Peggy Noonan said it best: "the Republican Party in in thrall to hucksters who don't believe what they are saying". It's another way of saying the Republican Party has become the Stupid Party

Great discussion Andrea...your point proven again by comment #1.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this is a trumped-up, pro-wrestling style farce orchestrated between you and Jeff with Nagel's blessing.

Okay, I fell for it and commented.

We should be proud that Andrea is a product of our town. I have never been more impressed by anything written in the Patch! Kudos to Andrea!

Disdain for America, liberal bullies...Andrea get out of the bubble. Liberalism and progressive thoughts always prevail in our country as more and more people become more accepting. McGroaty acted like a jerk and I am glad he will not be allowed back in the school.

Beautifully written and delightful to read, Andrea.
I hope your students read this and realize how lucky they are to have a teacher who truly can practice what she preaches...writing as well as patriotism!

If there is one thing important in life, it is a moral framework. It makes me profoundly uncomfortable that Ms. Cladis conflates "love of country" with morality.

Mike,

What makes me uncomfortable is that we have a teacher here who can't write!

Jeff

I'd like one example from Mr. Ward's Jan 17th column that constitutes bullying. Bonus question: Please demonstrate through a quote from the same article the Left's disdain for America.

Can someone please recap the letter? I tried to print it out but it came off the printer dripping with self-righteousness and smudged all the words after "Mr. Jeff Ward."

I didn't find Jeff's op-ed to be rude or mean spirited at all. Jeff went point by point and demonstrated, in my mind, some weak points in her argument. If anything, in the whole exchange borders on bullying or sour grapes it's: "Your repressive tolerance is astounding"
The fact that Andrea seems to take enough offence to being challenged that she'd pen a novella to cover much of the same ground she originally covered, only changing her tone from disagreeable to smug and condescending demonstrates a great deal of intellectual immaturity.
Andrea, not everyone will agree with you all the time. That doesn't mean that they're defective or wrong. In all likelihood, you're coming from a different place that formed your opinion. Google: post modernism.

Andrea,
You are an amazing young lady, and despite Jeff's new bully tactic, I think you are an excellent writer. Thank you for having the courage to defend the principles of our great nation.
Liberal progressives may also be surprised to learn that there are far more people in support of your arguments than their tunnel-vision dream for a new America. I hope that your courage propels others to speak up!
Thank you again Andrea.

I totally agree with Andrea, especially her last statement regarding the statement that "represssive tolerance is astounding". I was personally offended by Mr. Jeff Ward's entire "opinion". He is just one example of the bullying done by the media and the democrats.

Andrea, I would like to comment on the observation about government by your student. I would have asked that student do do an extra credit, in depth report on just which functions of government he or she feels that we can do without. Would it be police protection? A fire department? Construction and maintenance of roads? Schools? Universities? How about the CDC and protection from epidemics? The FDA and some assurance that the food we eat and the drugs we take are as safe as possible? How about national defense or air traffic control? How about NIH and research to advance medicine?

As far as regulation, could we do away with building codes and zoning? That would work fine until someone decided to build a bowling alley next to your house in a residential neighborhood or sold you a house with sub standard wiring that burned the house down. Could we do without highway safety regulations? How about on a national scale? The financial industry began rewriting their own regulations as far back as 1980 and many economists blame that, at least in part, for the serious recession that we are trying to overcome now.

Just what would life be like without government? How would you respond to Churchill's statement that democracy is the worst form of government except for all of the others that have been tried?

And finally, if you agree that some form of government may be necessary just what form should it take and what should it do?

I would love to see your student's answer.

Andrea, thank you for expressing your thoughts and beliefs. Your insight is refreshing and your assessment is spot on. Under the guise of journalism, Jeff Ward is quite simply, a bully. Fortunately for him he was born and lives here in America, where he is entitled to his opinion and has protected freedoms that permit him to express it. I and several members of my family are a few of those that served here and abroad to defend our country, our Constitution, and yes, our flag and all that it represents. I applaude you Andrea!

Ms. Cladis, I didn't know that the Pledge of Allegiance needs any defense. You seem obsessed with the need for taliban-like compulsory patriotism. It's an oath to an object, the US flag. What's important is the "for which it stands" part. And that includes tollerance for political discourse, whether you like a far-left or far-right mentality. Maybe your problem is that reality has a well-known liberal bias.

Well Jeff Ward--I am on the side of love of country, patriotism, and the US Constitution and the flag. So the other side of that is YOU? Wow, it's horrific that love of country is assailed here. What have we come to? Love of country is considered intolerant to some folks? Sick, sick, sick.

Mr. Ward: Might I suggest a refresher course in American History and a few visits to Veteran's homes and organizations. In addition, try a new occupation--something that appreciates your ignorance of the sacrifices made by the people who have secured your freedom to spew the angry rantings you "contribute" to the Patch.

Jeff, I just figured out why you're having such difficulty with Andrea's writing style. It doesn't contain any slang or innuendo.....and not a single "gotcha', c'mon or 'em".
Get out your thesaurus and give it another go!

Jeff--My favorite flags are the ones on my desk right now--bearing the Purple Heart Medal awarded to wounded military. Go ahead, be flippant about that.

There's so much irony in this debate....the original Pledge was authored by a Socialist (yup, he believed in redistribution of wealth), who saw it as a way to help him sell flags into schools. That's it folks. If he had been selling dish soap, we'd be hearing about how much Madge the Manicurist is like Reagan. As it stands this debate is pretty close to that.

Hotdiggitydawg--
Your posting is pathetic and illustrative of the point Ms. Cladis made. Yep, another liberal bully. Enjoy your welfare check, unemployment, food stamps, whatever you are on. And if you expect today's inauguration (by the way--he was sworn in yesterday per the US Constitution--but I doubt you know what's in that document--today was just ceremonial) to defeat us you are wrong. The pap spewed in that speech saddens those of us who believe in the principles of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. More government, more lies, more interference in individuals' lives--no, not my America. We are not a dying breed--we are the people who pay the bills. Now go back to your mom's basement and turn on your video game and escape to your version of reality while the rest of us deal with taxes and debt.

Ya sure.....
Well folks, it's come to this--Faux outrage, and an alias. These are the weapons of the left. We are supposed to cower because somehow they control the dialog. I am still standing up for patriotism, the US flag and the US Constitution. If that is passé then we are all in serious trouble.

Wow! I guess Andrea and others don't grasp what a democracy is all about.

Mr Ward expressed his opinion regarding your letter supporting a man whose outburst was inappropriate and frightening to the kindergartners. And he pointed out the failings of your thought process. He was not rude or disrespectful to you. And he did not call you a name either, unlike your name calling liberals.

This Nation has not abandoned the American Spirit but giving it rebirth. We just swore in a great man to the office of President of the United States. He is there because The People respect and honor his message. He calls for us to work together, stop the decisiveness, and make this country greater. I am a liberal and I am very patriotic, and that is something you can't take from me. And calling me names, as well as others who believe as I do, is immature and ignorant.

And Ms Cladis, if you really hate the schools, and feel they teach disdain for the country, don't teach. Do something else. Enlighten us as to which schools have no flags in the classroom. Which schools removed Liberty and Justice for all? Which schools have policies that increase bullying? I'm sure the principals who offend you would like to know who they are.

And I repeat, faux outrage and silliness on the part of liberals. According to them anyone who disagrees with liberal pap is "immature or ignorant." Ya Matilda, the one who was inaugurated today DID call for us to STOP the "decisiveness" (your word). We are no longer a decisive nation. We are a nation that delays any meaningful action on debt or spending, a nation that pushes welfare and entitlements, and a nation that ignores the real problems we have while calling for more attention to a disproved theory of global warming (just how cold is it tonight?). Yep, that's the new America the inaugurated one happily celebrates tonight. And no, this not the country I am happy to call home. I want the America Andrea spoke of. And Terry--if that's talking past one another then you are just not listening. Ya Jeff, I'm one of the wacky conservatives, and happy to be so while I wave my American flag.

We're all patriots. We all love America. This argument is asinine. Just because you have a sticker on your car or pin on you lapel doesn't make you more american. I'm a teacher and we always talk about how great this country is. It's sad to see that patriotism is just another aspect of life that has been coopted to turn ourselves against each other along the lines of political affiliation. Liberals, democrats, moderates, who cares! We're all in the same boat. In reality it's us vs. them. Those who control power, money, and influence vs. those of us who are affected by their decisions. Btw I drive an American car and saw zero dark thirty last night and said a silent "hell yeah" when UBL got his, yet I think baseball is boring and old western movies are lame. Do they cancel each other out? Should I overcompensate by buying 5 bumper stickers showing how much I love America? Or can I be content knowing that my patriotism doesn't have to be defined?

A couple of points:

--Good writing is more than just the use of a certain register or ostentatious words. In sum, good writing makes a coherent point.

--When someone writes a letter to the editor, he accepts that anyone can write a response to that letter. In fact, that should be expected. Jeff Ward did just that in response to Andrea Cladis's original letter. Letters to the editor, and the newspaper editorial pages of which they are a part, are active, bonafide relics of our First-Amendment rights. Coherent editorial-page exchanges represent a bulwark of true patriotism, I might add.

And the editorial-page exchanges would be much more meaningful if those commenting would take ownership of their ideology....by using their real names.

I have read the previous editorial, letters to the editor and comments about patriotism, etc. The part that disturbs me the most is that it is now okay if one is a Christian conservative to be treated with disdain. To castigate another person because of their conservative politics, morals and patriotism should be offensive to all. If it is done to me one can be guaranteed that it will be done to all. This is a poison in our country and it speaks ill of who we have become. I am greatly disappointed and afraid of where this will lead.

Mr. Flanagan: Let's be honest here. I am on the right and proudly call myself a conservative. I have read what you have written on the Patch and it's pretty obvious you are on the left and a liberal. Never the twain shall meet. Interestingly you tend to demean anyone who has conservative views--it's a pretty recognizable pattern you exhibit. To you us conservatives "don't understand," are "repetitive and juvenile" or other such criticism. You seem to have to show how superior you and your views are by telling the world how stupid anyone who dares to disagree with you is. Well Mr. Flanagan, you are tiring. Conservatives are kind of tired of such dismissive attitudes by liberals like you. Liberals like you accusing conservatives of "second grade taunts" is laughable. Really, having to tell us all how smart you kind of defeats your argument.

Many, many years ago, when I asked my Mom to explain to me the difference between a liberal and a conservative she said this:

"Liberals strive to improve the future while conservatives want to return to a past that never really existed".

Ah yes, Ms. Kane, let's be honest. Let's back up a few comments in which you accused Mr, Licht, aka HotDiggitydawg, an individual you could not possibly have known since he was using an alias at the time, of being "another liberal bully. Enjoy your welfare check, unemployment, food stamps, whatever you are on" you said and suggested that he "go back to your mom's basement and turn on your video game and escape to your version of reality while the rest of us deal with taxes and debt." Tell me again who's being dismissive and demeaning. You may call yourself a proud conservative, but I haven't heard you say anything that could be considered worthy of a proud conservative. It's difficult to see comments like that as anything but juvenile. All you have done is to prove that any attempt to engage you in an exchange of ideas is a monumental waste of time. So go back to reading the one book Ann Coulter has written 5 times and you've probably read a thousand times and see if you can come up with something original and clever.

The silly back and forth in these posts have done a great job of masking the original statements that started the whole thing, Namely, Ms Cladis' assertions that schools have shown "disdain for the pledge and complete disregard for patriotism and American values"

These are serious statements that she backs solely with anecdotal observations and a list of examples of actions that take place at unnamed schools. I'm not quite sure whose "confidentiality" she is trying to protect. Don't you think the parents have the right to know that their schools are portraying the country and constitution in a negative manner?

That said, I don't believe that a majority of schools don't fly the flag in class and I don't believe kids are using the flags (which incidentally aren't in the classes) for art project or rugs on the floor. If you are going to make statements like that be prepared to provide details.

You mention that you've been is social study classes where the constitution is portrayed in a negative manner? Please explain. What are you basing this statement on? Did you report your findings to the principle? The School District? The PTO?

Are you really qualified to determine that schools "neglected or even eliminated the important task of educating young people about what it means to be an American."

Wait, this isn't one of those left wing conspiracies is it?

The feigned outrage of liberals is amusing. How dare us conservatives disagree with you? Mr. Mr. Flanagan's tactic is to belittle the opponent by asserting his superior intellect–-that anyone who disagrees with him isn't worthy because they might read authors who have the audacity to call out their pomposity. It's tiring. Time to move on. It only serves to prove the points made by the original article that has spurred all this discussion.....

Looking back at Andrea's 2 letters, she indicates a concern for a lack of patriotism in the nation. May I point out that this past election had a huge turnout, on both sides of the aisle. That does not suggest a passivity to patriotism to me, that shows me that people have been moved to act and to use their rights to vote. It may not have gone the way the Cladis family wanted, but the voter turnout tells me that people DO care and ARE acting in what they believe is the best interests of the country. It negates her stance that there is a lack of caring and respect for the our government and constitution.

Matilda, the patriotic act of voting is only a part of patriotism. Patriotism imvolves love of country, supporting the Constitution, flying the flag of the United States of America, obeying the laws of the land (when they do not usurp God's laws), saying the Pledge with hand on heart, being kind to one another. What this entire interaction has made me more aware is the amount of intolerance one can now see that is extended towards conservatives and Christians. It has caused me to feel quite depressed to realize that a few years ago it was okay to express conservative moral values and now it is not.

Patricia, A couple of questions, if I may please?

You say that patriotism means "obeying the laws of the land (when they do not usurp God's laws)".

Yet the first amendment to the Constitution and a large body of supporting case law support the separation of church and state in our Country. The founders, in their commentaries, made it quite clear that many of them, having witnessed what it did in Europe, deeply mistrusted organized religion and wanted to keep it out of our government. How do you reconcile the possibility of disobeying our Constitution in favor of someone's interpretation of "God's laws" as being patriotic?

Second: could it just possibly be that honestly recognizing our shortcomings as a Nation; the areas in which we do not live up to our promise, and trying to improve on those things might just be patriotic?

For example, the bitter and hugely costly battle waged against slavery, which was protected in our Constitution, might be seen as progress toward "liberty and justice" for all?

Could the decades long battle for women's suffrage be seen as progress toward " "equality under the law" although those who opposed it cited the Constitution and the "law of the land" in support of their argument?

Do we, as a Nation, still have room for improvement? Does our Constitution, written over 200 years ago for a small group of disparate, agrarian states, still adequate to answer the problems that we face in a huge, post industrial, world power?

Patricia, we have separation of Church and State. Our government is not based on the Christian faith. It is fine to use your faith to guide your judgements but you can't make your faith be law over others.
Secondly, you are depressed over feeling like you can't express your opinions and values. Think of how the message is given. There has been much disrespect and hate spewed by the Right. The ugliness is incredible. We have never had this before but then, we never had a Black president before. This hate is racially motivated.
Look at the title of Andrea's letter, It is designed to end discussion and create hostility. And it succeeded, and she became an ineffective communicator by that action
Ms Ward, Andrea said it publicly , now she should back up her statements or we can conclude that she is willing to make things up to support her argument.

To Colin and Matilda, It is apparent by both of you referring to the statement separation of church and state that you have not read the Constitution nor the first amendment nor the Bill of Rights. That phrase is no where in either documents. The Constitution guarantees that the government will have no laws that enforce nor create a state run church (an example is the Church of England)(not quoted exactly). Look it up for yourselves. To Matilda, I am not a racist and I take offense that you would think that my feelings have anything to do with the color of our President. I grew up in a racially integrated city and went to racially integrated schools. I have black friends and cannot believe that you resorted to such an accusation when you know not what or of whom you speak. To Colin, our Constitution did not protect slavery. That is why the issue was so inflammatory. It states that "all men are created equal". The slavery issue was considered by both the north and the south as a states rights issue. Personally, what I tried to express before and will do so again is the degree of nastiness and false accusations that are being poured out of the keyboard of so many of the reader's of this column. And, Colin and Matilda demonstrated exactly to what I am referring. It is an extremely sad commentary on the state of our nation.

Also, I never tried to even claim by the phrase "obeying the law of the land (when it does not usurp God's laws)". I was personally referring if a law was passed that would cause me to have to obey that law and directly disobey God's laws. This is a personal choice that I have made; i.e. if I was told to that I could not pray and read my Bible to myself in a public place. Or, if I was told to bow before an idol.

Patricia, You are quite correct that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution. However, the term "separation of church and state" is commonly used in legal circles to refer to the Second amendment and the huge body of case law that has grown up around it. And it is precisely that amendment that would protect you from any law that would prohibit you from praying or reading your Bible in a public place or forcing you to bow before an idol.

And no, no one has outlawed prayer in schools. What the courts have said is that the school cannot tell you how, when, or to whom you must pray. If you wish to witness prayer in a school just walk into a classroom right before the AP calculus exam.

The Constitution addressed, and by default, approved slavery in Article 1, Section 2 by stating that, for the purpose of representation, states were allowed to count "all other persons" as 3/5 of a person. It was understood that these were slaves. This was negated by the 13th and 14th amendments.

You still have not attempted to answer my questions.