The Informationist

Special Thanks to Senators Bennett, Lieberman & McConnell

The U.S. Senate has been posturing a lot lately. Last week we saw two disgraceful attempts by leading Democrats to prove that though they may not have any alternative anti-terror strategy, they are prepared to abandon the poorly-executed one currently underway. There are only two good things to say about these motions: both went down to defeat, and neither one would have had much of a bearing on reality anyway.

This week it was the Republicans’ turn to buckle under to the ways of terror. They pushed a vote on an anti-flag burning amendment. Why is this capitulation to terrorism? Because it establishes the concept of a speech code--an abomination that has worked its way across Europe, and that we have so far been able to withstand.

The issue on flag burning is really rather straightforward. It pits two principles against each other:
1. There are some statements, images, and symbolic actions so offensive that society can--and must--prohibit them.
2. Free speech means that society permits all statements, images, and symbolic actions, no matter how offensive.
The U.S. Constitution embraced the second of these principles. Most European countries--and all authoritarian regimes--embrace the first. The problem is that once you condone speech codes, the debate shifts to precisely where to draw the line. Once we have banned cross burning--through an inexcusable 9-0 Supreme Court ruling in which 8 Justices cowered before Clarance Thomas’s personal experience, why not ban flag burning? In fact, why not ban Holocaust denial or religious insensitivity or cartoons featuring the Prophet Mohammed? After all, the principle is the same; the only question is who gets offended and how offended are they.

The U.S. has never experienced a flag-burning epidemic. If we did, we should probably spend a bit of time wondering what message the arsonists were sending, and how we could best respond. Knee-jerk criminalization might not be the best approach, even in such cases.

In the meantime, we are fortunate that all three of these politically-inspired nonsensical bits of Senatorial pandering failed--albeit by a one-vote margin in the third case. And we owe a special debt of gratitude to the ONLY THREE Senators who cast the common-sense votes in all three cases: Bennett (R-UT); Lieberman (D-CT); and McConnell (R-KY). The other 97 should all be ashamed of themselves. I suspect that they are not.

Posted by Bruce Abramson from on 06/27 at 08:01 PM in American Government, Politics, and Domestic Policies