Donald Trump: burning the flag should result in $100k fine or a year in prison.

Donald Trump: burning the flag should result in $100k fine or a year in prison. November 29, 2016

Our President-elect is back on Twitter assuring the entire world he’s unfit for the job:

Where to even start?

First, flag burning is protected free speech thanks to Texas v. Johnson. Of course, if Trump gets to appoint a second SCOTUS Judge, that could change, but it would only change due to political cronyism. Burning a flag is free speech.

What’s more, here we have a guy who thinks it’s perfectly fine to grab a woman by the pussy if you’re a celebrity, but if you burn a piece of your own damn cloth that you should go to prison for a year. That’s who will hold the veto pen. Joy.

The person tasked with protecting the First Amendment is now a person who would annihilate it on a whim. How are those protest votes feeling now, Bernie-or-Busters?

Trump supporters are out in droves on Twitter though, linking to the Flag Protection Act of 2005 which was sponsored by Hillary Clinton:

What really kills me here is the underlying assumption: that morality is based on which political party you support. Well, it’s not. Hillary Clinton was wrong here too because punishing somebody for expressing themselves is wrong. Don’t argue over who fucking said it, argue over whether or not the First Amendment is a good idea (it is), and that alone will render sufficient judgment on anybody, Democrat, Republican, or otherwise, who wants to prohibit flag burning.

The type of person making this comment is a person who would support Donald Trump doing all kinds of terrible things because apparently allegiance to a person is more important to them than allegiance to compassion or justice. That’s what’s really scary.

Oh, and for the record, in 2006 Clinton voted against an amendment to prohibit flag burning. The Republicans sure loved it though. Meanwhile, Donald Trump wants to imprison people for freedom of speech right fucking NOW. And Republicans hold all of Congress, so you can guess how much resistance there will be if Trump tries to sunder the Constitution in this manner — especially if Trump gets to appoint a second SCOTUS Justice.

This guy hits the nail squarely on the head:

Anyway, after pointing out that HRC voted against this very thing in 2006, one of my interlocutors wasn’t finished:

Shooting a living, breathing human being for an opinion you don’t care for? Totally fine. But whoa, if you harm an unfeeling chunk of fabric you should go to jail. Jesus Christ, this psycho’s vote counts just as much as mine, and I’ll bet you dollars to donuts they think Jesus is giving them the cosmic thumbs up for every lunatic thought that enters their head. Why try to reason out what is fair or just under such circumstances?

And these people think they have a right to make the laws. Welcome to America.

At least we still have George Takei:

I think I’ll just close my eyes for a bit and imagine Takei is actually our President rather than the authoritarian toddler we’ve got — and that I don’t live in a nation where 45% of the citizenry can’t tell the difference between strength and a celebrity throwing a tantrum, and who apparently think whether an action is right or wrong depends on who’s doing it.

"Are you *sure* that's a clarification?"

Am I evil for pointing out ..."
"Is that a strawman i see you building over there?Nah... i'm not special. Only difference ..."

Am I evil for pointing out ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment