A Facebook post by Randy Brogdon during his Senate campaign, overlooked until now, is generating controversy in the race for Republican Party chairman.
Brogdon faces incumbent Dave Weston and challenger Pam Pollard in the April 11 election during the GOP convention.
In the post, Brogdon questions the patriotism of the Pledge of Allegiance.
He apparently posted the item during his failed campaign for the GOP nomination for the Senate but it failed to gain attention until now.
http://www.1170kfaq.com/podcasts/patcampbell/297243301.html
I’m sorry that Mr. Brodgon appears to misunderstand the wording of the Pledge of Allegiance. It does not pledge support for the “nationalistic government”, but to the “republic” and to ideals of “liberty and justice for all”. It acknowledges the unity of states as “one nation” (not one government) and “under God” as the binding power.
If allegiance is pledged to an existing government (as an entity), Mr. Brogdon has valid concerns! The Pledge of Allegiance (as written) does not, nor should it be twisted to become such!
It is food for thought and no matter whether one chooses to pledge or not.
Besides and tests of patriotism go the Pledge is a pretty weak test. It is too easy to sit in the highest seats with enlarged tassels putting on airs of “oh look at how patriotic I am!!”
FOX news analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano speaking on the issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7sisyX637s
It appears the Mccarville report has become a tool for smear tactics and dirty politics.
Please explain your comment, Karen.
Brogdon responded ths morning, on KFAQ Radio.
Here is my best paraphrase of his points:
“I say the Pledge of Allegiance at every public event where it is included in the program.”
“People see that and assume I have a problem with “under God, but my disagreement is over the rights of states to govern themselves.”
“I am a constitutionalist and the word ‘indivisible’ and ‘one nation’ mean something different that a ‘union of states’ [united states]. ”
So the headline is quite different from his disagreement over the correct wording to describe this union we are. Incidently, ‘union’ is the term that the northern states used to describe their entity in the civil war.
Hooray for Brogdon! It takes a lot of courage to point out the truth when it runs contrary to collective customs. I used to be a rabid pledger then one day it hit me that the founders and patriots of old would have never pledged their allegiance to a central government over that of their respective states which comprised the Union.
Mr. Buxton is correct in that the pledge does reference a republic, but the republic the Bellamy Societies and the National Eduction Association had in mind when instituting the pledge in the early 1900’s was the French republic which was a unitary state ruled by a central government. The pledge has been key in the change from “the united States are” to the present “the United States is” in public perception and understanding.
I believe that an honest evaluation of our current government reveals a unitary state ruled by an all powerful central government and not a federal republic whose authority is defined by a written constitution.
Randy Brogdon asks thought provoking questions and in it he makes no statements against our country, our flag or even the Pledge of Allegiance itself.
It is wrong to accuse him because he asked questions. Yes. they were rhetorical questions designed to make us think about what we are doing and to realign our understanding of patriotism, but they do not assume an answer that is unstated.
Correct. Did anyone accuse him of anything?
The Headline accuses him of being “Against The Pledge”.
David, to be as fair as possible, I have altered the headline. It could also have read, “Argues Against The Pledge.”
The term “one nation” would be a foreign term to most people in the founding era and I applaud Randy for sticking with the facts of history on this one. In referencing the beliefs of the Founders when compared to certain notions in the Pledge, Randy merely asks us to examine those notions. I applaud him for that. So, are we “one nation” as the Pledge asserts?
Not according to some of our founding documents:
From the 1783 Treaty of Paris that was a negotiated settlement and end of hostilities between these United States and England we read:
“His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every…”
Not a hint of a “nation” in that document negotiated by John Jay, John Adams and Ben Franklin. Just a list of the 13 “…free, sovereign and Independent States…” So, we can’t rely on that document for proof of the pledges notion that we’re “one nation.”
How about our first Constitution called the Articles of Confederation? Did that document create a “nation” with a powerful central government that would eventually swallow the States?
“Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.”
“Article 1 – Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” Likewise, it doesn’t appear we can rely on that document for proof of the pledges notion that we’re “one nation.”
How about the current Constitution; did that document create a “nation” governed by a power central government that would eventually swallow the States?
Article VII of the U.S. Constitution: “The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same” Again, it doesn’t appear we can rely on that document for proof of the pledges notion that we’re “one nation” either.
So, perhaps Randy is on to something we should all consider when he asks questions about the nature of the “nation” we are supposed to be.
Get it straight people.We are not a nation , we are a Republic . A democratic republic of fifty(50) sovereign states.RU8