The USA Flag, Essay Example

The United States should not amend the U.S. Constitution which prohibits the desecration of the U.S. flag. The U.S. flag stands for many things to Americans, which includes the freedom, liberty, and justice that America was founded upon. The individuals who fought for this country and sacrificed their lives did so to provide the rights for that flag to continue flying high. Making legal revisions to desecrate the U.S. flag is unnecessary but it is also disrespectful to those who gave their lives protecting it. The U.S. flag is not just a piece of material, it is a symbol for the greatest nation in the world and all that it stands for. The better argument would be why is there a need to amend the U.S. Constitution to allow desecration to the flag? What need would there be to desecrate the flag? As an American, the U.S. flag is a symbol of pride, and if one does not feel that way, perhaps the better option is to move to another country. American is a melting pot of all races, religions, economic and political positions, something the flag of the United States represents. One would have to wonder, who could live in the United States and have a need or desire to desecrate the representation of such a great country?

The article is addressing several different factors. The first argument is that Tom DeLay is an un-Texas politician based upon the fact that he is mean. It also sets the basis that Tom Delay specializes in harsh punishment and is hated and feared in Washington. And that Texas politicians are well intentioned and agreeable.

The author uses many different rhetorical fallacies, and it is difficult to determine how she really views the issue. However, based upon the first part of the article and the last part of the article it can be concluded that the author is not in favor of Tom DeLay as a Texas politician because he is mean and hated as well as feared in Washington.

The argument that the author presents is that congress must be representative of the population and therefore congress should consists of some fools. It means that not all congress members will be loved by their constituents, however they still represent their best interest. The author supports the argument against Tom Delay by defining him as mean, feared, and hated. These arguments are not favorable to any constituent.

The author used many rhetoric fallacies. These include:

• Texas politicians are agreeable and well intentioned
• Congress must be representative of the population, so should have some fools
• Their sense of collegiality is strong, and there were not harsh punishments for partisan reasons

The author also uses rhetoric analysis which are:

• Tom DeLay is an un-Texas politician, because he is mean
• Tom Delay specializes in harsh punishments and is feared/ hated in Washington