• We are a multilingual website again. Read the notice about this.
  • Understand AI use at MyPTSD: all AI use is explained in our AI help page. AI use is by choice here. It exists if you want it, but does nothing unless you choose to use it.

News Us politics - read first post before comment

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not even American and I find this offensive. Why would anyone actually consider removing the pledge of allegiance from state council meetings?

The guy commentating seems pretty centrist, that's why I chose his video.
 
I didn't watch the video. That happened close enough to where I live that it's been in the news since WAY before it went viral.

Personally, I couldn't care less whether they say the pledge of allegiance at the start of a meeting or not. I thought the reason given for dropping it was ridiculous AND offensive.
 
Well, I think the whole thing is a bit silly and don't have strong opinions one way or another. It seems like the council created a problem by anticipating one that didn't exist. I also find the reasoning they used strange. If they had talked about the thing that's typically found controversial "One nation under God" I would have understood more

However, they aren't "banning" the pledge, they are no longer requiring it to be said at the beginning of meetings. They specifically said, in their decision that they would have the option to do it at special "they weren’t banning the pledge altogether, and could still choose to add it to the agenda on special occasions, or if they had a Boy Scout color guard in attendance." Dead Link Removed.

And, what is American, is that states and local jurisdictions get to decide what they want to do. So, while I may think there reasoning is silly, and many in the nation may think they are wrong, if that area is in support of removing the pledge that's their freedom to do so.
 
The suburb in question voted to go back to saying the pledge, amidst much drama. Another suburb has voted to begin saying the pledge at the start of their meetings, just because. This seems like a good example of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

On a totally different note. I'm old enough to remember the Vietnam war. (Or the American war, depending on where you're from.) One of the epithets that was thrown at the protesters was that if they didn't like it here, they should leave. "America, love it or leave it". They were, among other things, called communists. I find it both interesting and ironic that a guy who evaded the draft during the Vietnam war is now throwing those same lines at people who don't agree with him. It's also interesting that he started doing this at a time when it distracts people who might otherwise be paying attention to the legal problems his alleged friend, the alleged pedophile/ human trafficker.
 
His latest rude tweeting spree has gotten alot more press than his "safe third country" agreement he may sign with Guatemala. If Guatemala wasn't such a violent corrupt place, it might actually have been an economical means of removing asylum seekers from the overcrowded detention centres, giving them somewhere to go and dissuade some of the people from trying to get in through the southern border.
I don't think it would be a terrible idea if it wasn't trading one set of deplorable conditions for another. As it is, it's not humane enough for my moral compass.

The AOC border publicity photo shoot fiasco got me laughing me arse off. She's really good at the pouty face isn't she? :roflmao:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Donation drives

2026 Donation Goal

Goal
$1,800.00
Earned
$910.00
This donation drive ends in
0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds
  50.6%

Trending content

Featured content

Back
Top Bottom