Skip to comments.
Bill Would Withhold Tax Dollars from Those Who Ban American Flag
CNS News ^
| 13 Nov 01
| Jeff Johnson
Posted on 11/13/2001 9:40:00 AM PST by titleist975
Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) says Congress has no obligation to financially support groups that adopt policies banning the display of the American flag during the U.S. war on terrorism. He has introduced the "Freedom to be a Patriot Act," which would ban federal funds from going to any individual or organization that "prohibits the patriotic display of the flag of the United States."~~ In a "Dear Colleague" letter distributed to other members of Congress, Tancredo wrote, "There is no reason to offer any taxpayer support, at any level, to those who do not believe in America enough to allow her flag to waive proud and free." He says his approach is the right way to handle the problem because the bill would not stop any person or group from exercising their 1st Amendment right to free speech, nor would it stop private businesses from setting policies banning flag displays on their premises. "What it will do," Tancredo wrote, "is remove any taxpayer dollars from flowing to an individual or organization that chooses to ban the patriotic display of the Stars and Stripes." More to come. (CNSNews.com Capitol Hill Correspondent Jeff Johnson filed this story.)
TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
He has my vote. Wonder if this would cut off any federal money for the Boulder library?
To: titleist975
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) says Congress has no obligation to financially support groups that adopt policies banning the display of the American flag during the U.S. war on terrorism. Congress has no obligation to financially support groups AT ALL.
In fact, the Constitution doesn't even allow most of it.
But what's the harm in a little socialism if it lets you seem a bit more patriotic?
Right?
2
posted on
11/13/2001 9:44:22 AM PST
by
OWK
To: titleist975
OOOOhhhhh, just think of the hue and cry from the lib community. Hehehehe, hit 'em where hit hurts. I just wonder whether it will pass and if Bush will sign it?
Yeah, they gonna cry "Free speech violation", "they are seeking to penalize my free speech" Well...Congress giveth, they also may take away...
To: OWK
Hell, some of these toads mouthing off (like professors) should be tried for sedition anyway and deported.
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
Comment #6 Removed by Moderator
To: Northman
You might be right. But, a public library that displays dozens of penises and refuses to fly the flag should have it's funding taken away.
To: el_texicano
I agree. Every two-thirds of all my professors have been little Paul Wellstones.
To: Northman
This is just like the "freedom of religion" issue. No one is REQUIRING you to do anything. But, just like religion, no one can PROHIBIT you from doing it IF YOU CHOOSE. Easy enough for you?
9
posted on
11/13/2001 10:32:42 AM PST
by
goodieD
To: titleist975
I don't think this bill would require anybody to fly a flag, it would keep places that get federal money from banning flying of flags. Like wearing a flag pin, having a flag in your office, or on your car.
To: titleist975
I think I really like Tom Tancredo! What a GREAT and HONEST idea! It's a reality check of the best sort. The choice remains, but with a semblance of responsibility attached. If our hard earned, and I MEAN hard earned tax dollars are going to be used to support certain efforts or organizations here on our homeland, at least, then by gosh those on the receiving end had better now be ANTI-AMERICAN! I don't WANT my tax dollars supporting a library somewhere where ceramin penis's are hung on a noose as art but the American flag is not because it might offend sensibilities! OFFEND SENSIBILITIES? Of who??????
11
posted on
11/13/2001 10:39:48 AM PST
by
Republic
Comment #12 Removed by Moderator
To: titleist975
This bill would not require anyone to fly the flag. It would prevent groups which are offended by the symbol of this country from getting our tax dollars. Seems more than fair to me.
They can set up private schools and libraries. No one who hates this country or goes into a frenzy at the sight of the SYMBOL of this country is forced to remain here.
13
posted on
11/13/2001 10:41:31 AM PST
by
Dante3
Comment #14 Removed by Moderator
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
Comment #16 Removed by Moderator
To: Northman
Should the "Freedom to be a Patriot Act" be more accurately titled "Required to be a Patriot Act?" Does the flag really mean anything if we are forced to fly it?Read the post again. No one will be forced to do anything. Don't want to fly it? Don't. Want to? Go ahead.
That's it. Now if the money flows or not is a completely different question.
17
posted on
11/13/2001 10:51:00 AM PST
by
dpa5923
To: tex-oma
Gish-if you can't read my typos, just ignore my posts! It should have read NOT instead of NOW ( be anti-American ).
18
posted on
11/13/2001 11:07:41 AM PST
by
Republic
Comment #19 Removed by Moderator
Comment #20 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson