New Glory: Flagging Down a Burning Issue

If there had been a Constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration in 1988, George Bush would probably be in jail today.

Because rarely in recent history has a candidate so exploited the flag. And surely using the flag for crass political purposes is no less a desecration than burning it.

Yet Bush had no trouble using the flag in this manner during his election campaign. He had no trouble using the “issue” of pledging allegiance to the flag to question his opponent’s patriotism.

Nor was this a commonplace tactic in presidential politics.

As Lou Cannon of the Washington Post wrote: “I have covered all or part of every Reagan campaign since 1966 . . . But I cannot recall a single instance in which Reagan questioned the patriotism of an opponent, as Bush gratuitously has done depicting Michael S. Dukakis as a foe of the Pledge of Allegiance.”

And as I wrote in an earlier column, Bush recognized the potency of the flag as an issue long before his aides, even Lee Atwater, did.

Bush used the flag so much, in fact, that by the time he made his famous flag factory visit to Bloomfield, N.J., on Sept. 20, 1988, people were beginning to get just a little bit sick of it.

And the visit did not go well for Bush. The crowd was not enthusiastic and barely applauded as Bush, framed by three gigantic American flags, made his speech.

One picketer held a sign that read: “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” Samuel Johnson said it first in 1775. And when others heckled him, Bush faltered during his speech.

The man in charge of Bush’s rallies, Stephen Studdert, had opposed the flag factory visit. He had a fine touch for exploiting Americana, but knew you had to be delicate about it.

“It is inappropriate to use the flag,” Studdert told me, “but not inappropriate to display the flag. To blatantly use it is a little too much.”

At another rally, when Studdert arrived early and saw that a truly gigantic American flag had been set up behind the podium, he threw a fit. “It was literally a scene from ‘Patton,’ ” Studdert said. Studdert told them to take the thing down, but when it could not be done in time, he covered up most of the flag with bleachers full of people.

Studdert knew there is a line that one does not want to cross. Political rallies that use American symbols--flags, bunting, Uncle Sam, bald eagles, etc.--are designed to leave the audience with a good, warm feeling.

But all you have to do is look at the documentary footage of a few decades ago to see the difference between displaying national symbols and worshipping them.

Hitler’s Nuremberg rallies used 200,000 banner-carrying, uniformed men marching through a gauntlet of 130 anti-aircraft beams (which Albert Speer, Hitler’s architect, had determined should be exactly 40 feet apart to create a “cathedral of light”) and when Hitler took the stage, 30,000 flags dipped in salute.

And nobody dared to desecrate the Nazi flag. You got shot for doing that.

Now, George Bush and some members of Congress want an amendment making the desecration of the American flag a crime. They want this because the Supreme Court has said that desecrating a flag is free speech, repugnant but protected by the First Amendment.

So Bush wants to amend the Bill of Rights for the first time in history. He wants to make an exception to the First Amendment.

Bush surely loves the flag. He also loves winning. And he still has a keen sense of what wins. As the New York Times reported last year, when the Supreme Court first struck down a Texas flag desecration law: “Within the White House senior staff level there were mixed views on the flag, but Sununu came around to the view that this train was pulling out of the station fast, and the President might as well lead the parade,” said one White House official, referring to John S. Sununu, the chief of staff.

But are Americans really complaining about flag burners and demanding Constitutional amendments to stop them? Or are they merely responding to pollsters’ questions?

I know Americans who complain about the cost of health care and who want something done about the homeless and finding a cure for AIDS and drugs and other issues. But I know very few Americans who think flag burners affect them in any way.

And why should they? Flag burners are repugnant creatures, the kind of people who, as children, dropped their pants when company came over because they knew it would get a big reaction from the adults.

Flag burners are no danger to the flag or what it represents. They cannot harm this country; they cannot harm democracy.

Only amending the Bill of Rights will do that. And only by letting the flag burners push us into that, will we give them a victory.