Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
June 28, 2006
POLITICS: Hillary's Flag Flop

You know, I wasn't in favor of an amendment to the Constitution to ban flag-burning, not least for the reason I mentioned here back in 2003: "Every time some nitwit college student burns a flag on camera, that's one less idiot who can ever run for public office." But let's not leave this topic without noting the following:

1. Hillary Clinton drew widespread publicity - referencing her position as evidence of a move towards the political center - for supporting legislation banning flag-burning.

2. Like everyone else who follows politics even remotely, Hillary knew full well that the Supreme Court in 1989 had held that the First Amendment protects flag-burning, and therefore that such legislation, to accomplish anything, required an amendment to the constitution.

3. When that amendment came up for a vote, it failed by one vote, and Hillary voted against it. In other words, Hillary's vote by itself defeated the position she had depicted herself as supporting.

Posted by Baseball Crank at 7:55 AM | Politics 2008 | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

I'm no fan of the party that Hill will oppose in '08, but no one should be surprised any more to see her voting consistently along one line: That which favors . . . Hillary Clinton.

As I said in one of today's posts on my blog (in the context of a discussion on "values" from a perspective that . . . let's just say, probably differs from Crank's): "After the press conference ended, reporters questioned Hillary Clinton about the agenda as she strode down the Capitol steps. 'Values?' she asked, apparently dumbfounded at the question. 'I value me. Vote Hill in '08.'"

You don't have to be a Republican or a right-winger to hate Hillary. Being an American, and possessing an ounce of integrity is enough cause for me to hate her.

Posted by: Mike at June 28, 2006 1:24 PM

Hillary's flip flopping on the flag misses the forest. Any proposal to add a frivolous amendment to the Constitution for political expediency is a disgrace and should be condemned in the harshest terms. What Hillary has done in this area is pathetic. What the 66 Senators did in voting for the amendment is nauseating.

Posted by: Steve at June 28, 2006 2:12 PM

Everything about the Flag Burning Amendment is idiotic and deplorable. Yet it confounds the Democrats year after year.

How should Dems handle it? Without fail, the GOP shamelessly trots it out in close elections. So should Dems hold their nose and vote for it.

Maybe they should up the ante and offer an amendment to the Amendment mandating flag burners be TORTURED.

While no fan of Hillary, I think she took a good swipe at this riddle. If anyone actually read her proposed legislation, it was pretty harmless (unlike the very HARMFUL proposed constituional amendment).

Posted by: patrick at June 28, 2006 10:15 PM

Something like five flags are burned in Amercia per year. There could not possibly be a less important issue for America to waste it's time on when the country is at war, hugely in debt, and possibly facing huge environmental challenges. Unless Hillary's position on the issue is the same as mine (that it could not possibly matter less), I don't care what it is.

Posted by: Jerry at June 28, 2006 10:42 PM

Jerry - its easy to type that anonomously into Crank's website. But if you were a Senator or a Congressman, would it be as easy to read it aloud on the floor?

How about if you were up against the likes of Rick Santorum or Robert Ney - scoundrels who will stop at nothing for their own personal advancement.

Perhaps you may say - 'well its so useless, I may as well just vote for it and move on.'

But, did you know all 50 State legislatures have 'courageously' passed resolutions for such an Amendment?

So, with your vote, you could place this mudsplat not the fasttrack to soiling our Constitution.

And, I am sure a fine lawyer like Crank will agree, that any additional sentence placed in the constitution will be stretched and pulled and processed to the point that such a seemingly innocent mudsplat could lead to absolute horrors.

Much like the interstate commerce clause currently allows the federal government to regulate how much the dishwasher is paid at the local subshop.

And much like the ammendment forbidding the government from placing soldiers in your home was interpreted to support the Roe v. Wade decision.

With this precedent, giving Congress the right to legislate patriotism would surely portend dark days ahead.

Kudos for Hillary!

Posted by: patrick at June 29, 2006 8:53 AM

A far greater disgrace is a hack like Bill Frist, who of course, to show just what a patriot he is, along with the Republican majority, who simply can't wait to haul out the flag, and try to pass an amendment to our constitution. While religous people feel whatever version of the bible they believe in is most important, I consider the Constitution of the United States, and its first Ten Amendments to be the most important piece of writing in the history of humankind. It is supposed to define the limits of what the government may actually do, NOT to define what a single person may not do.

And any amendment that tries to supercede the Bill of Rights deserves a quick denunciation. The dems should run on the republicans trying to insult James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and that Washington fellow, Federalists all.

My guess is Bill Frist diagnosed a flag burner on TV, and figured the problem was with Mr. Madison's document. Diagnosing via TV is what he does, isn't it?

Posted by: Daryl Rosenblatt at June 29, 2006 1:56 PM

Good one Daryl -- and if this passed,Frist was probably ready to sell short his stock in the integtrity of the US Constitution. 'Cause if there is anything Dr. Frist knows, its when to sell.

Posted by: patrick at June 29, 2006 2:17 PM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg