Media focusing on flagpole fight

Sun-Sentinel.com ^ | September 13, 2003 | Peter Franceschina

[Pan_Yans Wife]

The flap surrounding George Andres, his flagpole and his crusade to fly Old Glory on that flagpole played across the country on Friday.

Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the controversy, and Andres also did a segment on Lou Dobbs Tonight on CNN.

Andres said his phone began ringing shortly after 6 a.m. Friday.

[robertpaulsen]

Excuse me, but the guy is a jerk. The only reason he's getting any support at all is that the issue is about a flagpole. If it were some lawn ornament, we'd never hear about it.

But this is typical "take it to the court of public opinion" behavior that is all too common. Rather than challenging the homeowner's association rules in court, Mr. Dumba$$ violates the rules and erects a flagpole. Then when they take him to court (and win), he cries that he can't afford to pay their court-awarded legal expenses, and that he may lose his house.

Take it to your priest, doofus. You started it.

[just looking]

What you didn't read in this story, was that the previous Home Owners group ok'd the flag pole. This is a new group that changed the restriction on flag poles.

[cubreporter]

Hope he flies that flag high and proud!!!!

[robertpaulsen]

Assuming that he erected the flagpole when it was OK to do so, and assuming the new restrictions were retroactive, it doesn't change much.

He could have taken it down until the issue was resolved. Obviously, the judge agreed.

I'm not a real big fan of, "I think the rule/law/regulation is stupid, and rather than working to change it, I'll break it, call the press, and act the martyr".

Do you have another link that tells a more complete story?

[sandmanbr]

I'm not a real big fan of, "I think the rule/law/regulation is stupid, and rather than working to change it, I'll break it, call the press, and act the martyr".

Disregarding unjust laws is as American as the Declaration of Independence.

[robertpaulsen]

Hey, no problem. Just suck it up and suffer the consequences is all I'm saying.

Taking personal responsibility for one's actions used to be as American as the Declaration of Independence, also.

[=Intervention=]

You're basing your entire argument on guesswork -- that the law was retroactive (never mind that retroactive laws in themselves have a rather checkered history -- so much so that the Constitution forbids Congress from passing them). Your initial reaction is predictably leftist, and thus, just more media regurgitation. He may be guilty of doing what you described, but until more data flows in, I'll take the little guy's side, not that of the homeowner's association.

[Leatherneck_MT]

The jerks here are people who think that they can tell others what to do on their property.

YOU don't own his property, HE does, the Judge in the case doesn't own his property. HE does.

Get a clue, it's HIS to do with as he wishes.

THAT is what private property is all about. But I guess the Marxists in the crowd don't understand that concept.

[Leatherneck_MT]

" Disregarding unjust laws is as American as the Declaration of Independence."

Amen Brother

[robertpaulsen]

"Get a clue, it's HIS to do with as he wishes."

When you're part of a Homeowners' Association, they set the rules. He knows this.

[Leatherneck_MT]

The rules need to be changed. Civil Disobedience has always been a tool for change.

Homeowners Assn's be damned. They are filled with just as many tin-horn dictators as your average bananna republic.

Rules are made to serve Man, not vice versa.