordingly.
Posted by: Sharkman at June 16, 2019 04:11 PM (7cCNF)
165
Andto get it passed, call it the "anti-KKK law." Dare the Reds to oppose it.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 04:03 PM (A2Uq6)
That law already exists in Alabama and a couple other southern states, I believe.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 04:03 PM (A2Uq6)
That law already exists in Alabama and a couple other southern states, I believe.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 04:12 PM (V2Yro)
Posted by: An Observation at June 16, 2019 04:13 PM (mBISV)
167
The banks I go to have signs on the door saying no hoodies, sunglasses or masks. Never saw a sign about no baseball caps.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 04:08 PM (aKsyK)
Now that's just odd - why would a Bank be worried if you go up to the Teller's Window wearing a mask? LOL.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot, Jr. at June 16, 2019 04:08 PM (aKsyK)
Now that's just odd - why would a Bank be worried if you go up to the Teller's Window wearing a mask? LOL.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 04:14 PM (V2Yro)
168
For the left the flag burning, rioting, etc. IS a religious practice.
Posted by: DaveA at June 16, 2019 04:14 PM (FhXTo)
169
>>That said, I am willing to accept the consequences
of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's
another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that
always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
If burning a flag incites people to violence then perhaps the idea that it is protected free speech and not something subject to the Fighting Words doctrine is not so out of line.
Freedom of speech can be limited and not by some edict from God. It's up to humans to figure out what is and what isn't free speech and what is merely an incitement to violence.
I don't like banning free speech as much as anyone but I also don't think I need someone burning a flag to know what their opinions are. There is no reason to do it in my mind other to incite a violent reaction.
of any actions I might take when confronted by a flag-burner. That's
another aspect of the free speech v. not free speech argument that
always pops up when flag-burning is discussed.
If burning a flag incites people to violence then perhaps the idea that it is protected free speech and not something subject to the Fighting Words doctrine is not so out of line.
Freedom of speech can be limited and not by some edict from God. It's up to humans to figure out what is and what isn't free speech and what is merely an incitement to violence.
I don't like banning free speech as much as anyone but I also don't think I need someone burning a flag to know what their opinions are. There is no reason to do it in my mind other to incite a violent reaction.
Posted by: JackStraw at June 16, 2019 04:16 PM (PxX58)
170
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
18 U.S. Code 241 (see paragraph 2):
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or
intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession,
or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege
secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or
because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises
of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or
enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten
years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in
violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an
attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or
both, or may be sentenced to death.
I want a BAN on wearing any type of mask or cover on one's face while "protesting," a.k.a. rioting.Posted by: Soothsayer's wacky innacurate lyrics at June 16, 2019 04:00 PM (+YYCN)
18 U.S. Code 241 (see paragraph 2):
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or
intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession,
or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege
secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or
because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises
of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or
enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten
years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in
violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an
attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit
aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or
both, or may be sentenced to death.
Posted by: An Observation at June 16, 2019 04:18 PM (mBISV)
171
IIRC it wasn't until the 30's that the SC found that displaying a 'symbol' or non-speech was actually protected by the 1st as free speech and that it wasn't until the 80's that the SC found that State's desecration laws were unconstitutional and flag burning was protected as free speech.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:41 PM (2DOZq)
This would be a good thing to remember when the SC, with those new team mates they added the last couple of years, modify the Roe vs Wade decision.
IIRC it wasn't until the 30's that the SC found that displaying a 'symbol' or non-speech was actually protected by the 1st as free speech and that it wasn't until the 80's that the SC found that State's desecration laws were unconstitutional and flag burning was protected as free speech.
Posted by: Can't resist temptation at June 16, 2019 03:41 PM (2DOZq)
This would be a good thing to remember when the SC, with those new team mates they added the last couple of years, modify the Roe vs Wade decision.
Posted by: LeftCoast Dawg at June 16, 2019 04:21 PM (sy5kK)
172
I have an OT question. Since part of the ceiling is missing in the guest room, can an AC unit be installed to push air thru the furnace forced air ducts?
Posted by: Infidel at June 16, 2019 04:24 PM (xzK3J)
Posted by: creeper at June 16, 2019 04:25 PM (BK/QP)
174
Burning a flag isn't freedom of speech, it is freedom of expression. Of course, I will consider myself free to express my distaste by punching the burner in the nose.
Posted by: Bill R. at June 16, 2019 04:26 PM (wzzJf)
175
I'm not convinced that this really matters anymore.
Rights are for citizens. We're approaching a time when a third of the population aren't going to be fellow citizens anymore, one way or another.
Rights are for citizens. We're approaching a time when a third of the population aren't going to be fellow citizens anymore, one way or another.
Posted by: lurker (the other one) at June 16, 2019 04:27 PM (67XdO)
176
This is true but people tend to over-generalize a single set of
circumstances into a broad principle. Having too much faith in that
broad principle can leave you at a lot of risk. Again, in general, TX
law is not "shoot anybody doing anything wrong and get away with it."
The specific set of circumstances in any given instance matter a lot.
In Texas, the law allows the use of deadly force to stop the commission of a felony, or criminal mischief performed at night. For example there was a case of a Texas father who walked in on his minor daughter being molested - shot and killed molester - no prosecution, and the DA specifically cited the Texas law about deadly force and felonies.
This is true but people tend to over-generalize a single set of
circumstances into a broad principle. Having too much faith in that
broad principle can leave you at a lot of risk. Again, in general, TX
law is not "shoot anybody doing anything wrong and get away with it."
The specific set of circumstances in any given instance matter a lot.
In Texas, the law allows the use of deadly force to stop the commission of a felony, or criminal mischief performed at night. For example there was a case of a Texas father who walked in on his minor daughter being molested - shot and killed molester - no prosecution, and the DA specifically cited the Texas law about deadly force and felonies.
Posted by: An Observation at June 16, 2019 04:31 PM (mBISV)
177
I have an OT question. Since part of the ceiling is
missing in the guest room, can an AC unit be installed to push air thru
the furnace forced air ducts?
Posted by: Infidel at June 16, 2019 04:24 PM (xzK3J)
In thru the duck's ass and out through his beak? What kind of duck abuse is this tomfoolery?
missing in the guest room, can an AC unit be installed to push air thru
the furnace forced air ducts?
Posted by: Infidel at June 16, 2019 04:24 PM (xzK3J)
In thru the duck's ass and out through his beak? What kind of duck abuse is this tomfoolery?
Posted by: Count de Monet at June 16, 2019 04:33 PM (q1Pj5)
178
I binged it and it seems it can be done without much modification.
Posted by: Infidel at June 16, 2019 04:40 PM (xzK3J)
179
Leftists say it's hate speech to burn the LGBT flag, but it's free speech to burn the American flag.
Posted by: lyn at June 16, 2019 04:43 PM (nB7PU)
180
I think Trump is trolling in the same way that he did when he said he would accept dirt on political opponents from foreign sources.
Posted by: lyn at June 16, 2019 04:44 PM (nB7PU)
181
That law already exists in Alabama and a couple other southern states, I believe.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 04:12 PM (V2Yro)
That was the source of the idea, in fact.
Posted by: Tom Servo at June 16, 2019 04:12 PM (V2Yro)
That was the source of the idea, in fact.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 04:51 PM (623jb)
182
My guess is that PDT will just leave this hanging out there. And then a lot of smarmy awful people will a) burn the flag publicly to illustrate free speech and b) snarlingly screech about their right to burn the flag. Which is perhaps what he's going for.
Posted by: m at June 16, 2019 04:57 PM (ZfNws)
183
180 I think Trump is trolling in the same way that he did when he said he would accept dirt on political opponents from foreign sources.
Posted by: lyn at June 16, 2019 04:44 PM (nB7PU)
Nicely put.
Posted by: lyn at June 16, 2019 04:44 PM (nB7PU)
Nicely put.
Posted by: m at June 16, 2019 04:58 PM (ZfNws)
184
I don't care, F them. Have you read about thecakes they are demanding Masterpiece cake make? Is it protected speech to demand one with Satan sucking a cock?
I just went to take a look at a blog on matural dyeing. She was doing an unflattering tapestry of the President, because of his "cruelty". Her solution? Give Planned Parenthood a donation, right away! Sabo has the right idea. Rub their noses into it.
I just went to take a look at a blog on matural dyeing. She was doing an unflattering tapestry of the President, because of his "cruelty". Her solution? Give Planned Parenthood a donation, right away! Sabo has the right idea. Rub their noses into it.
Posted by: Notsothoreau at June 16, 2019 05:03 PM (Lqy/e)
185
Sorry, but there's nothing wrong with protecting our flag. It's Normal America's Flag. Not the fucking National Socialist American Workers' Party flag. We live in a clown world now. It's not 1982. New Rules. New Game. New Fight. Get with the times idiot.
Posted by: Chiounard at June 16, 2019 05:08 PM (ua1m6)
186
Who is being incited to do what? And how can the burning of a symbol be obscene.
Burn a rainbow flag then report back - if you even survive.
Burn a rainbow flag then report back - if you even survive.
Posted by: Blue Bird of F'ing Joy at June 16, 2019 05:12 PM (lD3vL)
187
We have been subjected to watching foreigners piss on
American society/culture and too long, with being told respect their culture/views Then we are told we must respect and allow their culture and ways they bring over here. Sorry, I can abide they dissing us while we must respect their disrespect of us. American culture/nation deserves more respect than the foreigners coming here to plunder this nation and piss on us and our ways.
American society/culture and too long, with being told respect their culture/views Then we are told we must respect and allow their culture and ways they bring over here. Sorry, I can abide they dissing us while we must respect their disrespect of us. American culture/nation deserves more respect than the foreigners coming here to plunder this nation and piss on us and our ways.
Posted by: ron n. at June 16, 2019 05:16 PM (om5HK)
188
Burning the American flag is now considered "freedom of expression". Anyone who doesn't like it turns away because they know that punching the flag burner will be prosecuted as assault and battery.
Has anybody ever tried to burn a rainbow flag? I'm not aware of any such incidents. Most normal people probably don't give a shit. But I suspect that anyone who tries it will feel the full force of the State come down on their heads like a 16 ton weight.
Some flags are more equal than others, comrade.
Has anybody ever tried to burn a rainbow flag? I'm not aware of any such incidents. Most normal people probably don't give a shit. But I suspect that anyone who tries it will feel the full force of the State come down on their heads like a 16 ton weight.
Some flags are more equal than others, comrade.
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 05:16 PM (sdi6R)
189
The socialist posers have fought like hell for foreigners, rebels, perverts, deviants, anarchists, felons freedom of speech, then turn around and demand censorship of Americans that disagree with socialist and are patriotic or Christians. The phonieness and hypocrisy is like Mount Everest in size. Still....What a fool believes (or is willing to try to contort to believe), DOOBIE BROS.
Posted by: ron n. at June 16, 2019 05:22 PM (om5HK)
190
Did flag retirements. Polyester and nylon flags do raise a nasty chemical smell.
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at June 16, 2019 05:35 PM (G/6B6)
191
I would generally agree with this, but my new philosophy of "no enemies to the right" says that if they're going to imprison some leftists for burning a flag, well OK then. I'm not going to raise a big fuss.
Posted by: Chris M at June 16, 2019 05:38 PM (6XZdO)
192
126. You need a 'credible' threat. Ron White is not a reliable source in this instance. But game cameras are...
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at June 16, 2019 05:44 PM (G/6B6)
193
I have responded with a blog post of my own, "Against Free Speech" (link in the handle). Thanks for the dialogue!
Posted by: SciVo at June 16, 2019 06:08 PM (7K1tb)
194
How would Darth Vader ever open a bank account?
Posted by: torabora at June 16, 2019 06:10 PM (Y274z)
195
Burning, or other disrespect, of other flags is treated as a crime.
Disrespecting the American flag should be a crime.
As for the appeals to free speech, they would be convincing - if it were not for all the appeals to have the federal government intervene and put the stomp down on social media sites for their censorship of conservatives.
If it is all well and good for the federal government to make them play fair, it is all well and good for the federal government to prosecute people for burning the flag.
Disrespecting the American flag should be a crime.
As for the appeals to free speech, they would be convincing - if it were not for all the appeals to have the federal government intervene and put the stomp down on social media sites for their censorship of conservatives.
If it is all well and good for the federal government to make them play fair, it is all well and good for the federal government to prosecute people for burning the flag.
Posted by: Sam at June 16, 2019 06:19 PM (YScgw)
196
Attempts to criminalize burning the flag is a fight that has been going on for several decades.
The best answer is to return to allowing "Fighting Words". Yes, you most certainly have a right to do something douchey like burn the flag. But Joe there also has the right to be upset enough about it to punch you right in the mouth. Just like if you called his mother a whore. It's not an affirmative good, but it's a defense against battery charges.
That would have a properly chilling effect on the "offensive speech".
IMO, of course.
The best answer is to return to allowing "Fighting Words". Yes, you most certainly have a right to do something douchey like burn the flag. But Joe there also has the right to be upset enough about it to punch you right in the mouth. Just like if you called his mother a whore. It's not an affirmative good, but it's a defense against battery charges.
That would have a properly chilling effect on the "offensive speech".
IMO, of course.
Posted by: GWB at June 16, 2019 06:36 PM (p+uA1)
197
How would Darth Vader ever open a bank account?
Posted by: torabora at June 16, 2019 06:10 PM (Y274z)
By holding the bank manager up with one hand, and the bank agreement up with the other.......
Posted by: torabora at June 16, 2019 06:10 PM (Y274z)
By holding the bank manager up with one hand, and the bank agreement up with the other.......
Posted by: GWB at June 16, 2019 06:38 PM (p+uA1)
198
Dr. samuel johnson said it best "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel!" When boswell asked dr, johnson what he thought about the american revolution going on at the time he said "I observe those who scram the loudest about freedom and liberty are the slave holding southerners." Some things never change. America is an idea not a piece of cloth. After 9-11 the san jose mercury editorial cartoon showed the little napalmed vietnamese girl running down the road with the twin towers crashing down behind her. Caption what goes around comes around. This made the ignorant white trash ameriKKKans angry as even they could understand the symbolism.
Posted by: raimondo at June 16, 2019 06:57 PM (wpP8q)
199
It's called punching back in the culture wars, CBD. Get a GRIP.
Posted by: Phil Ossiferz Stone at June 16, 2019 06:59 PM (7Bx7D)
200
198
After 9-11 the san jose mercury editorial cartoon showed the little napalmed vietnamese girl running down the road with the twin towers crashing down behind her.
Posted by: raimondo at June 16, 2019 06:57 PM (wpP8q)
You are aware that the little napalmed Vietnamese girl became an American citizen and a Christian and doesn't blame America for her injuries, right?
After 9-11 the san jose mercury editorial cartoon showed the little napalmed vietnamese girl running down the road with the twin towers crashing down behind her.
Posted by: raimondo at June 16, 2019 06:57 PM (wpP8q)
You are aware that the little napalmed Vietnamese girl became an American citizen and a Christian and doesn't blame America for her injuries, right?
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 07:03 PM (sdi6R)
201
I'm for bannig flag burning just on the selfish grounds that I hope it will pave the way to banning all tattoos. (That shit has gotten out of control!)
I'm for bannig flag burning just on the selfish grounds that I hope it will pave the way to banning all tattoos. (That shit has gotten out of control!)
Posted by: Serious Cat at June 16, 2019 07:09 PM (Xqo6t)
202
With decent co-citizens, I usually agree with free speech. But, with many of my American neighbors now wanting to regulate pronouns as hate speech, I'd support a flag burning ban. Anything to make the left more miserable.
Posted by: Panchito Pistoles at June 16, 2019 07:09 PM (9Xq60)
203
You are aware that the little napalmed Vietnamese girl became an American citizen and a Christian and doesn't blame America for her injuries, right?
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 07:03 PM (sdi6R)
Also, IIRC, she was napalmed by the South Vietnames air force, not ours.
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 07:03 PM (sdi6R)
Also, IIRC, she was napalmed by the South Vietnames air force, not ours.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 07:13 PM (zmxYi)
204
I'm for bannig flag burning just on the selfish grounds that I hope it will pave the way to banning all tattoos. (That shit has gotten out of control!)
Posted by: Serious Cat at June 16, 2019 07:09 PM (Xqo6t)
Tattoos are already past their sell-by date. They're on their way to joining bell bottoms and leisure suits as an embarrassing era of popular culture.
Posted by: Serious Cat at June 16, 2019 07:09 PM (Xqo6t)
Tattoos are already past their sell-by date. They're on their way to joining bell bottoms and leisure suits as an embarrassing era of popular culture.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 07:14 PM (zmxYi)
205
203
Also, IIRC, she was napalmed by the South Vietnames air force, not ours.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 07:13 PM (zmxYi)
Yes, exactly. It was a horrible accident, but such things happen in war. There's just no way to sugarcoat it.
I read about her on another site years ago. It's a really inspiring story about how she overcame her trauma and forgave.
Also, IIRC, she was napalmed by the South Vietnames air force, not ours.
Posted by: Deplorable Jay Guevara at June 16, 2019 07:13 PM (zmxYi)
Yes, exactly. It was a horrible accident, but such things happen in war. There's just no way to sugarcoat it.
I read about her on another site years ago. It's a really inspiring story about how she overcame her trauma and forgave.
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 07:19 PM (sdi6R)
206
If she's still alive, and I think she is, she's at least 50 years old by now.
Posted by: rickl at June 16, 2019 07:30 PM (sdi6R)
207
I don't know, I would rather be speached than set on fire. I think there may be a difference if you use a thermometer.
Posted by: Rob in Katy at June 16, 2019 07:53 PM (yCDuR)
208
I love Trump. Anyone who STILL believes he doesn't think before he tweets or he doesn't understand basic concepts like "freedom of speech" really needs to think again.
Posted by: ... at June 16, 2019 08:47 PM (uEbPt)
209
One of the best protections of a free society is the guarantee of the free expression of ideas. But having said that I think it is in important in a free society to remember the purpose of free speech. The basic ideal, I believe is that unfettered exchange is the best way to discover truth in political discourse. But the concern about free speech like every other constitutional right must be balanced against the disorder that would arise from a civil conflict that could be incited by too little concern over the difference between a peaceable exchange of ideas versus in your face actions that are inherently violent.
I think burning anything, defacement of property or even undeniable speech referring to a particular group of citizens with a word that begins with "N" are all acts that could be seen as violent unless you think there is no substantive difference between burning the Flag and criticizing it.
There is a context that limits the value of every communication especially one that is likely to result in social unrest. Courts make this kind of distinction all the time; weighing the probative value of evidence against its prejudicial value. In American society, context used to be a common set of values that included most Americans but today not so much. It is only a small step from breaking things to breaking heads.
The unfortunate truth is that there can be no freedom of anything without prosperity and social order. You can LOL and tell people to get f*cked all you want until some person takes a bike lock to your head. Similarly criticism of a political ideas is not the same as violent action against things and living people associated with those ideas
Is there really any substantive difference between pulling down a statue or burning a flag. Both are physical acts of violence. And those people who do not understand the difference will end up killing their opponents long before they can persuade them.
In our country, dancing naked for drunken patrons, defacing public monuments and attacking people for their religious beliefs have all been called freedom of speech. If every destructive act is called freedom of speech then freedom of speech becomes meaningless and will result in a lot less actual speech and a lot more actual violence. There is nothing inherently wrong with setting useful behavioral limits through a Constitutional Amendment even if some people call the limited behavior free speech.
I think burning anything, defacement of property or even undeniable speech referring to a particular group of citizens with a word that begins with "N" are all acts that could be seen as violent unless you think there is no substantive difference between burning the Flag and criticizing it.
There is a context that limits the value of every communication especially one that is likely to result in social unrest. Courts make this kind of distinction all the time; weighing the probative value of evidence against its prejudicial value. In American society, context used to be a common set of values that included most Americans but today not so much. It is only a small step from breaking things to breaking heads.
The unfortunate truth is that there can be no freedom of anything without prosperity and social order. You can LOL and tell people to get f*cked all you want until some person takes a bike lock to your head. Similarly criticism of a political ideas is not the same as violent action against things and living people associated with those ideas
Is there really any substantive difference between pulling down a statue or burning a flag. Both are physical acts of violence. And those people who do not understand the difference will end up killing their opponents long before they can persuade them.
In our country, dancing naked for drunken patrons, defacing public monuments and attacking people for their religious beliefs have all been called freedom of speech. If every destructive act is called freedom of speech then freedom of speech becomes meaningless and will result in a lot less actual speech and a lot more actual violence. There is nothing inherently wrong with setting useful behavioral limits through a Constitutional Amendment even if some people call the limited behavior free speech.
Posted by: Punchinello at June 16, 2019 08:49 PM (zOrpp)
210
NEVER trust a libertarian, they cannot help themselves but to break ranks. They are of the left.
Posted by: Quilp at June 16, 2019 08:56 PM (Bf3hj)
211
I am a retired military member with 25 years of active duty service. While it irritates me that some assholes think they are making statements by burning the Stars and Stripes, I can tolerate that.
What I won't tolerate is those who desecrate the US Constitution. The oath of office for every military and civilian officer of the USA includes the words "...support and defend the United States..." Nothing there about defending the flag.
Defending the Constitution is a lot more important.
What I won't tolerate is those who desecrate the US Constitution. The oath of office for every military and civilian officer of the USA includes the words "...support and defend the United States..." Nothing there about defending the flag.
Defending the Constitution is a lot more important.
Posted by: TOF at June 16, 2019 09:16 PM (XwMGP)
212
I am a retired military member with 25 years of active duty service. While it irritates me that some assholes think they are making statements by burning the Stars and Stripes, I can tolerate that.
What I won't tolerate is those who desecrate the US Constitution. The oath of office for every military and civilian officer of the USA includes the words "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States..." Nothing there about defending the flag.
Defending the Constitution is a lot more important.
What I won't tolerate is those who desecrate the US Constitution. The oath of office for every military and civilian officer of the USA includes the words "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States..." Nothing there about defending the flag.
Defending the Constitution is a lot more important.
Posted by: TOF at June 16, 2019 09:17 PM (XwMGP)
213
Fuck off and die, raimondo.
Posted by: Chris M at June 16, 2019 09:37 PM (6XZdO)
214
This is a non-controversy. The discussion is around an amendment to the Constitution, not an attempt to pass a law (which has already been declared unconstitutional by the SCOTUS). If two thirds of Congress AND three fourths of the States (via their State Legislatures) approve of an amendment to declare the flag an exception to the First Amendment, so be it. That's a VERY high bar, and if met, there is nothing contradictory about it. That will not allow "the other side" to similarly curtail the First Amendment, unless another amendment is passed - still a very high bar.
In essence, it's an easy political point to score to say you are in favor of it, and there's no problem with it actually passing, if that were to occur. Way more heat than light on this issue.
In essence, it's an easy political point to score to say you are in favor of it, and there's no problem with it actually passing, if that were to occur. Way more heat than light on this issue.
Posted by: BetaPhi at June 17, 2019 12:30 AM (hGNrS)
215
I must admit ( ( robinson.buckler@Yahoo.com ) ) is really a genuine man when it comes to getting an ex back,
HE BRING BACK LOST LOVERS IN 24hrs.
*FAVOR SPELL
*GET RIDE OF ANY WITCHCRAFT, BAD LUCK CURSES.
* EXPERT IN HEALING ALL KIND OF SICKNESS
*COURT CASES EVEN IF ONE IS CONVICTED[IF THERE'S A CHANCE OF APPEALING]
*ARE YOU BEING FORCED INTO A DIVORCE?
*HE PREVENT BAD LUCK
*HE CAN STOP SOMEONE INTERFERING WITH YOUR RELATIONSHIP.
*DO YOU WANT QUICK MARRIAGE PROPOSAL?
*DO YOU NEED EXCESSIVE SEXUAL POWER AND STRONG ERECTIONS.
1. Getting your lover or husband back
2. Spiritual protection
4. Money spell
5. Long life spell
6. Prosperity spell
8. Get a job spell
9. Becoming a manager spell
13. Pregnancy spell
15. Love spell
18. Success spell
19. Marriage spell
20. revenge spell
21. Popularity spell
He cure all kind of sickness
All kind of Herpes, CANCER,Bipolar disorder,Hepatitis,Syphilis,Bipolar disorder,Bedwetting,Carpal tunnel syndrome,Celiac disease,Ear Infections,Endometriosis
Epilepsy,Chlamydia,Low sperm count,Barrenness,Genital Wart,Rare disease,Coronary Artery Disease (Ischemic Heart Disease)Alopecia,Leukemia,Infectious Disease
Men's Health,Mental Health,Neurology,Pregnancy,Sexual Health,Skin,Thyroid,Women's Health,Alzheimer's,Arthritis,Asthma,Cancer,Cholesterol,Chronic Pain
Cold Flu,Depression,Diabetes,Digestion,Disease Prevention,Eyesight,Heart,Hepatitis,High Blood Pressure,HIV,Infectious Disease,Liver,Lungs,Menopause
Men's Health,Mental Health,Migraine,Osteoporosis,Pediatrics / Healthy Kids,Rheumatoid Arthritis,Senior Health,Skin,Sleep,Thyroid,Urology,Weight Loss Management
Women's Health
HE BRING BACK LOST LOVERS IN 24hrs.
*FAVOR SPELL
*GET RIDE OF ANY WITCHCRAFT, BAD LUCK CURSES.
* EXPERT IN HEALING ALL KIND OF SICKNESS
*COURT CASES EVEN IF ONE IS CONVICTED[IF THERE'S A CHANCE OF APPEALING]
*ARE YOU BEING FORCED INTO A DIVORCE?
*HE PREVENT BAD LUCK
*HE CAN STOP SOMEONE INTERFERING WITH YOUR RELATIONSHIP.
*DO YOU WANT QUICK MARRIAGE PROPOSAL?
*DO YOU NEED EXCESSIVE SEXUAL POWER AND STRONG ERECTIONS.
1. Getting your lover or husband back
2. Spiritual protection
4. Money spell
5. Long life spell
6. Prosperity spell
8. Get a job spell
9. Becoming a manager spell
13. Pregnancy spell
15. Love spell
18. Success spell
19. Marriage spell
20. revenge spell
21. Popularity spell
He cure all kind of sickness
All kind of Herpes, CANCER,Bipolar disorder,Hepatitis,Syphilis,Bipolar disorder,Bedwetting,Carpal tunnel syndrome,Celiac disease,Ear Infections,Endometriosis
Epilepsy,Chlamydia,Low sperm count,Barrenness,Genital Wart,Rare disease,Coronary Artery Disease (Ischemic Heart Disease)Alopecia,Leukemia,Infectious Disease
Men's Health,Mental Health,Neurology,Pregnancy,Sexual Health,Skin,Thyroid,Women's Health,Alzheimer's,Arthritis,Asthma,Cancer,Cholesterol,Chronic Pain
Cold Flu,Depression,Diabetes,Digestion,Disease Prevention,Eyesight,Heart,Hepatitis,High Blood Pressure,HIV,Infectious Disease,Liver,Lungs,Menopause
Men's Health,Mental Health,Migraine,Osteoporosis,Pediatrics / Healthy Kids,Rheumatoid Arthritis,Senior Health,Skin,Sleep,Thyroid,Urology,Weight Loss Management
Women's Health
Posted by: cortez at June 19, 2019 05:32 PM (QBJ7N)
Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.0507 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0198 seconds, 224 records returned.
Page size 128 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Primary Document: The Audio
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Top Top Tens
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
Greatest Hitjobs
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat