Janet Nguyen On The Flag And Freedom

This came over the transom yesterday fro Garden Grove Councilwoman (and potential 1st Supervisor District candidate) Janet Nguyen:

Fly That Flag !! Fly It High !!

By Councilmember Janet Nguyen

Recently, the United States Senate again failed to pass a constitutional amendment banning the desecration of our nation's flag. The debate hinged on the freedom of speech, guaranteed under the First Amendment to our Constitution.

While protecting freedom is something that I have passionately championed, I believe that protecting our flag from desecration is not necessarily equivalent to curtailing one of our fundamental rights.  I believe that our legal system can be trusted to distinguish between self-expression and desecration. After all, we have similarly broad concepts, such as the right to privacy, that we must continually re-visit and re-define for ourselves as a society, and that process has not led to wholesale erosion of our personal freedom.  With the July 4th celebration coming tomorrow, it is, perhaps, appropriate to remind ourselves why our national flag deserves more respect, and protection from desecration.

As victims of Communism, my family and I deeply value the ideals of democracy and personal freedom that the United States offers. My father, a Veteran in the South Vietnamese Army, fought in the jungles of Vietnam alongside American GIs seeking to protect that freedom. Thirty years later, my brother, a proud United States Marine, fought alongside his fellow Americans when we went to Iraq to fight for the Iraqi people's freedom. Obviously, the Nguyen Family does not take our freedom for granted.  And our experience is not unique.  Orange County's population is made up of a sizeable number of immigrants, who have come to the U.S. seeking the personal liberty that our flag stands for.  Whether here or flying over our protected territories overseas, our flag gives hope to people everywhere that true opportunity and self-fulfillment can only exist when all people are protected equally under the law.

Therefore, our flag stands for the fundamental principle that our Founding Fathers had fought to establish, that all Men are created equal.  This simple, but powerful, declaration is beloved and cherished by all Americans, and admired all over the world.  It is an outrage and affront to the men and women, who have perished defending our flag and preserving Liberty and Democracy, to argue that the desecration of our flag is merely another form of self-expression.

How unfitting is the Senate's vote when in the next few days we will be observing Independence Day.  Observing Independence Day should not only be a festive time for gatherings of friends and families, but should also be a time for all of us to celebrate and reflect on the meanings of our Declaration of Independence.

The stars and stripes represent a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Throughout our history, we have struggled and fought for greater respect for individual civil rights throughout the world. 

This Fourth of July, amidst this troubled time, we should take time to recognize the many soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice, and those who are still making the sacrifice, in our continuing fight to protect the world against tyranny.  Their selfless sacrifice represents the essence of the American sprit, and the flag they defend with their lives is the embodiment of that sacrifice.  This is why the flag deserves to be treated better by the U.S. Senate.

Comments

example #1 on why rove and co. brought this thing up. gives congressional and local candidates something to blabber about in the midst of a year where all of their friends are in trouble. janet, you have no say in such issues. send out a press release that is relevant to the people of garden grove.

every who just read that is dumber for doing so. i reward you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul

[Flag Waver]

Janet. I appreciate your zeal in defending our nation's flag against desecration. The irony of the rights you strongly defend is the ability to burn one of those symbols. I don't approve of burning the flag and I believe individuals who burn flags to bring attention to their causes are only proving the cause impotent. And bear no further consideration.

I worry about the mentality of those who prize icons over civil liberties. I believe it is in contrast to the ideals set forth by our Founding Fathers as detailed in the previous thread on this blog regarding the Declaration of Independence.

Let's not stop at desecrating the flag, let's move on to this one after we've protected the flag.

[Fly em if you got em]

247pm Anon,

I understand that you might not agree with Janet but why would you ask for God to have mercy on her soul? And using the small case "g" for god I wonder exactly which "god" you are refering to.

[JozefColomy]

So if burning a flag is freedom of "speech", can I set a car on fire and have it still be freedom of "speech"? Whata about killing someone? I mean, I'm only "expressing myself", right?

People who claim that it is every citizen's right to burn a flag need to take their backward logic and move out of my and every other decent American's United States.

[Mike Lawson]

JozefColomy....that's silly.

Yes, you can set YOUR car on fire and it would be freedom of speech.

Your rights are limited by the rights of others...killing somone infringes on someone elses rights. This is basic civics. COME ON!

[Flag Waver]

Jose. You can absolutely set your car on fire. Just get ready for a charge of arson.

If we start believing desecration of a piece of cloth is more sacred than the rights it represents we have problems as a society that portends to hold the liberties of the individual sacred.

How about any of these as desecration? Should these individuals be prosecuted as well?

[Spanky]

The real question is what does Janet Nguyen -- and those who align themselves with her -- believe is just punishment for someone who burns a flag?

Isn't this a property rights question? Who is Janet Nguyen to tell us what we can and can't do with our own property?

Most of us see right through people like Janet Nguyen. She spends a short time on the GG council with its meager stipend and then hopes to move on up the food chain to a county supervisor with a six figure salary.

Sorry, Ms. Nguyen, you're not fooling anyone.

[Spanky]

I take that back.

Janet Nguyen is fooling those of us who can't think their way out of a wet paper bag.

[JozefColomy]

So burning a car constitutes arson, but not a flag? But I was only "expressing" myself...just like I would be doing by burning a flag. Why is it any different?

[JozefColomy]

Furthermore, why would anyone cherish the "right" to burn an American flag unless they hated America? Why do you include burning a flag in "civil liberties"?

Here, try to outwit this logic: I find it offensive that you're burning the flag, much like a black person would if they had the n-bomb dropped on them. Since I, as well as others, shouldn't you all be sensitive to that and make anti-flag burning laws? I mean, hate crimes are separated from other crimes because of their content, why not flag-burning?

[Janet Rocks!]

Why do some of you so strongly opposed to Janet? Are you scorned lovers? Woman haters? Anti-Vietnamise?

[Silence Dogood]

Jozef-

You keep making fatal flaw after fatal flaw in your arguments. You use the bad policy of hate crimes to justify the bad policy that would be a flag burning amendment. I beg you to graduate from high school civics before taking that large shovel of yours (your keyboard) and digging yourself a deeper hole.

[Silence Dogood]

Janet Rocks!-

More race-baiting. I'm starting to recognize a pattern.

[JozefColomy]

How is it any different? I just don't understand how something that offends people, such as racist behavior, can be made illegal, but not flag-burning. Particularly when flag-burning covers an ever broader scope of hate.

Bad policy is a flag-burning amendment? I think the EPA is a bad policy because it stifles business, should that go away? Since when is "good policy" synonomous with "liberals who hate America"?

Janet has shown herself to be the nitwit she truly is. There are more important things to be concerned with than passing a flag burning amendment. I personally support the right of people to burn any flag they want. This is America, not AmeriKKKa.

[Flag Waver]

Jose, a hate crime is aimed at a particular person, or groups of persons, and is usually performed on a person's property. It is seen as a direct threat against that person or group. You know...the whole lynch party thing. The two situations are not even close. You want to burn a cross on your property? Go right ahead...the courts have ruled this protected speech on multiple occasions. You want to burn one in someone's front yard? Then expect to be charged with a hate crime. And arson.

And furthering the arson to expression analogy is ridiculous. You could set a pack of twinkies on fire and get the same penalty as setting a flag on fire. Burning is the crime. Not the object.

Like I said earlier. I worry about the mentality of those who put symbols on a higher pedestal than civil liberties.

Your comparison of the two is almost a non sequituir.

I posted a link detailing examples of the symbol of our flag being used in multiple fashions. Were none of them desecration? Yet you don't say a word about those. So I guess you don't mind that kind of desecration.

[Flag Waver]

The whole flag burning issue is nothing more than a deflection issue being pushed by right wing partisans in Congress to deflect the nations attention away from their dismal failures at governing in both fiscal and foreign policy. Nothing more.

Proving that patriotism truly is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

{247pm Anon,

I understand that you might not agree with Janet but why would you ask for God to have mercy on her soul? And using the small case "g" for god I wonder exactly which "god" you are refering to.}

haven't you seen billy madison? i mean it was on comedy central for free yesterday. or do you only stick to the family section at blockbuster? and no, i dont need to capitalize god, because im sure "God" doesn't care about the punctuation of my comments on a blog. furthermore, what would my religious affiliation have anything to do with this argument? newsflash: you do not own religion. quit trying to make it your own personal property. i guess i wont show up for church next week cause i didnt capitalize god... my bad.

[Mark Leyes]

Pardon me, Mark Leyes here, and I post under my name and resent the insinuation of the cowardly, anonymous idiot who just posted and referred to me.

Apart from being opportunistically jingoistic and a little confusing (what are the "...the meanings (plural?) of our Declaration..."), there is nothing wrong with the piece. And after reading the comments, I am not sure which are supposedly "Janet-hating" or "Asian-envious."

But since the central premise of the post is that it is ME that is both those things, let me just clear up a couple points. First, I have never run against Janet for anything, nor do I plan to. Her questionable positions (or lack of them) on the Garden Grove City Council have caused me to question her (and many others) publicly and, when appropriate, harshly. But she's a big girl and I would remind of kitchens and standing the heat, etc.

As for "Asian Envy," can anyone illuminate what I should be envious of? The infighting? The heavy-handed political machinations that obviously are not breaking in Janet's favor? ....Anyone?

Maybe the poster is envious of something, but ascribing it to me is disingenuous.

Methinks thou dost protest too much....

Mark Leyes
Garden Grove City Council

[calwatch]

There is no epidemic of flag burning. But rest assured there will be in the unlikely event that this amendment is passed and ratified by all the states. This isn't a threat; rather, it's the reaction that some people have when told not to do something - they do the opposite. Childish, sure, but it's best not to plant the seed.

[QXP]

Karl Rove to Garden Grove: All politics is local. No casinos, no revenue. Roll the dice, that's nice! Victims no more, liberators no less.

M. Leyes Re: "Asian envy" and "infighting." Do you believe that Asians should all get along and think alike because they/we are Asians? Look at the infighting in the local GOP.

Janet's post brings back memories of years ago when I attended POW survival school (SERE) where a Navy sailor burned an American flag that set off our (the trainees) ire. Our military still burn/destroy our flag in the name of training.

"Mock interrogators desecrated an American flag, stepped on a copy of the Constitution, and "kicked the Bible around..."

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/29/torture/

Same sex marriage ban and flag desecration ban...talk about a Senate diversion.

[Mark Weez]

You very smart Joe. Why you tear everyone down? Better focus on work hard. You go far.

Oh I'm sorry, my use of bad english reminds of a mailer someone did. Oh ya, that was you during your run for Assembly.

[JozefColomy]

Diversion by "right-wing partisans"? The amendment recieved the vote of 4 Democrats, too. Methinks the only partisanship is on the part of the Democrats.

Why do you all hold so near and dear to your heart the "right" to burn our flag? All this tells me is that liberals do, in fact, hate America. This isn't about holding a symbol over the rights it represents. I'm not advocating taking away peoples' right to protest the administration or anything else. It just seems to me that when citizens of a country start burning the very symbol of that country (read: not a symbol of said country's government, but of the country itself), that is step 1 of the nation falling apart.

Again, I will stress, what would drive someone to burn an American flag if they did not, in fact, hate the United States?

Also, flag waver, yes some of those items on that page were/are desecration of the flag, but the majority of them were very far stretches of the term "desecration".

It also seems to me that most who advocate the preserving of the "right" to burn an American flag also advocate taking away our right to bear arms. That seems truly backward.

I can draw comparisons all day and night, and all you all do is say "quit taking my rights!" and "this isn't America the police state!" and "Bush is Hitler!". You can all hold sacred the "right" to burn an American flag, but just remember that that is what they do in Iran, North Korea, Syria, etc. When Americans start doing our enemies' job for them, I find myself increasingly worried about the perseverance of our great nation.

[Councilwatcher]

"flag desecration ban...talk about a Senate diversion."

You mean that diversion co-sponsored by Sen Hillary Clinton that she voted no on?

[Mr. Asian Envy]

"First, I have never run against Janet for anything, nor do I plan to." .......................Mark Leyes...OCBlog.net June 2006

I can't blame you Mark. She would clean your clock. I don't imagine you will run against Van Tran again either.