Kaepernick and the National Anthem

[Numark3]

And you don't think that's divisive?

 

I don't think most people want to unite with that stereotype of a person, which sadly exists.

 

I certainly don't.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

I don't think most people want to unite with that stereotype of a person, which sadly exists.

 

I certainly don't.

You realize that the cartoon is characterizing people who disagree with taking a knee for the anthem that way, correct?

[Rob's House]

You realize that the cartoon is characterizing people who disagree with taking a knee for the anthem that way, correct?

You're giving him too much credit.

[Numark3]

You realize that the cartoon is characterizing people who disagree with taking a knee for the anthem that way, correct?

 

If you want to interpret it that broadly, but I didn't. I am thinking of the stereotype of those that fly the confederate flag and criticize the protests. Lots of people can't stand the confederate flag and criticize the protest. I am not lumping them together,

You're giving him too much credit.

 

Where's the Objective Interpretation of Cartoons Manual?

[Rob's House]

 

If you want to interpret it that broadly, but I didn't. I am thinking of the stereotype of those that fly the confederate flag and criticize the protests. Lots of people can't stand the confederate flag and criticize the protest. I am not lumping them together,

And a lot of people have a problem with this so-called "protest", not because of an abstract sense of patriotism, but because it is an attack on the people of this country and western culture generally.

 

They live in the most egalitarian society in the history of the world, one that has bent over backwards to give them equality, often to the detriment of the majority, and they have the audacity to spit in our faces and whine about how racist we are and how oppressed they are.

 

There's a lot to be said for someone who has the courage to stand up for himself in the face of adversity to defend his rights. But there's a clear distinction between that and a pampered brat throwing a temper tantrum over perceived micro-aggressions.

[Domdab99]

[Rob's House]

That's not politics injecting itself into anything. That's a company contracting to do a promotion as a form of paid advertising.

[Doc Brown]

That's not politics injecting itself into anything. That's a company contracting to do a promotion as a form of paid advertising.

I'm assuming that's part of the defense budget so that would absolutely be politics injecting itself. Your tax dollars are going directly to the NFL to require the players to stand for the anthem. Here's an article on it. http://atlantablackstar.com/2016/09/19/defense-department-paid-sports-teams-53m-taxpayer-dollars-play-anthem-stage-over-the-top-military-tributes/

[TakeYouToTasker]

I'm assuming that's part of the defense budget so that would absolutely be politics injecting itself. Your tax dollars are going directly to the NFL to require the players to stand for the anthem. Here's an article on it. http://atlantablackstar.com/2016/09/19/defense-department-paid-sports-teams-53m-taxpayer-dollars-play-anthem-stage-over-the-top-military-tributes/

We need to have a military. We live in a country where our military service is non-compulsory, which is a truly amazing thing given the way the world has always worked throughout history.

 

The military has to advertise.

 

Why do you have a problem with that?

[TakeYouToTasker]

My problem with it is that the NFL should do it out of patriotism. Does the NHL or MLB get paid anything from the government to have their players stand for the National Anthem?

Why !@#$ for free if she's going to pay you for it?

[Doc Brown]

Why !@#$ for free if she's going to pay you for it?

True. God forbid the leagues that make obscene amounts of profits anyways just make the players stand for the anthem out of patriotism for this country.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Doc Brown

[Boatdrinks]

That's not politics injecting itself into anything. That's a company contracting to do a promotion as a form of paid advertising.

Bingo! Let's go back to the old way. I liked it better then. And the players will no longer have to suffer the oppression of being used as military recruitment tools against their will.

[BringBackOrton]

Weird, I seem to recall seeing Jim Kelly on the field when Whitney Houston sang the anthem in the SuperBowl. Thank you, infographic without a cited source!

[Boatdrinks]

Weird, I seem to recall seeing Jim Kelly on the field when Whitney Houston sang the anthem in the SuperBowl. Thank you, infographic without a cited source!

Super Bowl was different. We are talking about regular season games here.

[MakeBuffaloGreatAgain]

LMAO

 

Can you explain what Kap is protesting? Is it that racist cops kill twice as many whites than blacks every year? Or that blacks are killing each other in record numbers? Or that his black dad ran out on him, so a white couple took him in, gave him an education, got a scholarship from a white run school, and made millions from a white NFL owner. Damn those racist Whities that gave him every chance to succeed.

[KD in CA]

 

And the problem with this is what, you feel the DoD could get a better return if they go back to the 'Army of One' commercials?

 

Do you also have a problem with the government spending money to advertise enrollment dates for the ACA?

[Doc Brown]

 

And the problem with this is what, you feel the DoD could get a better return if they go back to the 'Army of One' commercials?

 

Do you also have a problem with the government spending money to advertise enrollment dates for the ACA?

I feel dumb and naive for not even knowing the DoD paid the major sports leagues for the athletes to stand for the National Anthem. I just thought it was decent patriotism. So the NFL has Salute to Service games, breast cancer awareness month where I'm forced to see pink everywhere, United Way, NFL Play 60, etc... but they need money in order to have their players stand up on the field for the National Anthem? Pathetic. Does Canada pay the NHL for playing Oh Canada?

 

 

[Joe Miner]

If that's actually true, I'd be curious to see what the govt actually contacted the NFL for.

 

Assuming the agreement didn't say anything about how they appear during the anthem, I'd stop playing for ****ty NFL service.

 

Now if the govt was paying the NFL to have players stand at attention during the anthem, I'd sue the NFL if I was the govt.

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

As a note, I'm ok with the DoD halting payments to the NFL. Mostly because, JHFC the NFL makes enough money that they can cover it themselves for those publicity stunts.

 

As for the flag thing...

 

Look, I understand that people are upset about the flag kneeling thing. To ape Firefly, I understand, but I don't comprehend. But I accept that.

 

But come on, the kneeling for the anthem was dying out people. Less and less attention was being paid. It was old news, and the best way to stop a movement designed to generate publicity would be to ignore it.

 

Instead, our President put them back in the limelight and fed it.

 

Reporters had said that they heard a lot of whispers that players privately supported the protests, but many didn't join because they were worried about making the team, or about their contracts. They, like a lot of people, agreed with a stance but didn't say anything because it meant they might not have a job. But when some blowhard says that people should be able to fire you on caprice, and insults people at every level of your organization, no schiesse, it galvanized people.

[BringBackOrton]

I'd say most people don't like players protesting during the anthem because the NFL made it a pseudo-salute to service military ceremony. Some folks find it distasteful to take the attention away from that and draw it to other things. They don't want these players to never be activists or to never speak out, just that they find a proper time and place to do so. I'd say, from my experience, that's how a huge chunk of the "!@#$ Kaep" crowd feels.

 

Rightly or wrongly, the anthem had become ingrained in football and our American culture had conjoined it with patriotism and supporting the troops. You saw it way back in the first Bills Super Bowl with the show of force during the anthem. It was a symbol of America and our military.

 

I don't think they should "do away," with the anthem. This saga sucks on all sides, but the anthem is football. Far too often we call our football players warriors and preach about their sense of leadership, toughness and devotion when the true warriors get less attention. Remembering who are the real heroes is important. Maybe not to some soulless parasitic leeches, but it's important to the heart of America.

[Rob's House]

As a note, I'm ok with the DoD halting payments to the NFL. Mostly because, JHFC the NFL makes enough money that they can cover it themselves for those publicity stunts.

 

As for the flag thing...

 

Look, I understand that people are upset about the flag kneeling thing. To ape Firefly, I understand, but I don't comprehend. But I accept that.

 

But come on, the kneeling for the anthem was dying out people. Less and less attention was being paid. It was old news, and the best way to stop a movement designed to generate publicity would be to ignore it.

 

Instead, our President put them back in the limelight and fed it.

 

Reporters had said that they heard a lot of whispers that players privately supported the protests, but many didn't join because they were worried about making the team, or about their contracts. They, like a lot of people, agreed with a stance but didn't say anything because it meant they might not have a job. But when some blowhard says that people should be able to fire you on caprice, and insults people at every level of your organization, no schiesse, it galvanized people.

I like that he put it back in the limelight. We now have the absurdity of this "protest" of some vague and undefined injustice on full display and lefties are coming out of the woodwork to remind us that they hate everything about America and the west.

 

Now everytime some unhinged leftist starts demanding someone's head over a non-pc comment we can remind them of their supposed principled support of free speech. Although some in this thread have already admitted that the free speech principle only applies to speech they like.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Rob's House

[OGTEleven]

This thing has gotten so far out of control I don't know what to think of it at this point, other than thinking that everybody is wrong, at least in my opinion (except, oddly enough, maybe Shady).

 

 

Kaepernick started the whole thing as a protest over Michael Brown IIRC ( I think that was it). It turns out that it may not have been the greatest cause that ever existed because it sure seems probable that the Brown incident was at least primarily on him and not the cop. Regardless of that, how was kneeling for the anthem the right way to protest at all? How about speaking out about Ferguson Mo. in particular? Was the Ferguson incident an indication of our nation as a whole? The ideals of our nation? He certainly seemed to think issues went beyond Ferguson and that is something worth discussing. Starting that discussion the way he did and then with the pig socks, Guervera t-shirt and positive words about Castro might not have been the way I would have approached it.

 

Kaepernick not having a job seemed to be phase two and that one has a lot of moving parts. A high salaried marginal QB who is far from bad and far from a guy that is the last piece to a championship brings a lot of questions by itself. Add the potential fan uproar to the mix and then what? Then his girlfriend and the Ray Lewis stuff? Every owner gets to make his own decision based on his own situation and Kaepernick didn't make it easy but man there are 32 teams so somewhere between 64 and 96 QB jobs and I would put him in the top 64 somewhere. He isn't being blackballed due to his skin color (see Taylor, Winston, Wilson, EJ, Webb, and many other QBs), but i it due to politics?

 

Fast forward (skipping a lot) to Michael Bennett which just seems like it is being overblown to me. The guy was in a chaotic scene and was was detained by police. Was it a little rough? I guess. Were there some bad choices of words flung around in the heat of the moment? Maybe. Was he shot or hurt or falsely charged with anything? No. He has made claims that he got off easy because he was a football star. Maybe. Has anyone named even one non-football star that was not let off easy in that incident once they were cleared? I haven't seen it. Then Goodell and a bunch of owners jump in without all the facts to defend players. I get the labor relations side of this but the NFL has influence and I think they acted hastily.

 

Now we have a bunch of guys kneeling and protesting the flag and country over things that are very cloudy at best. Of course the backlash from the other side comes complete with stupid statistics about how more white people are killed by cops than blacks. Of course there are. That's because there are more white people available. As a percentage, more blacks are killed. There are so many factors that go into this that are socio-economic, locations based and otherwise, but everyone takes a side, all sides based on bad math.

 

Fast forward again and the president says something along the lines of having a right to protest but they should all be fired. What was the point of that? It's none of your business so stay out. How is it different than when Obama said the cops acted stupidly even when they didn't? These are issues that presidents have stayed out of forever because they should be, you know, doing their actual job. Of course this led to yesterday's mass kneelings which led to more reactions. The whole thing is ridiculous.

 

Ted Kennedy, or Tip O'Neil (I can'r remember which, but neither of which I share ideologies with) was correct when he said all politics is local. The problem is that in 2017, everything is local. The speed of information has brought a lot of positives to society but it has also brought negatives, based on human shortcomings. We all oversimplify information in an effort to process it quickly. That proclivity knows no political boundary.

 

The part that I like the least is that the flag and the anthem are supposed to represent our ideals. These ideals are things we should always be moving towards, not away from. No society in the history of human kind has ever completely lived up to its ideals. We are all flawed and we all fail. I think the protestors are mistaken in their protest if they say the anthem represents cops killing black people or something like that. It doesn't. It represents the ideals toward which we should all strive. Individually and collectively we all make mistakes and there are bumps in the road, but the ideals laid out in our founding documents are worthwhile goals. The people speaking out about achieving those goals and not simply arguing about which side is right and which is wrong are few and far between at this point. I'm not sure I even see one.

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

I like that he put it back in the limelight. We now have the absurdity of this "protest" of some vague and undefined injustice on full display and lefties are coming out of the woodwork to remind us that they hate everything about America and the west.

 

Now everytime some unhinged leftist starts demanding someone's head over a non-pc comment we can remind them of their supposed principled support of free speech. Although some in this thread have already admitted that the free speech principle only applies to speech they like.

Oh, I definitely agree that the 1st amendment only applies to legal retribution. If advertising and fans want to pull out, that is their right. If they want to petition a player be fired, that's right. Heck, the is no protection in the 1st amendment if teams fire players.

 

But...

 

1) are you upset that players are kneeling because it's disrespectful? (Because to me, silently kneeling is more respectful than the fans getting refills of their beers in concessions.) Or is it because what they are saying is uncomfortable to you.

 

2) you have two groups. One thinks that people of color have more lethal run ins with police and would like to being attention to it. Another group feels that removing a statue tries to ignore their culture. Now you can think either or both premise is wrongheaded.

 

The first group protests peacefully, quietly with zero injury or property damage. The other arms themselves, storms a school with torches, beats the schiesse out of college kids and runs a car through people who oppose them.

 

Again, you can disagree with their points, but holy f***, how on earth to you consider their protest in any way equivalent. How does your political leader roundly denounce the first and equivocate on the second? How can anyone support that dichotomy?

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

Please continue to get mad at BLM protesters for doing what you said for them to do. As opposed to what you wanted (read: shut up, go away, don't trouble my existence with self evaluation)

Edited September 25, 2017 by WhitewalkerInPhilly

[26CornerBlitz]

@JennyVrentas

Per CBS Sports, the network's Wk 3 game coverage was up 4% from same week last yr. NFL Today pre-game studio show had best rating since '10.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Please continue to get mad at BLM protesters for doing what you said for them to do. As opposed to what you wanted (read: shut up, go away, don't trouble my existence with self evaluation)

The issue with the protests is multi-fold.

 

1) The way the Anthem has been marketed by the NFL is that it is a tribute to service, and kneeling during the Anthem has bad optics in that regard.

 

2) That the protests are over a narrative that is built of the backs of lies, and names our society as racist, which many take umbrage with because they are dealing with unfounded charges of racism.

 

3) Black Lives Matter espouses a racist dogma, and has not been non-violent.

 

to name a few

[Rob's House]

Oh, I definitely agree that the 1st amendment only applies to legal retribution. If advertising and fans want to pull out, that is their right. If they want to petition a player be fired, that's right. Heck, the is no protection in the 1st amendment if teams fire players.

 

But...

 

1) are you upset that players are kneeling because it's disrespectful? (Because to me, silently kneeling is more respectful than the fans getting refills of their beers in concessions.) Or is it because what they are saying is uncomfortable to you.

 

2) you have two groups. One thinks that people of color have more lethal run ins with police and would like to being attention to it. Another group feels that removing a statue tries to ignore their culture. Now you can think either or both premise is wrongheaded.

 

The first group protests peacefully, quietly with zero injury or property damage. The other arms themselves, storms a school with torches, beats the schiesse out of college kids and runs a car through people who oppose them.

 

Again, you can disagree with their points, but holy f***, how on earth to you consider their protest in any way equivalent. How does your political leader roundly denounce the first and equivocate on the second? How can anyone support that dichotomy?

They're entirely equivalent from a free speech perspective. One group marched with a permit to protest what they saw as an attack on their racial/ethnic group. The other took a knee during the national anthem to protest what they see as an attack on their racial ethnic group.

 

The primary difference is that one group was met by a group of "counter-protesters" who came to pick a fight. The other group was only countered with angry tweets and boos. Had "counter-protesters" stormed the field in masks with bats and pepper spray it wouldn't be so peaceful. And if the players fought back and one player killed someone I don't think you'd portray it the same way.

 

Edit: And I'm not all that upset about anything other than perverting football with this abject faggotry.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Rob's House

[4merper4mer]

Please continue to get mad at BLM protesters for doing what you said for them to do. As opposed to what you wanted (read: shut up, go away, don't trouble my existence with self evaluation)

 

 

I wonder if the chick in Colorado said that exact same thing to Kobe.

[/dev/null]

 

@JennyVrentas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Per CBS Sports, the network's Wk 3 game coverage was up 4% from same week last yr. NFL Today pre-game studio show had best rating since '10.

Rubbernecking past a car accident

[KD in CA]

I like that he put it back in the limelight. We now have the absurdity of this "protest" of some vague and undefined injustice on full display and lefties are coming out of the woodwork to remind us that they hate everything about America and the west.

 

Now everytime some unhinged leftist starts demanding someone's head over a non-pc comment we can remind them of their supposed principled support of free speech. Although some in this thread have already admitted that the free speech principle only applies to speech they like.

Completely agree with that, but it seems yesterday was not so much protesting black guys getting shot as much as protesting aholes like Trump piling on Kaepernick and publically warning them about how they should act. Cant say I blame them for giving him a big F-U. Edited September 25, 2017 by KD in CA

[Rob's House]

Completely agree with that, but it seems yesterday was not so much protesting black guys getting shot as much as protesting aholes like Trump piling on Kaepernick and publically warning them about how they should act. Cant say I blame them for giving him a big F-U.

I think you're right, but it's still a pretty gay way to go about it IMO. They're essentially dissing the country as a whole to get back at Trump. It might make them feel good, but it really trivializes their supposed movement.

[boyst]

Rubbernecking past a car accident

it's still down overall and we'll below average. But don't let that anyone stop the narrative.

 

Train wreck is all it is.

[DC Tom]

 

Yeah, that's not true.

[boyst]

 

Yeah, that's not true.

yes it is, it's on a meme!

[4merper4mer]

yes it is, it's on a meme!

A meme with a person's name at the bottom. That's double.

[boyst]

A meme with a person's name at the bottom. That's double.

about 10 years ago I used to make a half dozen of these a day. I would take a quote by Gandhi out of context and put it as Stalin, or a bush quote as Maya Angelou etc. **** would spread pretty far.

[B-Man]

 

Yeah, that's not true.

 

I wonder how anyone who went to a game or watched it on TV could have fallen for this.

 

I mean I can remember going to games for decades before 2009 and seeing the players out there.

[grinreaper]

Oh, I definitely agree that the 1st amendment only applies to legal retribution. If advertising and fans want to pull out, that is their right. If they want to petition a player be fired, that's right. Heck, the is no protection in the 1st amendment if teams fire players.

 

But...

 

1) are you upset that players are kneeling because it's disrespectful? (Because to me, silently kneeling is more respectful than the fans getting refills of their beers in concessions.) Or is it because what they are saying is uncomfortable to you.

 

2) you have two groups. One thinks that people of color have more lethal run ins with police and would like to being attention to it. Another group feels that removing a statue tries to ignore their culture. Now you can think either or both premise is wrongheaded.

 

The first group protests peacefully, quietly with zero injury or property damage. The other arms themselves, storms a school with torches, beats the schiesse out of college kids and runs a car through people who oppose them.

 

Again, you can disagree with their points, but holy f***, how on earth to you consider their protest in any way equivalent. How does your political leader roundly denounce the first and equivocate on the second? How can anyone support that dichotomy?

When you make such wrongheaded statements like this it reflects poorly on what else you might post.

[B-Man]

General Martin E. Dempsey: Why We Stand for the Flag

At USA Today:

 

In the course of everyday life, there are very few opportunities for the people of the United States to come together, pause and reflect on the hope that is only possible with freedom and democracy. Our national anthem is a statement of respect for this hope, not a declaration that those present agree with everything our nation does or fails to do.

That’s why members of the military and other public servants love sports and why sports love them. As the 18th chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I witnessed the public ritual of playing the national anthem at sporting events dozens of times and saw Americans rise above their own self interests and celebrate something that is greater than themselves. More recently, I was in Rio de Janeiro for the Olympics and stood with enormous pride as our flag was raised and the anthem played when outstanding athletes across a variety of sports were moved to tears by the honor of representing their country.

National anthem doesn't belong only to the military: Dan Carney Life presents plenty of opportunities for us to disagree with one another and seemingly fewer opportunities on which we agree. Standing together during the national anthem at sporting events should be one of those times when we agree, when we focus on the things that bind us together, even as we prepare to let our voices be heard in disagreement about which team is the better team...

 

 

 

 

 

 

UPDATE: Two Years After Embracing Racial Protests, Mizzou Football Is A Dumpster Fire

 

http://www.dailywire.com/news/21480/update-two-years-after-embracing-racial-protests-james-barrett?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro

The team that helped ignite the football protest movement a lesson in what happens when politics eclipse sports.

 

[keepthefaith]

The players participating in the protests are really making fools of themselves as they've chosen about the worst form of demonstration that they could (showing disrespect for the country, flag and anthem) and I've yet to hear one articulate explanation from CK or any of the other players defining what they are protesting and what they feel should be done. For sure if you put 10 of these protestors in separate rooms and asked them all individually what is their point in doing this, you'll get 10 different answers.

 

The owners would be quite justified in telling the players to take their protests out of the workplace and to do so on their own time and away from the "office". That should have done last year long before Trump threw gas on the fire.