Thursday, January 5, 2012

Winston-Salem Journal LTE's TH 01/05/12


Remedial training
I am writing about the Dec. 30 flag burning in Charlotte by members of the Occupy Charlotte movement as reported by Fox News Network on Dec. 31. There has been little coverage of this in the local media.
I am infuriated that members of the Occupy movement in Charlotte chose to burn my flag. I served in two combat tours in Afghanistan and in Iraq under my flag so that the Occupiers would have the freedom to protest. I serve as an honor guard for the North Carolina National Guard. I have the distinct privilege of folding our nation's colors over the remains of our fallen heroes. Presenting the flag to the next of kin is a sacred moment and last visible memory of their loved one's service.
Remedial training in respect for Old Glory is in order — a class I would be more than willing to teach.

KEVIN WINEMILLER
CHAPLAIN, N.C. NATIONAL GUARD
Winston-Salem
History reveals
Reports of failing nations around the world are as old as history, for earthly governments do not last, as history reveals. The United States has been very fortunate to have leaders with a sense of liberty and justice for all. Unfortunately, we also have leaders in public offices, including the White House and Congress, who expect citizens should serve the egotistical and partisan desires of politicians, who enrich themselves, as none retires poor. Like too many Americans, they have little interest in the spiritual values of life. Consequently, we are doomed to suffer the same fate as many other civilizations that have failed to fulfill responsibilities of divine faith in their lives as well as in families and communities.
Nations of this world do not last, but they can enjoy the benefits of God's presence when leaders are committed to serving their citizens rather than themselves. It is not only bankers and CEOs who are greedy. Also, many political candidates spend millions of dollars when running for public offices. The media also profits off of these campaigns. Government is ordained of God (Romans 13), but it only succeeds when people are committed to godliness, as Samuel (I Samuel 7) warned. Achievements of people like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln as well as Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi are manifested when people are devoted to the spirit of God, as seen in Christ and taught by Micah (6:8): "do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with thy God."

JIM HELVEY
Winston-Salem
Sum It Up
The Sum It Up question from Sunday was: Have you already decided which candidates you will vote for in 2012?
* * * * *
No, but I know who I am voting against.

DONALD R. CREWS
* * * * *
I'll be voting for candidates who know what they want, say what they want and know why they want it. I'll be for the one who seems to understand the other side, has friends there and can find common ground. I'll be for the one who will not vote to shut down the United States over a pipeline. I'll be for the one who is in it for the joy of working for the country, not the one who asks what the country can do for his or her friends. It will not be easy to find these candidates, but I hope I'll have company in the search.

STEVE SCROGGIN
* * * * *
I choose any GOP candidate to defeat Barack Obama. November 2012 cannot get here fast enough.

BETH McMULLAN
* * * * *
I will vote a straight Democratic ticket.

CATHERINE W. PITTS
* * * * *
I look forward to voting to re-elect the best president in my lifetime.

JAN HAMPTON
* * * * *
Of course I will know the background of candidates for whom I vote, but frankly I will be voting for all Democrats as I cannot imagine a current Republican worthy of my vote.

ANNE GRIFFIS WILSON
* * * * *
It is too early to pick a candidate or candidates. However, I set guidelines for myself to choose candidates. One of the guidelines is to eliminate candidates who condemn the Occupy movement.

BOON T. LEE
* * * * *
The Republican candidates for president are vying with one another to see who can be the most conservative. Wasn't it "compassionate" conservatism that made the mess we're trying to deal with now? I have no rational reason not to support President Obama again. Gov. Bev Perdue is one of the few responsible adults left in Raleigh, and she will have the same opponent who I could not support before. Let's vote!

HENRY FANSLER
* * * * *
The presidential election is a no-brainer, given the comedic act of the Republican contenders. As for the other races, I will evaluate their positions and track records as Election Day approaches.

SUZANNE A. CARROLL

52 comments:

  1. People on the extremes do things. On the radical right, they protest at military funerals, on the radical left, they burn flags. I don't believe either furthers the causes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I TOTALLY understand Mr. Winemiller's outrage at the Occupier's burning of the American Flag but, respectfully, his mission in the wars in the Middle East WAS NOT " . . . so that the Occupiers would have the freedom to protest . . . ". Actually, the stated mission for THOSE wars are STILL pretty murky. The fight for our "freedoms" was forged a couple of centuries ago, give or take a few decades. Fortunately those freedoms include the freedom of expression in which, sadly, the burning of the flag falls under.

    Buenos días, Bob.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi, LaSombra. Setting fire to a piece of cloth in a public place is not freedom of expression. It is endangerment, possibly arson, violation of open air burning laws. It is also a reflection of the real nature of the Occupy people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Boy....., it's the who's who of the radical, liberal Democrats in the response section today. They actually believe that 'thinking' and 'informed' Americans will actually change their minds based on their simplistic perspective on current politics and economic conditions, and vote to reelect one of our worst presidents in history.

    Haaardy har har! And I'm not refering to your old boyfriends the Hardy boys, Nancy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you don't respect the country that has helped you to enjoy a wonderful life, then you probably have no respect for yourself, and others.

    You're also probably a Democrat.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Stab...we haven't heard much from you lately. You must be busy.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good afternoon folks!
    LTE 1: The SC ruled in Texas v. Johnson in 1989 that the mentioned "freedom to protest" also includes burning the flag. The flag, like the country itself belongs to everyone. Freedom of speech has expanded to encompass a lot of areas including campaign money.
    LTE 2: Putting aside the theological arguments, those millions of dollars are spent with the expectation of receiving a return on their investment. That's why politicians are more focused on doing the will of those who pay the campaign bills while throwing the occasional bone to the voters.
    Sum it up: "Have you already decided which candidates you will vote for in 2012?" lol, it's still months before we have the primaries to determine who will be on the Nov. ballot! Get back to me this summer.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The US Supreme Court long ago ruled that burning a flag is protected free speech, thus not subject to open burning laws. Arson involves the burning of someone else's house or land, so has no application here.

    Such actions cannot possibly reflect "the real nature of the Occupy people" since most of the Occupy people disagree with the acts of flag burning.

    I have no problem with people burning flags. As Bob points out, it is a counterproductive act, but...

    My real problem is with phony patriots, who are the greatest abusers of the flag by:

    1. Flying the flag 24 hours a day without lighting it properly at night.
    2. Flying a cheap, non-all weather flag in the rain.
    3. Flying the flag after it has become worn and tattered, as thousands did, especially on their cars, in 2001 and 2002. When a flag is worn out, the most appropriate remedy is BURNING it in a respectful manner.
    4. The ever popular gigantic flag unfurled across a football field - the flag should never be carried flat, but aloft and free.
    5. The flag should never touch the ground or any other object below it. There is one fool on South Main Street in Washington Park who has two flags, one of which is too large for its staff and so drapes over a bush. Shame!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Have to agree with dotnet about voting.

    Anyone who, at this point, says that they know who they will or will not vote for is a poor citizen, because there are certain to be many changes in the conditions of life in the US between now and November, 2012. I will make my decision then.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The OWS protesters are no more all flag burning deadbeats than Tea Partiers are all racist redneck homophobes.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Stab's 1242hrs: I agree, setting fire to a piece of cloth in a public place IS endangerment, and stupid. Charges for arson or open air burning violations could be considered.

    The American flag is not JUST a piece of cloth. Otherwise, why would there such fury in protecting it? Or burning it?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Agree all you like. Charges can be CONSIDERED for anything, but in the case of burning a flag, it does not meet the legal "elements" for arson, and because the Supremes have declared it free speech, it cannot be interfered with. You would have a very difficult time proving "endangerment", whatever that is. And if stupidity were a crime, half the nation, at least, including a significant portion of Congress, would be in prison.

    As to the fury, that is the whole point. The flag is a symbol...for some it is a symbol of freedom...for others it is a symbol of tyranny or oppression...either way, it can generate passion, as often as not on both sides, wrong-headed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Rush: I agreed with Stab re his opinion on burning A PIECE OF CLOTH.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I agree with YOU re burning the flag not meeting the legal elements for arson.

    ReplyDelete
  15. BTW: what's the dif between "freedom of expression" and "freedom of speech". I've seen it been used interchangeably here today.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Freedom of expression is merely an extension of freedom of speech...the terminology came about because of the attempts by the government to narrow the interpretation of the first amendment to "just" actual speech.

    In the 1960s, because a few flags were burned during anti-war protests, many states enacted laws forbidding flag burning. That was ended by the Supreme Court decision of 1989.

    People also burned draft cards at those demonstrations. Since every male over age 18 was required by law to have a draft card, some were arrested. That didn't last long, either, because it was deemed to be "expression".

    Our nation was founded in civil disobedience...both the Boston Tea Party, a higly destructive event, and the Declaration of Independence were acts of civil disobedience.

    Without civil disobedience, both the anti-war and Civil Rights movements of the 1960s would have failed.

    This summer, when the Democratic convention is held in Charlotte, demonstraters will not be allowed anywhere near the convention center. That has become common practice, but is clearly unconstitutional, a matter awaiting a serious legal challenge.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I know who I won't vote for. President Obama appointed 2 more union shills to the NLRB, in spite of Congress not being in recess.

    ReplyDelete
  18. OT, reckless endangerment is behaving in a manner that can cause indiscriminate harm. An example would be a crab wrangler waving burning textiles in public. But, the USSC has pronounced this protected speech. One of Dickens' characters said, "The law is an ass." At least some of the time.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Also, if burning cloth in public is speech, then it's no stretch to declare that a group of spending money to SAY political things (real uttered or printed words, y'know) is expression, also.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bucky, I am working long hours, managing several households, so I am hard pressed to spend time in this blog, which I miss. Thank you for inquiring.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes, that was Mr. Bumble speaking out against the fact that the law held him accountable for his wife's behavior, as was common practice in mid-19th century England, that being based upon the simple fact that when a woman married, all of her property and rights became the property of her husband. Note that Mr. Bumble never spoke out against that part of the law...he liked owning her property and otherwise controlling her life, but did not want the responsibility that comes with that. He reminds me of our own Mr. Bluster.

    It is noteworthy that the US Supreme Court has shown its ass in some recent cases, for example in 2000 when it stuck its nose into what is clearly defined as state business in Florida, thus electing George W. Bush POTUS by a vote of 5-4.

    Or last year, when it declared that a corporation is a person, when the whole idea of corporations is to avoid personal responsibility for the actions of the corporation.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Stab: We have freedom of speech/expression, but we don't have freedom of consequence. The utterance of hate, in the history of this country, has incited many riots (a consequence) that has put the public at risk.

    ReplyDelete
  23. A corporation is a group of persons who spend money to SAY things, no matches involved.

    The FL SC tried to finish the job the Dem FL elections boards were doing, trying hang enough chads to elect Gore. You could have had Gore if Dems had the since to tell the genuinely lawbreaking Willard to hit the trail.

    ReplyDelete
  24. LaSombra, freedom of consequence is correct. The courts even recognize the existence of "fighting words," which might be invoked when a wrangler start s a fire in public.

    ReplyDelete
  25. 1032: "since" should be "sense." Sorry, a bit tired.

    ReplyDelete
  26. . . . but burning a flag vs. starting a fire? Two different scenarios. We can burn a flag and its a protected freedom. We start a fire, (maybe as we're burning the flag . . . hmmm?) and it's a chargeable offense.

    ReplyDelete
  27. That's my point. Light the flag in your fireplace or charcoal grill, go ahead. Advocate flag burning, that's free speech. Setting a fire in front of city hall, whether it's flag or a union newspaper, that's setting a fire.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Cuz, when it comes down to it, you are saying that anything is OK as long as you agree with it, and not OK when you don't.

    The USSC's meddling in Florida had nothing to do with Bill Clinton and everything to do with politics as usual.

    As to the Occupy folks, it would be interesting to know where you get your information. I have visited and talked with Occupiers here and in several other cities, including Chicago and New York...the ones I have talked to are bright, educated young people who have an acute awareness of some of the serious problems facing our nation. Just because the movement has failed so far to articulate its complaints does not invalidate the underlying basis. It took the Civil Rights movements decades to figure out how to focus on the right issue.

    As to the term "crab wrangler", perhaps you are buying the exaggerations projected by some city officials in various places who have no interest in the 1st Amendment, but only an interest in their own careers...city councilman Besse being an excellent example locally.

    That kind of terminology sounds more like what Mr. Bluster might say than what Cuz Stab might say.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I see your point. Didn't intend to make it for you, but I see it. My point, though, and the beauty of our freedoms, is that we CAN express our freedoms in front of City Hall even if it's done in the form of fire. It doesn't have to be uttered.

    ReplyDelete
  30. On the other hand if I burn a flag so as to incite terror, this is not protected speech.

    ReplyDelete
  31. LaSombra, your argument can be extended to stabbing in front of City Hall being expression.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Stabbing? A living thing? Stabbing in NO WAY, NO WHERE, is a protected form of expression.

    ReplyDelete
  33. OT, I tossed in the Willard remark as an off-topic afterthought. The FL SC sought to manipulate the election; 7 Dems, 1 R, y'know.

    As for "crab wrangler," the liberal city of L. A. was considering suing the OWS people over the mess they left, and NYC had to pressure wash the park they infested.

    ReplyDelete
  34. LaSombra, then why is the lawless act of public burning protected?

    ReplyDelete
  35. My point is that any movement has to determine its own course, and, thankfully, in the USA, they have that right.

    I'm glad that the folks who carried out the Boston Tea party did not worry about the damage to property that they were committing and who was going to clean up the mess.

    And I am glad that Thomas Jefferson included plenty of "fighting words" in the Declaration of Independence. If those people had exhibited the timidity that I am hearing here, we would all still be living under the British flag.

    And I might point out that most of the trouble spots in today's world were created by those same British:

    1. Iraq, and their gross mishandling of that mandate.

    2. Palestine/Israel, another mandate blown.

    3. Pakistan/Afghanistan/India...easily their worst BUMBLE of all.

    "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
    -- Mark Twain

    ReplyDelete
  36. You make a valid point re public burning, Stab. I would ask the same question you are if we WEREN'T talking about the burning of the American Flag in public. The Supreme Court made that a distinction.

    ReplyDelete
  37. And what is the mission of the wranglers?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Does Occupiers = wranglers to you? Just trying to understand your question in order to proceed.

    ReplyDelete
  39. LaSombra, I re-cite, "The law is an ass."

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yes to your question re occupiers = wranglers.

    ReplyDelete
  41. My 11:17 was in response to your 11:10.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Stab is quoting Mr. Bumble, who was happy as could be about the way the law worked until it held him responsible for the benefits that he had been enjoying.

    ReplyDelete
  43. OK, time to turn in. I will try to reengage tomorrow night. Fun discussion. Good night, Cuz OT ans LaSombra.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Convenient quote, OT, didn't really worry it's origin, but there is probably a little Bumble in all of us :)

    ReplyDelete
  45. The law is an ass. I now understand.

    If I could answer the question re the mission of the wranglers, I would be out there with them. There may have been a clearly defined mission at inception but it's become so diluted as time has passed. I never paid them much attention anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Great discussion tonight, gentlemen. Hope to continue it again soon.

    ReplyDelete
  47. The threat of a lawsuit by the city of LA and the "pressure washing" in NY are laughable... grandstanding at its best, and reminiscent of the spectacular toppling of the Saddam statue by jubilant Iraquis that we all enjoyed so much on national TV in the early stages of Cheney's war on Iraq.

    It was only later that we discovered that the whole thing had been staged...that the toppling was done under orders by US Marines and that they had had to go out and round up some locals to make it look legit. And that the myth had been perpetuated by the tight camera angles employed by those outrageously liberal US TV networks.

    You ought to see the mess that has to be cleaned up every night during the summer after our "Music in the Streets" events...trash thrown heedlessly on the ground from only a few hours of attendance by nice, mild mannered, unthinking middle class folks.

    Those who attend the events don't see the cleanup because it happens in the middle of the night...I do, because I live right in the middle of it. The same thing happens after every major sporting event. Think about that next Monday night while you're watching Alabama correct an earlier error involving the Bayou Bengals of LSU.

    ReplyDelete