Pandering to the public

I note that Mark Steyn is also speaking out against the flag-protection amendment. Steyn reiterates the point that flag-burning is an excellent way to determine who the true losers are. I think we can all take a solemn oath as citizens and voters, that just as we never negotiate with terrorists/kidnappers, we will never give the flag-burners an inch. I've got no problem with that. "Burn a flag, and you lose the debate, the election, public respect, just about everything but your freedom, which the American people will allow you while they ignore you." The best way to stop flag-burning is to punish them politically, not legally.

There's another "benefit" to flag-burners, however. They provide contrast to the respect and honor most Americans show their flag. There are places where people praise their leaders loudly, knowing that anything less than loud praise is punished. We don't take that sort of praise seriously. If honor has to be bought with armed force, it's not worth much, is it? Why deny the Stars and Stripes the honor it deserves by stripping the meaning from the act. To the totalitarian leaders of the world, nothing is more incomprehensible, and more frightening, than that the American people are perfectly free to dishonor their flag, and yet they continue to fly the flag with pride and reverence. The American flag and other national symbols receive, unforced, the honor those leaders can only received with threats. Lets not stoop to their level.

If you read only the blogs, you have to wonder who is really supporting this amendment? Those who watch Washington seem to think that the flag amendment is much more popular with the general public than with the blogging and punditing crowd. I don't blame the public. The burning a beloved symbol of our nation is still a very powerful act, even if it is just a symbol that is harmed, and people have every reason to dislike it, and dislike those who do it. But rewarding those low-life types with their own personal amendment in the foundational document of the country is not the best way to combat them. We also, as a great nation and a great people, must occasionally put up with people and things we do not like. We depend on statesmanlike leadership to help the people understand these hard lessons, but we don't have much of that at the moment.

The President was courageous in explaining to the American people that the war against global terrorism would be long and costly. Tough news, but we needed to hear it. Where are the national leaders who will help the American people understand how making flag-burners into legal martyrs is both counter-productive and far beneath the dignity of a confident nation? I hope we hear from them; leaders who's patriotism and support for our military are unquestioned (not a member of the Democratic leadership, in other words) who can bring people to understand that our troops, now and through our history, have fought to defend a constitution that needs defending at home right now.

What the Congress is doing is a political defacement of our Constitution, a cheap stunt timed, no doubt, to coincide with the 4th of July, and designed to pander to the people's admirable love of country. Just having the votes to get something passed is not reason enough to do it. There ought to be things in America that are off-limits for political publicity stunts. The naming of a public building or landmark is already a political battleground, but there are buildings, like the Capitol, that ought to remain out of the running. Congress can declare this month "National (fill in the blank) Month", or can express its outrage over all manner of situations in resolutions and even statutes. They have plenty of scope open to them for their games. The Constitution is not their toy, nor their tool.