This is an early example of the "new bipartisan" tone the left is so eager for... i.e., "You shut up and sit down! We're in charge now!"
I can't wait for the flood of further proof of the new bipartisanship in the air across the nation...
Once the leftists in power get on a roll, we'll have tons of issues upon which to campaign. The next 2 years are going to be a hoot!!!
Posted by:
babyboomer aka dbogdan at November 10, 2006 05:16 PM
Mark,
Another example of how you righties think government is the answer to everything. This is a group of students who, through their own free will decided not to say the pledge.
You're solution to this? Elect FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS to FORCE people to say the pledge of Allegiance. Free will is not to be tolerated under any circumstances. Compliance must be mandated by direct control of the federal government.
If people don't want to say the pledge, why is your solution to force them to do at at the behest of Washington politicians? Why is more government always the answer?
Posted by: Jim Oliver at November 10, 2006 05:21 PM
These three morons should head back to high school as they obviously need to grow up.
College students always try to pull this crap, thinking of themselves as rebels and fighting against 'the Man'. Ill accept this event as evidence of that; three dateless fools trying to impress the girls at Omega-Mu with adolescent talk of revolution and rousing the proletariat. They think that skimming through 'Das Kapital' and hanging a soviet flag on their dorm wall makes them a true socialist.
The article explains how these kids had their pants tucked into combat boots, were wearing matching berets and had star-and-sickle pins on their shirts. Tough guys pretending to embrace Che Guevara militarism while taking classes called "World Socialism" and "Cuban Studies".
Posted by: Lose the Bongos at November 10, 2006 05:29 PM
Meanwhile, their capitalist parents are busy working in the Great Satan, trying to earn money for their kids tuition and Xbox© games. I wonder how these geeks reconcile that fact as they yell "People, Onward to Victory!" in the campus quad? I wonder if their parents ever think of repoing their kids car to shut them up?
Eventually these punks will grow up and figure out that being a professional revolutionary-wannabe wont pay the bills and they will trade the combat gear for an off the rack suit. Or they wont, and their days will be spent in a place like Berkeley, attending nudist rallies and living four to a room in some communal, hippy flophouse.
Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at November 10, 2006 05:33 PM
A bunch of college students don't represent the Democratic party any more than the people who murder abortion doctors represent the Republicans.
Posted by: DougW at November 10, 2006 05:36 PM
[I}A bunch of college students don't represent the Democratic party any more than the people who murder abortion doctors represent the Republicans[/I]
Au contraire! The halls of academia are where the motherlode of future liberal, loony Democrats resides. They have been for several generations. It's only been recently that Conservative students have managed to enter into political discourse on college campi. And usually, when they do, they are heckled, harassed, or otherwise intimidated by their radical leftist counterparts. That is, when they're not rushing the stage to silence speakers who've been invited by Conservatives to speak at the institution, or throwing pies at noted right-wing spokespeople... or trashing ROTC Recruitment Centers...
So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it...
Posted by:
babyboomer aka dbogdan at November 10, 2006 05:44 PM
"If people don't want to say the pledge, why is your solution to force them to do at at the behest of Washington politicians"?
Mr. Oliver, Again you find yourself on the wrong(Left)side of an issue. The Pledge has never been mandatory. You have a right in this country to say "under god" or you have a right to stand there and not say anything at all. The problem is you lefties want not only god taken out of schools but you also want patriotism taken out also. So, who is pushing their will against whom? You people believe in free speech only when it falls within your godless anti-american guidelines.
Posted by: npfl at November 10, 2006 05:47 PM
I am still looking for the "hate" in Mr. Ball's action. The poster refers to Mr. Ball as having performed a "hate-filled action," but saying that a phrase from the Pledge of Allegiance is "sort of offensive to me" (note the "to me"!) doesn't seem hateful. I happen to disagree with what he said (the phrase is not offensive to me), but I can't really see the hatred there. And why would anyone want to regulate, from Washington D.C., what a group of people in California choose to say or not say at their own meetings? Let them have their chance to be college kids, for crying out loud... they'll grow out of it soon enough.
Posted by:
declinetosate at November 10, 2006 06:00 PM
Absolutely right Mark! If these atheistic leftist communists don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance they should move to Cuba. If they have a problem with "under God" then they can go the devil.
This is a winning issue that God-fearing America loving Republicans can win on. Let's get Nancy "San Francisco values" Pelosi to go on the record in support of these Godless LIEberal DemoRATs.
Posted by: Bob Arctor at November 10, 2006 06:13 PM
So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it...
Don't give me that bull that the Army of God, Timothy McVeigh, and all the right-wing separatist militias aren't representative of the Republicans in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it....
What? I thought we were playing the Completely Stupid Generalization Game. Well, at least Noonan (to the shock of none) and dbogdan were; I was just trying to keep up.
Posted by: SeesThroughIt at November 10, 2006 06:24 PM
While I disagree with these students I don't see a need for a Federal response to this. Let the local folks deal with these guys and be done with it. While I do find it hilarious that folks going to Captalistic Colleges being socialists it doesn't bother me if they don't say the Pledge.
Which is better, having them say something they don't believe to please everyone. Or being open about their beliefs in the matter? I'd rather have them say nothing then to make a false pledge of allegance.
Posted by:
Gozer at November 10, 2006 07:15 PM
The goofs didnt decide to just not say the pledge, they banned it, and therefore banned the right of anyone in the meeting to say it. They didnt even make it optional and decide to stand mute.
Dont worry, the left has it all figured out, you just shut your trap and do as youre told and let them do the thinking for you.
Posted by: Bacon-I Will Miss Thee at November 10, 2006 07:44 PM
Which is better, having them say something they don't believe to please everyone. Or being open about their beliefs in the matter? I'd rather have them say nothing then to make a false pledge of allegance.
Gozer - you missed the point! It's not a question of them choosing to verbalize it or choosing not to verbalize it. The student leaders are banning the pledge entirely from their meetings. It's not a question of anybody standing silently, opting not to recite the pledge while others choose to do so. It's shutting down the rights of those who wish to recite the pledge because of the tyranny of the minority who is "offended" by the words contained within it.
This act is further proof of how duplicitous and cunning the left is. In a venue which is supposed to be the epitome of freedom of expression - a university - some hate-America, hate-God element has decided that freedom of speech is subordinate to their freedom not to be offended. Therefore, freedom of speech is shut down...
This is just the tip of the iceberg folks. Since the left now feels that they've been given a mandate, they are emboldened to reveal themselves to us without any fear of repercussion. After all, they've gotten back in power and don't intend to ever let is slip away again. Not in 2 years. Not in 20 years. Not ever. That's why we Conservatives need to get ready for the fight of our lives to hold back this wave of hatred from the left toward this country...
This is just the opening round in a new theatre of political engagement. There's plenty more where those loonies come from...
Posted by:
babyboomer aka dbogdan at November 10, 2006 07:45 PM
Is this the Righties' great plan to take back control in Washington? To make hay over a group of students not wanting to say the pledge of alliance, and then mandating that they do so?
This really illustrates how completely out of touch you wingers are. You know, this country faces real challenges - we're at war, we have real issues of healthcare and economics grapple with. But all you guys want to do is get all hot and bothered over this kind of irrelevent nonsense. If this is your plan to get back into power, you're going to be sadly disappointed.
Posted by: Aarontime at November 10, 2006 07:45 PM
Aarontime--another case of selective reading. Nobody's mandating that they, singularly, recite the pledge.
Those idiots took away the option of saying it entirely.
Who's infringing on who's rights?
But I think you already knew that, didn't you, Aarontime.
Posted by:
Leo Pusateri at November 10, 2006 08:07 PM
A lot of you folks are saying that the rights of those students who want to say the Pledge before every meeting are being unduly infringed upon because people who didn't want to particpate could just sit quietly while it proceeded. Well, what if I wanted to pledge allegiance to the Freemasons, in a 6 minute, or two hour, chant during every meeting? Why, you could just opt out, so if you don't let me do it, you must be unduly infringing on my rights then, huh? And then every person who wants to engage in some sort of ritual at some point in every meeting would have to be allowed, right? Wouldn't this then infringe on the right of people to hold orderly meetings of established length and focused purpose?
The truth is, it would be insane to allow everyone who wanted to perform a spoken ritual during the meeting to do so. Realizing this, if you continue to argue that it is wrong of them to ban the Pledge of Allegiance, you are suggesting that the Pledge itself should be given special place as a sacred ritual whose meaning should be venerated above other meanings. This, my friends, is tyrrany. It is the antithesis of freedom of speech. You may think that tyrrany is deserved in this instance. I wonder what other instances you may soon come up with once you win this fight.
I personally think it's stupid to pledge allegiance to a flag, or for that matter, a nation, and I prefer to express my DEEP RESPECT for the vast majority of America's bedrock principles in ways that are more meaningful to me. Furthermore, as an agnostic, I personally don't think America is necessarily a nation under god. But you wouldn't want to listen to me recite my form of a pledge, so why do I have to listen to you recite yours?
Anyway, not the most coherent argument, but I think you should get the drift - I certainly could go on about how I can dislike the Pledge yet have deep respect for America, but, not now.
Posted by: PatriotismIsJustAnotherIsm at November 10, 2006 08:52 PM
"This is the real task before us: to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength. Only by building a wall of such spiritual resolve can we, as a free people, hope to protect our own heritage and make it someday the birthright of all men." President Ronald Reagan March 20, 1981
Posted by: Mark M. Davis at November 10, 2006 08:53 PM
Okay, so these Orange Coast College student trustees banned the pledge at their meetings. What is this boards job? I mean if it's a club or private organization that is on campus (like a Literature group, 4H, or the like) then it's their right to ban what they want at their meetings. Just like Boy Scouts can ban girls and the LPGA can ban men from their organization.
Now again I have no clue what these Orange Coast College student trustees do. I mean if they're an official arm of the college, like say the President of the college is on it and they're doing the college's work that's a different story. If a Public college is banning the pledge during their meetings then I can see the point. Since it's a public institution it should allow the pledge to be said, even if those in charge don't even stand (they don't have to stand even).
So my counter point is, what the heck do these guys do?
Posted by:
Gozer at November 10, 2006 09:08 PM
"So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it..."
Actually, I know the opposite is true, as do you. The problem is, as usual for this site, you hate liberals more than you hate terrorists.
But I refuse to reciprocate your vitriol. As my fellow American, I respect your rights to free speech, even when it's lies full of hatred directed at people with whom you have disagreements.
As for me, saying a pledge doesn't make one a patriot. It's like with the extreme radical rightwing hate judge Roy Moore. If his faith was stronger, he wouldn't need graven images. My patriotism extends beyond pledges.
Posted by: DougW at November 10, 2006 09:29 PM
"So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it..."
Actually, I know the opposite is true, as do you. The problem is, as usual for this site, you hate liberals more than you hate terrorists.
But I refuse to reciprocate your vitriol. As my fellow American, I respect your rights to free speech, even when it's lies full of hatred directed at people with whom you have disagreements.
As for me, saying a pledge doesn't make one a patriot. It's like with the extreme radical rightwing hate judge Roy Moore. If his faith was stronger, he wouldn't need graven images. My patriotism extends beyond pledges.
Posted by: DougW at November 10, 2006 09:29 PM
I don't understand why the few who find the Pledge
offensive get to have it removed for those who may WANT the pledge. Again, it's the few, who seem to want to dictate to the majority. It does
remind me of the San Francisco Kook, who wanted to
remove prayer before school because he was an athiest. He went through alot of trouble, and that was only ONE person-His daughter, by the way
didn't mind prayer at all, and didn't even live with this kook. The Mother said the daughter had never brought this issue up, and that the Father was using the child to advance his OWN AGENDA.
Kinda reminds you of the Activist Dupe, Cindy Sheehan who was political BEFORE her son was killed, and then used his death, to advance her sick agenda.
Posted by: Jo at November 10, 2006 11:03 PM
This will push the Democrats to declare themselves in unmistakable terms: are you patriots, or aren't you?
Even if this was true, Mark, it was your side that started this particular you're-with-us-or-against-us rash of crap, and you know it full well. Do you honestly think most of us on the Left are inspired by idiots like Ball? Sure, we may defend his right to say what he wants, but that doesn't mean we're swayed by his words -- there's a difference between a defense and an endorsement.
What a pity that you right-wingers can't see it for yourselves...
Posted by:
Mimus Pauly at November 11, 2006 01:50 AM
Ism,
I'm sorry, but that was one of the most asinine examples of cobweb spinning sophistry I've ever read.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at November 11, 2006 02:22 AM
Aaron,
Who is mandating? No one is forcing these people to attend government-funded institutions of higher education. They are perfectly free to start their own schools, with their own money, where they can pledge allegiance to the doorknob, for all I care...but in an American school funded by American tax dollars, at least some respect must be paid for where it all comes from...to not do so is akin to coming in to my house for dinner and not having the decency to thank me for the food, even if you helped me cook it.
As for the issue - this is the sort of galvanising issue we need to clearly show the difference between our side and yours. I know, if we bring it up, you'll accuse us of being divisive and seeking wedge issues...essentially accusing us of ruing national unity, rather than those who hate the country so much that they won't pledge allegiance to, ya know, the Constitution and all the tiresome claptrap the left despises so much. Well, we don't care - quite honestly, we on the right have learned the lesson: Doesn't matter what we do, you'll oppose it and call it a failure...might as well make the most of it.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at November 11, 2006 02:27 AM
Hear hear Mark!
Nothing is ever right with America or with any decision the Republicans make for many on the left. So why try being "friendly" when we should just try to get our ideas passed.
Posted by:
Gozer at November 11, 2006 02:47 AM
This is an early example of the "new bipartisan" tone the left is so eager for... i.e., "You shut up and sit down! We're in charge now!"
I can't wait for the flood of further proof of the new bipartisanship in the air across the nation...
Once the leftists in power get on a roll, we'll have tons of issues upon which to campaign. The next 2 years are going to be a hoot!!!
Mark,
Another example of how you righties think government is the answer to everything. This is a group of students who, through their own free will decided not to say the pledge.
You're solution to this? Elect FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS to FORCE people to say the pledge of Allegiance. Free will is not to be tolerated under any circumstances. Compliance must be mandated by direct control of the federal government.
If people don't want to say the pledge, why is your solution to force them to do at at the behest of Washington politicians? Why is more government always the answer?
These three morons should head back to high school as they obviously need to grow up.
College students always try to pull this crap, thinking of themselves as rebels and fighting against 'the Man'. Ill accept this event as evidence of that; three dateless fools trying to impress the girls at Omega-Mu with adolescent talk of revolution and rousing the proletariat. They think that skimming through 'Das Kapital' and hanging a soviet flag on their dorm wall makes them a true socialist.
The article explains how these kids had their pants tucked into combat boots, were wearing matching berets and had star-and-sickle pins on their shirts. Tough guys pretending to embrace Che Guevara militarism while taking classes called "World Socialism" and "Cuban Studies".
Meanwhile, their capitalist parents are busy working in the Great Satan, trying to earn money for their kids tuition and Xbox© games. I wonder how these geeks reconcile that fact as they yell "People, Onward to Victory!" in the campus quad? I wonder if their parents ever think of repoing their kids car to shut them up?
Eventually these punks will grow up and figure out that being a professional revolutionary-wannabe wont pay the bills and they will trade the combat gear for an off the rack suit. Or they wont, and their days will be spent in a place like Berkeley, attending nudist rallies and living four to a room in some communal, hippy flophouse.
A bunch of college students don't represent the Democratic party any more than the people who murder abortion doctors represent the Republicans.
[I}A bunch of college students don't represent the Democratic party any more than the people who murder abortion doctors represent the Republicans[/I]
Au contraire! The halls of academia are where the motherlode of future liberal, loony Democrats resides. They have been for several generations. It's only been recently that Conservative students have managed to enter into political discourse on college campi. And usually, when they do, they are heckled, harassed, or otherwise intimidated by their radical leftist counterparts. That is, when they're not rushing the stage to silence speakers who've been invited by Conservatives to speak at the institution, or throwing pies at noted right-wing spokespeople... or trashing ROTC Recruitment Centers...
So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it...
"If people don't want to say the pledge, why is your solution to force them to do at at the behest of Washington politicians"?
Mr. Oliver, Again you find yourself on the wrong(Left)side of an issue. The Pledge has never been mandatory. You have a right in this country to say "under god" or you have a right to stand there and not say anything at all. The problem is you lefties want not only god taken out of schools but you also want patriotism taken out also. So, who is pushing their will against whom? You people believe in free speech only when it falls within your godless anti-american guidelines.
I am still looking for the "hate" in Mr. Ball's action. The poster refers to Mr. Ball as having performed a "hate-filled action," but saying that a phrase from the Pledge of Allegiance is "sort of offensive to me" (note the "to me"!) doesn't seem hateful. I happen to disagree with what he said (the phrase is not offensive to me), but I can't really see the hatred there. And why would anyone want to regulate, from Washington D.C., what a group of people in California choose to say or not say at their own meetings? Let them have their chance to be college kids, for crying out loud... they'll grow out of it soon enough.
Absolutely right Mark! If these atheistic leftist communists don't want to say the Pledge of Allegiance they should move to Cuba. If they have a problem with "under God" then they can go the devil.
This is a winning issue that God-fearing America loving Republicans can win on. Let's get Nancy "San Francisco values" Pelosi to go on the record in support of these Godless LIEberal DemoRATs.
So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it...
Don't give me that bull that the Army of God, Timothy McVeigh, and all the right-wing separatist militias aren't representative of the Republicans in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it....
What? I thought we were playing the Completely Stupid Generalization Game. Well, at least Noonan (to the shock of none) and dbogdan were; I was just trying to keep up.
While I disagree with these students I don't see a need for a Federal response to this. Let the local folks deal with these guys and be done with it. While I do find it hilarious that folks going to Captalistic Colleges being socialists it doesn't bother me if they don't say the Pledge.
Which is better, having them say something they don't believe to please everyone. Or being open about their beliefs in the matter? I'd rather have them say nothing then to make a false pledge of allegance.
The goofs didnt decide to just not say the pledge, they banned it, and therefore banned the right of anyone in the meeting to say it. They didnt even make it optional and decide to stand mute.
Dont worry, the left has it all figured out, you just shut your trap and do as youre told and let them do the thinking for you.
Which is better, having them say something they don't believe to please everyone. Or being open about their beliefs in the matter? I'd rather have them say nothing then to make a false pledge of allegance.
Gozer - you missed the point! It's not a question of them choosing to verbalize it or choosing not to verbalize it. The student leaders are banning the pledge entirely from their meetings. It's not a question of anybody standing silently, opting not to recite the pledge while others choose to do so. It's shutting down the rights of those who wish to recite the pledge because of the tyranny of the minority who is "offended" by the words contained within it.
This act is further proof of how duplicitous and cunning the left is. In a venue which is supposed to be the epitome of freedom of expression - a university - some hate-America, hate-God element has decided that freedom of speech is subordinate to their freedom not to be offended. Therefore, freedom of speech is shut down...
This is just the tip of the iceberg folks. Since the left now feels that they've been given a mandate, they are emboldened to reveal themselves to us without any fear of repercussion. After all, they've gotten back in power and don't intend to ever let is slip away again. Not in 2 years. Not in 20 years. Not ever. That's why we Conservatives need to get ready for the fight of our lives to hold back this wave of hatred from the left toward this country...
This is just the opening round in a new theatre of political engagement. There's plenty more where those loonies come from...
Is this the Righties' great plan to take back control in Washington? To make hay over a group of students not wanting to say the pledge of alliance, and then mandating that they do so?
This really illustrates how completely out of touch you wingers are. You know, this country faces real challenges - we're at war, we have real issues of healthcare and economics grapple with. But all you guys want to do is get all hot and bothered over this kind of irrelevent nonsense. If this is your plan to get back into power, you're going to be sadly disappointed.
Aarontime--another case of selective reading. Nobody's mandating that they, singularly, recite the pledge.
Those idiots took away the option of saying it entirely.
Who's infringing on who's rights?
But I think you already knew that, didn't you, Aarontime.
A lot of you folks are saying that the rights of those students who want to say the Pledge before every meeting are being unduly infringed upon because people who didn't want to particpate could just sit quietly while it proceeded. Well, what if I wanted to pledge allegiance to the Freemasons, in a 6 minute, or two hour, chant during every meeting? Why, you could just opt out, so if you don't let me do it, you must be unduly infringing on my rights then, huh? And then every person who wants to engage in some sort of ritual at some point in every meeting would have to be allowed, right? Wouldn't this then infringe on the right of people to hold orderly meetings of established length and focused purpose?
The truth is, it would be insane to allow everyone who wanted to perform a spoken ritual during the meeting to do so. Realizing this, if you continue to argue that it is wrong of them to ban the Pledge of Allegiance, you are suggesting that the Pledge itself should be given special place as a sacred ritual whose meaning should be venerated above other meanings. This, my friends, is tyrrany. It is the antithesis of freedom of speech. You may think that tyrrany is deserved in this instance. I wonder what other instances you may soon come up with once you win this fight.
I personally think it's stupid to pledge allegiance to a flag, or for that matter, a nation, and I prefer to express my DEEP RESPECT for the vast majority of America's bedrock principles in ways that are more meaningful to me. Furthermore, as an agnostic, I personally don't think America is necessarily a nation under god. But you wouldn't want to listen to me recite my form of a pledge, so why do I have to listen to you recite yours?
Anyway, not the most coherent argument, but I think you should get the drift - I certainly could go on about how I can dislike the Pledge yet have deep respect for America, but, not now.
"This is the real task before us: to reassert our commitment as a nation to a law higher than our own, to renew our spiritual strength. Only by building a wall of such spiritual resolve can we, as a free people, hope to protect our own heritage and make it someday the birthright of all men." President Ronald Reagan March 20, 1981
Okay, so these Orange Coast College student trustees banned the pledge at their meetings. What is this boards job? I mean if it's a club or private organization that is on campus (like a Literature group, 4H, or the like) then it's their right to ban what they want at their meetings. Just like Boy Scouts can ban girls and the LPGA can ban men from their organization.
Now again I have no clue what these Orange Coast College student trustees do. I mean if they're an official arm of the college, like say the President of the college is on it and they're doing the college's work that's a different story. If a Public college is banning the pledge during their meetings then I can see the point. Since it's a public institution it should allow the pledge to be said, even if those in charge don't even stand (they don't have to stand even).
So my counter point is, what the heck do these guys do?
"So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it..."
Actually, I know the opposite is true, as do you. The problem is, as usual for this site, you hate liberals more than you hate terrorists.
But I refuse to reciprocate your vitriol. As my fellow American, I respect your rights to free speech, even when it's lies full of hatred directed at people with whom you have disagreements.
As for me, saying a pledge doesn't make one a patriot. It's like with the extreme radical rightwing hate judge Roy Moore. If his faith was stronger, he wouldn't need graven images. My patriotism extends beyond pledges.
"So don't give me that bull that students on college campuses aren't representative of the Democrats in general. To make that assertion is simply asinine and disingenuous, and you know it..."
Actually, I know the opposite is true, as do you. The problem is, as usual for this site, you hate liberals more than you hate terrorists.
But I refuse to reciprocate your vitriol. As my fellow American, I respect your rights to free speech, even when it's lies full of hatred directed at people with whom you have disagreements.
As for me, saying a pledge doesn't make one a patriot. It's like with the extreme radical rightwing hate judge Roy Moore. If his faith was stronger, he wouldn't need graven images. My patriotism extends beyond pledges.
I don't understand why the few who find the Pledge
offensive get to have it removed for those who may WANT the pledge. Again, it's the few, who seem to want to dictate to the majority. It does
remind me of the San Francisco Kook, who wanted to
remove prayer before school because he was an athiest. He went through alot of trouble, and that was only ONE person-His daughter, by the way
didn't mind prayer at all, and didn't even live with this kook. The Mother said the daughter had never brought this issue up, and that the Father was using the child to advance his OWN AGENDA.
Kinda reminds you of the Activist Dupe, Cindy Sheehan who was political BEFORE her son was killed, and then used his death, to advance her sick agenda.
This will push the Democrats to declare themselves in unmistakable terms: are you patriots, or aren't you?
Even if this was true, Mark, it was your side that started this particular you're-with-us-or-against-us rash of crap, and you know it full well. Do you honestly think most of us on the Left are inspired by idiots like Ball? Sure, we may defend his right to say what he wants, but that doesn't mean we're swayed by his words -- there's a difference between a defense and an endorsement.
What a pity that you right-wingers can't see it for yourselves...
Ism,
I'm sorry, but that was one of the most asinine examples of cobweb spinning sophistry I've ever read.
Aaron,
Who is mandating? No one is forcing these people to attend government-funded institutions of higher education. They are perfectly free to start their own schools, with their own money, where they can pledge allegiance to the doorknob, for all I care...but in an American school funded by American tax dollars, at least some respect must be paid for where it all comes from...to not do so is akin to coming in to my house for dinner and not having the decency to thank me for the food, even if you helped me cook it.
As for the issue - this is the sort of galvanising issue we need to clearly show the difference between our side and yours. I know, if we bring it up, you'll accuse us of being divisive and seeking wedge issues...essentially accusing us of ruing national unity, rather than those who hate the country so much that they won't pledge allegiance to, ya know, the Constitution and all the tiresome claptrap the left despises so much. Well, we don't care - quite honestly, we on the right have learned the lesson: Doesn't matter what we do, you'll oppose it and call it a failure...might as well make the most of it.
Hear hear Mark!
Nothing is ever right with America or with any decision the Republicans make for many on the left. So why try being "friendly" when we should just try to get our ideas passed.