Home / Politics / City Removes “Don’t Tread on Me” Flag
Print Friendly and PDF

City Removes “Don’t Tread on Me” Flag

Written by Gary North on April 23, 2013

The city of New Rochelle, New York owns an empty building. It has been empty for years.

Why does it own an empty building? Why doesn’t it sell it? No one seems to know. No one asks.

It used to be owned by the U.S. Army, but the Army wisely abandoned it.

A veterans group decided to hoist the famous Gadsden flag: a coiled snake and “Don’t Tread on Me.”

Now the city council has removed the flag. Why? Because it is supposedly a Tea Party symbol. The Tea Party wants tax cuts. It wants wasteful government cut back.

This would mean wasteful empty buildings.

The symbolism was too much for the city council. It wants no such symbol flying over an empty government building. People might get the wrong idea, namely, that there is no reason why the city should own an empty building.

The veterans group has sued the city. This will tie up city resources to fight a court case.

Wouldn’t it be cheaper for the city to give the building to the veterans group? Or sell it for a dollar? But that would be a symbolic retreat from useless government. It would send a dangerous message to voters. The city prefers to spend money to fight a court case. It wants to send this message to voters: “Don’t tread on the city council.”

From now on, when anyone sees a coiled snake in New Rochelle, he should think “city council.”

Continue Reading on newyork.cbslocal.com

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

6 thoughts on “City Removes “Don’t Tread on Me” Flag

  1. Michael Fernandez says:

    Without knowing what legal right (if any) the veteran’s group had to hoist any flag above a “city owned” building, I’d have to side with the city council, as the the legality, but with the veteran’s as to the sentiment.

  2. It appears the motive of the city to take the flag down is prompted by their own political views not based on legalities. This is depicted by their supposed argument of being a "Tea Party Symbol". That is where "red flags" go up in my perspective. The article proposes a more supportive argument that it would be cheaper to sell the building to the veterans, a group who has served our country, something that couldn't be measured in dollars. For the city to choose the option of running through city resources or in other words, citizen's tax dollars seems like an inflicted city agenda. Ironically, the symbolism of the flag could be applied to this very situation the article covers.

  3. Through this ridiculous assertion, the city council has proven its ignorance of both history and the Tea Party and its bias against freedom through limited government, free markets, and the U.S. Constitution.

  4. Seymour Kleerly says:

    New Rochelle is an upper middle class city filled with college graduates. Who can blame them for not wanting to be associated with the LOWBROW, Right Wing Tea Party!

  5. SumerianMan says:

    City property does NOT exist, the proper term is "taxpayer property". And if taxpayers want to hoist a real AMERICAN FLAG on taxpayer property, and most veterans are indeed taxpayers, just who does the city council think they are to stop them. Oh, that's right! all government now thinks they are only obligating to themselves, to hell with the people they're supposed to represent.

  6. I don't know about the legalities, but I am usually amused at people's sensitivity to these flags.
    I say this because the First Navy Jack, the red and white striped flag with the rattlesnake and "Don't Tread on Me" is hoisted on every US Navy vessel when in port!