Democratic senator: ‘I’ll beat the hell out of you’ for flag burning

Posted by | November 29, 2016 15:12 | Filed under: News Behaving Badly Politics

West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin is considering changing parties. Good.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) lashed out at flag burning on Tuesday after President-elect Donald Trump raised the issue.

“It’s a First Amendment right, but you do it in front of me, I’m going to beat the hell out of you,” Manchin said, according to a Roll Call reporter.

Manchin is up for reelection during the 2018 cycle in a state that Trump won by more than 40 points. His comment came after Trump floated legal consequences for those who burn the American flag, which the Supreme Court ruled is protected as free speech.“Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag – if they do, there must be consequences – perhaps loss of citizenship or jail,” Trump tweeted Tuesday morning.

 

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

76 responses to Democratic senator: ‘I’ll beat the hell out of you’ for flag burning

  1. Budda November 29th, 2016 at 15:49

    I’ve always had a hard time understanding what was sooo upsetting about flag burning.

    On another note, tough guy Joe should remember there is always someone bigger, badder, stronger, tougher, and meaner before he talks about beating up someone.

    • whatthe46 November 29th, 2016 at 15:51

      his old ass won’t do sh!t.

    • bpollen November 29th, 2016 at 16:16

      I agree with you about the burning. I guess I don’t have enough of a fantasy life to get all up in arms over symbols.

      • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 20:29

        It is more than a “piece of cloth.”

        • bpollen November 30th, 2016 at 02:06

          Nope. Any other import given is NOT intrinsic to the cloth. You can make claims about other characteristics, but those characteristics are all in your head. Kinda like holy water is just water even IF it is blessed.

          • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 19:43

            It is. But you go tell that to the mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, of dead sailors, marines, soldiers and airmen whose coffins are draped in those “meaningless” pieces of cloth.

            • bpollen December 1st, 2016 at 03:04

              “meaningless”

              That’s actually a great shot at undercutting your own argument.

              Meaning – adjective – intended to communicate something that is not directly expressed.

              Meaning is something conveyed. It is NOT intrinsic to that object. You “attach” meaning.

              For instance, let’s take the cross. Symbol of Christianity, right? And NO OTHER POSSIBLE interpretation? Well, it is ALSO the 20th letter of our alphabet. A cross similar to a Maltese Cross was found on a statue of an Assyrian king (who predated Christ and Christianity.) In many Greek representations of Diana, the cross is shown above her head. The actual use of the cross by Christians dates from the time of Constantine, so early Christians used the ichthys, an anchor, a lamb, a shepherd, a dove… Obviously, pre-Christians imbued the symbol with DIFFERENT meaning, and early Christians didn’t recognize it to be a symbol of Christ or Christianity.

              So, the exact same symbol, yet different interpretations of what that “meaning” was. Each “imbued” that symbol with their OWN interpretations. But ultimately, it is simply a symbol of two intersecting lines at right angles to each other. It has NO intrinsic meaning.

              • RightThinkingOne December 1st, 2016 at 18:37

                Yes, we attach meaning. What does the “star-spangled banner” mean?

                And you actually think that one can just wipe this out, this deep, deep cultural value and symbol, just by being “rational” or something?

                You have no understanding of the human heart.

                • bpollen December 2nd, 2016 at 02:11

                  Actually, I do understand “the human heart.” I know that TWO human hearts, looking at EXACTLY the same thing, may get identical impressions, divergent impressions, or no impressions at all. What “the human heart” feels is only valid for that specific heart.

                  • RightThinkingOne December 4th, 2016 at 18:49

                    Yes, that is why it is vulgar, ugly, and reprehensible for people to desecrate our flag in public. It those ingrate, ill-bred, hateful people want to do that in private, fine.

                    • bpollen December 4th, 2016 at 18:59

                      Sez you.

                      Your opinion only, and, like the “human heart,” really isn’t a standard to judge anything factual.

                      Once again, can’t refute my point, so you just insult it. Troll Tactics 101 – If you can’t disprove the message, attack the messenger.

                    • RightThinkingOne December 4th, 2016 at 19:57

                      I know that there is this “right” to desecrate our flag. One has a right to not take a bath, burp and fart in public, be foul-mouthed, etc. Same thing: Anyone who desecrates a flag is a low-bred, rude, vulgar, ungrateful, ugly reprobate.

                    • bpollen December 4th, 2016 at 19:59

                      Can’t refute, so you deride. How very Trollish.

                    • RightThinkingOne December 4th, 2016 at 20:03

                      No. You are wrong.

                      First of all, the decision – brought to the court by a card carrying member of the Communist Party – was wrong.

                      Next, it is patently obvious that flag desecration is NOT related to the first amendment, any more than one demanding to be able to walk nude down public streets is as a matter of “free expression/speech.”

                      Finally, since it is now a “right,” it is obvious that anyone who does this is scum.

                    • bpollen December 4th, 2016 at 20:06

                      “No. You are wrong.”

                      Prove it. Unless or until you do, your statement is BS.

    • muffler November 29th, 2016 at 16:36

      It’s a micro trigger to some people… its yet another one of those things that doesn’t really hurt anyone, is done generally to your own bought property, is usually made in china now, but triggers the idea that patriotism can 1) be beaten into you and 2) free speech is limited to what “someone else” says you can say or do based on their own emotions. “Who do you chose to decide for you what you can say? No one? You can think of no one to decide for you? I had no idea!”

      • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 20:29

        It does hurt many. And deeply.

        • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 22:38

          Freedom of speech sometimes hurts.

          • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 23:18

            Unrelated. Deflection.

            • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 23:27

              Not at all. Freedom of speech means that you are not going to like the speech of some people. You are not free to quell that speech.

              • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 23:34

                The Court never should have even taken that case. Public flag desecration was illegal in 48 states. It should have remained with the states. Maybe, with a Court that adheres to Original Understanding, we can return the appropriate power to the states.

                • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 23:50

                  Like the legalization of marijuana? That will be under attack by your so called power to the states.

                  • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 01:19

                    Unrelated.

                    • Snick1946 November 30th, 2016 at 09:41

                      Notice a pattern here? Everything not serving this poster’s purpose is ‘unrelated’.

                    • Jack E Raynbeau November 30th, 2016 at 10:58

                      It’s a states rights issue.

                    • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 21:01

                      Yes.

                • fahvel November 30th, 2016 at 04:20

                  are you nuts? how can what you think is an inviolable symbol be turned over the individual states if it the biggie on a national scale – living in a small bubble seems to be squeezing your head.

                  • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 20:52

                    It is not part of the First Amendment, any more than public obscenities and pornography are, of course.

                    To claim that desecrating the flag in public is a “right” is to pervert and profane the First Amendment, of course.

                    • William December 1st, 2016 at 00:19

                      “It is not part of the First Amendment, any more than public obscenities and pornography are, of course”.
                      Good point.
                      So when exactly is Mrs Trump the lesbian porn actress getting arrested?

                    • RightThinkingOne December 1st, 2016 at 00:27

                      Deflection.

                      Typical.

                    • William December 1st, 2016 at 00:38

                      You are the one deflecting with your stupid porn analogy. Flag burning is completely legal as established by the first amendment and reinforced by a 5–4 decision of the Supreme Court. You are the one deflecting with stupid and completely unrelated nonsense while ignoring the law of the land.

                    • RightThinkingOne December 1st, 2016 at 01:12

                      I know it is “legal.” But it is wrong. It should be up to the respective states.

                      To claim that it is free speech makes a mockery, a travesty, of our First Amendment. It is actually absurd.

                    • William December 1st, 2016 at 01:20

                      Just because YOU think it’s wrong has absolutely no bearing or influence on any part of the bill of rights or the Supreme court and its adjudication that burning a flag is completely within the scope of individual freedom granted by the first amendment.
                      In other words, you can sh*t in one hand, drop your opinion in the other and put them together, and get sh*t. IE your opinion doesn’t change the law. In other words, the citizens of this nation can burn all the flags they want your opinion notwithstanding. You don’t actually count.

                    • RightThinkingOne December 1st, 2016 at 01:24

                      It is not what “I think.” It is an understanding of the Original Understanding and Rule of Law.

                    • William December 1st, 2016 at 09:09

                      …and finally. Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha. Looks like Cheeto-Hitler flipped again huh? https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e4f024d2c5fba47e586f2b1c9326a4d595ca54b261eb13a4ea8142301cb9e65e.jpg

                    • RightThinkingOne December 1st, 2016 at 18:41

                      If that is a real “tweet,” then he is wrong.

                      But this is not about Trump. You seem very agitated about his becoming the next president.

                • oldfart November 30th, 2016 at 10:02

                  Operative word…was.
                  Such a cry baby.

        • Snick1946 November 30th, 2016 at 09:40

          Only if you let it. Get over your obsession.

          • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 21:01

            It is not related to an “obsession,” of course. But I know that tactic: Don’t discuss, diagnose! Stalin actually started it.

    • Red Mann November 29th, 2016 at 20:08

      The one that gets me is when they claim it “disrespects” our troops and their sacrifice. I point out that when I took an oath upon enlistment it wasn’t to a flag or an office, it was to uphold the Constitution and that Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, so I was upholding the right to burn a flag. I also point out that freedom of speech isn’t freedom of speech you like or approve of, but speech that you detest and firmly disagree with, Of course that’s way too hard for some to understand.

    • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 20:28

      What is so “upsetting?”

      Talk to some mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, sons and daughters of dead soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines whose coffins are draped in that flag.

      • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 22:39

        So what? We either have free speech or we don’t.

        • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 23:19

          Yes, you are free to hate, show disrespect, offend people whose family member died for our nation, spout vileness, etc.

          • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 23:30

            Now you are beginning to understand freedom of speech. I tend to not do it even though I am free to do so. BTW, I took the oath of a Marine. I vowed to defend the Constitution. It meant that I would hear things that I did not like. I’m fine with that. Is this a great country, or what?

            • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 23:36

              Please do not USE your military service to buttress your point. I do not use mine.

              • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 23:49

                It didn’t buttress my point. It explained my oath. I took no oath to a flag.

                • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 01:19

                  One should not desecrate the flag. It is vulgar, base, unseemly and repugnant.

                  • Snick1946 November 30th, 2016 at 09:39

                    You obviously believe in the American Civil Religion. God chose our nation for a special purpose with Washington as his prophet. The constitution is divinely inspired, voting is a blessed Sacrament (so we can’t let some people participate) And the flag is the holy of holiest.It has a life of it’s own, it is a living thing.

                    All bullshit.

                    • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 21:00

                      Please calm down.

                  • Jack E Raynbeau November 30th, 2016 at 10:59

                    Your opinion is noted.

      • William November 30th, 2016 at 09:30

        I served twenty years six months and thirteen days. My Dad had a flag draped on his coffin, so did his and generations before. My brother had one on his. I’ll have one on mine. I’m not upset over anyone burning a flag. I am upset by Nazi-freak right wing idiots who want to interfere with the first amendment. BTW, not during any of my 11 deployments did I find myself fighting for a Constitutional right. That fighting for the flag BS is some weird mantra made up by right wing chickenhawks who never donned a uniform. Your contention is nearly as inane as your B-movie, senile actor avatar.

      • whatthe46 December 1st, 2016 at 00:15

        the freedoms we enjoy are the freedoms that they fought and died for. you don’t get to speak for them.

  2. Buford2k11 November 29th, 2016 at 16:10

    blue dog asshole…

  3. bpollen November 29th, 2016 at 16:11

    Hey, Joe! Guess what? They will probably FIGHT BACK. And guess who is MOST apt to go to jail for assault?

  4. Willys41 November 29th, 2016 at 17:57

    Well, this is West Virginia “Democrat” so I can’t say I’m real surprised.

  5. Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 20:12

    Be careful, Senator. There’s probably more than one fool out there just itching to exercise his 2nd Amendment rights immediately after exercising his 1st Amendment rights.

    • Bite-My-Bippy November 29th, 2016 at 23:34

      Lot of angry upset folks. Stokin’ the fire cowboy? I’m thinkin’ Senator Joe just might be crusin’ for a brusin’ with talk like that.

      • Jack E Raynbeau November 29th, 2016 at 23:53

        Yep. I took it as a challenge. Sad that I’m too old to physically engage but OTOH I’m old enough to have little to lose.

  6. RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 20:27

    The so-called “right” to publicly burn our flag is a PERVERSION of the First Amendment.

    Most people do not know that it was a COMMUNIST who brought it to the Supreme Court. No, not someone with some “communist tendencies,” but a Party member.

    It fits.

    • dewired4u November 29th, 2016 at 21:59

      Hey Sparky here in good ol America we all have the same rights even commies. I can buy a flag and do any thing I want with it like burn it, patch my jeans, make a rug or throw it in the trash and it’s none of yours or the governments business. The flag stands for freedom even the ones we find objectionable.

      • RightThinkingOne November 29th, 2016 at 23:15

        Yes, Communists have the right to hate our nation. We all know that.

        • dewired4u November 30th, 2016 at 00:22

          What’s with this we crap, you have a mouse in your pocket?

          • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 01:24

            It is clear: Communists and Socialists have a right to hate our nation, and to preach against our founding principles.

            • robert November 30th, 2016 at 05:58

              All that went out the window with declared wars. At least this issue was defended by the supreme court,take it up with them….

              • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 20:52

                I know the ruling. Read what I wrote. I know it is a “right.”

            • Um Cara November 30th, 2016 at 09:09

              Of course commies and socialists have that right, so do the rest of us. Hell, the Republican presidential elect’s campaign slogan was “America sucks”. Right wing kooks ate it up!

              • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 20:59

                As I wrote: There is no law against hating our nation, and Communists and Socialists do.

            • oldfart November 30th, 2016 at 10:19

              Drape yourself in your precious flag
              and go cry on the steps of the supreme court…
              or maybe in front of the white house.
              Better yet build yourself a time machine and go back to the 50’s.
              But please continue to celebrate your right to blather on about the good old days.

              • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 21:01

                Yes, the flag is precious.

    • fahvel November 30th, 2016 at 04:16

      read your own history – jefferson was forever plagued by weird colonists who wanted a form of equality by distributing everything equally amongst the people. Old jeff wanted nothing but white land/slave owning mostly virginians to have the right to vote – considering the negro was inferior and needed taking care of, women incompetent and the working man uneducated – so he justified all the sht in the constitution to fit for the upper !%. no difference in the usa today.

      • RightThinkingOne November 30th, 2016 at 20:50

        Yes, Jefferson would be repulsed by such colonists. He knew that there was a “natural aristocracy.”

        Please look up the term “historical presentism.” That is because you are using it. One cannot understand the past unless one abandons that.

  7. Snick1946 November 29th, 2016 at 22:52

    Joe’s daughter is the CEO who is trying to justify outrageous price gouging on life saving drugs her company peddles. He has always been a deep blue dog Democrat. Yeah he’s a vote in the caucus and all that. I think I’d rather see him gone next cycle.

  8. Bite-My-Bippy November 29th, 2016 at 23:39

    Alt-Right really needs to send a better troll over here. Their resident agent is sorely lacking in the requisite skills. Not too bright. Trump University grad no doubt. Sort of… impotent and shootin’ blanks.

Leave a Reply