Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TN4Liberty

“I’m open to Romney, but the answer was different.”

Wrong, they both said the flag should not be displayed in public because of the connotation it has to a certain portion of our population, and that it divides rather than unites. You can choose to disagree with that, and in part, I do, however, that is what both of them said. Wait for the transcript to be posted and then go back and read their replies.


2,302 posted on 11/28/2007 7:52:50 PM PST by flaglady47 (Thinking out loud while grinding teeth in political frustration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2208 | View Replies ]


To: flaglady47

If that’s what you heard, that’s what you heard. What I heard was Thompson acknowledge that the flag did have a purpose in certain situations like memorials, but that it needn’t be flaunted because it is offensive to some people. Romney just dissed it across the board.


2,314 posted on 11/28/2007 7:55:49 PM PST by TN4Liberty (A liberal is someone who believes Scooter Libby should be in jail and Bill Clinton should not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2302 | View Replies ]

To: flaglady47; TN4Liberty
You're wrong flaglady47. Mitt offered a blanket prohibition on the stars-and-bars.

Fred said the flag, out of deference to harmony, should not be displayed alone or over a capital but said it could be part of a flags exhibit, an historical display or memorial.

Fred's answer was reasoned and balanced. Mitt's was knee jerk pandering to revisionists.

2,332 posted on 11/28/2007 8:00:43 PM PST by newzjunkey (“Market forces” demanded serfs and market forces got them. - Kolokotronis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2302 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson