I have to say the guy could bring a decent point without insulting those who feel otherwise as "all these pledge-and-pin, hand-and-heart, loyalty-ritual fetishists." This is the kind of crap that pisses me off about politics these days. If I disagree with you I'm likened to a mindless Nazi (as Rosenbaum goes on to imply). I can put my hand over my heart (during the national anthem) as a representation of how I feel about my country, and still think for my self. I think Obama’s action, or lack-thereof as a lack of respect. Also - one can express respect without being mindlessly loyal. Obviously we all have different ideas of what expressing respect should be.

The first mentioned: "Minnersville School District v. Gobitis" was about children refusing to salute the flag during the pledge. The finding basically said the "ends justify the means." The end being a "unifying sentiment without which there can ultimately be no liberties, civil or religious." While I don't think "unifying sentiment" about justice and liberty comes from the act of saluting the flag, I agree with the statement (also in the finding) that: "It mocks reason and denies our whole history to find in the allowance of a requirement to salute our flag on fitting occasions the seeds of sanction for obeisance to a leader." While I disagree with the ruling, the finding brings up a valid point I think.

The case "Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette" was also about refusing to give a military salute during the pledge, and those who didn't salute were expelled for "insubordination." Almost the exact same situation as in the previous case. I don't think you'll find a reasonable person who'll disagree with that ruling.

Does Rosenbaum mention the circumstances of the case in his argument - children being forced to render a salute during the pledge? No.

I’m amazed that if I disagree with Rosenbaum I get likened to fetishists and Nazis! All for expressing an opinion! That's not argument, that's not debate, that's name-calling. That's pathetic.

Does Rosenbaum mention the circumstances of the case in his argument - children being forced to render a salute during the pledge? No.

Well, you'd have to go back to the previous page and connect the anecdote about the Jehovah's Witnesses in Nazi Germany to the relation of the second Supreme Court case. Yes, the writer expects the reader to follow a sustained argument from point to point over several paragraphs. Insulting!

It's fabulous that you're able to decry a poignant article about the meaning of patriotism and the history of its conception in America as an exercise in petty name-calling, and manage to still work in the shot that Obama disrespects our nation.