-
RSS Subscribe
-
Obama and the Flag and Now the National Anthem
A PICTURE IS WORTH 1,000 WORDS: I know it’s an old story that Obama has removed the US flag pin from his lapel after wearing it following 911 and he justified this by stating: “I am less concerned that what your are wearing on your lapel than what is in your heart.” He also stated that he has abandoned the pin in favor of actions that would be more meaningful in demonstrating his patriotism. Snopes confirms HERE that this picture is an authentic picture from Time magazine of the candidates (note Richardson & Hillary) at an Iowa steak fry.
Now I am not critical of Obama not wearing the lapel pin, I don’t wear one myself, but his overt decision to take it off and make a statement gives pause, but not a terrible lot of pause until you add this to the question: what is the statement that this action in the picture above demonstrates where he sort of stoically flaunts protocol designed around national respect (hand over heart) in context of his own standard that he would take actions that would more meaningfully demonstrate the authenticity of his patriotism. I’m not ready to conclude the Manchurian Candidate thing, but I am not sure he is rising to a reasonable credibility level about his true viewpoints with these actions. He raised this issue himself and we can only measure him by his own statements, standards and actions.
UPDATE COMMENT: This may be one of those “read my lips” moments…..steve
comments
21 Responses to “Obama and the Flag and Now the National Anthem”
Leave a Reply
… Kicking rocks… Whistling
M2……….What, all the way to the White House? ………steve
& hey, I got a look at Obamas socks during a campaign stop a couple weeks ago… American flags on both ankles, very discrete… It’s like he’s an undercover patriot or something. Hmmmmmmm?
M2……….So, now it all makes sense. Flag socks. He is not willing to wear the flag, but is willing to walk on it……..and MDBL attending an Obama campaign stop, very intersting
………steve
i understand your reservation on the concerns for obama leading during wartime. however, i was challenged by my wife and a friend from st. croix last night about justiying the deserving merits of my candidate instead of picking apart the competition. they both felt the reason i am so anti-left was that i had few if any good answers to why the current admin, and our choice of nominee were neglecting its core values (limited govt, cuts in spending, free enterprise, securing borders, protecting jobs on our soil etc.). though there is some merit to alot of distrust of the left, i am very concerned with how our candidate will stackup independent of the quagmire that is the left.
the media will pounce all over rudy’s behavior, romney’s waffling and indecision and the lack of a reliable track record for the rest of the also rans. i could only justify my position by the standby, lesser of two evils, holding my nose when voting, preserving the constitution, homeland security etc). truthfully, is there anything exciting about our lead candidate and that is why it is so easy to criticize the left for their embarrasing moments? i am having a hard time looking for merit about why our candidate (currently rudy) is the best choice outside of political rhetoric.
Matt……your friend from St. Croix is correct, but not entirely. In the final analysis you make a choice between options, if neither is your first choice you need to weigh the plusses and minuses of each. Therefore you need pick apart what you don’t like about either in that decision………steve
Yeah, flag socks … I’m sure his toilet paper is red, white, and blue too. It’s always cute to have someone running on the Rat ticket that despises our nation so much. What a freaking joke.
Tammi………I seriously do not think he is ready for prime time, even given that I oppose his politics. I don’t agree with Biden either, but at least he is ready. I should add he (Biden) was for the surge before he was against the surge……….steve
Hi Steve,
While I also noticed Obama’s unpatriotic behavior, I figure he’s a Democrat so that’s a given. The real burning question is, once elected, will he follow his religious training and let his beard grow? If he’d just answer yes to that, I might even vote for him since, after all, how long has it been we’ve had a President with facial hair? Perhaps it’s time for a change in style? This, by the way, also applies to Hillary, so if she will at least quit plucking her mustache and it obtains a noticeable growth by election day, she gets my vote. Of course, this issue is trumped by any candidate who consistently wears a hat. A real hat that is, not one of those beanie things or a towel.
the Grit
Hi Grit…………Un-patriotic or Un-refined? I like the slant toward un-qualified for the job. Regarding Hillary, even Dick Morris has stated that she needed to run this time because the “Hag” factor would be setting in and she would see much of her intrinsic support erode…..steve
You all are seriously embarrassing… The “rat ticket”, “his religious traning”… Wow, just the type of dialogue you desire here huh Steve. Keeps the blog so legitimate!
& oh Matt, nice that you have the ability to show some authentic republican vulnerability. I think your concerns are more than legitimate but it’s unfortunately obvious that you’re attempt at any real discussion regarding them here at NSL is futile. I’ll email you!
M2……..now cummon…….all are welcome just so they are selling something….steve
I feel that we do not need to worry about the pins which are worn, for anyone can wear a pin with an American flag, patriot or not. I feel that our actions will show our patriosim much more than the clothes we wear. It’s time for some change!! ~Obama.
Well he talked the talk but couldn’t walk the walk it seems…………steve
Ok - but some might say that choosing not to make a small expression of support for your own country during a determination of who will lead that country is in itself an action, and, in fact, a statement in regards to patriotism (of the misguided variety).
I have no doubt an Obama Presidency would usher in change. The question is; would it be change for the better?
plodon………….”The question is; would it be change for the better?”
Of course not…………steve
Changing the course we’ve been on the last seven years?
Change just for change’s sake isn’t a good idea. Better really look at the direction you think a particular course is, or probably will be, going before getting on board. If someone doesn’t like the course we’ve been on for the last 7 years, ok (personally, I have my disappointments, but that’s another story). All I’m saying is that folks shouldn’t let their eagerness for “change” promt them into rashness. Then again, considering ithe “change” is Obama, Clinton, or (fairly unlikely, IMO) one of the also-rans, maybe it doesn’t really matter at what point one gives onself over if you’re most likely gonna. On the GOP side, no Candidate stands out as particularly “worthy”. It’s down to a better of many evils thing. What a great cycle.
LOVE everything you typed… Really wish everyone that voted for our current band of misfits (& then most likely voted for them again 2nd time around) would have subscribed to it!
Hmm. Well, thank you, M2. Not intended to be personal, but given that I haven’t agreed with quite a few of your positions as expressed on this blog, I think perhaps I should do some self-examining on this matter. Just thinking. Not that I would necessarily change my mind on anything. Just gonna brain-chew on it some more. In any case, thanks, though.
All i will say is Bush puts his hand over his heart and recites the “National Athem” everytime Its required and we see what type of “President” He has been!
Keith…….Yeah, we need to find someone who isn’t as patriotic to show ole Bush…………steve
UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 36
CHAPTER 10
PATRIOTIC CUSTOMS
* § 170. National anthem; Star-Spangled Banner.
* § 171. Conduct during playing.
* § 172. Pledge of allegiance to the flag; manner of delivery.
* § 173. Display and use of flag by civilians; codification of rules and customs; definition.
* § 174. Time and occasions for display.
* § 175. Position and manner of display.
* § 176. Respect for flag.
* § 177. Conduct during hoisting, lowering or passing of flag.
§170. National anthem; Star-Spangled Banner
The composition consisting of the words and music known as The Star-Spangled Banner is designated the national anthem of the United States of America.
§171. Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
§172. Pledge of allegiance to the flag; manner of delivery
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, ‘I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.’, should be rendered by standing at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. When not in uniform men should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should remain silent, face the flag, and render the military salute.
Jt……..Thanks for the refrence. This really clarifies the issue and the responsibility of Americans, not to mention those that would be our leaders………..steve
“Guard against postures of pretended patriotism” - George Washington
In other words “screw those who wrap themselves in the flag and challenge the patriotism of others.”
This thread is dead already…
M2……..I don’t think JT was talking about patriotism, but the law………sc
Again…
“Guard against postures of pretended patriotism” - George Washington
& that particular code refers to “customs” not “laws”… You can’t be put in prison for “violation”.
Again again…
“Guard against postures of pretended patriotism” - George Washington
Give us a new post already
M2……….JT left off maybe the most important “custom” here and it is section 178
§178. Modification of rules and customs by President
Any rule or custom pertaining to the display of the flag of the United States of America, set forth herein, may be altered, modified, or repealed, or additional rules with respect thereto may be prescribed, by the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, whenever he deems it to be appropriate or desirable; and any such alteration or additional rule shall be set forth in a proclamation.
I guess that Obama was only getting a little ahead of himself on being elected President since as President he can deem what ever he wants as appropriate or desirable in which case it would make him the only one on the stage “in conformity” said custom. ………steve
Well that puts the GW quote into even better perspective.. Thanks!
I wonder if Bill Clinton wore a flag pin when he was boinking around with Monica or when he lied to the American People and said he WASN’T boinking around with her, or Jennifer or when they were leaving the White House stealing thousands of dollars of the furnishings.
Comment:
This picture is fake. It was created using multiple layers and you can tell because however created it forgot a very small area from layer on between Obama’s left leg and the chair in respect to the flag and the grass field. You should only see the grass field instead you see a very little bit of the original picture. Also notice how Mr. Richardson is looking elsewhere!! The others have been placed in such a way where you cannot see their shadows. Smart but still stupid! Why would Obama not pledge his allegiance and blow the entire campain?
Steve…………Let me start by saying that this is NOT a fake. This is not some doctored photoshop picture, but a complete video that you can watch in detail. If you watch it and study it you will see Richardson looking around at various sections of the audience. The other participants are looking toward the podium where the flag that they are actually saluting stands. Not Smart but Stupid……….to the contrarity. You have now introduced the most appropriate conclusion with your epitath “Why would Obama not pledge his allegiance…..” Check out this link at Snopes who also confirms the authenticity of the facts of this event. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp …………..sc
Hi Leon………Don’t know where to begin here so I’ll just start at the beginning and interline as necessary.
I have every confidence in the world that the responders to these posts are caring and deeply patriotic Americans. Despite all your little jokes and quips, you know also that both Sen.’s Obama and McCain are great American patriots.
Great…….you use such words so casually………Have you read Jerome Corsi’s Obama Nation? ……..you might find it interesting and you will find his research unimpeachable.
The Radical Right has such short memories it astounds me. Who was it that day after day, week in and week out attempted to obliterate Sen. McCain’s patriotism in that fabled 2000 South Carolina primary. I believe that was President “Debacle-by-the-Day” Bush and his henchmen led by Carl Rogue and Rush “give-me-some-more-drugs” Limberg. The issue in this election is NOT lapel pins nor socks nor anything of the sort. The issue is NOT 99.9% of what we read, write, and say.
It is simply this, which man brings us the best hope of restoring some semblance of quasi balance of power in the mid east that existed BEFORE “Debacle-a-Day” took office.
Shall I start with the flags and bands now? Obama is likely a threat to world peace and is definately a threat to economic prosperity……..I only assume you are not an economics major.
Furthermore, this is not about who can get us out sooner and under what conditions, or who can tweak the tax code better, as most of that babble is political BS.
You think it is political bable because you don’t understand the tax code or how it impacts fiscal policy and economic consequences, you’ll have to read a number of my other posts to come to speed before we can debate that.
Today, thanks to President Debacle, we are closer to an all out war with major nuclear implications than at any time since the Cuban Missile crisis. If President Debacle had or even could read the simple little book: “Mid East History for DUMMIES”, he like his father, who was much wiser, would not have moved one grain of sand in Iraq.
President Debacle took his eye off the real 911 culprits in Afghanistan to go chase modern day windmills called WMDs while attempting to settle an old personal grudge match with Saddam.
Friend we have been at war for a long time now, Bush just finally recognized it and started to defend America. Your forbearance with the radicals in the ME is a risk to our national security.
I believe Saddam was as evil as they come, but given today’s world politics and Iran’s nuclear/expansionist ambitions it sure would be nice to have him staring down Iran today and daring them to make a move.
Just by the hee-hee language some of these posts, a number of this group is still very wet behind the years.
Take note: There is a very ancient saying that goes like this: “The enemy of my enemy is my ally.”
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, but you don’t seem to take into account that on 911 it became apparent that America will have to defend itself and not rely on the enemy’s of my enemy’s to secure our self defense.
Therefore, get off this lapel pin BS and get down to the real issue at hand: Averting a nuclear war in the mid east.
President Debacle’s great cross to bear it that he lied to this nation 1,000 times over only to settle a personal grudge match, and in so doing, destabilized an entire region which is rapidly arming with nuclear weapons while killing 5,000+ of America’s finest sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and beloved friends. If that is not enough, he just happened to dump us into a deep recession and saddle us with a $250 billion/year bill to finance his swashbuckling misadventures.
By the way, you probably missed it, but the GDP came in for the recent quarter at being up 1.7%. The only negative quarter was Q407 which was just adjusted to negative .2% (that is two tenths of one percent). We are not even in a recession as opposed to you false claim that it is a deep recession. You sound like you get all your information from the networks and MSNBC. B-T-W during the election year of 2000 in the third quarter (where we are now in this election year) Clinton posted a .5% negative growth then again beginning in January of 2001 (i.e. before the Bush inaguration) not to mention that a primary leading indicator of the economy (the stock market) had been tanking since the beginning of 2000. Aren’t you the one claiming that Bush is the Liar? Which means that contrary to the lies of the media, Clinton did not hand a strong economy to Bush, the recession of the early Bush years was the “Clinton” recession. If you want to challenge this you’ll need to demonstrate more knowledge in the area that you have thus far.
Al-Qaida is stronger than ever, and Mullah Omar is on the comeback trail.
God, please don’t saddle this nation with another George Bush wannabe in the form of Sen. McCain.
This is patently nonsense, and I’m sure the surge failed and we lost the war in Iraq already, etc. Al Qeada was defeated in Iraq and have scrambled to retreat to the hills of Pakistan to lick their wounds.
Sen. McCain is a GREAT man, this is just NOT his time and, due to age, will never be.
Not so great in my opinion. You are pretty loose with that greatness monkier.
Now, I ask you one more question. Which were our Founding Father’s more concerned with: A president screwing around with his girlfriend in the ante room of the Oval Office; or a president who lies and cheats daily while leading this nation to the precipice of a nuclear war in the mid east.
Straw man argument here. I’m sure the founders were more interested in a President that would defend the nation rather than one that admittedly let bin Laden get away when he was offered his head by the Sudan. I know Media Matters lies and claims it never happened, but I personally hear Clinton admit it. This was all during the time his primary focus was as you say lying about Monica and not dealing with bin Laden.