Clark Favors Flag-Burning Amendment

[CADsortaGUY]

Clark Tells Veterans He Favors Amendment to Ban Flag Burning, Breaking With Democratic Rivals

<snip>
Breaking with most of his Democratic rivals, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Tuesday he favors amending the Constitution to ban flag burning.
</snip>

CkG

 

[Pennstate]

Ok, that's 1 strike against him for my vote. Some of the most fervant opposition to flag burning ban are veterans.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Clark Tells Veterans He Favors Amendment to Ban Flag Burning, Breaking With Democratic Rivals

<snip>
Breaking with most of his Democratic rivals, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Tuesday he favors amending the Constitution to ban flag burning.
</snip>

CkG

He can favor it all he wants it won't change anything.

 

[tnitsuj]

Another good reason not to vote for him. We don't need that fascist bs.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Speaking at an American Legion hall on Veterans Day, Clark said he agrees with the amendment, although he cautioned that true patriotism involves more than respecting symbols.

... like respecting the ideals those symbols represent, perhaps?

 

[Witling]

It seems to me that there are only three reasons to burn the flag: (1) You need heat; (2) You need light; or (3) You want to make a political point. As much trash as we cover under the rubric of "free speech," it bothers me when a serious candidate favors banning flag burning. The exact kind of political gesture that the founding fathers meant to protect.

 

[konichiwa]

He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

 

[markuskidd]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

 

[DealMonkey]

Clark's just pandering to vets on Veteran's day... Flags are just inanimate objects, it's no big deal to burn them.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Clark Tells Veterans He Favors Amendment to Ban Flag Burning, Breaking With Democratic Rivals

<snip>
Breaking with most of his Democratic rivals, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark said Tuesday he favors amending the Constitution to ban flag burning.
</snip>

CkG

<-- marks Clark off the list...

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: markuskidd

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

"judicial review"

 

[markuskidd]

I may be seriously revealing my ignorance, but what do you mean by judial review?

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: markuskidd

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

"judicial review"

Judicial Review is in relation to laws and government actions to ensure that they are constitutional. If the constitution itself is changed to say that flag burning is prohibited then thie ris nothing to review. Jeebus...the sad state of American Education these days.

 

[tnitsuj]

 

[NuclearFusi0n]

to paraphrase moonbeam: the day you can't burn the flag is the day you should.

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: markuskidd

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

"judicial review"

Judicial Review is in relation to laws and government actions to ensure that they are constitutional. If the constitution itself is changed to say that flag burning is prohibited then thie ris nothing to review. Jeebus...the sad state of American Education these days.

I'm perfectly aware of how judicial review works. And it would take approximately 4 seconds for the amdendment to be challenged and brought before the courts.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Clark is definitely a #2.

 

[Witling]

With respect to judicial review of an amendment. Yes, there are some peripheral things the Supreme Court might review, e.g., if you destroy the flag with acid is that the same as burning it. But other than interpretations -- and baby, can that cover some scope -- the amendment stands and is the supreme law of the land. The discussion seems a little simplistic though. Presidents don't generally have too much to do with amendments.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: markuskidd

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

"judicial review"

Judicial Review is in relation to laws and government actions to ensure that they are constitutional. If the constitution itself is changed to say that flag burning is prohibited then thie ris nothing to review. Jeebus...the sad state of American Education these days.

I'm perfectly aware of how judicial review works. And it would take approximately 4 seconds for the amdendment to be challenged and brought before the courts.

Okay...you don't know how judicial review works. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. The courts cannot "review it". It doesn't work that way. You can't file a case saying that a constituitonal ammendment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbtitrar of what the Constitution means and to an extent how it is to be applied but it can not "review" the Constitution itself.

Do you understand yet? Judicial Review does not apply to the Constitution. That is the whole point of an ammendment, to get around the fact that any other law to prevent flag burning would be a violation of the 1st Ammendment.

Understand????

 

[KenGr]

Another Democrat breaks the hearts of the Left.

Now you know how I felt when Bush extended the steel tariffs.

 

[tnitsuj]

Konichiwa. What level of education do you have, and where did you get it? I find if shocking and disturbing that you lack such a basic understanding of the US legal system.

 

[LunarRay]

I thought burning the flag was the proper way to dispose of one. Shall we be required to use a garbage disposal?

Some see the Flag as a symbol of freedom. To burn it is the exersize of one of those freedoms.

When I see the Flag I see me and you and the US and its ideals and its pride. When it rises at the Olympics or flown today I see my yesterday and our hope for tomorrow. When I see you burn it I see you take what I hold dear and throw it in my face and yelling at the top of your lungs... America Suc$s! I won't arrest you for burning it because it is your right. But, if you seek to burn my Flag on My lawn... I'll sig my dog on you... I figure that is my right.

The Amendment won't pass nor should it..

 

[markuskidd]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: markuskidd

Originally posted by: konichiwa
He can make all the amendments he wants; they won't get past any supreme court in its right mind. Perhaps this will be a litmus test of the judges Bush might be appointing ...

ummm... if he makes an amendment, then the supreme court isn't really involved....

"judicial review"

Judicial Review is in relation to laws and government actions to ensure that they are constitutional. If the constitution itself is changed to say that flag burning is prohibited then thie ris nothing to review. Jeebus...the sad state of American Education these days.

I'm perfectly aware of how judicial review works. And it would take approximately 4 seconds for the amdendment to be challenged and brought before the courts.

Okay...you don't know how judicial review works. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. The courts cannot "review it". It doesn't work that way. You can't file a case saying that a constituitonal ammendment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbtitrar of what the Constitution means and to an extent how it is to be applied but it can not "review" the Constitution itself.

Do you understand yet? Judicial Review does not apply to the Constitution. That is the whole point of an ammendment, to get around the fact that any other law to prevent flag burning would be a violation of the 1st Ammendment.

Understand????

Whew... alright, I didn't *think* judicial review would have anything to do with an amendment being added to the constition. Glad to know I wasn't completely ignorant after all

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I thought burning the flag was the proper way to dispose of one.

You'd be correct. Ceremonially it would be the proper way to dispose of the Flag.

Now, I'm not at all in favor or people burning the flag in hate demonstrations, but alas - it is the freedom to do so and show your descent that makes America great.

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I thought burning the flag was the proper way to dispose of one.

You'd be correct. Ceremonially it would be the proper way to dispose of the Flag.

Now, I'm not at all in favor or people burning the flag in hate demonstrations, but alas - it is the freedom to do so and show your descent that makes America great.

CkG

Fine with me but, again if someone wishes to burn the flag I'd advise against doing it on my lawn. I don't like fire and would use what ever means were at my disposal to extinguish the fire.
First Amendment rights end where mine begin and visa versa. I applauded Rick Monday!