Hi Kelley,
>furthermore, you wrapped yourself in the bill of rights. no different than
>wrapping yourself in a flag and it is pandering in the same way. the flag
>stands for the US bill of rights, no?
This is partly true. The US flag is a symbol of the entire country, so it stands for the bombing of Afghanistan just as much as it stands for the Bill of Rights. My impression is that most people who are displaying the flag nowadays, the folks that put flags on their SUV's and hang flags from their windows and such, are not thinking about the Bill of Rights. Rather, I think the dominant sentiments are 1) to show sympathy for the victims of the WTC bombing (which is great), and 2) to show support for Bush and the US response (which is not so great).
I think the point Cockburn's is trying to point out that the flag is a very potent symbol in the US, and that folks on the left should try to appropriate such a powerful symbol for our cause. Most folks in the US will instinctively recoil at people who desecrate the flag, and not be favorably inclined to someone who does not show it respect. On the other hand, they will feel a sense of solidarity with someone who displays it proudly. This means displaying the flag at rallies protesting legislation that diminishes our civil liberties, and pointing out that we mean the flag to stand for the Bill of Rights. I have no idea if he's right or not, but I see his point.
I don't much care, personally. I'm patriotic in the sense that I root for the US soccer team in the World Cup, but that's about as far as it goes. If you're a Vietnamese peasant whose villiage was destroyed by B-52 bombers, the flag probably elicits revulsion, and doubtless means something different to you than the Bill of Rights. If you are a Wall Street fat cat, it probably evokes a sense of pride and patriotism for a country that has treated you well.
Brett