[Vision2020] The pledge Controversy

Fri Jan 27 11:44:26 PST 2006

Phil,
The symbolism of the pledge took on a whole new meaning to me at 7:00pm on
September 11, 2001.  I had to attend a Deary City Council meeting that night
to discuss preliminary plans to convert the old Lions Hall and nearby
fertilizer facility into a community center.  There was talk all day of
canceling the meeting in light of earlier events; however, Mayor Foster
would have none of that.  The city hall was filled (not hard to do in Deary
but considering that day it was still a nice sight) as the Mayor, the City
council, and all of us in the audience stood and recited the pledge.  There
was not a dry eye in the place but still government and life went on. 

The pledge may be a rote phrase to many, it may be offensive to others, it
was written by a socialist, it has been battered around, beaten, cursed,
ignored, and pronounced antiquated; however, in the end it is as you say, a
symbol that unites us to serve a common cause, defense of liberty and the
defense of our nation.   It is not perfect, is there anything earthly that
is?  It is offensive to somebody, is there anything that is not?  It is
though a powerful symbol of our nation.  It is the only statement of
allegiance and commitment to our nation that most Americans ever state
(since a vast majority of Americans do not serve in the military).  

Of any time I have ever said the pledge, that night in Deary less than five
years ago was one of the most meaningful and oddly enough, wonderful,
experiences in government service I have ever had.  I only hope that those
on this list who condemn repetition of that simple statement can remember
back those few years ago to your feelings of that day, and realize that in
the end all we really can do is to unite ourselves to move our imperfect
experiment in governance forward to succeeding generations.

Chris Storhok

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Phil Nisbet
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 7:08 AM
To: privatejf32 at hotmail.com
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] The pledge Controversy

J

Morning Formation is hugely rich in symbolism.  You did not need to say a 
pledge because the other symbolic things were there in spades.

Then there is also the larger formation parades to add to your sense of 
place and you also have reveille and recall, stop and turn to the location 
of the flag going up or down and salute.  The company guidon, the battalion 
and regimental colors, the ordering of events. . .

So the reminders of your place within the unit and its function were 
constant.

Verwen the pay this bill and do not pay that one that form the basis of most

council or commission meetings, its nice to think that their is some call to

civic duty.  That is what the people who want the pledge are looking for, a 
symbolism that calls the proceeding into its place.

Can a unit that does not make formation ve effective in combat?  Sure, but 
its more likely to be a unit through the sense that formation brings.  Even 
with Formations and the rest that unit can still break down and members of 
it can and do screw the pooch, but its a form that tends to assist most of 
us.

So, the pledge is not the only thing that can add that form and symbolism to

council meetings, but it is one of the possible forms.  Just like formation 
telling a troop that he now has to put aside his persnal desires to act as a

unit, some opening form at the start of a council meeting is there to give 
that council the sense that they now are to put aside their personal agendas

and act as the unit charged with overseeing the public weal for the people 
who elected them.

Lacking such a symbol will not end good government any more than lack of a 
formation will make a fighting unit unable to fight, but time has told us 
that some forms increase the odds of better performance.  Pick your symbol, 
but remember that for many the Pledge is one of the more powerful.

Phil Nisbet

>From: "J Ford" <privatejf32 at hotmail.com>
>To: pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] The pledge Controversy
>Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 00:30:33 -0800
>
>While I agree with most of what you say, I must add that those that are 
>gripping the loudest about the pledge not being said (a) do not themselves 
>make that kind of demand of themselves; (b) do not attend the majority of 
>the meetings held at City Hall; (c) gripe because that is what they do 
>best.
>
>I personally do not see the need to open each and every single meeting with

>the pledge; just like I did not understand us having to say it EVERY single

>day at school.  As I have stated before and others have stated, saying it 
>does NOT in any way, shape or form guarantee that the person will follow 
>the pledge, adhere to its standards, continue to be accountable to the 
>citizens of this town/country or even believe in what it says.
>
>I like Nancy's idea of opening with some kind of statement to set the tone,

>but if the Council didn't do that I would not be offended or hurt or feel 
>like they were not being loyal to this country or city.
>
>During my time in the military, when we would fall in, go through 
>inspection, report for duty, we did not say the pledge or sing the anthem.

>That did not make us any less loyal or dutiful to this country or the 
>citizens.
>
>Seriously, where were the people four years ago when the pledge or opening 
>statements were not even thought of being done?  Why this fuss now?  I 
>think a mole hill is being made into a mountain simply for joy of doing so 
>by those doing it.
>
>My thoughts - take them for what they're worth.
>
>J  :]
>
>
>
>
>>From: "Phil Nisbet" <pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com>
>>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>Subject: [Vision2020] The pledge Controversy
>>Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:41:22 -0800
>>
>>I had a say earlier and figured that it was sufficient to the day, but the

>>huge volume of traffic on this issue has me scratching my head.
>>
>>There are some with honest opinions here on both sides.  Chas, for an 
>>example, is a non-conformist and hates all things related to pledges.  His

>>opinion on the subject and his feelings are valid and need to be 
>>respected.  Similarly, those who want the pledge said have solid feelings 
>>on the subject and valid desires to see the pledge said as a symbol of 
>>their own love of country and they deserve as much respect as Chas does.
>>
>>One of the people I had dinner with last night had something very valid to

>>say.  He noted that at his age he still tripped over the portion of the 
>>pledge that was added in the 1950's and that he had an easier time of it 
>>when it was not there.  He still preferred to have some sort of a 
>>patriotic opening to a governmental proceeding.
>>
>>Nancy says that she wants to vary things as opening statements before the 
>>meeting to set the tone.  I would say that is fine, one meeting the 
>>pledge, the next meeting the national anthem, the next a brief patriotic 
>>poem, what ever.  What ever the pick for opening, pledge or song or poem 
>>or speech portion, it needs to reflect civic participation in the great 
>>American political process.
>>
>>This need not have been a controversy had this idea been circulated in the

>>first place.  If at the first meeting it had been made clear that that was

>>the plan, I do not see the kind of concerns that have been aired.  The 
>>problem occurs when actions to make changes are made without the public 
>>being informed, in effect, the public having to discover by word of mouth 
>>and Listserver that a change has happened without their knowledge.
>>
>>So perhaps we can get Nancy to post her ideas and she can also inform the 
>>papers with a list of the openings she intends and the controversy can die

>>down.  Heck, she can open a suggestion box for citizen preferred openings 
>>to council meetings and then everybody can get a crack at picking one.
>>
>>I nominate,"I am not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world" 
>>Socrates, in hopes of getting Chas and his kindred spirits into the idea.
>>
>>Phil Nisbet
>>
>>PS  On the other hand there have been one heck of a lot of not very honest

>>answers on this subject.  Those of you who expressed things not your own 
>>opinion just to make political hay know who you are and that is from all 
>>sides.  Its exceptionally bad when an official plays finger pointing as if

>>that offical was not involved.
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!

>>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>>
>>_____________________________________________________
>>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net

>>                               mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

_____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯