Londonderry Flag Flap Revisited

by Steve MacDonald

Bill Ayers on the flagThe lead story in today’s Union Leader is about the Londonderry Flag Flap. The reporting is measured and comforting with a Gee Wally, Leave it to Beaver feel. And that’s fine. It covers the bases, gives the nice folks at Londonderry High and company an opportunity to say shucks, that wasn’t what we meant, but we’ll make the best of it.

I think that they will. Teachable moment, and all that. So I’ve no issue with their response.

But that’s not the only teachable moment here.

The Union Leader’s reference to “with one commenter on a conservative blog calling for “armed patriots” to descend on Londonderry and “occupy the buildings” refers to this blog but why that comment?

It’s incendiary.

Adam Samuels, in a different remark, agrees with me that this is damage control, which is also referenced by the UL. But there are several other comments about how (and I’m paraphrasing) understanding proper flag protocol would have been a better choice than saying that none were permitted, and ain’t that the truth.

While GraniteGrok is not mentioned specifically, the choice of references suggests an overreaction, and I’m sure the flag hating leftists who would sooner step on or burn Old Glory will nod duitfully while ignoring their silence to other more measured “responses” like those of Antifa, BLM, and others.

Stories that don’t get as much ink or fail to address the uncharacteristic quiet from Democrat party officials or leaders when their folks get “fired up.”

Hey, you can’t cover every story, right? I know I can’t.

But I stand by my original point which is that there are cultural tipping points at play (and ample evidence to support that).

1) There are multitudes of stories about every level of the American education industrial complex taking issue with the presence of the American flag because the rules are overwhelmingly set by liberals.

2) University speech codes question the presence of the flag or observe that the use of the word American may be either offensive or make others uncomfortable.

3) Tales about disgruntled veterans taking issue with student ignorance over flag protocol are few and far between but most often are in reference to items one or two.

4) And because it is relevant, disrespecting the flag is still protected by the First Amendment, just ask a liberal.

Puting a cover on the can will only hide the smell if you don’t empty it.

We’ll keep watching.

Leave a Comment

  • roger

    “1) There are multitudes of stories about every level of the American
    education industrial complex taking issue with the presence of the
    American flag because the rules are overwhelmingly set by liberals”

    Really I haven’t read any except on this blog.

    “niversity speech codes question the presence of the flag or observe that
    the use of the word American may be either offensive or make others uncomfortable.”

    Really which ones? UNH I’ve never read that before. Can you provide a citation?

    “Tales about disgruntled veterans taking issue with student ignorance
    over flag protocol are few and far between but most often are in
    reference to items one or two.:

    You mean disgruntled older men don’t sit around and complain alot? Hahaha, this blog had me fooled.

    “And because it is relevant, disrespecting the flag is still protected by the First Amendment, just ask a liberal.”

    You are correct, but this is a SCHOOL and schools can regulate speech under Tinker v. Board of Education and it’s complimentary cases.

  • Nick Martin

    Heh, funny that the comment you reference on the prior post has been deleted. I thought we were all for free expression here?

    Here’s my take: let the crazies like Kevin comment, but moderators and other commentators should stop being so incredibly, stubbornly silent when when they make racist statements or advocate violence (and honestly, I couldn’t tell whether it was tongue-in-cheek). It’s well within the rights of this site’s moderators to call out unacceptable behavior. That doesn’t always mean to delete it, but to acknowledge that it’s out-of-bounds. Instead, you seem to be blaming everyone else for your failure to address it. That’s my opinion.

    Frankly, that’s the reason I keep coming around. The lack of dissenting opinions is sort of by design on a political blog — which is fine. But, when people take it a step too far, the us-versus-them mindset frequently prevents anyone from calling it out.

    • Radical Moderate

      “Frankly, that’s the reason I keep coming around. The lack of dissenting opinions is sort of by design on a political blog”
      – You are a buffoon or a liar to say something like that. If you really have been reading G.G. you would know there are those like myself that hold opposing view points. I am pro choice and I am pro-Union. I agree on the same end points as the writers at G.G., but I have different methods of arriving there. I visit this website because the owners allow me the courtesy of voicing my opinion even though I oppose theirs, UNLIKE the Left. In my mind that’s what a true American is. Someone that still believes in the credo that, although I don’t agree with what you say, I will fight to the death for your right to say it. Not only that “Roger” but they are using their own money to allow you and I to have a public forum! At least say “Thank you” before you spit in their face!
      You are obviously a “child” in the historical sense. You rail against the First Amendment rights of those you oppose, when just a few decades ago the ACLU were fighting for the rights of the KKK’s to speak, because they understood that eventually, if they take your opponents rights to speak away, that its just a matter of time before they take yours away too. Unfortunately, I’m sure that’s a concept that children like you just simply fail to grasp at this point in your life.
      Remember what Santayana said…
      “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
      It’s a shame that great men like him had to suffer only to transmit their hard earned lessons through the vacuum of space and time only for worthless people like you to callously cast it aside.
      And one last thing….
      “F” you Roger, and the horse your rode in on! (sorry moderators)

      • Radical Moderate

        And this goes for Nick as well!

        • Radical Moderate

          Firstly, to “author” a post is completely different than “responding” to a post.
          If you “author” a post that would mean the blog you’re posting to would be in essence “supporting” your viewpoint and accepting liability for it. That’s why people like you have their own blogs with a Leftward slant, and conservative blogs have a “Rightward” slant. Its called the “market place of ideas”. If you want a Chevy go to a Chevy dealer, if you want a Ford go to Ford dealer.
          Secondly, in a market place of ideas, my real name is not the issue. What is the real “issue” is, is the “idea” itself and not the “person” presenting it. If you understood anything about history you would know that was how the KGB operated in the Soviet Union. They were more interested in the person, not the idea. if you want to educate yourself read the “Gulag Archipelago”, which should tell you something about your mindset. Debate the IDEA coward!
          There is nothing new under the sun – Ecclesiastes

          • Radical Moderate

            And let me add this; if you had your own blog “Nick” I would gladly post on it and debate you in the marketplace of ideas. Start one and I’m sure many people will post. Unfortunately it seams the NH market doesn’t appear to be interested in debate anymore.
            Much the pity.

          • Nick Martin

            Well, I can see now why you don’t want your reputation attached to your ideas: they’re pretty much useless. I understand very well the idea behind authoring a post — and you’re somehow making my point for me without realizing it. That Chevy/Ford analogy you used is exactly the point I was making. I’m the Chevy fan at your Ford dealership telling you when the marketing hype is lying to you.

            “Secondly, in a market place of ideas, my real name is not the issue.”

            Ah yes, spoken like a true coward. If you don’t want to put your name behind your ideas, are they even worth listening to?

          • Radical Moderate

            Yes, i’ a coward “so called Nick”. Anyone can call themselves anything on the internet “so called Nick” so it really means a lot.
            And I suppose you’re the same “Nick Martin” that was with for UNPROFOR who’s rear end I pulled out of the fire in Yugoslavia in ’96’?
            If it is, you still owe me a drink.

      • Nick Martin

        Really now? You’re claiming GG is a neutral forum for anyone to just come and participate? That may be true to some sense in the comments (until Steve deletes them) — anyone can show up and leave one. But I’ve asked, and have been denied, the ability to author my own post here because I’m not conservative enough. And again, that’s fine. I get it. This is a conservative site. So, that’s my point. And, if you’re going to call people names, at least have the courage to use your real name when you post.

        • granitegrok

          We’re not neutral – our cast is Conservative with small “L” libertarian leanings. Groksters are people that have shown they match my outlook most of the time before they are invited to write on a regular basis.

          Commenters, on the other hand, are welcome to write in the comments as long as they follow Rule #1. Insulting me and mine IN MY HOUSE (which this blog is) on a constant, taunting fashion will get comments deleted. I wouldn’t tolerate it in my real house and I won’t tolerate in my virtual house.

          • Nick Martin

            But, but … the marketplace of ideas??

          • I’ve only ever deleted one published post on GranitGrok in ten years and it was because you (Nick) pointed out (correctly) that it was promoting a group with some very questionable priorities.

            Comments/commenters are another matter. We tolerate just about anything from anyone except persistent use of vulgarity or violating a very narrow interpretation of threats/fighting words.

            Everything else is left for the “community” to debate and I don’t much care how you want to twist that. It’s a better deal than you’re going to get on just about any other privately owned forum.

            We have “banned” maybe one or two commenters in the past, and delete their remarks when they resurface–often using different screen names. We reserve the right to moderate space we pay for at our discretion.

          • Nick Martin

            Fair enough. There was some sarcasm in my “marketplace” comment, aimed at a prior commenter. I understand the willingness to tolerate folks on the other side is somewhat unique here.

            But, I’m still going to keep asking Ed for that apology. …

          • Ed Naile

            But, but…If you had one.
            Talking points aren’t ideas.
            Talking nonsense isn’t an idea or a conversation.
            Tossing around the tired labels depend on is boring and is a worn out technique to limit debate.
            Progressives never labor under the weight of telling the truth or using facts.
            Reverse logic makes a lousy conversation bait.

      • 175jfs

        Well said. Currie would post but he’s burning a flag. Hopefully Antifa’s.

Previous post:

Next post: