G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile


Buell Forum » Quick Board » Archives » Archive through March 31, 2010 » US soldiers forbidden to wear the US flag » Archive through March 23, 2010 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nevrenuf
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 08:31 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

i'd like to know how obamacare will work with all the drug dealers, thieves and plain ole thugs or what not. who's gonna get them to pay for their health care.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 08:38 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

How yawl like the idea of the federal government telling you (for the first time in history) that you HAVE to buy something or you get fined?

That's pretty "out there", eh?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ft_bstrd
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 08:49 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

I really like the fact that the IRS will now have 16,000 more auditors verifying MONTHLY that you have "suitable" coverage.

I believe that 38 states have signed onto the lawsuit against Obamacare, and I know that Landmark Legal has several lawsuits ready and waiting final Presidential signatures.

Also waiting to see if Section 310g will kill this thing dead in the Senate.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 08:52 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

How yawl like the idea of the federal government telling you (for the first time in history) that you HAVE to buy something or you get fined?

That's pretty "out there", eh?


The real insanity is that they are doing this on the basis that it is a right that you must purchase. Imagine if they started charging your for your right to free speech, and you don' have the right to refuse to purchase your free speech.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 09:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

This is what happens when 51% of the folks are accustomed to living off the public teet . . . led by a guy and his wife who have lived their entire life off it.

I wonder how the unemployed and "just barely employed" are feeling right now? Caterpillar announced today that they expect this to cost them $100,000,000 the first year and they are already planning the layoffs.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M2me
Posted on Sunday, March 21, 2010 - 11:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

I wonder how the unemployed and "just barely employed" are feeling right now? Caterpillar announced today that they expect this to cost them $100,000,000 the first year and they are already planning the layoffs.

Probably not much different than they were yesterday. Caterpillar had net income of $900 million in 2009. They had net income of about $3.5 billion in both 2008 and 2007. Caterpillar is hurting right now along with everybody else. Their pain has nothing to do with the health care reform bill that just passed.

But there is some good news.


quote:

Chief Executive James Owens said earlier this month that he expects Caterpillar's 2010 sales to rise 10% to 25% from last year's beaten-down levels on inventory restocking and a stronger-than-expected global rebound.

In January, Caterpillar said its fourth-quarter earnings plunged 65% yet exceeded expectations for the quarter, as the company said it saw demand rising and reported an uptick in orders for mining equipment as a result of rebounding prices for mined commodities.

Shares were down 28 cents to $59.94 in recent trading. The stock has more than doubled the past 52 weeks.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M2me
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 12:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

How yawl like the idea of the federal government telling you (for the first time in history) that you HAVE to buy something or you get fined?

I don't have a problem with it because I already have health care insurance. I can afford it and it's the right thing to do. I, and my employers, have been paying my health care insurance premiums since 1982. I, and my employer, will continue to pay those premiums. I have no plans to drop my health care insurance.

Am I the only one on BadWeb who has health care insurance? Well, now you've all got a choice to make. Get insured or pay a fine! If you can't afford insurance, I will help you pay for it through my taxes. It is in my economic interest to have everybody covered by health care insurance. I want everyone and their family to be able to see a doctor because universal health care is cheaper in the long haul.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 01:03 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

You are an idiot and a moron. It is indeed illegal to fly another nation's flag over the American flag in this nation.


quote:

U.S. Code TITLE 4 > CHAPTER 1

§ 7 (c) No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy. No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof: Provided, That nothing in this section shall make unlawful the continuance of the practice heretofore followed of displaying the flag of the United Nations in a position of superior prominence or honor, and other national flags in positions of equal prominence or honor, with that of the flag of the United States at the headquarters of the United Nations.



You owe some people here a sincere apology. That there is no penalty for breaking the above law does not render it not a law. It absolutely is the law and when found to be broken will be corrected.

Socialized medicine is absolutely cheaper. It is also grossly inferior. Waiting lines, fewer doctors, less technology, reduced availability of high tech equipment, rationing of health care are the norm when the state heads towards insolvency.

Fact: Medicare/Medicaid suffers 20% in excess cost due to waste, fraud, and abuse.

Fact: The average fed gov employee earns 30% more than his private sector counterpart.

Fact: Private insurance suffers 2.5% of excess cost due to waste, fraud, and abuse.

Fact: Ten years of taxes to cover six years of benefits.

Fact: A gaping abortion loophole.

Fed Gov wants to turn the entire American health care system into the medicare/medicaid model, the one where its administrators get paid 30% more yet end up with 20% lost to waste, fraud and abuse?

We're going to cover everyone, even with pre-existing conditions? Idiocy. That is like requiring an auto insurer to cover the repair of an already wrecked vehicle. Moronic.

The math is pretty simple. The logic is lunacy. Only a complete and utter moron would believe that Socialized medicine is a good idea beneficial to most Americans. It's a massive tax hike and another huge nation-killing entitlement program. But that isn't what the Socialists/Progressives are after. They simply want the power. America is first and foremost about freedom, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. I

The opposition was strong and bipartisan. The support was weak, corrupt, 100% partisan, and as arrogant as it gets. This nation is being ripped apart.

The Socialists/Progressives in the Democratic party will soon learn a tough lesson as they are booted from office.

The cost of health care will increase, the cost of insurance will increase, the quality of care will decrease, just as it has in every other socialized nation.

The lies, and corruption that have been waged to ram this abomination down our throats, against the vast majority of Americans wishes is outrageous.

I never imagined I'd witness the death of freedom in America, but I've been seeing it for decades now.

Welcome to the United Socialist States of America (USSA) comrades, where health care is now a "right" just like murdering babies.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 01:06 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

"Well, now you've all got a choice to make. Get insured or pay a fine!"

Please try to make me.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Nevrenuf
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 06:44 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

i've been under the socialized health care for a number of years now through my va(disability) and dr's appointments are at least a month out here in tampa and even when you do get there, your waiting in lines like cattle at a stock yard. free, yes. great, no. and in order to maintain my disability, i am required to do what they want me to do. which i really don't have a problem with that in the hopes that it is in my best interest. if anyone thinks that health care is going to be better under this new plan, their kidding themselves.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 07:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

>>>>>I have no plans to drop my health care insurance.

Uhh . . I have bad news for you. You, thanks to a group of misguided folks . . no longer have that choice.

In addition you are in error by saying your employer pays for it. YOU pay for it through your employer.

Good news is that, as a union member, I'll be exempt from a lot of crap.

Bad news is that NY got screwed . . we got none of the "side deals" like many other states so New York ends up paying for many of them.

I suspect the bill will never stand. If it does the next step is that they'll be requiring me to buy a GM.

: )

Assholes.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 08:48 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Is mass amnesty for criminal trespasser new Democrat voters next? ( Illegal alien is soooo not PC )

Or will it be a new attempt at making us a theocracy with Climate Change the excuse for massive taxes, great wealth for the traders in invisible gases, and iron restrictions on all "energy use" activities? ( which is anything you don't pick up and carry by muscle power, like food picked from your own yard )

M2me seems to have ignored the fact that this bill's purpose is to take away his health insurance and make him buy it from Obama's minions. My health insurance may last a bit longer, ( I'm in a Union too ) but not after 2014 I'm betting.

I'm also betting that M2me will have a spaz attack when the Obamacare worth committee deny him or his an operation and just give them a script for pain pills. Take as many as you want, it's all you get till you die. He'll be blaming the republican party for it, since they will be in power at the time..... and so will I since they won't be able to get the Supreme court to cancel Obamacare's unbreakable socialist regulations.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 08:58 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Good point

(Message edited by court on March 22, 2010)

(Message edited by court on March 22, 2010)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Reindog
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 10:13 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Yeah, thanks for the thread hijack. : ) Get yer own thread. : )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mikej
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 10:17 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

(gonna lay low until the dust and commotion settles)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M2me
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 07:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

You owe some people here a sincere apology. That there is no penalty for breaking the above law does not render it not a law. It absolutely is the law and when found to be broken will be corrected.

I owe no one an apology. The Flag Code is not law. It "is merely declaratory and advisory". If you want to fly the flags of France and Canada above the U.S. flag on your private property there is no way for anyone, including the police, to legally correct you. If someone takes down your U.S. flag and takes it with them my advice is to call 911 and have that person arrested. They are nothing more than a common thief.


quote:

The Flag Code is a codification of customs and rules established for the use of certain civilians and civilian groups. No penalty or punishment is specified in the Flag Code for display of the flag of the United States in a manner other than as suggested. Cases which have construed the former 36 U.S.C. § 17521 have concluded that the Flag Code does not proscribe conduct, but is merely declaratory and advisory.





quote:

While wearing the colors may be in poor taste and offensive to many, it is important to remember that the Flag Code is intended as a guide to be followed on a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M2me
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 07:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

M2me seems to have ignored the fact that this bill's purpose is to take away his health insurance and make him buy it from Obama's minions.

Why? How? Cite from the bill! What provisions in the bill are meant to take away my insurance and make me buy it from Obama's minions? Who are Obama's minions anyway? Seems to me they are the health care insurance industry. Did you see what health care stocks did today? I've already bought from those minions. Obama wants another 32 million to buy, either with their own money or subsidized by public money. The bill is not a government take over of health care. The health care insurance industry knows this very well. They are going to get more customers, not less. If some of the customers can't afford the product the government is going to subsidize the purchase. How sweet of a deal is that for private companies? Of course there are some tradeoffs. Like accepting pre-existing conditions, etc. But all in all the system is going to continue to be largely based on private, for profit insurance companies.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ulyranger
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 10:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

How does that kool aid taste?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Roadcouch98
Posted on Monday, March 22, 2010 - 10:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

>>>If some of the customers can't afford the product the government is going to subsidize the purchase.<<<

..... and, the Government will be using the Tax monies paid by who.....?

Those who might have other uses for their hard "earned" (being the key point)taxed wages being used for those who do not want, or do not pay for their own healthcare.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M2me
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 12:05 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Those who might have other uses for their hard "earned" (being the key point)taxed wages being used for those who do not want, or do not pay for their own healthcare.

Yeah, and when those people who decide not to pay for health care insurance because they think they're Superman and have "other uses" for their money get sick or injured and end up in the emergency room, guess who picks up their tab? We all do. We're all doing that right now. What we're saying to these people is: Pay up sucka! You've got your freedom and now you've got a choice: Either buy health care insurance or pay a fine. But the rest of us aren't going to cover your ass anymore so you can buy another big screen TV instead of paying health care insurance premiums. I work hard for my money too. I have health care insurance because it's the responsible thing to do.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 12:34 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Well, I think the bill is all about making us a tax paid insurance nation because that's what the President said he wants to do, as do various congressmen & women, and the bill is meant for the prime purpose of socializing health insurance as fast as possible, but not all in one big lump. Oh, no, we'd bitch about that. It's an incremental process. Might take 10-15 years before you have no choice. That's per Obama.

the "progressives" can repeat the propaganda talking points all they want, I can post the youtube video of the actual comments. So can you if you're bored.

If I was bored I bet I could find the original website the "progressives" get their stuff and post links to the entire context. Should we have a no-prize for who can identify if a given comment is from a george Soros sponsored propaganda site?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 12:40 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

M2me, I agree this bill does the "pay up sucka!" to low income folk.
But aren't you paying for it with only an emotional appeal to your darker side?

The hypothetical middle class yuppie immortal scum that don't buy healthcare insurance because they are too greedy to,( would rather play more ), I'm sure exist. I doubt the numbers are that high, but they could be. I notice you're supposed to feel good about screwing them, as revenge for them living off us. Gotta love the ideology that uses hatred and envy to justify it's actions, don't you? Enjoy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 12:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Hey! how'd the "Obamacare bitching" stuff get over to the "patriotic bitching" thread and the "patriotic bitching" get over to the "Obamacare thread"?????
LOL Ok, my bad. Um... I think that the flag nuts are flag nuts, and also that it's silly and disrespectful to not fly the flag over an aid place in a foreign land. I think it shows a bad attitude on the part of this admin. ( see above comment re: ideology, envy, badness ) Most people in other countries know that the American Soldier will treat them better and help them more than most anybody on the planet. Usually far better than their own govt. Dude's who bitch about our flag are probably not nice people, screw them.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 05:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

It takes a "one world" Socialist/Progressive moron to dispute that our laws are not really laws.

In this nation it is absolutely contrary to law to fly another nation's flag over the American flag. That law is enforced. If you imagine it isn't, then try to defy the law on any government property in any territory of the United States of America, anywhere. I dare you.

On this issue, you and your fellow anti-American Progressives/Socialists hang your hats on a wildly controversial 5 to 4 split decision by our Supreme Court concerning only the public burning/desecration of our flag. The act of flying a foreign flag in superior position relative to our flag has not come before the court.


quote:

U.S. Code TITLE 4 > CHAPTER 1

§ 7 (c) ... No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof ...

Again, that there may have been no penalty for civilians breaking the above law does not render it not a law. It is law, period. How that law may have been enforced or adjudicated is another matter.

Flying another nation's flag on sovereign American territory in a position superior to that of the American flag is nothing short of stating that the applicable territory is under control and jurisdiction of the superior flag's nation and/or that America herself is subordinate to the other nation.

Which is why doing so is illegal. If anyone wants to claim American territory for another nation, they'll need to conquer it and defend their claim. If they cannot defend it, then they lose it.

Good on the man with the knife.

(Message edited by blake on March 23, 2010)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 05:57 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

The dissenting views offered by the four minority Supreme Court judges in the State of Texas versus Johnson put it best:


quote:

... The result of the Texas statute is obviously to deny one in Johnson's frame of mind one of many means of "symbolic speech." Far from being a case of "one picture being worth a thousand words," flag burning is the equivalent of an inarticulate grunt or roar that, it seems fair to say, is most likely to be indulged in not to express any particular idea, but to antagonize others. Only five years ago we said that "the First Amendment does not guarantee the right to employ every conceivable method of communication at all times and in all places." The Texas statute deprived Johnson of only one rather inarticulate symbolic form of protest -- a form of protest that was profoundly offensive to many -- and left him with a full panoply of other symbols and every conceivable form of verbal expression to express his deep disapproval of national policy. Thus, in no way can it be said that Texas is punishing him because his hearers -- or any other group of people -- were profoundly opposed to the message that he sought to convey. Such opposition is no proper basis for restricting speech or expression under the First Amendment. It was Johnson's use of this particular symbol, and not the idea that he sought to convey by it or by his many other expressions, for which he was punished.

The Court concludes its opinion with a regrettably patronizing civics lecture, presumably addressed to the Members of both Houses of Congress, the members of the 48 state legislatures that enacted prohibitions against flag burning, and the troops fighting under that flag in Vietnam who objected to its being burned: "The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong." The Court's role as the final expositor of the Constitution is well established, but its role as a Platonic guardian admonishing those responsible to public opinion as if they were truant schoolchildren has no similar place in our system of government. Surely one of the high purposes of a democratic society is to legislate against conduct that is regarded as evil and profoundly offensive to the majority of people -- whether it be murder, embezzlement, pollution, or flag burning.

by Chief Justice Rhenquist with Justices White and O'Connor joining


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 05:57 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

And


quote:

The creation of a federal right to post bulletin boards and graffiti on the Washington Monument might enlarge the market for free expression, but at a cost I would not pay. Similarly, in my considered judgment, sanctioning the public desecration of the flag will tarnish its value -- both for those who cherish the ideas for which it waves and for those who desire to don the robes of martyrdom by burning it....

The Court is quite wrong in blandly asserting that respondent "was prosecuted for his expression of dissatisfaction with the policies of this country, expression situated at the core of our First Amendment values." Respondent was prosecuted because of the method he chose to express his dissatisfaction with those policies. Had he chosen to spray-paint -- or perhaps convey with a motion picture projector -- his message of dissatisfaction on the facade of the Lincoln Memorial, there would be no question about the power of the Government to prohibit his means of expression. The prohibition would be supported by the legitimate interest in preserving the quality of an important national asset. Though the asset at stake in this case is intangible, given its unique value, the same interest supports a prohibition on the desecration of the American flag.

The ideas of liberty and equality have been an irresistible force in motivating leaders like Patrick Henry, Susan B. Anthony, and Abraham Lincoln, schoolteachers like Nathan Hale and Booker T. Washington, the Philippine Scouts who fought at Bataan, and the soldiers who scaled the bluff at Omaha Beach. If those ideas are worth fighting for -- and our history demonstrates that they are -- it cannot be true that the flag that uniquely symbolizes their power is not itself worthy of protection from unnecessary desecration.

I respectfully dissent.

Justice Stevens


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ducxl
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 05:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

I listened to a Navy (Commander)chaplain describe to me the ONLY flag allowed OVER the stars&stripes is the black pennant.

I think going insuranceless is NOW the way to go!! The fine is ONLY $615 per year.And with the new "pre-existing" clause,WHEN i get sick is when i sign up.We save boatloads of money this way..right?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 07:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

I think going insuranceless is NOW the way to go!! The fine is ONLY $615 per year.And with the new "pre-existing" clause,WHEN i get sick is when i sign up.We save boatloads of money this way..right?

Exactly! And this is just one reason why this fiasco is doomed to failure.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dennis_c
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 08:35 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Lets all try to get along ok.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 10:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only)

Unwise. If we value freedom, then at some point the line must be drawn, and the anti-freedom haters of liberty, those who worship the welfare state must be confronted and exposed for the sniveling, conniving liars that they indeed are.
« Previous Next »

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration