Fair warning – Don’t click through if you don’t want to read something political in nature.
I’m sensitive to those that don’t want to read that sort of thing, hence the fair warning. Nothing bad here, just a curiosity and I’m wondering if other people in the USA are doing the same thing, so testing it on WUWT’s wide readership will likely help answer it.
I have seen upside down US flags twice now in my town. The first time I just thought it was self commentary, now seeing it a second time in a different part of town, I stopped along E. 5th Avenue to get this shot. I wonder, how many people across the United States are doing the same thing after November 6th? In case you don’t know, flying the flag upside down is a sign of distress or emergency. Flying at half staff is respect for the fallen in service of our country. Combined it makes quite a commentary on the Benghazi incident, the fallen soldiers and ambassador, and the election. Checking the Internet I find there are others doing the same thing now, such as this fellow in South Bend, Indiana. Then there’s the story about an upside down half-staff flag at McDonald’s which has angered a lot of veterans even though it was claimed to be a mistake.
The U.S. Flag code says in section 8:
The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.
Some people consider it flag desecration such as is on par with burning it as political commentary.
I wonder though, if this sort of visual political commentary I’ve seen in my town is being quietly repeated elsewhere since many people now see the USA as being in distress?
Two points:
a) one of the advantages of having a Monarch is that patriotism is focussed on her, not on the Head of Government; so that I don’t need to fuss about a Flag as a non-political focus.
b) The US has a lot of really fine, generous warm-hearted and hard-working people. But the two who stood for President this time were, at best, lack-lustre candidates. It would be splendid if the political system allowed more good candidates to step forward. At the moment the qualification seems to be the ability to raise obscenely large amounts of money to spend on nasty derogatory advertisements.
c) A third point (I’ll plan ahead next time): does anyone ever sue for slander or libel as a result of the worst of those advertisements? Or are they somehow protected in law?
On a related note: I am very disappointed with many republicans. Quite a few of them get hung up on trivia and do not engage in any form of useful debate at all. Back in the late 90s I visited a guy (friend of a friend) who was hung up on Clinton. The guy basically lived back in the 50s, opposed to sex ed in the schools, very upset about what Clinton did (not only the cigar thing, but apparently Clinton sold military secrets to the Chinese…) and wanted religion (his religion of course) taught in school. Four days ago, my local newspaper ran the following story: http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/usavalg/Hatet-mot-Obama-7037043.html which claims that some of your fellow citizens believes Obama wears a ring that praises ‘Allah’.
I sympathise with the Republicans. I suspect I would lean heavily towards them come election time, had I been an American. But seeing first hand the kind of arguments some of their supporters bring to the table… I am not impressed. Playing the religious card all the time… Good grief. Superstition mixed with politics is never good (just look at the CAGW crowd, eh?).
It is time to jump on the pro-choice bandwagon. You cannot seriously preach the message of keeping the “guvment” out of everything while asking the government to force raped women to complete a pregnancy (especially not on the belief that “women can shut that whole thing down”). Protect women from getting molested in the first place, and then leave them alone. Most of them are quite able to make rational decisions about their own body without the government getting involved.
Same with gay marriage. It doesn’t concern others. If the gay part of the population want to live like the rest of us, why should we object? It makes absolutely no sense, unless you are gay yourself and envy others who are able to live out their life the way they like to. Besides… It is not as if the gay part of our population will be able to spread their genes dramatically. (not that such an event would pose a problem)
Republicans! You got massacred this election! And look what you were running against! Now look at your own team… Sheesh. Next time, if you give people a rational and educated choice… I am sure that more voters will feel comfortable voting for your team. Biblethumping is not getting you guys anywhere. It is certainly not taking you in the direction of a more enlightened civilization and I hope even more people will realize that come the next election.
In any case: I don’t know what happened at Benghazi. There is a facebook friend that keeps spamming my facebook feed demanding the president tell him “who gave the order to stand down”. And here is my point: I do not care. I file this under “wearing a ring praising Allah” — i.e. garbage. Maybe the Benghazi-case is real. Maybe it isn’t. I am not wasting any calories looking into it myself, because too many cooks have uttered too many insane allegations already. “Wolf”. “Wolf”. No, I won’t bother go and look for my sheep the third time.
Phil. says:
November 9, 2012 at 11:08 am
That link you post is nothing but propaganda. It has long been shown that they pick as choose the data that supports that argument. Just to name a few things they include which they shouldn’t.
Social security. Most people move to red states to retire because the taxes are lower and cost of living is much much lower.
Federal military. Most red states have huge federal military to local populations. The federal military is there to protect everyone and should not be counted as a cost(which they do).
Indian reserves. Red states have overwhelmingly more Indians and Indian population vs normal population.
The list goes on and on. When you remove a lot of the stuff that has nothing to due with the state the numbers switch hard.
You can go here for a more balanced and not completely propaganda view of welfare states.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31910310/The_Biggest_US_Welfare_States?slide=1
I’ve long chuckled at the Chicken Littles worried that the sky is falling…. this is the end of the planet…. They have no perspective, I think… millions and billions of years of climate history…
I am fighting hard not to feel that way about this election: somehow (I don’t know how) we will survive, I tell myself. We always have, so far.
I posted a simple message on RedState stating that I believe that stirring social conservatism with fiscal conservatism is a big mistake. The hard line GOP is looking to scratch all members of Congress — regardless their commitment to the Constitution, a balanced budget, state’s rights — not committed to “pro-life,” “forced birthing” sentiments. Turning women into non-person birthing incubators will not fly, from sea to shining sea. The imposition of the religious beliefs of some on the entire population is more like an American taliban, sharia law writ small — for now.
I have been banned from Red State. So much for a bigger tent, different ideas….
I hope the gleeful headiness the Tea Party has experienced with past wins, disappears and a more reasonable tack is set for future. I do *not* believe America is/wants to be socialist.
….Lady in Red
Sam the First says:
“…the GOP selected as their candidate a stonking hypocrite, an animal abuser, a man who spoke out of both sides of his mouth.”
Some folks are completely clueless, no? And spreading lies about “animal abuse” is insanity. I have transported my dog in exactly the same way: in a locked kennel, fastened to my car roof because it would not fit inside. Get a clue. That is not abouse; I was taking him to the vet.
Romney was by far the most decent politician of this century. He inherited a lot of money, and gave it all to charity because he wanted to make it on his own. And he did. He also gave millions to charity out of his earnings, unlike Biden and Obama, who are both very stingy when it comes to charitable giving. Unlike his opponent, Romney is honest. He saved tens of thousands of jobs that would have been lost in receivership and bankruptcy. Most of those companies came to him asking for help. But some stupid folks are swayed by negative advertising, which they mindlessly buy into like idiocrats.
Romney is the Fixer. To the extent possible in a Republic, he would have largely fixed the country’s fiscal problems. He proposed that everyone must pay at least some taxes. He belonged to the only true American religion, and he is an extremely moral person. That is entirely a good thing. What we now have is a totally amoral president with no respect for the rule of law, an out of control EPA, and an Attorney General who is an accessory to murder.
Welcome to the idiocracy.
The whole “partisan” thing is ridiculous.
Sure Obama is bad, Romney would be equally bad…because the same banks, corporations, and think tanks write the checks for these guys.
We will be screwed as long as our government and economy remain in the hands of a private banking cartel, or more importantly, whoever owns said banking cartel. Yes America is being destroyed, and debt money is the prime weapon in the hands of the International.
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4&feature=player_embedded"
Up here in Canada, I am cheesed off with our $5 Billion deficit. We need to fix that. I hate the fact that voters are stealing from my kids and grandkids. It is imoral!
I can not even comprehend 1.5 trillion. But you know what is really crazy? Most Euopean countries are even worse off.
Well, I always buy the American Flag “forever” postage stamps, which have those meaningless words, like Freedom, Liberty, Equality, and Justice on them.
And ever since the results of the 2008 election became known, I have ALWAYS stuck those stamps upside down; and will continue to do so.
I don’t have an American flag, since I am just an American, but not a citizen. And I also don’t have a flag of the Country of my citizenship, since I consider it extremely rude, and even insulting to fly any such flag here.
I tend to get quite irate, when I see all the cars, and trucks that drive around flying Mexican flags; it is their statement, that California is part of Mexico.
If I had an American flag (I might get one now), I would never fly it both upside down, and at half staff. Those in the Military who defend our right to free speech, and freedom itself, deserve our utmost respect and thanks; and should not be dragged into the middle of political differences.
And just to be pre-emptive; don’t even think about playing any of your race cards on me. Racism, is something I heard about when I first came to the USA. For a while, I thought it might actually disappear. But now we have had two elections where racism was front and center of the platforms of the team that came in ahead of the losing party. My better half doesn’t own a Mexican flag, or a flag of the Republic of Texas, where she was born.
If the election results disturbed you; well then you can’t imagine, what the majority of the American voters just bought into, on your behalf.
Governor Romney’s “47% ” has just become “51%”, so we already went over the cliff, and it’s about a week to late to stop it.
I think this a worthy enterprise; just changed the orientation of my flag.
I’m a veteran. There is nothing wrong with flying the flag upside down, only something wrong with the reason it is being flown upside down.
“The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.”
Do unconstitutional acts carried out by our government qualify, or should we wait to be drowned in debt before we send out a distress signal?
mstickles says:
November 9, 2012 at 11:11 am
“@LKMiller – John Galt is one of the main characters in Ayn Rand’s book Atlas Shrugged. I’ve never read the book; you might check the Wikipedia entry for him (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt). The “Cultural significance” section of the entry explains the phrase “going Galt” (which I’ve been seeing pop up here and there since the election).”
Doh!!
Sorry mstickles, but the fact that you haven’t read Atlas Shrugged is the very reason why my post went right over your head.
The producers, who have been more or less sitting on the sidelines because of the tremendous economic uncertainty imposed by the policies of President Obama and his minions, now will begin to withdraw from the economy. We are tired of producing for an ever increasing proportion of ungrateful takers.
Who is John Galt?
John says:
November 9, 2012 at 8:50 am
But in a democracy, just accept the result.,/i>
John,
The US of A is constitutionally governed as a Representative Republic, not a ‘democracy’. It’s real basic. The rest of your observations were of equal accuracy…
MtK
Going John Galt is a quaint high school level notion, embraced by disenfranchised adults.
@mstickles says:
November 9, 2012 at 11:11 am
FYI “Who is John Galt?” is not a question, it is a statment. You should read the book. Unless you are a true marxist, it will lift the fog from your eyes.
“Takers…”
Interesting that global warming receives such scrutiny and skepticism, but the notion of “takers” is embraced with little question. Where is the “audit” for the notion of “takers”?
The internet is a hothouse incubator for memes.
“Takers” is simply a dishonest replacement for the proper term: thieves.
I suspect that this gesture ties in neatly with the belief that Obama is the USA’s Gorbachev.
“””””…..David Bailey says:
November 9, 2012 at 10:01 am
Since I am British, my view of Obama is irrelevant, but like a lot of Europeans, I cheered when he made it back to the White House. I don’t agree with Obama about climate change, but the previous Bush administration was dangerous, and ended up starting two wars it couldn’t win – basically through arrogance. Romney seemed to inherit some of that same gung-ho approach, so I still feel a lot safer with Obama in control!…..”””””
Well David, you don’t seem that “British” to me.
As for “””””…..Bush administration was dangerous, and ended up starting two wars it couldn’t win – basically through arrogance……”””””
Those two wars were actually started, as is described in the Constitution; by a vote (actually three votes) in the Congress of the United States.
The first of those votes passed by 534:1 , since one member of of the house of representatives, being both a communist and also educationally challenged, didn’t seem to understand the meaning of the word “necessary”, or that voting to NOT DO, that “which is necessary, is a very good definition of insanity.
The other two votes specifically to declare each of those two wars, were less well supported, but still approved by significant majorities of the Congress; and yes Bush signed them.
But back to being proudly British; seems like you (or your ancesters) actually voted (immediately) out of office, the very leader, who brought you, and the rest of the world, through the worst calamity in history. Well surely it was the height of arrogance for that particular leader to even imagine he could win a war, that already devoured the rest of your Europe, in world record time. Yes a truly proud tradition you Europeans have.
“””….so I still feel a lot safer with Obama in control!…..”””””
Well yes, just look at his control in Benghazi, and of course there is that little episode of an Iranian attack on a US plane in international airspace, that Commander in Chief Obama, didn’t even bother to inform the American people about; let alone demonstrate he is actually in control of so much as a lemonade stand.
Now in 2008 he campaigned on a promise to end one of those wars, but after election he embraced it as his own personal enterprise; so you can’t lay that one on Bush at this point; it IS Obama’s war.
A. M. Priestas says:
Here’s an observation for you, if I may. Is it me or do the people who tend to be skeptical of climate change “science” the same people who are skeptical of nutrition “science” (see Gary Taubes, Dr. Michael Eades) and are the same people who are skeptical of government in general? In other words, libertarian? Thoughts?
Although it’s certainly not a total correlation, I have noticed a fairly strong overlap between those groups.
“””””…..Lady in Red says:
November 9, 2012 at 11:31 am
I’ve long chuckled at the Chicken Littles worried that the sky is falling…. this is the end of the planet…. They have no perspective, I think… millions and billions of years of climate history…..”””””
Are your DAR membership dues paid up ? Maybe your red Hat ladies Dues are.
Keep the faith. I’m English and learned long ago (I’m nearly 70 years old) that the key thing in all this is the need to get the opposition divided. Set warmists against skeptics; set black against white; set Christians against Muslims; set socialists against capitalists. It’s all a smoke screen to keep our minds occupied while they carry on making shed-loads of money and laughing all the way to the bank.
Over here, we don’t hold the flag in quite the same reverence as you Americans. No one sings the National Anthem at the start or end of the school day (not sure if you still do that). As another Brit mentioned, few British people would know if the Union Flag is upside down or not.
You became a ‘skeptic’ due to your knowledge as a scientist, not because you blindly followed a blog post one day. Don’t let the emotion shown by some detract you from your faith in your science. Otherwise, they (whoever they are) will win.
Yes, those of us who hate and despise socialism in its current malicious form, felt a sense of despair at Obama’s win. Not because of who he is, but because of what he represents. The AGW camp is symptomatic of his and his backers’ beliefs. Time will tell who is right in this argument and time is on the side of truth, whatever that turns out to be.
Best wishes to all Americans from your friends in the UK.
Thomas T says:
“The internet is a hothouse incubator for memes.”
That may be so, but the fact is that half the country pays no federal income taxes. Therefore, they are “takers.” QED
Nop. More like a city folk – country folk kind of divide
Hint: Look the red vs blue counties on this last election map .. more like a ‘takers vs makers’ kind of divide if anything. (I will call it “Union America” vs “Free America” given the distribution between right-to-work states vs union states.)
Map: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2012/countymaprb1024.png
Webpage: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2012/
.
“””””……
Sailorcurt says:
November 9, 2012 at 10:05 am
Doug says:
It is very common here among those who hate democracy, particularly when it does not give them the answer THEY wanted.
You mean people like the founding fathers? You know, the guys who specifically did NOT implement a democracy in the United States, but rather a constitutional republic?……”””””
” The United States, shall guarantee to every State in this Union, a Republican form of government; and shall protect each of them from invasion,……”
So OK President, and Commander in Chief Obama; when are you going to do your job, and defend the States from the invasion that is rapidly destroying us ?
The cognoscenti will of course recognize Article IV section 4 of the US Constitution; I assume you all learn the entire Constitution by heart before you graduate from 8th Grade.
The terms “Union Jack” and “Union Flag” are synomynous. Either is correct according to Act of Parliament. For example, see:
http://www.flaginstitute.org/index.php?location=7.2
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/UnionJack.aspx
(and, yes, the latter is the official website of the British Monarchy.
Signed: The Voice of the Pedant aka Alan Bates.
(In reply to your question: Your site, your decision. But the warning is a good idea because it shows this is not an “official” part of “The world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate change.”