Flag burning wouldn't stop me from voting for Clark

[quinnox]

I'm sorry if this strays from the liberal norm, but Clark's position on a flag burning amendment wouldn't stop me from voting for him if he is against Bush. Likewise, if the nominee is for the free expression of burning the flag, it wouldn't lose my vote either. It's a non-issue for me.

[Mz Pip]

1. I wonder how

many people who are flaming Clark for supporting this 1st Amendment issue, are in favor of an amendment banning assault weapons.

If we're going to be purists, should we be able to pick and choose which amendment we're purist about?

I'm against a flag burning amendment but support one to ban assault weapons. SO I guess I'm not much of a purist.

MzPip
:dem:

[xultar]

3. PASS ME A TEK- 9 Bruva!

[DrFunkenstein]

4. I'm All For A Well-Regulated Militia

I heart the Constitution.

[xultar]

2. Finally some Sanity...

All of you getting HYSTERICAL take note...again for the 1000th time
Howard Dean, Dick Gephardt, Dennis Kucinich, and Wesley Clark all have the same stance.
Why
1. The Military Vote
2. The Southern Vote
3. Reagan Democrats
4. Centrists
5. Progressives

None of them would push for the amendment. I'm sure though if Congress actually got around to it and forced it, I bet they'd all send it back for a little rewording before they signed it.

[Renew Deal]

10. They cannot sign an ammendment.

So it is not an issue for them. Maybe they can make noise about it, but who is basing their campaign on this right now?

[DrFunkenstein]

5. Hey, I'm For A Guy That Voted Yes On The IWR

Who am I to knock you for not being a bindly one-issue Democrat?

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. I'm with you.

Clark, Gephardt, Kucinich and Dean are on the same page on this issue. Looks like a lot of DUers will have to find new candidates. :)

[mandoman]

8. is this a litmus test?

Why is this an issue? When was the last time an American flag was burned in protest in our country? Days ago? Months ? years ago ? I cant recall , lets move on to some really pressing issues.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. Couldn't agree more, mandoman! n/t

[mlawson]

7. Particularly when a president is essentially separate from the

amendment process. He can't veto the amendment (it would be pointless), and all he can do is push for it. But history is not encouraging for that either: remember Jimmy Carter trying to get the Equal Rights amendment passed?? He was not so politely told that it was none of his concern.

My guess is, that once elected, Clark would not mention the subject, and Congress would put it aside until it became poltically 'useful'.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. Exactly.

I haven't heard any more about this issue since the House passed it MONTHS ago....I remember Kucinich standing up on the House floor giving a speech in support of it. :)

[Cronus Protagonist]

12. Bush desecrates the flag openly

I think that's a disgrace. However, everyone OTHER than the president has this right.

Bush has no problem with flag desecration:

(completely unretouched photo)



Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[sandnsea]

13. No candidate is perfect

It wouldn't stop me from voting for him and giving him my full support. He seems like a great guy to me and I understand his position, even though I strongly disagree with it.

[AnnabelLee]

14. Locking

Please see rule #5 here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=463744

5. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

Please continue in this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=692936

Thank you
AnnabelLee
DU Moderator

[tsipple]

15. I'm a Bit of a Constitutional Purist

Meaning that I think that wonderful document ought not to be amended unless there's a Great Reason. Flag burning doesn't cut it. It's just too "beneath" the Constitutional level.

Same with assault weapons. The Supreme Court doesn't seem to have a problem allowing legislatures to regulate so-called(*) assault weapons already, so presumably a Constitutional amendment would beef up the Second Amendment. That fails for me, too.

I'm also biased in favor of adding liberties, not subtracting them. So the flag amendment would fail on that test, too.

There actually aren't too many shortcomings in the current draft. An expanded ERA might be nice, but the 14th and 15th Amendments seem to be covering pretty well. I just wish we'd more vigorously enforce the document we've got, you know?

(*) I say "so-called," because Congress obviously has struggled with the definition, and gun manufacturers seem to have no trouble getting around the current parameters. Besides, you can assault someone with a knife or BB gun, so I'm not sure what the word means really. It's not a technical term, like "semi-automatic" or "revolver."