UPDATE: Response
Becerra defended the reaction in a statement to Fox News, saying:
“On the morning of February 20th, I was invited to address some 500 people gathered to discuss the human tragedy of a broken immigration system and the need to fix it. At some point during that meeting, a political operative for a congressional campaign asked if we could recite the pledge of allegiance. The meeting was already under way and the question was unexpected. It took us all by surprise. When the speaker explained that he was serious and asked me specifically if we could say the pledge, I said yes and gestured to the moderator, who then led the entire gathering in reciting the pledge.”
GP has the details.
Rep. Xavier Becerra (D – CA) laughs out loud when someone suggests that they start off their SEIU meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Representative and his Purple People Beater supporters got a kick out of that.(Date 2-19-10, location is the Los Angeles SEIU offices)
Send that creature back to bowels from where he came. Of course, it won’t matter soon as we now have another unreported story about Mexican law enforcement integrated with Border Patrol.
Becerra defended the reaction in a statement to Fox News, saying:
“On the morning of February 20th, I was invited to address some 500 people gathered to discuss the human tragedy of a broken immigration system and the need to fix it. At some point during that meeting, a political operative for a congressional campaign asked if we could recite the pledge of allegiance. The meeting was already under way and the question was unexpected. It took us all by surprise. When the speaker explained that he was serious and asked me specifically if we could say the pledge, I said yes and gestured to the moderator, who then led the entire gathering in reciting the pledge.”
February 22, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Becerra and other obamarrhoids, hell even barry, have no respect for our flag….they can’t be bothered. Guess it would interfere with their hoodwinking.
“Say What You Will…It Feels So Good”
February 22, 2010 at 4:00 pm
I agree.
February 22, 2010 at 3:53 pm
when I was 9 I was suspended for refusing to say the pledge of allegiance on the grounds that it violated my freedom from religion and that nationalism is not patriotism.
forced pledges of loyalty to inanimate objects and forcible statements of support for a religion are for nazis.
February 22, 2010 at 4:00 pm
Sorry you were suspended, but I disagree. I think that one should pledge allegiance to their country of origin.
February 22, 2010 at 4:32 pm
I am as patriotic as anyone, but I do not bark on command like a trained seal.
February 22, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Are you saying that anyone who says the Pledge with heart and soul is a trained seal Nom? If so, you are attacking me and many others here. We all say the pledge for different reasons. I hold that pledge dear to my heart. It means something to me that I cannot say would mean the same thing to anyone else because of my life experiences.
February 22, 2010 at 7:13 pm
I am saying that being compelled to make statements of loyalty is contrary to actual freedom.
If someone wants to talk to inanimate objects I can hardly comment, it’s not like I don’t yell at the people in the tv routinely.
February 22, 2010 at 7:15 pm
Nobody barked anything. The guy suggested the pledge of allegiance and was met with howls of laughter.
February 22, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Shades of Barky at his primary rallies- assholes!
Enjoy your freedom? Thank a soldier! They pledge!
February 22, 2010 at 7:14 pm
I do believe that I was born in the US for a reason PMM. I am thankful for my blessings everyday. What little I have, I am grateful for. So many around the world have but a pittance of what I have. I am not talking about money either.
The greatest of all blessings, “freedom of speech.” I would never begrudge this Congressman anything if he wasn’t one of the biggest suckers of the US teat. Who pays his insurance premiums, and his travel allowances, etc.?
Sounds ugly, but how dare he behave in this manner. I would love to see this ass try that shit anywhere in Latin America or better yet, Castro’s Cuba. Arrogant jerk and SEIU donkey. Who do they think protects their rights?
February 22, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Governmental/public meetings should begin with the pledge of allegiance, it’s as simple as that. Don’t like it? Too bad.
February 22, 2010 at 7:48 pm
I agree imust. If anything, it should serve everyone to focus on the gestalt. We are only one. When we attend governmental meetings, we are hopefully thinking about the whole serves all. It may sound hokey to some, but I remember that our neighborhood meetings would always begin with the Pledge.
February 22, 2010 at 7:48 pm
we have freedom of speech in this country guaranteed by the First Amendment. I don’t say anything on command for anyone, whether or not I agree with it.
don’t like it? go somewhere that doesn’t guarantee freedom of speech.
February 22, 2010 at 7:58 pm
Nom, that is you. I disagree. I think that if you are partaking of the government, it is not a laughing matter. It was a simple request. I think that the Representative was out of line.
You are not a civil servant, he is. He only corrected himself when he figured out that some of us would see his behavior and call him on it.
February 22, 2010 at 8:01 pm
that is not just me, that is the law. the first amendment is not negotiable to satisfy someone’s idea of propriety.
February 22, 2010 at 8:33 pm
Nom, do as you wish, no one is questioning your patriotism. It is very interesting to note that Obama all of a sudden placed his hand on his heart once he felt the sting of impropriety. IMO, he doesn’t care about the Pledge of Allegiance or the US Constitution. He is a civil servant and was called to task. The hypocrisy behind his change of heart is another matter.
February 22, 2010 at 9:07 pm
That fact of the matter is that civil servants will perform when they feel the need to. It is sheer hypocrisy to behave like this man did. It doesn’t matter what law is on the books. He will do what is expected, just like POTUS. You are defending someone who doesn’t defend his own actions. I do believe that you have formulated your beliefs and will stand by them, there is no hypocrisy there.
As I said, he is the government. He will do whatever it takes to get the vote to continue to live off the public that he must perform for. This is not about the law. No one will compel him to behave differently. Only the loss of his perks will force him to perform or not.
February 22, 2010 at 10:00 pm
His reason for not saying the pledge of allegiance is immaterial: he does not have to say it, I do not have to say it, no one should have to say it. Forced loyalty oaths are unamerican: they violate the First Amendment. And if there is a penalty for not saying it, even just a social penalty, or a financial penalty (y’all suggest job loss) it is coercion.
I am for ridding ourselves of the government entirely. I am not suggesting that this guy is an honest representative or anything of the kind; I am saying that no one should suggest that his right to freedom of speech be abridged.
February 22, 2010 at 10:10 pm
It is not coercion. He chooses to run for office. That is how it works. No one forces him to do anything. It is his choice. That is called self accountability.
I believe that one is accountable for one’s actions.
It is the core of his being Nom. The law will not feed him or his family power. His position of power does that. I personally think he would do very well in Latin American politics working for the cartels.
February 22, 2010 at 10:11 pm
We disagree.
February 22, 2010 at 11:17 pm
I am perplexed that the First Amendment does not seem an adequate legal foundation; therefore:
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html
Article 6, Clause 3: “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution
Oaths
“Federal and state legislators, executive officers and judges are, by the third clause of the article, bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution. Congress may determine the form of such an oath. In Ex parte Garland (1866), the Supreme Court held that a test oath would violate the Constitution, so it invalidated the law requiring the following oath:
“ I, A. B., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I have never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I have been a citizen thereof; that I have voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel, or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto; that I have neither sought nor accepted, not attempted to exercise the functions of any office whatever, under any authority or pretended authority in hostility to the United States; that I have not yielded a voluntary support to any pretended government, authority, power, or constitution with the United States, hostile or inimical thereto… ”
The Supreme Court found that the law constituted an unconstitutional ex post facto law, for it retroactively punished the offenses mentioned in the oath by preventing those who committed them from taking office.
Congress may not require religious tests for an office under the United States. Thus, Congress may include the customary words “so help me God” in an oath, but an individual would be under no compulsion to utter them, as such a requirement would constitute a religious test.
The current oath administered is as follows:
“ I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.] ”
John F. Kennedy, in his Address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on 12 September 1960, said,
“ [N]either do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test, even by indirection. ”
…
The third clause of the Article provides that no religious test shall be required as a qualification to any public office.”
I generally dislike arguing something on legal grounds: to start with, there are many laws that get passed with which I do not agree. Also, I am not 100% satisfied with the Constitution. But it is absurd to argue that he follow the law, and then say he should be compelled to act against our highest law.
If one wants to argue that he should swear an oath to follow the constitution I have no problem with that: because that is his job and that requirement is in accord with the constitution; but a nationalistic oath to an inanimate object including a statement of religious affirmation expressly called out as illegal is not “how it works”, not by any means at all.
February 23, 2010 at 6:53 am
That is how you feel. No one is arguing with you.
Your point is about the law. Since when do they follow the law?
My point is about how this reptile’s behavior will change at the shift of the constituency wind. His behavior is Pavlovian Nom. It has nothing to do with the law. He salivates at the thought of power by vote. That law maybe is what it is.
February 23, 2010 at 12:41 pm
“Since when do they follow the law?
I’d guess when we get off our collective asses and make them; that’s why we live in a banana republic, because we won’t.
It’d sure be a f#cking improvement if we did remove those who won’t follow the law and those who try to circumvent the intent of the law.
I don’t see how our voiding the authority of the Constitution ourselves will bring that about, however. In fact, it looks a whole lot like what they do.
Y’all are literally suggesting something that violates the freaking constitution (religious tests as criteria for holding office) as “protocol”: that is just plain stupid. I don’t know what else to call it. Oh yeah, how about illegal?
I could give a f#ck if they vote him out: that’s his problem.
Y’all’s dispensing of other peoples’ rights is my problem, and it’s a hell of a lot more serious a consideration.
Hypocrisy is a demand for better government when you yourselves don’t want to follow the law.
February 23, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Again Nom, this is not about the law. It is about how we feel. You have a right to your beliefs and so do we. You don’t have to be part of the group. You can do as you please. This is not about law.
February 23, 2010 at 2:27 pm
No one is dispensing of anything Nom. The request was not forced.
We disagree. Why do you persist on making this an issue? These are OUR opinions as you have yours. No one is asking you to change your beliefs.
I take great issue with you insinuating that we are trampling on your rights. This is a discussion. You seem unwilling to let our opinions be what they are. Give it up. You are entitled to your thoughts as I am of mine. If I believe that my civil servants should follow proper decorum, that is MY belief.
February 23, 2010 at 3:32 pm
well, I take great issue with someone suggesting that deleting an amendment or article of the constitution can be proper decorum.
I’m done.
February 23, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Nom, you don’t get it. We disagree. You have your opinion and I have mine.
February 23, 2010 at 2:28 pm
That is your interpretation of what has been opined.
February 22, 2010 at 10:14 pm
Also: I am not defending him, I am defending his rights, as they are equally my rights.
His job is to represent his state and nation in accordance with the law.
I do not actually think any of these clowns are doing this, but I hardly think reciting a loyalty oath will do anything to change that, nor am I willing to throw out the First Amendment in order to see.
The First Amendment is the law: it is not something I have formulated.
February 22, 2010 at 10:15 pm
post 11 should attach to my 9
February 22, 2010 at 10:18 pm
WP, it’s how it works or doesn’t sometimes.
February 22, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Nom, no one is telling you that you must do anything. If you do not want to be part of the group, so be it. This man is part of a group. He is a civil servant.
I know what rights I have. He is the government Nom. If he doesn’t like the Pledge, he can go back to wherever he is comfortable. I could care less. He should be called to task for being a hypocrite.
February 22, 2010 at 8:57 pm
American citizens are guaranteed the protections afforded by the Constitution including freedom of speech.
unless of course they are declared unprivileged enemy belligerentsOne does not get to make other people say what one wants to hear.
That anyone would actively promote doing so as desirable or imagines that anything good could come of doing so, is remarkable.
How in the world can one say: “He is the government,” so one should be able to compel him to state what one desires, and separate this mentally from one’s knowledge that the law for which the government is responsible, forbids such compulsion?
Just sayin.
February 22, 2010 at 7:33 pm
As children, we are taught to listen and mind our elders. When we grow up, then we make our own decisions.
While I am not always happy with my country, I can’t imagine pledging my allegiance to anyone or anything else. To me, it is more of a respect thing than anything.
“Say What You Will…It Feels So Good”
February 22, 2010 at 7:53 pm
I also believe that it is a sign of respect to this nation as well. I use the Pledge as a time to refocus on what is at hand. It brings the group together. Is that old fashioned? Because I don’t believe so.
Yes, I would squirm many a time while I was growing up when the request to stand was made. I did it anyway, until it all sank in. I saw some of my friends go to war. Some came back and others did not.
February 22, 2010 at 8:22 pm
“It brings the group together.”
I am uninterested in being in the group. I am autonomous. I am not less patriotic for being autonomous.
Respect? Why would I respect any institution that denies me autonomy or undermines my most basic rights? Respect is something that is earned: it is not arbitrarily given and it is not given upon command.
The 2 most important amendments in the constitution are probably the right to freedom of speech and the right to vote. No. 19′s already in the crapper. I don’t plan on giving up No.1. And I plan on keeping No. 2 so as I don’t have to.
February 23, 2010 at 7:14 am
Nom is completely off base. Sorry, your argument is not relevant. No one is forcing every Joe or Jane Smith to say the pledge randomly. But this was a PUBLIC meeting put on by the government. The pledge should be said, any who object can just not recite it, no one is forcing them, but as a matter of protocol, IT SHOULD BE SAID. When politicians or government employees take their jobs they must recite an oath of office this is no different. I can’t stand it when someone makes a big issue about something simple and respectful as saying the pledge of allegiance.
February 23, 2010 at 7:27 am
Imust, the man is a civil servant at a public government meeting. I agree, it is a matter of protocol. He will do what is correct whether it is law or not.
Heck, didn’t Barry start wearing a flag pin when people heard that he didn’t like one? As I recall that photo of him not holding his hand over his heart got out and low and behold, the reptile had his hand on his heart next photo op. Reptilian.
As for Barry, no one knows for sure whether he took his Oath of Allegiance at 18 to sever his dual citizenship. I am sure that if the documents were released, you would see Bam reciting that as well. His actions are quite historical. We will never know how these people truly feel about this country, but as civil servants they should follow protocol. They make a mockery of it instead.
February 23, 2010 at 7:30 am
We all grow up feeling very differently about our country. I can say that the Pledge of Allegiance mean so much more to me today than it felt when I spending my summers visiting a Third World country. Each year added another layer of gratitude for what the founding fathers left as a legacy to me.
February 23, 2010 at 12:42 pm
yeah? well I can’t stand people who are irrational. you whine about the government but you’re against following the freaking law.
February 23, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Nom, this is not about the law.
February 23, 2010 at 3:31 pm
yes it is. the Constitution is the highest protection of the rights of 300 million americans: preserving our rights is more important than protecting peoples’ feelings.
your desire to punish people who you feel do not conform to your idea of what they should does not give you the right to override the constitution.
I’m not averse to punishing congress members that fail to represent us, but not saying the pledge isn’t an example of that.
Not to mention, everybody did say the pledge: so you’ve actually added another demand, not just that officials say the pledge, but that they say it the way you like.
I’m not interested in authoritarianism as a form of government: that y’all fail to realize this is what you are proposing does not make it less so.
February 23, 2010 at 4:56 pm
….and disagreement would be one of our rights. It happens sometimes and we move on. Beating a dead horse doesn’t get us anywhere; that is why we just need to agree to disagree without any hard feelings
“Say What You Will…It Feels So Good”
February 23, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Thank you PssttCmere.
February 25, 2010 at 11:11 am
You didn’t just state an opinion, you proposed a mandate that is firstly not legal as it includes a religious test and secondly that would in fact affect me, though you refuse to admit this.
A mere opinion would be: I think saying the pledge of allegiance has a beneficial effect upon society. I would have responded likewise with a mere opinion: that I do not think it does. When you made your proposal, I responded with my proposal to stop you by legal means.
You have said you don’t question my patriotism. If that were really so, why then question the patriotism of anyone else who does not desire to say the pledge of allegiance? Do you claim protocol serves no other purpose than itself?
What you are really talking about is a purity test.
And you made it very plain who would and would not pass.
February 25, 2010 at 11:12 am
post 10. should be post 27.
February 25, 2010 at 4:55 pm
WP has control. I don’t understand it…sorry.
February 25, 2010 at 4:32 pm
You are not a civil servant Nom. This is a Congressman who serves at the will of the people.
This is not about you. You are not the man in the video who was elected to serve the people. I believe that an elected official who serves at the will of the people should not behave in this manner when such a request is made. It doesn’t matter to me if he is required to do so by law or not. The law does not require me to behave in any particular way. I would not break out laughing hysterically if I was a witness in trial. I do not laugh heartily or scream at funerals. It is a matter of simple protocol. You do not have to agree.
If you wished to not say the pledge as a child, that is up to your parents and the school to resolve. If you, as an adult do not wish to participate in a group that wants to say the Pledge, that is your choice as well.
March 3, 2010 at 2:52 am
[...] SEIU Respect For The Pledge Of Allegiance Ask Rep Xavier Becerra … [...]