« RVS.org sez: "Cut & Run!" | Main | C&RC: "Doin' Shit Is The Root of Terrorism" »

In Which Way Backward for the Democratic Party?

July 09, 2005

HRC: How To Protect Our Precious, Precious Flags?

Astute ReverseVoteSwappers will already have seen the first "Hillary 2008" bumper-stickers, available for purchase even before Kerrycrats have finished whining about 2004. Since Senator Clinton is clearly setting herself up for a presidential bid, she must act with a great deal of nuance, lack of principle, and nonsensical doublespeak, as befitting a liberal political candidate.

Currently, as the Bush administration finds itself mired in political crisis as the US edges closer to defeat in Iraq with remarkable 60% opposition at home, the major parties have seized on the decisive political question: flag burning.

Having certainly lit up a few Old Glories in their day, our loyal readers will of course recall that burning the flag is considered a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. It is therefore necessary not just to ban such merry-making by means of legislation, but to actually amend the Constitution to give Congress the power to do so. Many feel this begins to rise from the level of the merely reactionary to the openly dystopian.

This is not, of course, to suggest that Democrats don't support the flag-burning amendment. A basic tenet of liberal politics is: one must not refuse to support any act of empty jingoism, no matter how idiotic, because then the Right will accuse you of being unpatriotic. Being accused of unpatriotism by the lie-making, bribe-raking, Oxycontin-taking Right is an unstoppable attack in politics. Apparently.

In this situation, a skillful liberal like HRC will employ nuance to craftily land herself on both sides of the question simultaneously. Thus she has stated that while she supports federal legislation to ban flag-burning (which cannot be passed without an amendment), she does not support an amendment (which is required for the legislation). Hmm. While that hash of mutual contradiction will surely win over the chauvinist wingnuts who have hated Hillary Clinton for 13 years, we here at ReverseVoteSwap.org are concerned it won't quite pass with the more sophisticated conservatives; ie, those brilliant bulbs who exposed Bill Clinton as a sex fiend with only decades of evidence, or who managed to portray John Kerry as a flip-flopper armed solely with his mountains of flip-flops. Those guys have their eyes open!

Inasmuch as winning even a few right-wing votes causes Democrats to rush madly to the Right--thereby leaving the progressive field open to the authentic Left--RVS.org is committed to helping HRC develop the most nuanced way to save the endangered flag. We offer our suggestions below.

Extraordinary Flag Rendition: America could get a out-of-the-way client dictatorship to declare burning the US flag a crime punishible by exquisite tortures. Anyone seen burning the flag would then be shipped off to said country. That protects the flag and our Constitional rights!

Bioterrorist Flags: Congress could require all flags to contain heat-activated anthrax spores; this would make your ordinary flag-burner into a dangerous bioterrorist--and who could defend terrorism???

Pledges for Kids: Given the effectiveness of anti-drug and anti-sex oaths made by young kids who have no idea what they're agreeing to, schoolchildren could be encouraged to make some sort of "pledge" of "allegiance" to the flag on at least a weekly basis. Children are our future.

Multiflags: The American flag could be altered to incorporate images of Che and Osama; Koranic and Satanic verses; rainbows and pink triangles; etc. Thus anyone who burns a flag will also have to burn something they like! Nuanced!

Flag Personhood: Like corporations, flags could be senselessly declared a form of human for legal purposes. It would then be considered beyond the pale to burn flags, provided they didn't become Black nationalists, or suchlike.

Posted by convener at July 9, 2005 12:14 AM