wildcats20;1873373 wrote:Hope you save your receipt.

Uh oh, trouble in paradise?

Another take, I would like to see where everyone would stand if the players protested something else. Flip the script and they are protesting now something you believe in or don't believe in. What would the reaction be?

like_that;1873382 wrote:Uh oh, trouble in paradise?

He hurt Tomlin's feels.

SportsAndLady;1873333 wrote:I fail to see the comparison between the US and nazi Germany.

I wasn't comparing the two. I said that we are far from being like Nazi Germany. Way down the list of reasons why is because patriotic displays aren't required here.

Few thoughts:
1. I don't have a problem with the players taking a knee. Their right to voice their perceived injustice in this country how they see fit. I stand for the anthem, but I get their point of view and why they feel the need to take a knee. I grew up in a mixed race home and was the subject of racist rants and attacks growing up.

2. The players had to know the message would get muddled and distorted by politicians and the media (both left and right.) The intellectual art of the conversation and civil discourse about racism and perceived police brutality is missing in this country. Taking a knee for the anthem was not the right course of action. It did the exact opposite of start a civil dialogue. It fed the flames. Which led to Friday and...

3. Trump. His comments were below the The Office of the President and he should not have acted in that fashion on Friday. He took a complicated and charged issue, doused it in gas and lit the match. He did it to gain applause lines and cheers. It also did reinforce his views to his opponents that Trump is a borderline bigot and racist. He did nothing to advance the discussion and completely warped the issue to now either you are against the flag and country or with him and with the country.

4. Sports as an outlet. I get it. Sports for some are a way to get away from the world. I watch Ohio State to forget about how fucked up the world is for a few hours. But, sports and politics have always been close. Sports is littered with political figures and stories: Joe Louis, the great white hope, Jessie Owens, Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Bill Russel, most of the Olympics, 1968 Mexico City, baseball after 9/11, and now today. I'm sure I'm forgetting some. But, the whole point that these guys should just shut up and play flies in the face of the history of sports and politics in this country. In some cases in history, sports has driven political change and dialogue. I wonder how many people on here would have been against some of the moments and figures I listed above. I'm guessing quite a few..

5. I wonder what happens next week. How do teams respond? Will this keep going, lead to actual dialogue perhaps? Or, will it just fade into the distance as Trump creates a new firestorm and the media rushes to cover it?

ptown_trojans_1;1873394 wrote:...lead to actual dialogue perhaps?

If it does, would you give Trump credit for it?

But I agree with everything you wrote. I often had similar reactions to how Obama handled similar issues - and often to applause and cheers - but for some reason people calling out Trump for this didn't see Obama as divisive.

Michael Bennett trying to profit off of this. (Tweeted from Rovell). Same guy who lied about his Vegas PD incident. Never let a good controversy go to waste.

http://www.blacksanta72.com/product/equality-hoodie

So tired about hearing about 1st amendment rights in this situation. The First amendment applies to GOVERNMENT restricting the listed freedoms and prosecution. It extends only to public institutions, but does not extend to private business. It does not provide immunity to consequences outside of those public/government institutions.

gut;1873398 wrote: But I agree with everything you wrote. I often had similar reactions to how Obama handled similar issues - and often to applause and cheers - but for some reason people calling out Trump for this didn't see Obama as divisive.

I agree that Obama was divisive but Trump takes it to a new obnoxious level. He is clumsy, inarticulate and has no filter in an unpresidential way. Time and again he takes every opportunity to sound like a jack ass.

FatHobbit;1873418 wrote:I agree that Obama was divisive but Trump takes it to a new obnoxious level. He is clumsy, inarticulate and has no filter in an unpresidential way. Time and again he takes every opportunity to sound like a jack ass.

Yeah this whole kneeling shit was dying down until he decided to be a blowhard dipshit.

HitsRus;1873415 wrote:So tired about hearing about 1st amendment rights in this situation. The First amendment applies to GOVERNMENT restricting the listed freedoms and prosecution. It extends only to public institutions, but does not extend to private business. It does not provide immunity to consequences outside of those public/government institutions.

You do realize this whole situation blew up because the president (aka: GOVERNMENT) openly encouraged owners to fire those sons of bitches who did choose to kneel, don't you? Not that big of a line between the government punishing a person for exercising free speech and the government sanctioning said punishment.

like_that;1873419 wrote:Yeah this whole kneeling shit was dying down until he decided to be a blowhard dipshit.

reps

Heretic;1873421 wrote:You do realize this whole situation blew up because the president (aka: GOVERNMENT) openly encouraged owners to fire those sons of bitches who did choose to kneel, don't you? Not that big of a line between the government punishing a person for exercising free speech and the government sanctioning said punishment.

Agree 100% with that statement. But the arguement was made before and continues to be made even without Trump interjecting his sorry ass into this.

It is unfortunate that Alejandro Villinueva felt like he needed to apologize but I see his point.

While he was in the military they are heavy into UNIFORMITY. When a decision is made everyone is expected to follow on, unless it is illegal or unethical.

For instance, if you forget your winter hat, or gloves, no matter how cold many times everyone is forced to take those off. Some commands will make everyone in PT to wear the same colored socks since they allowed the wearing of black socks. You can add to a regulation, but not take away.

There is a very good reason for it.

So when the decision was made for them to not come out he felt compelled to apologize for not joining his teammates even though he did what he felt was right.

So the cheeto benito is tweeting again. What is he trying to distract us from?

superman;1873441 wrote:So the cheeto benito is tweeting again. What is he trying to distract us from?

The healthcare bill officially died, so maybe that?

Can someone please entertain my question?!?!?!? What do you think the reaction would be if these guys protested something else. Let's say they kneel down to protest against abortions since that is a touchy subject. Do you think each side would be consistent with their current reactions? I don't.

like_that;1873445 wrote:Can someone please entertain my question?!?!?!? What do you think the reaction would be if these guys protested something else. Let's say they kneel down to protest against abortions since that is a touchy subject. Do you think each side would be consistent with their current reactions? I don't.

The rancor would be about the same, only the sides would change. Partisan hypocrisy on a massive scale.

queencitybuckeye;1873450 wrote:The rancor would be about the same, only the sides would change. Partisan hypocrisy on a massive scale.

Pretty much this. Although it would be funny to watch neocons talk about how disrespecting the flag is okay for such an important cause and liberals being super patriotic.

like_that;1873445 wrote:Can someone please entertain my question?!?!?!? What do you think the reaction would be if these guys protested something else. Let's say they kneel down to protest against abortions since that is a touchy subject. Do you think each side would be consistent with their current reactions? I don't.

My thoughts would remain the same. I'd be on the players side.

I dont particularly agree with what they are protesting in this case (police brutality), but am 100% with them kneeling. I do agree with other parts of the protest though. Blacks are still oppressed, and there is no question white priveage (especially male) exists in this country still.

Laley23;1873467 wrote:My thoughts would remain the same. I'd be on the players side.

I dont particularly agree with what they are protesting in this case (police brutality), but am 100% with them kneeling. I do agree with other parts of the protest though. Blacks are still oppressed, and there is no question white priveage (especially male) exists in this country still.

Who in particular are holding blacks back may I ask?

fish82;1873302 wrote:The rulebook and the league operations manual are two separate documents.

Rest assured that it's completely accurate.

I know what the two are. I guess reading the rulebook isn't enough to know that there's no "A62-63?" There's ZERO mention of "national anthem" in there.

http://time.com/4955704/nfl-league-rulebook-a62-63-national-anthem-rule/
http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2017/09/facebook_post_citing_nfl_playe.html

like_that;1873445 wrote:Can someone please entertain my question?!?!?!? What do you think the reaction would be if these guys protested something else. Let's say they kneel down to protest against abortions since that is a touchy subject. Do you think each side would be consistent with their current reactions? I don't.

I personally can't think of any situation that a player could kneel during the anthem and I would think it was a good idea. However, the majority of people would completely turn their arguments around if it were for abortion or something like mentioned above, on both sides. Trump's dumbass certainly wouldn't be tweeting about it.

iclfan2;1873473 wrote:I personally can't think of any situation that a player could kneel during the anthem and I would think it was a good idea. However, the majority of people would completely turn their arguments around if it were for abortion or something like mentioned above, on both sides. Trump's dumbass certainly wouldn't be tweeting about it.

I feel the same. It would still be disrespectful and we would see everyone flip roles. Trump also would tweet about it, except he would show support lol.

OSH;1873471 wrote:I know what the two are. I guess reading the rulebook isn't enough to know that there's no "A62-63?" There's ZERO mention of "national anthem" in there.

http://time.com/4955704/nfl-league-rulebook-a62-63-national-anthem-rule/
http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2017/09/facebook_post_citing_nfl_playe.html

Which is probably why I didn't mention the rulebook, but referred to the operations manual, as did the original article on the topic.

The original article is what Snopes originally face-planted on when trying to discredit it. That said, I'm not sure why facebook dummies calling it the "rulebook" instead of the operations manual somehow discredits it.

The fact is that it's league policy that players stand at attention for the anthem, and Goodell is once again being exposed as a hypocrite.