Hillary Clinton Supports Flag Burning Ban
---
Senator Hillary Clinton will be the sole co-sponsor of a gratuitous, redundant and constitutionally suspect bill that (only sorta kinda) bans desecrating the American flag:
After all, destroying someone else's property is of course already illegal — but obviously we need a new federal law making that clear in the singular context of flag desecration. Ditto for "intimidating" people.
Meanwhile, never mind that, regardless of any Congressional chest-thumping to the contrary, a law that restricts expressive conduct on public property is going to be constitutionally suspect. And we already know how the Supreme Court feels about the subject of flag desecration — see Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
But as for Clinton, this is on-your-knees groveling of the worst kind. She is doing to the civil libertarians precisely what her pervert husband did to gays — sell them out for the sake of a few votes — not once (federal DOMA), not twice (Don't Ask, Don't Tell), but three times (advising John Kerry to flip-flop on gay marriage). Expect his hack politician wife to do the same for any other "expendable" group. To the Clintons, principles are never more important than votes.
There's a word for someone who sells her principles, ethics and dignity for myopic material gain.
Prostitute.
The bill doesn't explicitly ban anyone from setting the flag afire.I might — might — understand conservative hack politicians beating this dead horse as a pandering gesture to the Great Red State Unwashed. (Gay marriage bans are so 2004...)
But it makes it illegal for a protester to "intimidate any person or group of persons by burning" the flag — which leaves police with plenty of room for interpretation.
It also outlaws anyone from lighting somebody else's flag on fire and from desecrating the flag on federal property.
Congressional lawyers, who have been poring over Supreme Court rulings, believe the bill will withstand judicial review.
But for Clinton, analysts say the real value is that she can tout her co-sponsorship of the bill on the campaign trail.
After all, destroying someone else's property is of course already illegal — but obviously we need a new federal law making that clear in the singular context of flag desecration. Ditto for "intimidating" people.
Meanwhile, never mind that, regardless of any Congressional chest-thumping to the contrary, a law that restricts expressive conduct on public property is going to be constitutionally suspect. And we already know how the Supreme Court feels about the subject of flag desecration — see Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
But as for Clinton, this is on-your-knees groveling of the worst kind. She is doing to the civil libertarians precisely what her pervert husband did to gays — sell them out for the sake of a few votes — not once (federal DOMA), not twice (Don't Ask, Don't Tell), but three times (advising John Kerry to flip-flop on gay marriage). Expect his hack politician wife to do the same for any other "expendable" group. To the Clintons, principles are never more important than votes.
There's a word for someone who sells her principles, ethics and dignity for myopic material gain.
Prostitute.
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
- The Sanctity of the Flag Versus the Sanctity of Property
- No Independence From Flag Protectionism
- Nevada Town Passes Unconstitutional Flag Restriction...
- And to the Mob Rule for Which It Stands...
- Hillary Clinton Supports Flag Burning Ban
- Another Frivolous State Flag Burning Prosecution
- Flag Burning: Am I Missing Something?
- Early Thoughts on the Flag Amendment
Posted by Kip on
5 December 2005
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.



