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

Skip to comments.

On Bainbridge, Reciting Pledge Makes Some Edgy
kitsapsun.com ^ | September 9, 2006 | Rachel Pritchett

Posted on 09/10/2006 1:28:12 AM PDT by lil varmint

On Bainbridge, Reciting Pledge Makes Some Edgy
City council finds itself divided and digging in on both sides of the dispute.

More people on the island are entering the debate about whether the Pledge of Allegiance should be recited at City Council meetings -- something that hasn't been done until recently.

The local chamber of commerce, fearing widespread media attention, has sent out an e-mail urging city and chamber leaders to back Old Glory. And Council member Jim Llewellyn, who personally opposes the practice introduced by Councilman Bill Knobloch, doesn't appear to be backing down.

Last week, Llewellyn polled his colleagues by e-mail about whether the Pledge has a place at City Council meetings. He and at least two others -- Nezam Tooloee and Kjell Stoknes -- said no. A stiff statement supporting the Pledge and condemning the councilmen's stances was issued soon after from the local American Legion adjunct.

An article appeared in the Kitsap Sun.

On Wednesday, Bainbridge Island Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Kevin Dwyer sent an e-mail to city leaders and chamber members urging them to stand up for the flag, for the community's sake.

"We would like to discourage you from taking a negative stand against the Pledge of Allegiance. Although you personally may have a strong opinion against the current national administration ... we think the publicity surrounding such a stand would do more harm than good for you and the community at large," Dwyer wrote.

"Negative press reports that more than likely will come out as (a) result of a stand against the pledge could have unintended consequences for the business community and the community as a whole -- suggesting that Bainbridge Islanders are ultra-liberal and against the war, the Bush Administration, etc.," he stated.

But an e-mail also sent Wednesday from Llewellyn to City Council members and others suggested he is not backing down from efforts to seek wider control over whether it's said, and when.

The Pledge of Allegiance is not on the upcoming meeting's agenda. The e-mail was obtained by the Kitsap Sun through a request to the city.

"I will expect NOTHING between "Call to Order" and "Additions/deletions" except "Roll Call" unless agreed to by consent of Council chair and mayor -- prior to the meeting. This has been accepted protocol for the last 15 years, except for the recent couple months. Anything not on the agenda should be added (by consensus) at the "Additions/deletions" part of the agenda," Llewellyn wrote.

It is not known whether more than three of the seven-member Council support or don't support recitation of the pledge, or whether a consensus could be reached.

Repeated efforts to reach Llewellyn on Friday were not successful. But Knobloch, contacted on Friday, seemed to prefer a more permanent place for the pledge at Council meetings.

"I would hope that as a council, together, we make this a permanent part of the agenda," he said....


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: allegiance; bds; flag; pledge
This is what, on the eve on the 9/11 anniversary, my City Council worries about. This article is a follow up to the article, "3 BI Councilmen Flag Their Support for Reciting Pledge", which states, "...Councilman Jim Llewellyn polled his colleagues on the practice in an e-mail. He appeared against it. 'I pledged allegiance plenty in grade school. I served my country for six years in the U.S. Army Reserve. And, finally, my concept of ‘God’ is probably different than yours, thereby making that reference inappropriate,' he wrote. A later exchange from Llewellyn: 'If George Bush needs to wrap himself in the flag, I’m sure as hell not going to pledge allegiance to THAT flag.'..."

You may remember that Bainbridge Island as the place where an Iraqi Freedom veteran was booed while participating in our Fourth of July parade a couple years ago.

This is my first posting. Thanks for being an island of sanity for me, a resident of, at times, what seems to be an island of insanity.

1 posted on 09/10/2006 1:28:13 AM PDT by lil varmint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lil varmint
Maybe I'm biased, but I just don't recall this kind of thing during the Clinton or Carter Administrations--the hatred of America because one doesn't like the sitting President's politics.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me Democrats define themselves by their ability to find ways to bash their country, to mock its traditions, and to laugh at patriotism; and of course by their instantaneous protest when someone points to these as evidence that maybe they're not the most America-loving folks around.

I don't have strong feelings for or against the Pledge, which was written by a socialist who thought teaching obedience to the state a good thing. What I find curious is that this kind of thing--and the 9/11 tv movie--get liberals really cranked up, as do protests in public. It's the ordinary things they fear the most. They're like children, always needing to bitch about something most people don't care about, or just accept, in order to show they're "special". When it comes to actually working and making their supposed love of "liberty" real, though, they're off looking for something else to bitch about.

2 posted on 09/10/2006 1:38:12 AM PDT by Darkwolf377
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint
A later exchange from Llewellyn: 'If George Bush needs to wrap himself in the flag, I’m sure as hell not going to pledge allegiance to THAT flag.'..."

What a child. Sounds like he still has the right to make an A$$ out of himself in public. Seems like freedom of speech and the country are doing just fine under GW Bush.

3 posted on 09/10/2006 1:48:12 AM PDT by BallyBill (Serial Hit-N-Run poster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint

Bainbridge is a pathetic nest of ultra liberal busy bodies, who's principal interest in life is sticking their noses in other peoples business. The whole island is inhabited by people who barely tolerate the large Military community.


4 posted on 09/10/2006 2:17:30 AM PDT by adamsjas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint
...an island of insanity.

Seems the Liberals all live on that (Conceptual) Island, anyway.

The Religion Of Pieces

Made Especially for the Fifth Anniversary of 9-11.

5 Minute Video

Warning: Graphic Content

5 posted on 09/10/2006 2:56:30 AM PDT by lmr (The answers to life don't involve complex solutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
I don't have strong feelings for or against the Pledge, which was written by a socialist who thought teaching obedience to the state a good thing.
You of course have a point, but the amendment of the pledge by Eisenhower to limit the pledge with the words, "under God" does IMHO make an important difference.

6 posted on 09/10/2006 3:20:46 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint
'If George Bush needs to wrap himself in the flag, I’m sure as hell not going to pledge allegiance to THAT flag.'..."

This is more than a fundamental difference in political philosophy. While I'm sure the author of the statement would salute the same flag if Kerry was wrapped up in it, so would I. I may not respect someone who becomes president, but they are our commander in chief. I can be critical of positions without making it a case for the entire nation.

Ever since 2000, it's been Republicans v Sore Losers. Of course, they're being cheered on; the same 2006 election story is running again on CNN Headline news - the same exact story that has been running for a week. It is such the same story, such a pre 9/11 story, that it's a wonder it happens today. You really have to have a complete and utter lack of ideas, direction and vision to stay with 'we just hate Bush.'
7 posted on 09/10/2006 3:23:57 AM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377; fporretto; walford; rwfromkansas; Natural Law; Old Professer; RJCogburn; Jim Noble; ...
it seems to me Democrats define themselves by their ability to find ways to bash their country, to mock its traditions, and to laugh at patriotism;
The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR. That is, liberalism is pure spin. As such liberalism treats newspapers and other publicity organs as a deity. That would be quite impossible if the "various publicity organs" were actually "various" - but their interest lies in going along and getting along with each other and so they quite self-consciously limit their competition.

Above all journalism sells the idea that journalism is an the important thing. In that sense journalism is a single entity, "the news" (rather than what each individual news report legitimately is, "some news").

It is superficial vainglory to suppose that journalism - which is after all a limited view of reality which systematically averts its gaze from the mundane 99.99% of reality which is neither unusual nor especially exciting or unsettling - is the important thing. Tradition doesn't change every day; how can it merit the attention of the "important" journalist who is busy trying to grab our attention today? Disrespecting tradition gets attention, and attention of the public is the journalist's stock in trade.

Journalism is arrogant to promote the conceit of its own preeminent importance, and to presume to define objectivity, and to presume to define "moderation" as agreement with its own limited and self-interested perspective.

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . . It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith

8 posted on 09/10/2006 3:59:02 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

BTTT


9 posted on 09/10/2006 4:16:01 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1698570/posts
10 posted on 09/10/2006 4:22:10 AM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint

What a pissant. Did it ever occur to him to just not say the pledge while the others do? Just to shut his trap so things could move along? Lefties are so incredibly selfish.


11 posted on 09/10/2006 5:03:39 AM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint

If an elected body isn't willing to pledge allegiance to the flag, the question is to whom they do pledge their allegiance?


12 posted on 09/10/2006 5:07:23 AM PDT by WorkingClassFilth (Ever learning . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanChef

Exactly. I could respect a liberal who truly believed that it was wrong for him to stand up and say the pledge. Such a person should not be ashamed of his position and proudly and defiantly stay seated or quiet during the pledge. If he were a true believer, he shouldn't be ashamed of his position. There is no valid argument for getting rid of saying the pledge for all. Even if we were to accept that his fragile ego couldn't stand the attention he would get for not reciting the pledge in a sea of reciters, then why is he drawing so much more attention to himself by filing lawsuits and requests to eliminate the pledge for everyone?


13 posted on 09/10/2006 5:42:49 AM PDT by sportutegrl (A person is a person, no matter how small. (Dr. Seuss))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

Since when does the arrogant wishes of a few become the rule of majority.

He's had his little tantrum.

Continue as usual.


14 posted on 09/10/2006 5:59:48 AM PDT by imintrouble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lil varmint

This is painful to read, but it also works to clear the dust from the line between those who will fight for America out of love for our country and those who will side with our enemies out of hatred for George Bush.


LOVE OF COUNTRY WILL WIN NOW AS IT ALWAYS HAS AND ALWAYS WILL.


15 posted on 09/10/2006 6:54:47 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (DON'T BELIEVE PESSIMISM: FEELINGS ARE FOR LOVE SONGS. FACTS ARE FOR PREDICTING WHO WINS IN NOV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
If an elected body isn't willing to pledge allegiance to the flag, the question is to whom they do pledge their allegiance?

Good point!
They probably are pledging hopes that this controversy will soon fade and they'll be re-elected. It is the responsbility of dutiful citizens to hold them accountable.

16 posted on 09/10/2006 7:42:17 AM PDT by vox_freedom (Matthew 5:37 But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Propaganda begins with PR.
17 posted on 09/11/2006 9:09:02 AM PDT by auboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

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.

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