Now go, and troll no more.
Posted on 07/13/2004 12:04:37 AM PDT by ladylibertyok
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arnold un-Reagan-like
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: June 21, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Now that a decent interval has passed since the moving tributes and funeral of the late Ronald Reagan, maybe it's time to comment on something unseemly that took place before the late president was laid to rest.
There was Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister of Great Britain, standing next to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Thatcher recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America – not her own flag.
Schwarzenegger, an American running the executive branch of government of the largest state in the union, did not.
I didn't notice it when it took place. It was brought to my attention by a caller to my radio program. I had to go back and check the tapes. Sure enough, the caller was right.
Since then, other people who witnessed the funeral have told me they noticed it right away.
I wonder how many millions of people around the world took notice?
This troubles me.
I always liked Schwarzenegger's movies. But I've never liked him as a politician. I don't think he has any principles, any deeply held convictions, any beliefs beyond what the pollsters and the media advisers tell him.
Most of the positions he has taken are wrong. And when he takes the right position on an issue, you never know if he will reverse himself the following week.
Now this.
How can one explain why the governor of California, of all people, would not say the Pledge of Allegiance at an internationally televised funeral for Ronald Reagan? What was he thinking? Was it an oversight of some kind? Was he so in awe of the event that he lost himself? Is it possible he doesn't know the words? Maybe it's time for a crash course.
I've tried to think about this in ways in which I could give him the benefit of the doubt.
But I'm deeply troubled by it.
How embarrassing for our nation.
On the one hand, Lady Thatcher says the pledge though no one would expect her to do so. She's a British citizen who should not be expected to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. But she did. And she is standing next to a man who has chosen America as his adopted homeland – a man in a high-profile elected office – and he refuses to say it.
To me, this is more egregious than Bill and Hillary Clinton apparently dozing off during the eulogies at the National Cathedral. That bit of rudeness should be expected from a couple of cheap politicians. But I can't even imagine Bill or Hillary failing to say the Pledge of Allegiance – not when they know the whole world is watching.
I think Arnold Schwarzenegger needs to explain himself.
After all, Sen. Orin Hatch, R-Utah, has introduced legislation in the U.S. Congress to amend the Constitution so that the foreign-born Schwarzenegger could someday run for president. I don't expect that amendment to go anywhere, but, nevertheless, it has been introduced.
And Schwarzenegger is still the governor of California – the state, ironically enough, from where the latest challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance, and its "under God" phrase, went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
He needs to explain himself and apologize for the poor etiquette and unpatriotic attitude he displayed during the Reagan funeral. It was a slight not only to the United States of America, but to the late president.
Comparisons have actually been drawn between Schwarzenegger and Reagan. Reagan, an actor, launched his political career as governor of California. But, as far as I'm concerned, that's where the comparisons stop.
We all knew Ronald Reagan. And Arnold Schwarzenegger is no Ronald Reagan.
"This really troubles me too folks!! I don't think something like this should be over looked. There is absolutely no reason why he shouldn't be saying the Pledge of Allegiance. He's the governor of "Culifawnya" for pete's sake. Last time I looked at a map, it was still part of the USA. Like the author, I find him to be lacking in political beliefs and I think he only ran for governor because he is so obsessed with power. Am I off the mark on this or what?? I noticed no one else in the media picked up on it. Not surprising!!!"
That'd be singing the National Anthem. But if the words to the Pledge mean what they say, then Margaret Thatcher -- of whom I'm a huge fan -- just pledged her loyalty to a foreign government. A bit odd.
It's different when it's the late President.
Like I said, I can understand differences of opinion on this. What I object to is anyone who has a contrary opinion being labeled unpatriotic, a communist, or a Stern-disciple. I'm a patriot, a strong anti-communist, and I think Stern's an idiot.
To put it in perspective, I think its important to keep funerals from turning into a political events as did the Wellstone fiasco. Sing Amazing Graze, God Bless America, etc. The Pledge just doesn't seem to fit to me.
But the reason for saying the Pledge at a state funeral might be because it's a state funeral. And clearly Arnold should have said the Pledge. I'm pretty sure you or I would have proudly recited the Pledge, if we'd been invited.
I don't know about that. Still seems out of place to me. I'd have put my hand over the heart and been respectful, but I'm not sure I'd have said the Pledge. Not because I oppose saying it -- I still think schools should open with it everyday because they should be teaching citizenship.
What I don't like is the "disagree with me and your a commie" line.
That'd be singing the National Anthem. But if the words to the Pledge mean what they say, then Margaret Thatcher -- of whom I'm a huge fan -- just pledged her loyalty to a foreign government. A bit odd.
It's different when it's the late President.
Like I said, I can understand differences of opinion on this. What I object to is anyone who has a contrary opinion being labeled unpatriotic, a communist, or a Stern-disciple. I'm a patriot, a strong anti-communist, and I think Stern's an idiot.
To put it in perspective, I think its important to keep funerals from turning into a political events as did the Wellstone fiasco. Sing Amazing Graze, God Bless America, etc. The Pledge just doesn't seem to fit to me.
But the reason for saying the Pledge at a state funeral might be because it's a state funeral. And clearly Arnold should have said the Pledge. I'm pretty sure you or I would have proudly recited the Pledge, if we'd been invited.
I don't know about that. Still seems out of place to me. I'd have put my hand over the heart and been respectful, but I'm not sure I'd have said the Pledge. Not because I oppose saying it -- I still think schools should open with it everyday because they should be teaching citizenship.
What I don't like is the "disagree with me and your a commie" line.
I - unfortunately - happen NOT to be an American yet even I would have been aware of the importance and significance of uttering the Pledge of Allegiance on such an occasion. Sorry, but however energetically you hoover around to dredge up an excuse to offer "the benefit of the doubt" the plain fact is that there ISN'T one. Arnie's failure in complying is totally unforgivable - particularly since he has been elevated by the people of a state in his adoptive country to such high office. It hardly serves as an example to others.
I think dual citizenship is acceptable on occasion. My neighbour has been married twice - to American men on each occasion. Both children were born in the US although one lives there where she married, the other lives here (for most of the time.) Living in one country doesn't detract from the love and respect for the "other."
There are other more complex and acceptable reasons for "dual nationality", but whatever the case, perhaps any public display of disrespect or antagonism towards one's "home" country might raise the prospect of citizenship being revoked.
Francis Bellamy (creator of the Pledge of Allegiance) was a self-proclaimed national socialist and the purpose of the pledge was to promote a government takeover of education, and to eliminate all of the better alternatives, in order to create an "industrial army" (a Bellamy term) openly modeled on the military to nationalize the economy and establish a utopian society of Christian socialism, as described in the book "Looking Backward" by Edward Bellamy, cousin and cohort of Francis. The pledge was a prayer for a utopian society of Christian socialism even before it was explicitly deified in 1954. The Bellamy ideas were dystopian hell here and abroad.
Bellamy claimed that he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there. However the legacy of his government takeover of education was racism and segregation imposed by law and taught as official policy in government schools. It was behavior later displayed by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The racism and segragation in government schools continued even after WWII and into the '60s, even beyond. Bellamy never told anyone to leave government schools "because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there." Those schools still exist to this day. Bellamy was a bigot.
Edward Bellamy's book was an international bestseller and influenced the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (62 million killed), the People's Republic of China (35 million killed), and the National Socialist German Workers' Party (21 million killed). (Death tolls from the book "Death by Government" by Professor R. J. Rummel).
Believe it or not, "our" pledge was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
The original single right arm salute was no less worshipful idolatry then if the left arm had been extended also. That is the mentality that led to its adoption by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The claim that it was an old Roman salute is a myth.
The right hand over the heart is no less worshipful idolatry then if the left hand were crossed over the right, in another clearer position of prayer.
In 1942 Congress officially recognized the Pledge, but gave it the modern hand-over-the-heart gesture. There is probably one overriding reason why Congress interfered: to make everyone drop the straight-arm salute, which was becoming very embarassing and very revealing.
Congress' 1954 act deifying the national socialist's pledge should not have been a choice between "theistic socialism" or "atheistic socialism," but Congress compounded its 1942 mess in government schools with the 1954 tweaking. A choice between two evils is still evil. Through bizarre ignorance, the updated pledge's deification of government is more accurate in paying homage to Bellamy's monstrous establishment of theistic socialism.
Bellamy was not an atheist. Far from it. Bellamy was a preacher, and a member of the Society of Christian Socialists, and was expelled from the ministry for giving speeches such as "Jesus the Socialist" (finding a copy of that speech is harder than finding photos of the original Nazi-style
salute to the flag).
So, Bellamy was theistic and he was a religious wacko.
It seems like an oversight that the phrase "under God" was not in the original pledge. In that sense, there is no "secular" Pledge of Allegiance and there never was.
According to Bellamy's granddaughter, he would have resented the addition of the words "under God" in 1954. Research indicates that she is incorrect.
While it is true that the first pledge did not contain the phrase "under God," the accompanying articles for the first Pledge program did contain many religious references. A historic discovery may have just been made in that the phrase "under God" is in Bellamy's original article/speech next to the first Pledge (Youth's Companion, September 8, 1892, and see the article
therein "The Meaning of the Four Centuries").
A recent search of the internet indicated that there is only one webpage as the source on the internet for Bellamy's scary speech.
Most Americans support the socialist's pledge and support Bellamy's vision of a massive government-school monopoly, as well as the social security system and other widespread socialism. Bellamy has succeeded in duping even Congressmen into boastfully reciting the socialist's pledge, supporting his government schools, social security and massive spending. One reason for that is because Bellamy's government-school monopoly taught most Americans and most Congressmen propaganda about the pledge, and cajoled everyone into robotically chanting it daily on cue from the government, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state.
Also, most Americans and most Congressmen have never seen the rare photos of the pledge. Government schools never show them.
The separation of school and state is as important as the separation of church and state. The government should not run Sunday school, nor Monday school through Friday school.
On September 27th, the U.S. Supreme Court conferred about a case urging that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. The case is Wonschik v. U.S. and I have filed an Amicus Brief in that case.
Wonschik might end the "Pledge Protection Act" before the act starts. It is a race to see which happens first.
A motion to recuse might result in the recusal of the entire U.S. Supreme Court. The motion expands arguments that resulted in the recusal of Justice Scalia. It is the first time in history that a motion to recuse addressed each Justice. The motion to recuse discusses the history of the Pledge and the Court's segregation cases.
Let's restore the pledge to its pre-1892 version.
Francis Bellamy (creator of the Pledge of Allegiance) was a self-proclaimed national socialist and the purpose of the pledge was to promote a government takeover of education, and to eliminate all of the better alternatives, in order to create an "industrial army" (a Bellamy term) openly modeled on the military to nationalize the economy and establish a utopian society of Christian socialism, as described in the book "Looking Backward" by Edward Bellamy, cousin and cohort of Francis. The pledge was a prayer for a utopian society of Christian socialism even before it was explicitly deified in 1954. The Bellamy ideas were dystopian hell here and abroad.
Bellamy claimed that he stopped attending church because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there. However the legacy of his government takeover of education was racism and segregation imposed by law and taught as official policy in government schools. It was behavior later displayed by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The racism and segragation in government schools continued even after WWII and into the '60s, even beyond. Bellamy never told anyone to leave government schools "because he disliked the racial bigotry he found there." Those schools still exist to this day. Bellamy was a bigot.
Edward Bellamy's book was an international bestseller and influenced the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (62 million killed), the People's Republic of China (35 million killed), and the National Socialist German Workers' Party (21 million killed). (Death tolls from the book "Death by Government" by Professor R. J. Rummel).
Believe it or not, "our" pledge was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
The original single right arm salute was no less worshipful idolatry then if the left arm had been extended also. That is the mentality that led to its adoption by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The claim that it was an old Roman salute is a myth.
The right hand over the heart is no less worshipful idolatry then if the left hand were crossed over the right, in another clearer position of prayer.
In 1942 Congress officially recognized the Pledge, but gave it the modern hand-over-the-heart gesture. There is probably one overriding reason why Congress interfered: to make everyone drop the straight-arm salute, which was becoming very embarassing and very revealing.
Congress' 1954 act deifying the national socialist's pledge should not have been a choice between "theistic socialism" or "atheistic socialism," but Congress compounded its 1942 mess in government schools with the 1954 tweaking. A choice between two evils is still evil. Through bizarre ignorance, the updated pledge's deification of government is more accurate in paying homage to Bellamy's monstrous establishment of theistic socialism.
Bellamy was not an atheist. Far from it. Bellamy was a preacher, and a member of the Society of Christian Socialists, and was expelled from the ministry for giving speeches such as "Jesus the Socialist" (finding a copy of that speech is harder than finding photos of the original Nazi-style
salute to the flag).
So, Bellamy was theistic and he was a religious wacko.
It seems like an oversight that the phrase "under God" was not in the original pledge. In that sense, there is no "secular" Pledge of Allegiance and there never was.
According to Bellamy's granddaughter, he would have resented the addition of the words "under God" in 1954. Research indicates that she is incorrect.
While it is true that the first pledge did not contain the phrase "under God," the accompanying articles for the first Pledge program did contain many religious references. A historic discovery may have just been made in that the phrase "under God" is in Bellamy's original article/speech next to the first Pledge (Youth's Companion, September 8, 1892, and see the article
therein "The Meaning of the Four Centuries").
A recent search of the internet indicated that there is only one webpage as the source on the internet for Bellamy's scary speech.
Most Americans support the socialist's pledge and support Bellamy's vision of a massive government-school monopoly, as well as the social security system and other widespread socialism. Bellamy has succeeded in duping even Congressmen into boastfully reciting the socialist's pledge, supporting his government schools, social security and massive spending. One reason for that is because Bellamy's government-school monopoly taught most Americans and most Congressmen propaganda about the pledge, and cajoled everyone into robotically chanting it daily on cue from the government, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state.
Also, most Americans and most Congressmen have never seen the rare photos of the pledge. Government schools never show them.
The separation of school and state is as important as the separation of church and state. The government should not run Sunday school, nor Monday school through Friday school.
On September 27th, the U.S. Supreme Court conferred about a case urging that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. The case is Wonschik v. U.S. and I have filed an Amicus Brief in that case.
Wonschik might end the "Pledge Protection Act" before the act starts. It is a race to see which happens first.
A motion to recuse might result in the recusal of the entire U.S. Supreme Court. The motion expands arguments that resulted in the recusal of Justice Scalia. It is the first time in history that a motion to recuse addressed each Justice. The motion to recuse discusses the history of the Pledge and the Court's segregation cases.
Let's restore the pledge to its pre-1892 version.
oops, I unintentionally posted the same message twice. sorry.
can't figure out how to delete one.
Now go, and troll no more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.