I don’t know if you remember this (actually I do know that you don’t remember it), but in 2004 Nancy Pelosi released a Democratic Party platform “Compact for American Families” of 7 items — I believe it was seven — that…

… meant absolutely nothing electorally. I don’t think the DSCC even seriously floated it. I don’t have a clue what the purpose of it was.

We can blame Newt Gingrich and the “Contract With America” for every subsequent attempt to throw forth this set platforms. Rumours are that the Democratic Party is doing the same for 2006. More sinister rumours are that the Democratic Party already has — this “sinister” in the sense that if I only have a vague sense that it might have been floated out there, it probably didn’t say much.

The Republican Party for it’s part has given us an (ahem) “American Values Agenda”. This is quite a piece of work, a collection of pointless wedge issues the message of which is that they don’t deserve office, for anyone who pledges this as their agenda shows that they are not serious individuals.

I note that there are TWO, count them, TWO proposals to protect the flag. In fact, they top the list.

Pledge Protection Act (HR 2389; Akin)

Summary: Ensures an individual has the right to display the U.S. flag on residential property.

The canard. Whenever the Senate just wants to waste a couple of days, turn the Senate over to Orrin Hatch, and he’ll dig into his bag of tricks. Recently he did the Flag Desecration Act thangamajing. I note the New Yorker has weighed in on this on-going stalement of lunacy. Relevant line:

The proposed amendment is a one-liner, though lacking in comic punch. It goes, “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.” Now, really—is that so terrible? It doesn’t even prohibit flag burning, it just authorizes Congress to pass a law prohibiting it. As opponents point out, that would put the United States in the company of China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, pre-invasion Iraq, and other tyrannies. But it turns out that France, Germany, Italy, and India, all of which are reasonably free countries, also have laws against insulting their national ensigns. (Japan, Norway, and—cartoons notwithstanding—polite little Denmark forbid the burning of foreign flags but not their own.)

After the Senate vote came in with one short — 66 to 34 it be, Orrin Hatch said that if all Senators had voted their conscience or personal political fortunes, it would have passed with 80-something votes. A bizarre whipping job, that be. Imagine it passes. All of a sudden we have 50 states bouncing about playing around with this constitutional amendment. Why, pass it on to the Voters! That would, I assume, benefit the Party of God and Country, bringing in this vast swatch of voters mobilized to stop the half a dozen flag burners that have been spotted over the past decade.

I’m not sure what the correct vote I want my House Members and Senators to vote on matters such as this one, along with the majority of the “American Values Agenda” items. It’s either a “no” vote or simply no vote. By no vote I don’t even mean a “present”, I mean don’t even bother to show up for roll call. Let that be known for the Senate’s tact on the matter, so that the Democratic Whip will just have to proceed to the next person on the list to cast a “no vote”. No voting was my perferred stand when the Congress took up the Terri Schiavo matter.

I say this, casting it as meaning: to bring this up is a sign that you are not a serious person, and this body of government is presumably supposed to go forth with serious matters.

This entry was posted on Sunday, July 2nd, 2006 at 1:54 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.