Woman Rescues American Flag – Gets Cuffed and Detained

“This is what was going on at Valdosta University (Valdosta, Georgia) for 3 days…The campus refused to do anything about it … So we decided to get the flag and give it the respect it deserved…We just wanted to remove it and dispose of it properly…The American flag represents our Freedom why would you want to walk on that??? Please repost as much as possible make this go viral people need to see the truth…I wonder Donors of VSU are ok with this blatant disrespect of the flag.”

  • Drunk_by_Noon

    Where are the leftists that are claiming that “free speech is hate speech”?
    Oh, that’s right, it’s only hate speech when social conservatives speak it.
    Coexistence is a lie.

  • Surele Surele


  • Oracle9

    Americans are free to take their own country down – what bothers me the most is that they’ll take us down with it.

    • We have plenty of our own who will happily march in lockstep.

  • disqus_sRQwVYwiEu

    You people in the US really have to take your Country BACK

  • Xanthippa Socrates

    They were right to do that. She was wrong to take property that did not belong to her – but, what is more, she interfered with the freedom to express political opinions of others.

    Flags are political symbols.

    We must retain the right – and protect others who are exercising this right – to use political symbols to make political statements, even if we most vehemently disagree with those political statements.

    Perhaps not ‘even if’, but ‘especially if’!

    By taking the flag, this woman committed the minor crime of theft and the major crime of attempting to silence a political expression she disagreed with.

    It is right that she was charged – and I hope she gets actual jail time for her attempt to impose a ‘heckler’s veto’ on people with whom she disagreed.

    I just wish that the police and judicial system would apply these laws equally instead of properly applying them here while not applying it at all when the victims are conservative/libertarian people!

    • wallyj180

      My first thought was ‘who owns the flag’?

      Even a-holes are allowed to control their property.

      • Xanthippa Socrates


        If I own the flag, I am free to walk on it or burn it.

        Same goes for the Koran and anything else!

        • Drunk_by_Noon

          Although your foundational assumptions are correct (absolute control of your own private property), you both reach incorrect conclusions via the “Drunk by Noon” school of philosophy for societal, religious, and political reciprocity.

          Would you be allowed to burn the homosexual “rainbow flag” on campus?
          If no, then why can’t we prevent their expressions of hatred toward us?
          The artificial set of rules that have been thrust upon us is only used to constrain us and so we should hand them no more tools, even that of ideological consistency, to use against us.
          Conflating the rules we live by, with the rules we should be using to defeat them, serves no higher or better good.

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            That is why I ended my statement with a lament that the unfortunate situation today is that laws are applied selectively and that THAT is the problem.

            The core problem here is not ‘the rules’ – they are good and sound. The problem is that the police and judiciary are not applying them equally to every individual in society. Instead, they apply them correctly to this particular patriot, but would do nothing to protect this patriot’s rights if they were violated by progressives.

            So, let’s not cheer for one of ours for doing the wrong thing, nor vilify the police for properly applying the law. That is crass partisanship and the fastest way to ensure both sides loose their inherent rights.

            Rather, let’s demand that the rules are applied to everybody, regardless of their political views.

          • El Martyachi

            While selective enforcement is surely a problem, it’s not the problem. The problem is an extreme polarization such that everything appears as warfare (it often is). What shared values transcend partisan politics anymore?

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            This extreme polarization, this vilification of ‘the other’, is the result of Cultural Marxism and the identity politics it plays.

            Before we can effect a cure, we must spread knowledge of this corrosive doctrine of the Frankfurt School of political actions so that we and others can learn to recognize the many faces of this monster and take specific steps to stop it.

            Until we do this, this extreme polarization in politics will continue and rabid partisanship will continue to replace principled positions.

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            They (principled positions) have already been replaced and that is the new battle space we have been dealt.
            Yes, we allowed it to incrementally happen, but none-the-less that is where we are.
            We may once more practice tolerance (within reasonable limits) as a victor’s luxury, but only after we have won.

          • dance…dancetotheradio

            Pronounced looz.
            Spelled as Lose.

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            I sit corrected! Thank you!

            My apologies – fingers faster than the brain…I am a very slow thinker. I’ll try to tighten up my editing!

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            I wished I was that good Xanthippa Socrates!
            If I don’t take 8 or 9 passes (for typo suppression) after I have written a long piece, it looks horrible.

          • dance…dancetotheradio

            I’m not a grammar nazi but I play one on TV.
            The lose – loose thing is the one that really bothers me.
            It’s a holdover from having a boss who used to criticize my management skills by memo and couldn’t spell lose correctly.
            One of those bubble memory ‘fuck you boss’ moments that gets forever crystallized in your mind.
            I haven’t seen him in fifteen years but he still lives in my head rent free.
            Everything’s fine though.
            I’ve achieved more than he ever did.

          • The important thing is not to loose your cool over minor stuff.

            If you split an infinitive, however, I will loose all respect for you.

          • dance…dancetotheradio

            I have a feeling that if I wasn’t married I would really like you to loose your respect on me.

          • Awww.

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            …to boldly go where no Mod has gone before!

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            Up with which we shall not put!

          • dance…dancetotheradio

            Is that Magic Al Sharpton?

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            It’s misattributed to Churchill, but the actual wordsmith that cobbled work of linguistic art together should be collecting royalty checks.
            An unnamed editor for “The Strand” magazine gets the credit or blame, but it’s somewhat of a mystery.

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            Good for you, Dance!

            And, to be honest, I am a grammar Nazi too….and love it!

            So, when someone grammar Nazis me (if you excuse the stretching of the expressions), I actually appreciate it – a lot.

            You see, I am also an Aspie – so when somebody says something like “Person likes this more than me.” – I truly and honestly do not know if that person says that Peter likes ‘this’ more than he likes ‘me’ (i.e. the speaker) or if it means that Peter likes ‘this’ more than the speaker likes ‘this’, and is wrongly using ‘me’ instead of ‘I’…

            So, yes – English not my first or second language, plus an Aspie: perfect recipe for a grammar Nazi!

            On a brighter note: many non-native-English-speakers on reddit have thanked ‘all you grammar Nazis out there’ for helping them learn English properly, so they can pass their exams! So, we DO serve a positive purpose!!!!

          • I would not have guessed that English wasn’t your first language Xanthippa.

            The one that always gets me – I can’t remember the name for it – but whan somebody says “As a Canadian, maple syrup is my favorite thing in the world.”

            Don’t you see? This person has just called maple syrup a Canadian. It’s people like that what cause unrest.

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            Thank you, Mamba!

            Oh, there are so many little things like this!

            I have a bit of ‘hearing dyslexia, so, learning English, I had a hard time hearing the difference between ‘kitchen/chicken’, ‘breath/breast’ and many, many more little ‘things’ like this.

            Sometimetimes, I said some very, very ‘deep’ things….accidentally!

            Oh, those were fun days!

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            That’s excellent ‘strategic’ thinking, but insufficiently ‘tactical’.
            One area where we (our side – team good) are lacking is the ability to demonstrate our beliefs in the public space, and I think that is the most immediate problem. It’s not so much a matter of gaining converts, but if only to express that there is a contrary and legitimate view.
            Part of demonstrating our view is not just a display of the validity of our own beliefs, but the demonization OF “team evil”.
            I think we need to do both, and the politics of polarization is a feature and not a bug, and so we need to learn how to use that feature.

          • Xanthippa Socrates

            Thank you for your flattery – always appreciated! But I must admit that I rely heavily on spell-check….

            As for vilification: there is a big difference between vilifying/attacking/destroying a point versus vilifying/attacking/destroying the person making the point.

            And this is where I get back to Cultural Marxism. This corrosive, deeply corrosive political theory of culture actively discourages progressives from attacking the point their political opponents made because even listening to what that point is could pollute and corrupt their own mind.

            It teaches that non-progressives know perfectly well that the progressive message is the only true and right position and that the only reason someone would oppose it or disagree with it is because they are attempting to twist language to trick the progressives to stray from the righteous path for nefarious, nay, self-serving and evil reasons.

            When the other side is afraid to hear, much less think about, the content of your message, it is not workable to have a reasonable, principle-focused discussion with them.

            Pre Frankfurt School, both sides in political debates were trying to win partisan points, of course, but both sides would also try to couch their political positions in principled stances and so, despite partisan skirmishing and political games, it was plausible to have a constructive debate over the best, most principled course of action.

            Here, I am referring back to the times in, say, the US when the President would be the leader of the winning party while the leader of the runner up would be the Vice President…

            Post Marxism, rise of socialism, this began to fade – principled political debate became replaced by progressives, who were quite entrenched in power by the time of the so called ‘New Deal’…already on the downward spiral.

            Then came the Frankfurt School which applied Marxist theories of class warfare not to economics, but to culture. Hence, Cultural Marxism.

            I guess what I am trying to say….

            Yes, having an adversarial system is a feature, not a bug. But both sides need to be able to have a back-and-forth, intelligent and, perhaps most importantly, principled debate. This is not possible when one side believes that everything the other side says is a trick to be ignored and none of their points considered….

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            ” But both sides need to be able to have a back-and-forth, intelligent and, perhaps most importantly, principled debate. This is not possible when one side believes that everything the other side says is a trick to be ignored and none of their points considered…”
            But unfortunately that is EXACTLY where we are today.
            So, being that is our playing field, and the RULES that we are to “play” under, if we do not observe them, we will continue to lose until we have lost everything.

            I think we are so far down the well, we are very close to movements of (political and social) violence, and I don’t mean that metaphorically either.
            The time for reasoned debate is pretty much over.

          • Good points all.

  • Xanthippa Socrates

    Which is precisely why I suggested that we must study Cultural Marxism ourselves, so that we can:

    1. Identify it when we encounter it (there are numerous, subtly different transmutations and different manifestations)

    2. Once we know it – to both recognize it and to counter it, we can identify the particular strand

    3. There are experts teaching this, but nobody knows about them…but once we id the strand encountered, we must learn effective methods that have been developed to counter that precise strand

    4. We must master the language of Cultural Maarxism

    5. Now we put it all together and counter that strand, and present our principled stance in the language the progressive will think is part of ‘their side’ and therefore consider instead of rejecting it reflexively

    It is not easy – it will take a lot of work and time, but, in my never-humble-opinion, this is the only way we can restore our political debate into civilized, principle-focused discussions.

    I see no alternative means of actions that would be constructive…

    • dance…dancetotheradio

      Number 4.
      Now I understand loose.
      Anyway, I think a major part of the battle is to stand up and say who you are.
      I work with people who claim to be socialists and they are astounded when I call them communists.
      They jeer at me calling me a conservative and I say that I am, proudly and with no reservations.
      My conservatism is based on my life’s experience growing up poor.
      I like to point out to these so called socialists how truly conservative they are.
      What was your GPA in school I ask them and they say a number that is above average.
      Do you think you should have to share some of your GPA with other people for the sake of equality?
      No, they say, I earned that.

      • Xanthippa Socrates

        I am sorry about ‘loose’ – I did mean ‘lose’, did not catch it until ‘Dance’ set me straight…it would have been silly to go in and correct at that point.

        Your example with the GPA is excellent, but it does break down in the long run: rather than ‘share’ their points with the less intellectually gifted students, progressives are, more and more, implementing a ‘no evaluations’ system so that they would not have to ‘share’ because there would be no need to….letting them continue to feel intellectually superior and morally superior at the same time.

        Hence, no marks in the lower grades.

        No scoring in kids soccer games (as if they could not count themselves).

        Even some university Profs have instituted giving the whole class the median mark without telling them who earned what….or, alternately, giving everyone 100% without regard to their work.

        When my son was doing a swimming stroke incorrectly during swimming class, the teacher, despite my pleas and jumping up and down, refused to correct him on the grounds that pointing out his mistake might make him feel ‘stigmatized’…

        So, yes – what you suggest is a good first step. But, they will ‘get over it’, rationalize it away and ultimately, it will not sway them and their mindset.

        It will take much more work on our part, but that is a small price to pay for bringing principle-centred discussions into our political arenas!

        • dance…dancetotheradio

          It’s not them so much.
          You can’t change their mindset.
          But, you can change the people they influence.
          My sister is a diehard liberal.
          I don’t let her influence the way my kids think.
          And I won because my sister didn’t have kids.
          Who inherits the world, then?
          My conservative kids.

          • Xanthippa Socrates


            you are preaching to the choir!

            In March, I was invited to Calgary, for the second annual ‘Freedom School’ conference – and the topic of my speech this year was: ‘Inoculating children against Political Correctness’!!!

            My little talk was reasonably well received and it will be available on the internet ‘soon’…. (not in my power….)

            So – yes!!!

            Teach your children well!!!

            But that is not enough: you need to reach not just your kids, but their friends as well. In a positive way, you can teach them to know that there is ‘more’ to search for!!!

            Once they actually and truly know that, we have won!

          • dance…dancetotheradio

            I have to deprogram my kids every once in a while.
            What did they teach you in school today?
            Sit down, the earth is not flat.
            Global warming is a scam.
            We are not racists.
            That’s not even a real word.

          • Xanthippa Socrates


            Actually, when that Gore movie came out, my younger one was about grade 2-3. He LOVED the movie because he was convinced that it was a movie especially created for kids to learn to spot science mistakes in!

            He was glued to it and would yell out: “That’s wrong! I found another one!”

            Like I said, he LOVED that movie!

  • Maggat

    I can’t remember when I’ve so enjoyed reading comments, thanks.