Thursday, September 15, 2016

St. Louis Democrat: Why I didn't stand for the Pledge of Allegiance

Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, remained seated Wednesday during the Pledge of Allegiance as the Senate started its annual veto session.

Nasheed issued the following statement:

I decided to not stand for the pledge of allegiance today to stand in solidarity with the cause of injustice that Colin Kaepernick has shined a bright light upon. I am not anti-America, and in fact, it is because I love this country that I take this stand.

I am doing so not because of past transgressions by America, but to call attention to current injustices here in this state and country, such as:

The injustice of police brutality – the refusal to mandate police body cameras;
The injustice of poverty – the underfunding of our public schools;
The injustice of voter suppression – passing Voter ID laws;
The injustice of not having health care – not expanding Medicaid;
The injustice of unlivable wages – refusing to raise minimum wage and the right-to-work attack on labor;
The injustice of unequal pay for women;
The injustice of mass incarceration; and
The injustice of economic disparity.

The pledge of allegiance and the national anthem stand not just for what America is, but for what it should be. ‘Liberty and justice for all’ are not just words – they are our country’s ideals. We must commit ourselves to honoring those principles not just by speech, but also through our actions.

This is why I, as a matter of conscience, chose not to stand today.”


What do you think about Sen. Nasheed's action?


Anonymous said...

She's a racist.

Anonymous said...

I think she chose not to support or represent America. It isn't perfect (we live in an imperfect world) but it is head and shoulders above others because it is built on true freedom.

*There will always be injustice. There is police brutality and there is also brutality directed at the police.
*There will always be poverty. This is something to be taken care of locally not only by taxes and levies but also through community support. As far as underfunding public schools, the funding is actually there but is reduced dramatically by all the strings that are attached plus mandates to teach various things that truly aren't necessary.
*There will always be voter suppression each time someone fraudulently votes, it discounts my vote. The right to vote is for American citizens--and you only get one.
*There will always be those who struggle to afford healthcare more than others (refer to poverty). Many doctors do not want to be involved with the bureaucracy Mdicaid entails. When people have to use Medicaid, they have fewer choices in doctors and it takes MUCH longer for them to get an appointment.
*There will always be those who make more or less. Different jobs require different levels of education and/or training. One would expect a college graduate to have a higher salary than someone without one. Wages are less of a problem than the cost of items we purchase.
*There will always be unequal pay...for whoever.
*I am guessing that mass incarceration is in reference to blacks. There are statistics showing that the crimes blacks commit against blacks is much higher than blacks against whites. And I thought we weren't supposed to think of things according to race.
*There will always be economic disparity. If you want everyone to have the same thing, then you must enforce communism. We've already seen how that turns out.

I remember being told over and over again that life is not fair. Most of her complaints are about living in an imperfect world where life is not fair.
I wonder if her view would be different if she were in a Middle Eastern country or Russia or...someplace other than the United States of America.

Anonymous said...

She's the one who has been arrested for DWI and carrying a concealed firearm without a permit. She a real example for the black youth of today.

Steve Holmes said...

8:28, you make a lot of sense, but I keep hearing about people being freed from jail after a wrongful conviction (bad lawyer, corrupt cops or prosecutors, lying witnesses). There is no "liberty and justice for all." I won't make a big deal out of it in public. I usually get to events well after the Pledge and the National Anthem. Otherwise, i go to the bathroom or go off away from everyone else to text until the show's over.

Anonymous said...

Hey 405 try living in another country then see how you feel about America

Steve Holmes said...

I've been around enough other countries to know I want to be in the U.S. 22 in all. How many countries have you visited, 5:46? I stand by my statements.

Anonymous said...

The good news is that now she will not be required to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. What the white eyes do not realize is that they just gave a major pass to the black communities of this state.

Anonymous said...

What the white eyes do not realize is that they just gave a major pass to the black communities of this state.

And we should care about this why?

If they aren't criminals, they won't have to go to the expense of getting a permit. You do know that the campaign in the previous century against "Saturday Night Specials" was aimed directly at them, to keep inexpensive handguns out of their hands? Something that goes back to post-Reconstruction.

Yes, except for some early pre-Civil War attempts to suppress dueling, all gun control in the US was racist, first against blacks, then immigrants from less traditional countries, it's only recently it was applied to everyone.

It they are criminals, nothing's changed. They're already carrying illegally, they'll still be carrying illegally.

Anonymous said...

But now it will not be illegal. At least the cops will not have to worry about killing unarmed people anymore.

Anonymous said...

But now it will not be illegal.

What part of "If you're a criminal, it's illegal to carry a gun" do you not understand? For that matter, it's illegal for them to even possess ammunition, let alone a gun.

Nothing about this is being changed by the new law.

OK, "criminal" is defined to be convicted of a felony, or a domestic violence misdemeanor, plus a bunch of other disqualifications like being under indictment for either of those, or under a domestic protection order (which is a great way for a murderous man to disarm a female target), or involuntarily committed, or adjudicated a "mental defective" (the words of art back in 1968), etc.

The usual stuff. If the state wants to prevent "a criminal" from owning or carrying a gun, then it's their burden to appropriately charge and convict them ... which we might actually have a problem with in Jasper County for a whlie. But that's another matter.

Anonymous said...

@ 7:11 & 8:45 She dindu nuffins!

Anonymous said...

The state does not care who gets killed as long as the sales tax for the gun sales keeps rolling in.