Feinstein the Flag Hag

I was angry to find out that the so-called "flag protection" amendment failed by just one vote, and angrier still to discover that one of my two California senators found it necessary to declare herself "the main Democratic sponsor of this amendment" and waste whatever time it took to write a lengthy, defensive statement that promises still more "hearings, debate and legislation" on the issue, as if Congress had no more pressing scourge to consider in this dark era.

Senator Feinstein, let's leave aside the fact that you've played into a cheap Republican election-year ploy, or that flag desecration in 2006 is perhaps the prime example of a solution seeking a problem.  True, the amendment says nothing specific about "burning".  But however nebulous its language, it remains quite simply an attempt by Congress to regulate and punish not speech, but thought itself.  

Burn a flag to retire it from service, and you honor it.  Burn the same flag to protest government misdeeds, and you are guilty of a federal crime in the minds of some.  The question of intent is part and parcel of criminal law, certainly--but if we are to avoid an Orwellian existence, it cannot become the entirety of an offense.  

Your facile comparisons with the Lincoln monument and other such symbols fall short of persuasion. These irreplaceable historical artifacts are public property, whereas flags may be manufactured, owned, and disposed of by private citizens.  

They may, for instance, be plastered on truck windows to bleach in the sun and collect dead bugs, or affixed to antennae to be shredded by the elements, or otherwise exploited by self-proclaimed "patriots" to cloak their partisan support of an immoral and profoundly stupid war in a cheap veneer of rectitude, while soldiers like my brother risk life and limb in some distant desert.  

Perhaps this is the sort of flag desecration you had in mind?  

No matter.  The value of the symbol resides in the people, institutions and deeds it represents, not in the nylon or polyester thread from which most flags are now made.  For many of us, the flag's meaning could well be summarized thus: "You have the freedom to burn me."  

So if the vision of an American flag flying over Iwo Jima or Pearl Harbor or the beaches of Normandy is to evoke something, then let it be our continuing resolve to shun totalitarianism rather than our eagerness to embrace it.  The proud expressions of honor, allegiance and respect you cite will all be greatly diminished if they are made compulsory by a fearful State.  

Sadly, this amendment and its all-too-narrow defeat demonstrate that our Constitution, like our flag, is only as good as those we elect to defend its meaning.  You do not represent me in this perennial waste of energy and diversion of national purpose--which, despite your assertions, is anything but "necessary".  When choosing a representative, I will always look for the Democrat who places true Liberty above empty symbolism.  I hope that upon considered reflection, you will choose to become that Democrat, and work to protect the flag simply by standing for the freedoms it represents.

Sincerely,
(me)

•  Well Said

  I've got a real problem with Feinstein supporting the proposed amendment as well.  It's absolutely disgusting.  We really need to replace DiFi.

  by Kevin in Long Beach on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:18:33 AM PDT

•  No mas

  I have voted for her every time her name has appeared on the ballot.
  6/28/06
  Dianne who?

  by OCMIHOP on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:28:25 AM PDT

•  Exactly my thoughts...

  The picture of the wind ripped flag that many a self-proclaimed patriot places on their trucks, SUVs and large gas guzzling cars says it all for me. I have nothing but contempt for people that mistreat the American Flag in such a fashion.

  by VinBacchus on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:32:34 AM PDT

•  good for you! n/t

  by liberalsouth on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:37:37 AM PDT

•  love the title n/t

  by kindertotenlieder on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:40:18 AM PDT

•  feinstein panders more everyday. hey diane, u

  represent the people of california and not your husband's golfing buddies.

  by stodghie on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 08:47:29 AM PDT

•  Substitute symbols to burn

  For Americans to burn an American flag...seems too much like burning Mom and Apple Pie......so what substitue symbols could be burned in protest?

  What symbolizes "bad government"?

  Maybe people should just hold up all the American flags and flag-themed items......snip off the "Made in China" labels and burn them. Use the American flag to fan the flames?

  by LNK on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 09:14:24 AM PDT

•  september the 11th changed everything

  ever since then it's been unpatriotic not to display the flag in an inappropriate manner

  by bleargh on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 09:14:32 AM PDT

•  Well

  I've said this several times. America is not like Berkeley. People respect the flag and view it as being sacred. Most ordinary people don't care about the technical constitutional arguments with why people should be allowed to burn the flag.

  Mr. and Mrs. Suburban American swing voter aren't concerned about the technical issues of flag burning. This is what they think:

  Those who burn flags are spitting on the troops serving their country in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Those who burn the flag hate America and are unpatrotic. Democrats support the rights of flag burners to spit on the troops. Therefore, because Democrats oppose the flag burning amendment, they support flag burning. Democrats are unpatriotic Americans who hate this country. Otherwise, they wouldn't be defending flag burners.

  by jiacinto on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 10:25:19 AM PDT

  •  Americans disrespect the flag

    A lot of Americans proved they didn't know how to fly the flag correctly after 9/11.  About half who put it up in their windows got it backwards, which is statistically consistent with pure chance.  Nice try, but if you want to say we respect the flag, don't you think that would require that we properly educate ourselves about how it should be displayed?

    I know a cop who flies a flag 24/7.  Problem is, he doesn't illuminate it at night.

    These are just a couple instances.  Don't get me started on flag shirts, flag dresses, flag hats, and flag fucking lapel pins.

    Give me a break about how respectful Americans are about the flag.

    by bleargh on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 10:47:36 AM PDT

  •  The first amendment isn't a technicality

    The reason we have a constitution enshrining representative government with checks and balances and a high bar for amendments is so that majorities can't blithely override the principles and rights that make our country what it is.

    What you've described is the GOP game plan of tarring Dems as unpatriotic, and I agree it's shrewd.  (It's also about the only ammo they have left.)  But convincing people to rise above mere instinct and change their views is the job of leaders.  

    I want a leader as my senator, whose job is to represent Berkeley and the rest of CA, after all, not swing voters in heartland suburbs.  For that matter, 34 other senators including Dems and Repubs from states like Wisconsin, North Dakota, and Utah managed to vote against this rubbish.

    The people "spitting on the troops" are the ones who sent them to fight and die based on lies and hubris.  They're the ones cutting the VA budget and urging Americans to ignore the flag-draped coffins and max out the credit card instead.  Instead of passing stupid flag amendments, let's remind the voters which party really cares about American values.

    by turbonium on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 03:46:31 PM PDT

•  Are we stuck with her..

  As I recall cindy sheehan was going to run for feinsteins position but was talked out of it by reid and schumer..Are we stuck with her?

  by bayside on Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 10:55:28 AM PDT