Michael Savage
Wednesday, March 14, 2001

He states as follows, "Few countries in the world would think of amending their constitution for the purpose of protecting such a symbol. ... They may be destroying a piece of cloth but they do no damage to our system of freedom, which tolerates such desecration."

He then goes on to state, "If I were a member of Congress, I would not vote for the proposed amendment and would fully understand and respect the views of those who would."

These words are found in a letter from Powell to one of the most liberal senators, Patrick Leahy, dated May 18, 1999. The letter is now posted on the ACLU Web site.

As you well know, arch-liberals oppose the flag amendment for numerous reasons including, but not limited to, their desire to eliminate a unifying symbol of nationalism; the liberal desire to obliterate national identity; the liberal desire to see the elimination of borders, language and culture.

Constitutional scholars supporting the protection of the U.S. flag have found that flag desecration is an inarticulate, headline-seeking means of demonstration that does not rise to a protected form of expression.

Secondly, there are already several exceptions to the First Amendment, including libel, incitement and obscenity; therefore, this exception to the First Amendment, the so-called Flag Protection Amendment, would be in keeping with the best of our constitutional amendments.

For Colin Powell to have come out against this amendment shows us that he walks like a liberal, talks like a liberal and thinks like a liberal.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Bush Administration

Related Products:
Have an Opinion About This? Send an URGENT PriorityGram Today.