Archive for the ‘Free Speech’ Category

Latino KKK: Brown Beret Says “This is America–Go back to Europe”   Leave a comment

Hi All!

My goodness, so much has been happening since I last updated my blog that I’m not sure where to start, but I’m going to go ahead and start with this video that I meant to post a few days ago but I was speechless to make comment on it.

Well, I guess the video speaks for itself.  This most likely will not make it into mainstream liberal media, much the way the new black panther video went. 

This is jus the most lunatic, insane thing I have ever seen or heard in my entire life.  These people are REALLY out of touch with reality!


First of Arizona Anti-Illegal Immigration Law S.B. 1070 Hearings Held Today   Leave a comment

Well, it has begun.  The courts are finally going to be hearing the cases against Arizona’s anti-Illegal Immigration laws which mirror the Federal Law on the books. 

Firstly, please note that these trials are happening in Phoenix—a reputed ‘Sanctuary City’—with a judge that sides with Illegal Immigrants.

This does not bode well.  I am trying not to be negative about this and I’m praying for a miracle, but seriously folks . . . the odds are totally against them, even THOUGH THEY ARE IN THE RIGHT!  My prayers are with Arizona though this and it looks like these first frivolous law suits might get thrown out, but still . . .

And the fact that this officer refuses to comply with FEDERAL LAW should also be put under examination.  If he refused to pay his Federal Taxes—which paying them IS A FEDERAL LAW—do you honestly think he would get away with it and be able to use the fact that he refuses to pay his taxes as a reason to sue in court?  THAT is ridiculous!  I can see the point of these illegal immigrant groups that are suing, no matter HOW misguided, but not this guy!  He’s the most misguided of them all!

Sorry, I like to use the term ‘misguided’ in reference to those who are ‘misguided’ and ‘misinformed’ about the law.  LOL!!!  It just seems fitting.

Anyway, you had better believe that next week, when the Department of Justice makes their case, I will be paying attention!  My ears will be perked and my hackles raised to find out what is going to go down and will be until a verdict has been issued.


>steps off soapbox<

K, here’s the article:

Attorney: Immigration law puts cop’s job at stake

By JACQUES BILLEAUD, Associated Press Writer Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press Writer – 3 mins ago

PHOENIX – A Phoenix police officer’s attorney says the officer could be fired if he doesn’t enforce the state’s new immigration law, which he has sued to block.

Officer David Salgado and the statewide nonprofit group Chicanos Por La Causa filed one of seven lawsuits to try to overturn the law.

Attorneys for the Arizona governor told U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton Thursday that the lawsuit should be dismissed because Salgado and the group lack legal standing to sue and that there’s no valid claim of immediate harm.

Bolton didn’t rule immediately after hearing approximately 40 minutes of arguments on Gov. Jan Brewer’s dismissal motion.

Instead she began hearing arguments on the challengers’ request for an order blocking implementation of the law beginning July 29.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

PHOENIX (AP) — A federal judge heard arguments on Thursday morning over whether Arizona’s new immigration law should take effect at the end of the month, marking the first major hearing in one of seven challenges to the strict law.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also is considering Gov. Jan Brewer’s request to dismiss the challenge filed by Phoenix police Officer David Salgado and the statewide nonprofit group Chicanos Por La Causa.

Bolton began by quickly dismissing Brewer as an individual defendant to the lawsuit, a motion unopposed by Salgado’s lawyer. She then began considering whether to dismiss the case.

Bolton said last week that she may not rule on the officer’s request to block the law before it takes effect July 29.

Hearings on the six other lawsuits, including one filed by the federal government, are set for next week.

The large ceremonial courtroom at the main federal courthouse in Phoenix was packed with more than 100 spectators as the hearing began. More than a dozen lawyers were in place along two L-shaped tables, evenly divided between each side. The jury box was filled with law clerks for judges who work in the building who came to observe.

Protesters and supporters of the law gathered outside the courthouse amid heavy security.

About two dozen supporters of the law, many dressed in red, white and blue, held up signs praising Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a major backer of the crackdown on illegal immigrants, and one said “American Pride.”

About 50 feet away a group opposed to the law held up signs calling for repeal of the law.

The groups competed with each other using bullhorns.

“We demand an injunction. We demand a federal intervention,” opponent Sandra Castro of Phoenix, 22, yelled into a bullhorn.

The law requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person’s immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.

Supporters say the law was needed because the federal government hasn’t adequately confronted illegal immigration in Arizona, the busiest illegal gateway for immigrants into the United States. Opponents say the law would lead to racial profiling and distract from police officers’ traditional roles in combating crimes in their communities.

Since Brewer signed the measure into law April 23, it has inspired rallies in Arizona and elsewhere by advocates on both sides of the immigration debate. Some opponents have advocated a tourism boycott of Arizona.

It also led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave Arizona for other American states or their home countries and prompted the Obama administration to file a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the law.

Salgado’s attorneys argue the judge should block the law before it takes effect because it would require an officer to use race as a primary factor in enforcing the law and because the state law is trumped by federal immigration law.

Attorneys for Brewer asked that the officer’s lawsuit be thrown out because Salgado doesn’t allege a real threat of harm from enforcing the new law and instead bases his claim on speculation. They also said the state law prohibits racial profiling and that it isn’t trumped by federal immigration law because it doesn’t attempt to regulate the conditions under which people can enter and leave the country.

The other challenges to the law were filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, civil rights organizations, clergy groups, a researcher from Washington and a Tucson police officer.

Bolton plans to hold similar hearings July 22 in the lawsuits filed by the federal government and civil rights groups.


Associated Press Writers Paul Davenport and Michelle Price contributed to this report.

Apparently People Like Obama, Just Not His Policies   Leave a comment

Wow that’s an interesting title

First and foremost, again, as usual and as I always wind up saying: No one asked ME, the humble and quiet ShadowVixenPatriot, what I think of him!!!!! 

Well, okay, since you pulled my leg, I’ll tell you what I think 😀

I’m sure Obama is very nice, especially to people he wants or needs to impress.  I feel that he’s hollow, that while he believes in what he’s saying in his speeches, other people are feeding him his lines and his main agendas in addition to the fact that I feel he has his own personal agenda that he is using his position to fulfill.  He has no respect for America, the Constitution, our military, or our laws and makes no effort to disguise it.  He almost seems anti-American.  He is in over his head in the events that are taking place around the world and in his own backyard, and to compensate, he ignores them, curses at them, threatens them, and then goes golfing. 

Personally, I think my pet cat can do a better job.  My son had a pet mouse for a while, Harvey.  He could have done a better job too. 

But those are all the things I can say that are somewhat nice.  I’m not someone who likes to make fun of people, hurt their feelings, or insult them based on rumors or my dislike of them.  I just call it as I see it based on fact, experience and true events.  I try not to judge people before I see them, and while I didn’t vote for Obama and would get violently ill when CNN would bow down to worship him and he would speak while I was on my lunch break at work during the campaign, I still tried to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Sadly, my efforts were in vain.  He is proving to be all the things conservatives fear in an American president, and possibly worse.  I don’t think he and I would ever be friends.  I don’t feel that if I ever met him that I would be impressed in any way shape or form.  While most people fawn at meeting a president, I really don’t think I would be one of them—not this one anyway.  Not that he would want to meet the ever humble ShadowVixenPatriot 😉 I’m not even sure I would accept an invite by him.  Or maybe I would, just so I can ask some questions 😀 specifically about border security and his lust for amnesty, but really there would be no point.  One lone blogger isn’t going to change his lifetime world view.

So I shall keep on blogging and following the news from the ShadowVixenPatriot Den, make my voice known amongst my congressional people, and pray!

Anyway, the poll numbers in the article are weird and every poll has different results because I just saw a poll that said that like 57% disapproved of him and his policies.  I wish they would just do one mass poll and put out statistics that way, it would be easier to keep track of.  Of course they DO do that—it’s called an election 😉 but seriously, all this conflicting information is just annoying and frustrating.  I would not have even made a comment on it and posted it on my blog if it were not for the title.  The content of this article really has no value.   It conflicts with everything that is coming out in mainstream media that we’ve seen, including America’s overwhelming rejection of his big bill pushes, the fear from the Democrats that they are going to lose their seats and their outright petrifaction when it comes to Obama’s attack on Arizona and the immigration policy, and let us not forget Nancy Pelosi’s vicious snap for even suggesting that the Democrats are going to lose office.

So…yeah.  Not sure what’s going on with this, but we’ll find out for sure in November!  I can’t wait!  Hopefully this time we’ll get real ‘change’ and ‘change’ we really WANT!

Anyway, here’s the article in all its brilliant glory: 

TIME Poll: Voters Like Obama More Than His Domestic Policies

By ALEX ALTMAN Alex Altman – 2 hrs 26 mins ago

As he juggles the demands of a moribund recovery, multiple foreign conflicts and the reverberations of a catastrophic oil spill, President Obama still has more supporters than opponents. In a new TIME poll, 49% of respondents say they approve of the President’s performance, compared to 45% who disapprove. And yet the President’s popularity is at odds with the stinging appraisals of many of his signature policies, which lead 56% of voters to say the U.S. is on the wrong track.

Just 44% of poll respondents backed Obama’s stewardship of the economy, which 90% rate as fair or poor. Forty-three percent of poll respondents say the $862 billion Recovery Act, which a July 14 White House analysis credits with creating or saving some 3 million jobs, has helped, while 53% think the country would be better off if the money hadn’t been spent. Despite economists’ assertion that an additional injection of capital would help catalyze a recovery and head off a double-dip recession, such a step would be politically perilous, with two thirds of respondents – 83% of conservatives, 38% of liberals and 67% of self-identified “middle” voters – opposing a second stimulus.

While Obama’s approval rating on foreign affairs remain high – he earned a 52%-41% split overall, with respondents favoring his handling of the Afghan war by a 47%-44% margin – his domestic marks are considerably worse. Fifty-four percent of voters disapprove of Obama’s leadership during the oil-spill crisis, and 53% are unhappy with his performance on immigration policy.

The survey contained a batch of good news for both the President and Congressional Democrats, however. Asked to assign blame for the balky economy, 61% point to the Bush Administration, while 27% fault Obama. The President notched a favorable 31%-26% split between voters who believe his economic policies have helped and those who think they hurt, while nearly 80% believe the economy is stable or heading in the right direction. And despite the economic upheaval and political acrimony that have marked his term thus far, voters aren’t pining for Obama’s predecessor; they tapped Obama over George W. Bush by a 53%-33% margin. Nor are they convinced that Sarah Palin is up to the challenges of the Oval Office. Obama clobbered Palin, 55%-34%, in a hypothetical 2012 matchup that should have Democrats salivating.

At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Capitol Hill Republicans giddy at the prospect of reclaiming one or both chambers of Congress in November may want to temper their expectations slightly. By a 43%-39% margin, voters place greater trust in the Democratic Party’s ability to preside over an economic recovery, and 43% said they currently plan to vote for a Democratic congressional candidate, edging the 42% who prefer their district’s Republican.

If the GOP manages to capture the House or Senate, the party’s promise to pare back the federal deficit may collide with voters who have grown accustomed to the benefits that come with that largesse. Asked how they would reduce the deficit, respondents favored trimming the defense budget, a measure that is anathema to the leadership of a party that prizes its historical edge on national security issues. Other paths to deficit reduction highlighted the ideological gulf between Republicans and Democrats. Conservatives were more than twice as receptive (49%-21%) as liberals to cutting unemployment compensation, and they remain wary of healthcare spending, with 52% supporting fewer resources for the sector, compared to 8% of liberals. And despite widespread agreement that the trajectory of entitlement spending is untenable, tackling the hot-button issue would require a willingness to weather the repercussions. Voters cited Social Security and Medicare as the two expenses they were least eager to cut.

The poll, conducted by ABT SRBI, surveyed 1,003 adults – 88% of whom identified themselves as likely voters – on July 12-13.

Republican Senator Says He Backs Birther Lawsuits   Leave a comment

I’m going to have to research on whether or not he really does have a Hawaii birth certificate.  It just seems a bit fishy to me—like of all the states he had to be ‘born in’, it had to be that one.  Right.  Also, the fact that mainstream media didn’t do a very good job of verifying this at all and basically swept it under the rug is also cause for consideration.  Supposedly the birth certificate has been located, but it wasn’t announced on the news or anything for everyone to see.  Apparently THAT information is only for the select few who think birthers are crazy.  Note there are not even any links on the article to any mainstream media exposition of said birth certificate.

Usually when the mainstream liberal media does that, it means that they are hiding something ‘someone’ doesn’t want the public to see.

Okay, I KNOW that sounds conspiracy theory-like, but anyone who spends any time looking at the news can honestly deny that everything every station says sounds the same…exactly the same in some cases—especially in the liberal viewpoints they espouse. It just seems kind of, well, ‘fishy’ (I like that word, I’m going to use it a lot today)!

Vitter actually doesn’t mention the birth certificate matter as a main part of his comments.  It seems like he mentioned it in passing and the media grasped that and viciously dragged it out of context to get some attention.  Even as I write this commentary, I want to touch on the birth certificate issue and what I think of how he feels about it, even though that’s not the point.  However, he does acknowledge the fact that there is still question about it.  Do I think that this is a ploy to get votes?  Of course!  Just because someone is siding with conservatives doesn’t mean that they are not doing so just to get their vote.

But note how he tries to change the subject in the article.  I think he just agreed that it’s an issue, the media and his fellows focused on it to try to make him to be a nut (he IS a Republican in this hostile liberal environment) which I think is wrong but par for the course in mainstream media.

Anyway, here’s the article.

Republican senator says he backs birther lawsuits

By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer Ben Evans, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 13, 1:58 am ET

WASHINGTON – Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama’s citizenship in court.

Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama’s “refusal to produce a valid birth certificate.”

Such claims about Obama’s birth certificate have been discredited. But with the crowd applauding the question, Vitter responded that although he doesn’t personally have legal standing to bring litigation, he supports “conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court,” according to a video of the event.

“I think that is the valid and most possibly effective grounds to do it,” Vitter said, although he later cautioned that the matter could distract from policy issues.

“I think if we focus on that issue and let our eye off the ball … I think that’s a big mistake,” he said. “I’m not dismissing any of this. I think first and foremost, we need to fight the Obama agenda at the ballot box starting this fall.”

So-called birthers have challenged Obama’s standing as president by arguing that he was not born in the United States.

Hawaii officials have repeatedly confirmed the president’s citizenship, and his Hawaiian birth certificate has been made public, along with newspaper birth notices published when he was born in 1961.

Last year, a federal judge in Washington threw out a lawsuit on the issue, calling the case a waste of the court’s time and suggesting the plaintiff’s attorney may have to compensate the president’s lawyer.

Vitter said at Sunday’s event that the only direct information he has about the issue is what he’s learned through the news media “filter.” His spokesman did not respond to a question Monday about whether the senator questions Obama’s citizenship.

A spokesman for Rep. Charlie Melancon, a Democrat challenging Vitter, called the birth certificate issue “nonsense.”

“While Louisiana families are suffering from the biggest man-made disaster in history, David Vitter is trying to score political points by perpetuating a completely debunked conspiracy theory,” spokesman Jeff Giertz said.

PEACEFUL ACTION ALERT: Opponents Pack Hearing on Mosque Near Ground Zero   Leave a comment


I have been trying to avoid this since I first heard about it.  It’s just too….sad.  It’s too deep.  It’s too insane to even allow it to happen. 

I can’t believe that this is being considered. 

I can’t believe that discussion of this is even being allowed.

I can’t BELIEVE that they want to even DEVELOP Ground Zero in the first place . . . but to put a mosque on that property . . . WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?

That’s like . . . bulldozing Auschwitz and putting a Hitler memorial on top of it.

That’s like . . . letting the KKK have their headquarters where Martin Luther King Jr. got shot.

That’s like . . . putting a nuclear power plant and pro-nuclear weapon museum in Hiroshima.

I mean…it’s blasphemous!  And I don’t mean in a religious sense.  Let’s keep that out of it.  I mean that it’s just blasphemous in principle.  It’s blasphemous against the American people.  It’s blasphemous TO ALL AMERICANS WHO REMEMBER 9-11 AND TO THOSE TO DIED IN THOSE ATTACKS! 

I cannot even wrap my head around this. 

If this passes . . . it will be a dark, dark, dark day for this country—a day where we rolled over and allowed our enemies to step on us and kick us, asserting their dominance. We might as well pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan because we would have just lost the war.  What’s the point in fighting if we allow them to build their mosque on hallowed ground?  That’s what Muslims do.  When they declare war on another country or religion, whenever they CONQUOR said country or said religion, they tear down their important symbols and churches and whatnot and they BUILD MOSQUES ON THOSE SITES AS A SIGN THAT THEY HAVE WON!

Again, I ask . . . WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY THINKING!!!!!  (and I want to use more colorful language when I say this!)

Opponents pack hearing on mosque near ground zero

By CRISTIAN SALAZAR, Associated Press Writer Cristian Salazar, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 13, 11:56 pm ET

NEW YORK – Dozens of opponents and some supporters of a mosque planned near ground zero attended a raucous hearing Tuesday about whether the building where the Muslim place of worship would be created warrants designation as a city landmark and should be protected from development.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, who has sought an investigation into the funding of the mosque, was among the witnesses who testified in support of giving the building landmark status, which could complicate plans by Muslim groups to develop a community center and mosque there.

After noting the lower Manhattan building’s history and architectural significance, Lazio said it also warranted landmark designation because on Sept. 11, 2001, it was struck by airplane debris from the terror attacks against the nearby World Trade Center. That connection to the attacks, he said, made it “a place of deep historical significance and a reminder of just what happened on New York’s darkest day.”

Lazio has called on state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, his Democratic opponent in the governor’s race, to investigate the funding of the project. On Tuesday, he repeated that request and said the pace of the landmark designation process should be slowed to allow time to thoroughly investigate the matter.

Nearly 100 people attended the hearing at a college campus on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Fifty-six people testified at the hearing, which turned contentious at times, with some speakers drowned out by shouts from the audience and with one man escorted out by campus security.

“To deprive this building of landmark status is to allow for a citadel of Islamic supremacy to be erected in its place,” said Andrea Quinn, a freelance audio technician from Queens who said she had worked with people at the World Trade Center.

But Rafiq Kathwari, who described himself as a moderate Muslim, said the landmark discussion had been hijacked.


“This has been made by a very vocal minority into an issue of bigotry,” said Kathwari, as he held up his U.S. passport and was nearly drowned out by shouts from the crowd. “I’m standing in a hall in which I feel ashamed to be an American.”


The mosque and the related community center are a project of several groups, including the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, which promotes cross-cultural understanding between Islam and the West. Cordoba’s director, Imam Faisel Rauf, has refused to disclose the sources of funding for the mosque.

SEE!!!!!  Gee, I wonder who is funding this!!!!!!

But Sharif El-Gamal, the CEO of the company that owns the property, said that the project’s backers were committed to transparency and were working to set up a nonprofit organization.

“We are going to go through a capital campaign,” which will consist of equity debt, bonds, grants and fundraising from the grass roots, he said. They were committed to working with the attorney general’s Charities Bureau, which supervises charitable organizations and works to protect donors, he said.

El-Gamal testified at the hearing, saying they were opposed to designating the building a landmark because it does not meet the requirements of historical significance.

“This is not the Woolworth building, this is not the Chrysler building,” he said later in an interview.

The five-story building on Park Place, a few blocks north of Wall Street, was completed between 1857 and 1858 and is an Italian Renaissance-inspired palazzo. It formerly housed a department store, which closed after the building was damaged on Sept. 11. Muslim prayer service is held at the building at least one day a week.

Landmark status could require the owners to obtain the approval of the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission before making significant changes. It’s unlikely that, if granted such status, the building could be demolished.

The city’s 11-member Landmarks Preservation Commission is expected to vote later this summer on whether the building meets the standards of architectural, cultural and historic characteristics to qualify it for landmark status.








*steps down from soap box—fuming*

And this is why I didn’t want to bring it up. 

And this is why I am moved to tears when I hear our National Anthem.

Call it corny.  Call it lame.  Call it whatever you wish.  But we are a sovereign nation, they attacked us and killed civilians on our own land, and considering their history of invasion and destruction and building their places of worship over the ruins of the old civilization – THIS FITS THE BILL!!!!

If this gets passed . . . it will be a D*** shame. 

*kicks soapbox away and storms off, cursing—still fuming*

Arizona poll finds big surge for Brewer   1 comment

Good news!  Gov. Jan Brewer’s popularity is surging due to her bill!  Awesome!  She has my vote, even though I’m not living in Arizona lol!  We could use more gutsy politicians to stand up for what’s right in this country and FOR this country for that matter! 

My hat is off and my prayers are with her and her state!  To stand up to the President of the United States with such an important and controversial issue in the political world and NOT back down when said president viciously turns on her for doing the right thing?  That is amazing! 

Anyway, my two cents! 


Arizona poll finds big surge for Brewer

A new poll says Republican Gov. Jan Brewer’s popularity surged in recent months, with the Behavior Research Center saying she surfed “a political wave” from signing Arizona’s immigration enforcement law.

The Phoenix-based center’s survey was conducted June 30 through July 11. It found Brewer with support from 57 percent of surveyed Republicans and independents planning to vote in the Republican primary on Aug. 24. That’s up from 22 percent in April, when roughly half of the republican voters undecided. 

The combined sample of 236 registered Republicans and independents had a margin of error of 6.5 percent.

The new poll found Buz Mills with support from 12 percent and State Treasurer Dean Martin with 9 percent. Both have suspended their campaigns.

Take The Poll: Should the American Flag be Banned From School?   Leave a comment


Ban the American Flag in AMERICAN SCHOOLS???????????????  I’m horrified by this!

I’ve been horrified a lot today–let me tell you.  I’m having computer issues again folks–had at least ten posts prepared to upload and something happened to it . . . so I’ll get it all up tomorrow once I figured out what I did.  But, seriously, most of it just involved me being horrified!!!!

But THIS?  Wow.  Just wow!

When I was in school, the American Flag wasn’t a question.  It was a statement.  Of course, I was an Army Brat and I went to school with other Army Brats.  Even in the second grade, you better BELIEVE that if you made fun of the pledge in any way or goofed off during pledge there would be a group of Army Brats waiting to ‘speak with you’ during recess.

I did it.  ONCE! 

Never again . . . I learned my lesson really quick.  It wasn’t a beat-down or anything–it was just a gang up on you shame session. 

That was during the Gulf War though and most everyone’s dad was fighting in it and away from home.  I was lucky, my dad didn’t get sent over–but there were a LOT of resentful kids who made sure that I didn’t forget that their dads were gone.  We had bomb scares and had to evacuate our base too.  LOL–the kids even had a saying: we were stationed at S.H.A.P.E in Belgium.  The acronym stands for ‘Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe’ — but during the Gulf War we all called ourselves “Saddam Hussein’s American Personal Enemies’! 

I feel wierd now that I’m an adult and I don’t have to say the pledge every day.  I was very blessed to have my son in a good preschool and kindergarten–they raised the flag, said the pledge and sang the National Anthem every single day.  The local country station always played an instrumental National Anthem at 7am in the morning and so we would turn it on on our way to daycare/work in the mornings.  My son wasn’t even four years old yet and he was singing along to the music of the National Anthem, word for word, and it was a beautiful thing!!!!!!! 

Anyway–if this poll is still up–please vote on it!  I think it’s just sick!  If people don’t like OUR FLAG IN OUR COUNTRY THEN THEY HAVE THE FREEDOM TO GET OUT!  End of story!  There needs to be tolerance, but there also needs to be an understanding.  In America, we fly American flags.  Our forefathers fought and died for this country and for these colors, not for any other country.  To take down the American flag is to disrespect the very freedom that we have in this country and the very FREEDOM immigrants–both LEGAL and ILLEGAL–come here for.  As Americans, we tolerate flags from other countries on our soil, paraded by both ILLEGAL and legal immigrants because they are proud of their country of origin, but more than likely, they just refuse to accept an American identity and heritage.  I’m fairly sure that this is where this garbage is coming from.  I am half Belgian and I have Belgian flags–but I hold no allegiance to them.  I love Belgium, I have pictures and a few paintings of historical buildings from there–but I KNOW WHERE MY LOYALTY IS!  AMERICA IS MY COUNTRY AND I AM PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN! 

People who can’t handle that need to get off their high horse and come back down to REALITY!  You want to come here and drain our taxpayers dry, then you need to RESPECT our flag and THOSE PEOPLE THAT FIGHT FOR IT AND DIE FOR IT!

End of story!

I mean…WHY should this even BE an issue?  Have we sunk THAT low?  Do OTHER countries have this issue, or we the only ones?  Has ANY country EVER had this issue?


Here is the poll results when I took it:

Share your thoughts. First, answer our question below. Then click “Leave a comment.”

Thank you for voting!

No. This is a lame decision. Teach the kids what the flag means, instead of banning it. 60% (1,172,889 votes)

Yes. The safety of students comes first. 31% (595,063 votes)

Not sure, but of all things to ban, the American flag would seem the least ‘incendiary.’ <1% (3,992 votes)

Other (post a comment) 9% (173,755 votes)

Total Votes: 1,945,699View Comments (78)