Lawmakers oppose political speech, citing "national unity"

Rach3

It seems that a large majority of U.S. lawmakers have become blind to the freedom of political expression - particularly the protection of the unpopular views. It has been repeatedly established in SCOTUS that political descration of the act is, obviously, a political expression sanctioned by the 1st amendment (see Texas v. Johnson (1989) or US v. Eichman (1990)); so a majority of legislators in both houses have a problem with the First Amendment itself:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060627/...flag_amendment

This is a transparent, election-year political stunt that politicians have been attempting for decades. Obviously it won't get the 38 states' approval needed for ratification, even if it did pass the senate (which it didn't). The rhetoric ranges from renewed attacks on the judiciary

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/wa...rtner=homepage

to demagogy such as

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/wa...rtner=homepage

It's disturbing for what purposes this kind of nationalistic rhetoric is being used for.

(Incidentally, Hillary Clinton actually sponsored this farce, apparently selling out to cheap politics. )

Rach3

Moderators: my thread title is afflicted with dyslexia - could you fix the "political"?

Rach3

The AP article was inaccurate - the vote was not 63-37, but 66-34 for - only one vote short!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/wa...rtner=homepage

russ_watters

I'm confused as to why so many Democrats voted for it. Can anyone shed some light on that?

turbo

They are gutless idiots, practically indistiguishable from the gutless idiots of their opposition. The Congress of the past 6 years has been incapable of deliberation, representation, and oversight. They have allowed Bush to sign countless bills into law, while at the same time issuing "signing statements" that exempt him and his administration from obeying them. Congress is a batch of gutless cowards, intent upon maintaining their hold on their little fiefdoms at our expense. The differences between Democrats and Republicans in Congress don't amount to a bucket of warm spit. They are all beholden to special interest groups and the primary difference is in WHO they want to give my tax money to. I am more socially liberal than the Democrats and I am more fiscally conservative than any Republicans, and I can't find anybody to vote for without holding my nose. The 2-party system is controlled by corporate money and it SUCKS!

Gokul43201

It has to be that internal polling shows that a majority of the public are for the amendment. I'd venture that the majority of Democrats that voted for the amendment were trying to be nothing other than populist. They did not vote for the values they pretend to represent (that, in my opinion, makes them scumbags).