BringBackOrton Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 1 minute ago, MAJBobby said: Everyrhing isnt black and white and have a bunch of different goalposts And shockingly, you've managed to be incorrect on all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, joesixpack said: You're an idiot. Truth sucks i know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commsvet11 Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Just now, MAJBobby said: Completely different Oh yeah? Do tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 1 minute ago, Commonsense said: My brother is a veteran too and this might come of as harsh but just because your a veteran you don’t have a right to decide which freedoms you fought for and which ones you didn’t. You and Bobby were quick to mention the rights of the players but ignored the rights of the employer. That tells me you already have your own politics in the way of what is actually going on. Colorado definitely mentioned that the owners were within their rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Just now, MAJBobby said: Truth sucks i know Say, did they find anything russia-related in that set of indictments? And if you REALLY thought Holder and his cronies at the Obama DoJ were going to actually investigate Hillary, you really ARE an idiot. But don't worry. That's all coming out into the open, thanks to Horowitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Just now, thebandit27 said: Colorado definitely mentioned that the owners were within their rights. My apologies Colorado. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said: And shockingly, you've managed to be incorrect on all of them. Really show me where i am wrong in CBA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, thebandit27 said: I feel pretty confident that many (probably most) private employers wouldn't allow employees to protest in their place of employment while working But I think there's a fair question about active vs. passive protesting. Like if a player brought a banner that said "DOWN WITH TRUMP" and displayed it in front of TV cameras before every game, that protest would have few supporters. NFL teams could ban that behavior without any real backlash. But in this case you don't have players actively protesting. The NFL is forcing an activity on the players that has nothing to do with their profession, and some players have decided not to partake. So I think that's a little murkier. I'm not really sure what legal standing a private business has to force their employees to stand up for the national anthem, unless standing for the anthem was part of the job description. But this compromise seemingly solves that problem. Edited May 23, 2018 by HappyDays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColoradoBills Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, thebandit27 said: Well said. I don't agree 100%, but I definitely agree with the spirit of what you're saying. Thanks bandit. You have a right to feel the way you do. It's your right. This IMHO is what makes America great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Just now, MAJBobby said: Really show me where i am wrong in CBA Show us where you're right. YOU claimed it violated the CBA. Link it. Please and thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicken Boo Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 7 minutes ago, joesixpack said: No, not really. Because none of the indictments have !@#$ all to do with "russian hacking," "russian interference" or even "collusion" (whatever that is). Lies! Blatant lies. Your supreme leader would be proud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Would it? If an employee enters into a contract knowing that he's not going to be able to perform the job due to some esoteric belief, I'd think the employer would have good cause to argue that the contract was entered into in bad faith. I agree with that. But the issue of the employee being free to work elsewhere isn’t germane, imo. I’d like to look into some settled case law on the issue. Lot of interesting facets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrymessenger Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, joesixpack said: No, not really. Because none of the indictments have !@#$ all to do with "russian hacking," "russian interference" or even "collusion" (whatever that is). The one bonus of this whole dog and pony show is just how corrupt the Obama admin was in dealing with Hillary's investigation is going to be revealed to the full light of day, and very soon. Yeah, along with the truth about Elvis's two headed lizard baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Just now, Chicken Boo said: Lies! Blatant lies. Your supreme leader would be proud. Link 'em all. Burden of proof is on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 [This is an automated response]The thread is no longer contributing positively to the community and therefore the discussion has been closed.Thank you. Politics may be discussed in the forum Politics, Polls, and Pundits. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts