Should He Stand?

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
161

I keep hearing this same disregard for what free speech means. Yes he has every right to say what he wants or not stand for the anthem, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have the right to disagree. Free speech goes both ways. It doesn’t mean we accept everything that idiots spew forth.

Example. The KKK has the right to say whatever they want, and I would fight for their right to keep that freedom. But the KKK are a bunch of rotten fucks with whom I disagree and I will voice my disagreement by way of my freedom of speech. Get it? Nobody is saying Colin can’t kneel for the anthem or should be forced to stand. We are saying he is a fucking moron and God bless America, he has every right to be a moron.

1 Like
162

Damn straight on that…

You know what’s really sad? The fucking people buying his jerseys and worse yet, having their “selfies” taken with him. Jesus Christ. If the Chinese Navy sailed into Manhattan, people would take out their phones for a fucking picture, instead of picking up a rifle.

The year of the pampered , pussified , professional athlete. You want to make a difference, little cowards? put on a real uniform. Not standing for 9/11. Filth.

7 Likes
163

I think many of the “protest” across the NFL ended up fizzing out to a nothing.

Why? Because they were essentially ignored.

That’s the exact way you deal with a bratty Toddler having a Tantrum.

2 Likes
164

I am curious: what is your take on this column?

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/09/12/jared-odrick-colin-kaepernick-national-anthem

I happen to disagree with Kaepernick; unfortunately I think he has chosen a very poor method of protest, and I think he lacks the eloquence to connect the dots between his chosen form of protest and the thing that he is actually trying to protest. However, I do think that Jared Odrick wrote very well here about the ensuing public discussions, and I’d like to parse apart a few things that you’ve said here:

  1. “I want them to keep their politics off the football field. They are tentitled to support whatever cuase they want ON THEIR OWN TIME. Not mine.”

Since when did football games become “your” time? One of the great paradoxes that I’ve seen is this idea that the problem with Kaepernick’s protest is that he’s doing it in a highly “public” setting, but no one forces you to watch an NFL game; this isn’t the state-sponsored television station from the wall television in 1984 forcing a public announcement down your throat. Which brings me to my next point…

  1. “Football games are not the time and place for political protest.”

I’ve always found this angle strange, the idea that football games (or any sporting event) cannot be used for political statements. We get politics shoved down our throat before every game, since all of them start with huge pro-America moment by saluting the flag and playing the national anthem, and many include some sort of “paid patriotism” where the government actually pays the NFL team for some sort of acknowledgement to the military.

(note: I am fine with playing the anthem before all games and think it one of our better traditions, but one must acknowledge that yes, it is a political statement)

Isn’t the idea of any “protest” to do something in a forum where it will draw the most possible attention? A few times I’ve seen this argument protested that Kaepernick shouldn’t be protesting because he makes a lot of money and therefore has no right to speak about “oppression” of black people…but why are public figures precluded from taking social stances? We often want public figures to be colorful and speak their minds, until they do something that offends our own delicate sensibilities, and then we want them to go back to repeating the bland “I’m just here to help the team win…we gotta take it one game at a time…the Good Lord willing, it will all work out” and stay away from politics altogether.

Do you also believe that actors, influential businessmen, and others should refrain from taking social stances in public forum(s)? Or is your ire restricted to “black athletes” who should shut their yapper and score points for you to win your fantasy-football title against your other working-class-white-male, six-pack-of-Bud-Light-drinking, fights-in-the-parking-lot-against-fans-of-the-other-team buddies?

*EDIT: I want to clarify that this last statement is not about you specifically, but about a general stereotype of many people who are in the “Shut yer mouth and play football!” camp.

3 Likes
165

Also, to be clear, this is why I think Kaepernick is wrong. I do not particularly like what he is doing. But I’ve thought that a lot of the outpouring against him has amounted to basically one step above “Shut up and go win the football game, n*****!”

There are a lot of people who I like and respect commenting on this thread vehemently against Kap, and that’s fine. You guys aren’t really what I’m talking about.

1 Like
166

If he had been more Politically Correct, he would have upset fewer people.

167

You didn’t direct this at me, but my stance is that when I am at work, or in uniform on my way to or from work, or wearing a hat with my agency’s name on it, I have to answer for everything I say and do because it reflects on my agency. Why do his actions not reflect on the NFL as a whole?

If he was making commercials for BLM on his time, while not wearing his uniform I would say he is well within his rights, and that his actions do not reflect on his team or the league.

2 Likes
168

I tend to agree with most of what you wrote in that post, regardless of how poorly I think of CK. But here I think there is something else going on: I believe, like many, that Kap is a ‘limousine protester’ and he hasn’t done a damn thing about what he is apparently so outraged by that he chooses to sit during the Anthem. It is akin to a PR stunt in my view precisely because he hasn’t actually done anything about anything–

  • Bill Gates talks about renewable energy and he creates a consortium of private investors and foundations to pour money into green energy innovation to make it practical.
  • Gary Sinese talks about helping veterans and he spends a large amount of time raising money for them, going to visit and talk with them, and giving his time to them.
  • Ted Nugent talks about the 2nd amendment and conservation…and yep, you guessed it he writes and meets his state congressmen on the subject, stays involved, talks about the greatness of the outdoors and the right to self protection

There are tons of other examples, but the 3 above range from billionaire to actor to politically incendiary aging rock star…but they all put time and effort and willpower into what they feel strongly about. There are a ton of NFL players that help out with community building, projects to keep kids in school, stuff like that. Kap has done zilch except wear pig socks and cry like a bitch about the Anthem.

When people who talk about Kap’s financial position and privileged position in life and say that he doesn’t have a place to protest this is, I believe, what they are very inadequately trying to express. Where’s the proof? Where’s the activism? Where’s the work? You’re quite right that there are many people who have delicate sensibilities and also many people who are definitely 1 small step above the "shut up and entertain me n****** " line. However, I think much of the anger stems from this position above: they feel he displays hypocritical self-aggrandizing behavior without any proof that any of this is really THAT important to him, along with the behavior like “pig socks” which lets face it, does the whole damn point a disservice. People put time and effort into DOING things for their causes when they feel strongly enough to protest verbally.

Anyway I’m fully aware you’re not talking about people in this thread; I just wanted to chime in with my perspective on that part of your post. Bottom line, people act on what they feel is really personally important to them. This is nothing more than those stupid Kony facebook posts all over again.

4 Likes
169

Fair point, and thanks for chiming in.

All strong points, and agreed. Really great post.

As noted - I don’t really think very much of Kap and his chosen method of protest, I also just don’t think much of some of the comments being hurled at him (not just in this thread, but stuff I’ve seen and heard elsewhere as well). And while I understand Uncle Gabby’s point above that it’s reasonable to ask he behave according to some NFL code of conduct while he is on “company time” - I have been amazed at the venomous attacks towards him for what, in his mind, is a (very flawed) expression of his opinion.

170

Hanging out with a bunch of die hard Stillers fans?

2 Likes
171

I don’t really care that much. CK can do what he wants, and the NFL can do what it wants. It’s just brazenly stupid and biased.

CK is factually wrong in his stance. He is probably doing it for the wrong reasons. He offers no direct problems or solutions. And it’s a terribly ineffective way to create change (if he actually had concrete things he wanted to change), bringing divisiveness and negative attention to an already hot button topic.

The NFL is hugely biased and hypocritical on the topic. They only allow protest one way. No way in hell would they let someone in uniform on the playing field protest all the black people killing cops (or even all the black people killing black people), even though that’s a more factually sound argument. And if they want to be hypocritical lying partisan racists fine, but I’m going to call them hypocritical lying partisan racists.

2 Likes
172

Didn’t Richard Sherman catch a bunch of flack for speaking out about black on black violence a few seasons ago? Not from the league but from the talking heads.

1 Like
173

There is something very fundamental that many progressives just don’t understand. When you fail to show respect for the flag, it tends to trigger a “Traitor” response in many conservatives. Love of country, the sacrifices people have made, even giving their own lives.

It’s a very similar thing to Obama’s 2009 apology tour where he went all over the world apologizing for America’s “sins”. Or in 2003 when the Dixie Chicks denounced the Iraq war and said they were “ashamed” of Bush on foreign soil. In London, “Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.” They weren’t doing it in some more diplomatic way that showed love and support, even thought they disagreed. People boycotted them all over the place. Radio stations pulled their songs. Freedom of speech sometimes has consequences.

Put it this way. If you want to criticize or correct your spouse for something, you first emphasize your love for that person. The things you really appreciate. Then you say what you need to say in private. Even then, it’s risky. BUT you never go criticize your wife to all the neighbors and family members. When you go tell other people what a crappy spouse you have, it’s going to rightly trigger the “you’re disloyal, you’re a traitor” feeling.

That’s what Kap’s protest triggers in MANY Americans. He doesn’t understand it. He can’t figure out why his protest is offensive, or he thinks he’s some kind of victim. Presiden Obama doesn’t understand that either, and it’s pointlessly alienated a lot of people. He’s been the most divisive president in my memory. Honestly, I think his response to Ferguson helped just inflame the racial divide that we’re experiencing right now. I really wish our first black president could have been someone like Dallas police Chief Brown. At least he knows how to talk about the issues in a way that gets everybody on both sides of the aisle behind him.

4 Likes
174

(Post erased by poster.)

175

TV Ratings: Rams’ First Game as L.A. Team Pulls Weak ‘MNF’ Audience

Compared with the same game last year, the ‘Monday Night Football’ shutout sinks 25 percent.

2 Likes
176

Since I have been a member of T-Nation, I have always strived to be as professional as possible, but, the CK situation just makes my blood boil. Just as I stated in my first post, he has the Constitutional right to protest, but, I also have the right to vehemently despise him.

And you know why? Because he has not “lost” anything, he has not “been there” to base his fucked up stance on anything:

Did he lose two brothers in the 911 attack? NO

Did he watch 4 of his squad die in a filthy wadi in Iraq? NO

Did he see his brother get his left leg, right arm, blown off by a 13 year old suicide bomber? NO

Has he walked through the market square after a bombing and see the childrens body parts lying in the street, one arm still clutching a stuffed turtle? NO

Has he worked narcotics and seen the devastation that drugs cause for the poor? NO

Has he ever worked the streets , received a call, and walked in on a 30 year old male raping a 4 year old? No

Has he ever put his life on the line for anything other than a childs game? NO

Has he ever felt the pain and loss of losing a brother officer? a firefighter? a paramedic? a SF medic shot through the head trying to save a fellow brother? NO

If must be nice to have such noble views, when you have nothing to base it on.

My apologies for the rant, but, that is my last post on the subject.

For my fallen brothers:

For taking a stand and DOING SOMETHING besides sitting: They went in not knowing what they were facing, to serve and protect. They have no jerseys to sell or balls to throw.

Report sheds light on chaos, bloodshed of San Bernardino terror attack - CBS News

13 Likes
177

I mentioned the Dixie Chicks in an earlier comment. So many parallels to what they did and the response to Kap’s free speech. Many Americans thought it was much too soon after the tragedy of 9/11 for them to be speaking out against American policy, particularly doing it while on foreign soil. Of course, many of their fans were conservatives and by expressing their views, they alienated the people who buy their music.

Some excerpts from their Wiki page.

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Dixie Chicks performed in concert in London on March 10, 2003… During the introduction to their song “Travelin’ Soldier”, Natalie Maines, who along with Robison and Maguire is also a native of Texas, said:

“Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.”

The comment about United States President George W. Bush, who had served as the 46th governor of Texas from 1995 to 2000 before his election to the presidency, was reported in The Guardian’s review of the Chicks concert.[42] Shortly thereafter, the U.S. media picked up the story and controversy erupted.[43]

Maines’s remark sparked intense criticism;[44] media commentators claimed that she should not criticize Bush on foreign soil. Maines responded, “I said it there 'cause that’s where I was.”[45]

The comment by Maines angered many country music fans and was financially damaging.[46] Following the uproar and the start of a boycott of Dixie Chicks’ music, which, in turn, caused Dixie Chicks’ cover of the Fleetwood Mac song “Landslide” to fall sharply from No. 10 down to 43 on the Billboard Hot 100 in a single week. It dropped out of the entire chart the following week. Maines attempted to clarify matters on March 12 by saying, “I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world.”[47]

The statement failed to appease her critics, and Maines issued an apology on March 14: “As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers’ lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.”[48][49]

In wake of the statement against Bush, many supporters of the Dixie Chicks dropped their support… In one famous anti-Dixie Chicks display, former fans were encouraged to bring their CDs to a demonstration at which they would be crushed by a bulldozer. In one poll by an Atlanta radio station, 76 percent of listeners who participated responded “if I could, I’d take my CDs back”…

One exception to the list of Dixie Chicks opponents was country musician and vociferous Iraq war opponent Merle Haggard, who in the summer of 2003 released a song critical of US media coverage of the Iraq War. On July 25, 2003, the Associated Press reported him saying:

I don't even know the Dixie Chicks, but I find it an insult for all the men and women who fought and died in past wars when almost the majority of America jumped down their throats for voicing an opinion. It was like a verbal witch-hunt and lynching.[53][54]

On April 24, 2003, Dixie Chicks launched a publicity campaign to explain their position. During a prime-time interview with TV personality Diane Sawyer, Maines said she remained proud of her original statement. The band also appeared naked (with private parts strategically covered) on the May 2 cover of Entertainment Weekly magazine, with slogans such as “Traitors”, “Saddam’s Angels”, “Dixie Sluts”, “Proud Americans”, “Hero”, “Free Speech”, and “Brave” printed on their bodies. The slogans represented the labels (both positive and negative) that had been placed on them in the aftermath of Maines’ statement.[55]

Bush responded to the controversy in an interview with Tom Brokaw on April 24:

The Dixie Chicks are free to speak their mind. They can say what they want to say ... they shouldn't have their feelings hurt just because some people don't want to buy their records when they speak out ... Freedom is a two-way street ... I don't really care what the Dixie Chicks said. I want to do what I think is right for the American people, and if some singers or Hollywood stars feel like speaking out, that's fine. That's the great thing about America. [56]

Colorado radio station KKCS suspended two of its disc jockeys on May 6 for playing music by Dixie Chicks.[60] On May 22, at the Academy of Country Music awards ceremony in Las Vegas, there were boos when the band’s nomination for Entertainer of the Year award was announced. However, the broadcast’s host, Vince Gill, reminded the audience that everyone is entitled to freedom of speech. The academy gave the award to Toby Keith, who had been engaged in a public feud with Maines ever since she had denounced his number one hit “Courtesy of the Red, White, & Blue (The Angry American)” as “ignorant” the year before.[61] On May 21, 2003, Maines wore a T-shirt with the letters “FUTK” on the front at the Academy of Country Music Awards.[62] A spokesperson for Dixie Chicks said that the acronym stood for “Friends United in Truth and Kindness”, but many, including awards host Gill, took it to be a shot at Keith (“F**k You Toby Keith”), and some Dixie Chicks critics responded by wearing T-shirts with “FUDC” on the front.[63] In an October 2004 appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher, Maines acknowledged disagreements with Keith, and said that when she wore the shirt she “thought that nobody would get it”.

The same year, the American Red Cross refused a $1 million promotional partnership from Dixie Chicks.[67] The organization did not publicize the refusal; it was revealed by the Chicks themselves in a May 2006 interview on The Howard Stern Show on Sirius Satellite Radio.[68] According to National Red Cross spokesperson Julie Thurmond Whitmer, the band would have made the donation “only if the American Red Cross would embrace the band’s [2003] summer tour”.[69] Whitmer further said:

"The Dixie Chicks controversy made it impossible for the American Red Cross to associate itself with the band because such association would have violated two of the founding principles of the organization: impartiality and neutrality ... Should the Dixie Chicks like to make an unconditional financial donation to the American Red Cross, we will gladly accept it."[69]...

… Maines also retracted her earlier apology to President Bush, stating, “I apologized for disrespecting the office of the President, but I don’t feel that way anymore. I don’t feel he is owed any respect whatsoever.”

…Maines commented, “The entire country may disagree with me, but I don’t understand the necessity for patriotism. Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country … I don’t see why people care about patriotism.”

178

No apologies necessary, at least not for me mate. I feel mostly the same way about him. Rant all you want idaho, you’ve the right.

6 Likes
179

Un-fucking-believable.

3 Likes
180

Yeah, when Powerpuff posted that quote up I had to walk away from the computer to do something (fortunately) or my brain would have exploded. Fuck that bullshit.

3 Likes