 I've said this once, I'll say it again, Joe Biden throughout history has reliably been on the wrong side of basically every single issue, every single issue. And even when it comes to issues that are no brainers that a so-called progressive should not have to think very much about, he's taken the wrong side of the issue. He's been on the wrong side of history. So for example, a couple of weeks ago, CNN published an article that talked about how he was functionally on the side of segregationist because while he personally was against segregation, he sought support from fervent segregationists in order to oppose busing. Now on top of that, he voted for NAFTA. He voted for the Iraq War. He wrote the crime bill and he's just been on the wrong side of pretty much every issue that's a no brainer. Now, you all know where Donald Trump stands when it comes to one very specific issue and that is flag burning. Trump wants people to be punished legally for desecration of the flag. Turns out Joe Biden had a similar stance back in 1989. He wrote the statute saying, burning the flag in and of itself is a crime, period. Boom. Because if you look out there, you know, the thing that makes a Frenchman French or an Englishman English is their ethnicity. It's not what form of government they happen to live under. You can't define an American in terms anything other than the form of government that we live under. And so it seems to me that making that symbol, giving it a special place, a special unifying notion in times of peace as well as war, is an important and worthy thing to do. And that's why I introduced the bill. Free speech. I cannot yell fire in a crowded movie theater in the name of free speech. I cannot take actions to incite a ride in the name of free speech. So let's get clear here that there's nothing absolute about the First Amendment or any other amendment. Number two, the court, if you live in a house that was part of the Historic Preservation Act, even though you own that house, you can't go in and knock out the front windows. You own it. You cannot stand in front of your house that you own that is protected as part of Historic Preservation and say, in the name of protesting the decadence of America, I'm burning this house down. Because by law the house in and of itself cannot be changed. It doesn't relate to the communicative impact. That's why a statute is legal and that's why everyone from a liberal professor like Larry Tribe to less liberal people like the Dean of like the University of Virginia Law School and Duke Law School and others have come out and said, you can do this by statute and it would be constitutional. Now that's bad. Doesn't mean that Joe Biden currently supports that position. Not necessarily, but I think that this video is important because it speaks to him having a very conservative past and being on the wrong side of another issue. Now the reason why those clips were a little bit jump-cutty was because Zahid Jalani tweeted out in multiple videos and multiple tweets. So I kind of just took all of those and created a compilation based on that. He kind of stated his position and then there was a jump in between there where he was responding to a question by a caller about it and you know how this would or would not violate the First Amendment. Now it's funny that he says that you know this doesn't actually violate free speech because there are limits to freedom of speech and whatnot. You can't yell fire in a crowded room and of course this is true. You know no freedom is absolute but when it comes to this issue what I find especially alarming here is that he said all of this a month after the Supreme Court had already ruled on the constitutionality of this very issue. Now the case I'm referring to is Texas v. Johnson when as Oya's explains in 1984 in front of the Dallas City Council Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as a means of protest against Reagan administration policies. Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlining flag desecration. He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction the case went to the Supreme Court. Now before we get to the verdict here just think about this he was sentenced to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine all because he burned a piece of material. How insane is that? How inherently totalitarian is that where you essentially have to worship the state? I mean that's it's bizarre it's absolutely bizarre and on its face I think it's easy for anyone to see that that is against the First Amendment obviously flag desecration would fall under protected speech and can you guess how the Supreme Court held? Well in a five to four decision they agreed that yes flag burning and flag desecration that is protected speech and even Scalia and Anthony Kennedy were in the majority here. Now Oya's continues saying in a five to four decision the court held that Johnson's burning of the flag was protected expression under the First Amendment. The court found that Johnson's actions fell into the category of expressive conduct and had a distinctively political nature. The fact that an audience takes offense to certain ideas or expression the court found does not justify prohibitions of speech. The court also held that state officials did not have the authority to designate symbols to be used to communicate only limited sets of messages noting that if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. So the court releases this decision and then a month later Joe Biden was on C-span making the case as to why we need to criminalize flag desecration. Now what's interesting is that there were other individuals his colleagues that didn't want to just you know introduce legislation to do this because obviously the Supreme Court had already invalidated it so people who were really fervently in favor of making desecration of the flag illegal proposed a constitutional amendment. So another issue that again to emphasize here I don't know if he still has this view I hope you moved away from it but it's just one of many issues where Joe Biden was on the wrong side of history if you'll recall he wrote the 1994 crime bill he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act which banned same-sex marriages at the federal level he supported NAFTA the Iraq War the Patriot Act the repeal of Glass-Deagle and that list is by no means a comprehensive list because there's also the Anita Hill situation there's also the Lucy Flores situation and I think the more serious one is Anita Hill where he was the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee and he stopped witnesses from testifying other women who would have validated Anita Hill's testimony with evidence he didn't allow them to testify and he basically said look everything's fair game even in embarrassing questions and he asked her what's the most embarrassing thing that happened or that Clarence Thomas you know did to you or said to you I'm paraphrasing but basically something that you don't want to ask the victim of sexual harassment who's already been through enough who probably doesn't feel comfortable testifying so Joe Biden lacks a crucial thing that all presidential candidates should have and that is foresight he can't tell when he's wrong he doesn't anticipate how history will judge him and this is coming back to bite him in the ass now so hopefully he moved away from this position but nonetheless I mean to take that stance it's just honestly really it's puzzling to me I don't see why of all the issues to be concerned with that's affecting the world and the US you'd go for flag burning who gives a shit if it's offensive to you suck it up snowflake okay and this is why I don't like how the left and really SJW's quote unquote on college campuses are always attacked for being overly sensitive and needing you know safe spaces because if an SJW on a college campus is offended they protest but if a right wing or centrist SJW in Congress is offended they make laws that actually ban speech so who's the real threat to free speech is it students on college campuses who will use their speech to combat speech that they don't like or is it the lawmakers who are constantly attacking our free speech rights it's bad enough that Joe Biden voted for the Patriot Act but he was also against the First Amendment as well so this is reason one of 350 why we should not allow Joe Biden to get anywhere near the nomination because if he wins imagine how many people will be so disenchanted with another centrist who will just choose to stay home we saw how having a centrist at the top of the ticket panned out last time and you don't have to think too hard about what would happen if we did the same thing again so Joe Biden is an awful choice and I hope that Democrats don't vote for him just because of name recognition and nostalgia for the Obama years let's move forward not look backwards at someone who clearly is not the right person to be the leader of a Democratic Party base that is increasingly progressive