It has been nothing short of astounding to watch the alt-left reaction to President-elect Donald Trump’s suggestion that flag burners be criminally charged.

They seem to really get fired up when it comes to patriotism (pun intended) – as in they’re vehemently against it.

The media seems to have forgotten that most Americans support a ban on burning the flag, and that in 2005 four prominent Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, co-sponsored a law that would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence.

Now we have her exact statement on flag burning to Congress in 2006 …

 

So I hope, Mr. President, that we can pass a law that criminalizes flag burning and desecration,” Clinton stated. “I agree that this burning, this desecration that can happen to our flag is something that people have a right to ask this body to try to prohibit and prevent.”

As we reported previously, Clinton and the Democrats were seeking a punishment of one year in jail for the act of desecrating the flag – the exact same punishment Trump is proposing.

So you’d think they’d be on board, right? Wrong. Here’s a smattering of liberal responses to Trump’s flag burning proposal …

Democratic Party strategist, Julie Roginsky: “That is the last refuge of a tin pot dictator.”

The Hill reporter, Jonathan Swan: “It just exacerbated what fears were already out there.”

Washington Post reporter Ruth Marcus: “He’s going to war with the Constitution here.”

Dictator. At war with the Constitution. Exacerbating fears.

Weird, one has to wonder if this was the same reaction the media and Democrats had when Clinton stood before Congress and declared “people have a right to ask this body to try to prohibit and prevent” flag burning.

Cross-posted at the Political Insider