Post by: Noah W on September 25, 2017, 05:33:50 AM
To the NFL players who took a knee during the playing of the National Anthem.
So, you want to take a knee?
Take a trip to Valley Forge in January. Hold a musket ball in your fingers and imagine it piercing your flesh and breaking a bone or two. There won't be a doctor or trainer to assist you until after the battle. Wait your turn while listening to the screams of pain from the wounded.
Then take a knee.
Go to Normandy where man after American man stormed the beach, dodging dead bodies and withering machine gun fire,...the very sea stained with American blood. Imagine that your fellow players are your dead brothers in arms.
Then take a knee.
Take a knee in the sweat soaked jungles of Vietnam. Over 60,000 Americans died in those jungles.There was no playbook or million dollar contracts for doing your job, but they understood what our flag represented. When they came home, they were protested by their fellow Americans.
Then take a knee while they spit on you.
Take another knee in the blood drenched sands of Fallujah in 110 degree heat..Trade in your pads for a Kevlar helmet and battle dress...You'll have to stay hydrated, but there won't be anyone to squirt Gatorade into your mouth. And watch out for those IEDs when you take a knee.
There's a lot of places to take a knee. Americans have given their lives all over the world. When you use the banner under which they fought as a source for your protest, you dishonor the memories of those who bled for the very freedoms you have. That's what the red stripes mean. It represents the blood of those who spilled it defending your liberty.
So while you're on your knee, pray for those that came before you, not on manicured fields striped and printed with numbers to announce every inch of game yardage...but on nameless hills and bloodied beaches and sweltering forests and bitter cold mountains...every inch marked by an American life lost serving that flag you protest.
No cheerleaders, no announcers, no coaches, no fans...just American men and women on the land, air, and sea, delivering the real fight against those who chose to harm us..so you would have the opportunity to dishonor their service by "taking a knee."
You have no clue what it took to get you where you are...but your "protest" is duly noted. Not only is it disgraceful to a nation, it points to your ingratitude for those who chose to defend you under that banner that will still wave long after your stats and game jersey are forgotten...
If you really feel the need to take a knee, come with me to church on Sunday and we'll both kneel before Almighty God. We'll thank Him for preserving this country for as long as He has. We'll beg forgiveness for both of our ingratitude for all He has provided us. We'll appeal to Him for understanding and wisdom. We'll pray for liberty and justice for all...because He is the one who provides those things.
But no protesting allowed. There will only be gratitude for His provision and a plea for His continued grace and mercy on the land of the free and the home of the brave.
May He continue to bless America, the ignorant and selfish sinners we all are. What an incredible gift He has given us!
Noah W
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on September 25, 2017, 08:51:51 AM
...and due credit. That was beautiful, thanks for sharing.
Post by: Anthony on September 25, 2017, 09:03:30 AM
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 25, 2017, 09:21:02 AM
https://www.facebook.com/BodyByO318/posts/10210790369820172?pnref=story
Post by: Little Joe on September 25, 2017, 09:46:35 AM
And here's the counterpointTotally irrelevant. Whether or not they always stood for the Anthem has no bearing on them actively disrespecting the Anthem today, and by association, all the veterans that sacrificed to give them that right to protest.
https://www.facebook.com/BodyByO318/posts/10210790369820172?pnref=story
If they are merely protesting Trump, they should find another way. But if they are going to display their political opinions in public, then they should be ready to accept any backlash.
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 25, 2017, 10:09:23 AM
Totally irrelevant. Whether or not they always stood for the Anthem has no bearing on them actively disrespecting the Anthem today, and by association, all the veterans that sacrificed to give them that right to protest.So how many know what the protest is over, yet are commenting?
If they are merely protesting Trump, they should find another way. But if they are going to display their political opinions in public, then they should be ready to accept any backlash.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on September 25, 2017, 10:09:39 AM
While there was no "battle" at Valley Forge, brave men died there, but I get what the guy is trying to say. The players keep saying they are not disrespecting the National Anthem, nor the American flag. However, may veterans, service members, police, first responder, etc think they are. For that fact alone they should stop these protests. They can go on any talk show, TV, radio, street corner, public square, etc and protest. Instead they use their FANS relaxation time to protest. Very selfish, and egotistical.
He didn't say that there was a battle at Valley Forge, but the uneducated might infer that.
Funny how these turds say they are not protesting the flag/anthem, yet that is exactly when they decide to protest.
I avoid going to concerts because I know the artist is going to use the captive, paying audience to promulgate their "opinions".
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on September 25, 2017, 10:11:28 AM
So how many know what the protest is over...?
IT DOESN'T MATTER.
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 25, 2017, 10:46:43 AM
IT DOESN'T MATTER.Emotional outburst is the fuel for fire.
Post by: invflatspin on September 25, 2017, 12:08:52 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/alejandro-villanuevas-jersey-becomes-overnight-best-seller-stands-anthem-150312271.html
Massive boycott/counter-demonstration getting underway for Sunday Nov 12th. Veterans day. Works for me.
Post by: Little Joe on September 25, 2017, 12:29:39 PM
So how many know what the protest is over, yet are commenting?As I said, "irrelevant". I may not know what the protest is over, and I don't really care. There are only two relevant facts:
1. They have the right to protest anything they want to.
2. I have the right to think of them, and call them, unpatriotic assholes that are undeserving of my entertainment dollars.
You were/are a marine. I applaud you for that. Those people don't. They figuratively stick their middle finger out at you.
Post by: Number7 on September 25, 2017, 01:12:49 PM
Don't care.
Don't intend to care, because those crybabies lost any right to my respect when they spit on my flag.
Fuck them and anyone else that thinks I have a responsibility to care about them, their hypocritical "cause" and their league.
These pathetic children are no differnent than the mask wearing cowards from antifa and black lives (lies) matter. When they disrespect our servicemen and women and spit on my flag they can all go on the unemployment line before I will invest any of my time or energy in their playtime activities.
Actions have consequences and these punks are about to discover how many of the silent majority have written them off.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on September 25, 2017, 02:13:50 PM
Post by: invflatspin on September 25, 2017, 02:31:23 PM
You were/are a marine. I applaud you for that. Those people don't. They figuratively stick their middle finger out at you.
User Jaybird180 is a Marine?
Post by: bflynn on September 25, 2017, 06:52:30 PM
So how many know what the protest is over, yet are commenting?
I know what it is about...a very non specific "demand" that things get "better"
Weird that the same people who wail that America has so many problems seem to be th very ones that also resist making it great.
On the other hand, those who want America to be great really do want it to be great for everyone....everyone. Shame that so much blame, pride, arrogance and hate gets in the way
Post by: invflatspin on September 25, 2017, 07:13:14 PM
Post by: Anthony on September 26, 2017, 04:13:36 AM
Plowboys all take a knee before MNF. Heard it through news, I'm not watching anymore. If the Plowboys bow to pressure, there is no hope.
Jerry Jones previously said all the players would be standing. He caved. He lied. The NFL is a big lie. I am done with them also, after over 50 years of being an Eagles fan, they too can go to HELL.
Post by: Mr Pou on September 26, 2017, 04:33:36 AM
1. They have the right to protest anything they want to.
I as well believe they have the right to protest anything they want to, but not on the job. These guys are at work, and should act like it. Want to protest? Fine! Tweet, facebook, youtube, have your own damned web page, but don't protest at work.
If I were to trot out my politics on customer visits or during conference calls I'd be fired in a NY minute.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on September 26, 2017, 04:55:29 AM
Post by: Anthony on September 26, 2017, 05:10:15 AM
They all stood for the National Anthem.
They still injected POLITICS into other's relaxation, and entertainment time. I don't need controversy and heartburn when trying to be entertained for a few hours. I'm out.
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 26, 2017, 06:37:48 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/getnickwright/status/912421985958768640/video/1
Post by: invflatspin on September 26, 2017, 08:18:56 AM
They still injected POLITICS into other's relaxation, and entertainment time. I don't need controversy and heartburn when trying to be entertained for a few hours. I'm out.
Bingo. I watch sports to get AWAY from politics. I watch sports because it entertains me.
I don't give a wet, dribbly shit which side, or what perceived civic failure one wants to address. Do it on your own time, in your own house, or out in public. But - do NOT inject it into my sports.
Pretty soon I'll be relegated to watching HS football games on local channels. Pretty sure this infection is going to spread to college next.
Post by: MarkZ on September 26, 2017, 08:51:50 AM
Apparently, it works. Such is the reality-TV society we live in.
Post by: Anthony on September 26, 2017, 09:53:43 AM
I've learned, since Inauguration Day, that when 45 opens his mouth (or Twitter account), to start looking into news that isn't on the front page. Everything else is smoke and mirrors meant to distract.
Apparently, it works. Such is the reality-TV society we live in.
The Identity Politics Obama, Holder, Lynch, Hillary used, and are using is the main distraction. Kaepernick, and the other players started politicizing the NFL, with IDENTITY POLITICS, a sport people use to relax, be entertained, and escape politics. Now you blame Trump for commenting on the disrespect of the flag and Anthem he now has been elected to represent? Wow. I guess the Koolaid is strong in your area.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on September 26, 2017, 09:56:04 AM
Bingo. I watch sports to get AWAY from politics. I watch sports because it entertains me.
I don't give a wet, dribbly shit which side, or what perceived civic failure one wants to address. Do it on your own time, in your own house, or out in public. But - do NOT inject it into my sports.
Pretty soon I'll be relegated to watching HS football games on local channels. Pretty sure this infection is going to spread to college next.
This happens constantly in just about any entertainment venue.
Look at the "late night" lineup.
Johnny Carson must be spinning in his grave.
Post by: invflatspin on September 26, 2017, 10:03:37 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre
It'll be some antifa/BLM/99-percenter crapheads.
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 26, 2017, 02:10:07 PM
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 26, 2017, 02:18:13 PM
I've learned, since Inauguration Day, that when 45 opens his mouth (or Twitter account), to start looking into news that isn't on the front page. Everything else is smoke and mirrors meant to distract.
Apparently, it works. Such is the reality-TV society we live in.
How does 45 really feel?
Post by: Little Joe on September 26, 2017, 02:33:04 PM
AproposDo you really think those of us on this board feels either one is ok? Or that it is even any sort of popular feeling among those of us that love our Country?
If you do, then you are full of shit.
If not, then why do you throw shit like that out there? You know it is only going to make people angry. But then again, I suppose that is the point, isn't it?
Post by: Jaybird180 on September 26, 2017, 02:57:11 PM
Do you really think those of us on this board feels either one is ok? Or that it is even any sort of popular feeling among those of us that love our Country?So you can get past your anger, think about it and understand it from another perspective. Try my shoes on for a day or two.
If you do, then you are full of shit.
If not, then why do you throw shit like that out there? You know it is only going to make people angry. But then again, I suppose that is the point, isn't it?
But then again you got me wondering....(see post #7 and below)
Post by: Lucifer on September 26, 2017, 03:42:39 PM
Try my shoes on for a day or two.
Nope. I could never take up being a racist.
Post by: Little Joe on September 26, 2017, 04:06:59 PM
So you can get past your anger, think about it and understand it from another perspective. Try my shoes on for a day or two.I don't care who's shoes you wear: multi millionaire spoiled brats disrespecting the flag and the National Anthem does nothing to alleviate the problem that your cartoon alluded to. All it does is widen the divide. But then again, that is the point, isn't it?
But then again you got me wondering....(see post #7 and below)
Post by: Number7 on September 26, 2017, 05:25:55 PM
Apropos
I guess if you just love bullshit, it is.
Post by: MarkZ on September 26, 2017, 08:48:05 PM
The Identity Politics Obama, Holder, Lynch, Hillary used, and are using is the main distraction. Kaepernick, and the other players started politicizing the NFL, with IDENTITY POLITICS, a sport people use to relax, be entertained, and escape politics. Now you blame Trump for commenting on the disrespect of the flag and Anthem he now has been elected to represent? Wow. I guess the Koolaid is strong in your area.
Not commenting on what Trump said. I commented on the timing of it all. It's awfully suspect.
Post by: bflynn on September 27, 2017, 04:28:31 AM
Why is it OK for an NFL player for force his customers to endure his beliefs, but not ok for a baker? To the Left, the difference is entirely about which one they personally agree with plus the fact that the Left doesn't actually want the country to become better.
Post by: Little Joe on September 27, 2017, 07:37:45 AM
Trump should not have used SOB in his ranting.
Players have the right to express their opinion, within the confines of their employer's policies.
I think making such a radical statement as ignoring the National Anthem is stupid and risks alienating many fans.
I am one of those fans that feel alienated.
If they are truly trying to right a perceived wrong, (ie, persecution of blacks in various forms), then pissing off the people they think perform or allow the persecution is the absolute wrong way to go about it. That is a perfect tactic to make the problem worse.
If those NFL players truly wanted to make the situation better, there are multitudes of better ways to do that. Why don't they each donate a couple $million each to buy body cameras for the cops. Why don't they contribute to after-school projects for disadvantaged youths? Why don't the make statements urging blacks to NOT get in the cop's face during any encounter with them.
More whites are shot by cops than are blacks.
Blacks claim that you have to look at at the percentages of the population to see the discrepancy.
I claim that you have to look at the number of black police encounters vs white police encounters. I have never seen that stat, although it is probably out there somewhere.
Post by: Lucifer on September 27, 2017, 07:47:52 AM
And it's right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook, word for word.
Post by: gerhardt on September 27, 2017, 08:20:19 AM
Players have the right to express their opinion, within the confines of their employer's policies.
I think making such a radical statement as ignoring the National Anthem is stupid and risks alienating many fans.
We don't often see eye to eye, but I agree with both comments. I don't watch pro football so I'm not really a factor. I 100% agree with their right to behave childishly. But I'm not their boss. I think their behavior is disrespectful, and it's meant to be. If I was their boss they'd be out on their asses before the game began. To be honest, I'm surprised there's not a contract clause requiring them to behave respectfully.
But the goofy thing to me is how many people are taking this so seriously which actually gives their claims more merit. It's amusing that some people are so upset about this.
I get why so many black people are upset. Racism is a problem. Until recently I thought it was getting much better, but I was wrong. We do need to see changes in our country.
The thing is, the NFL protesters have the ability to effect the change. An ability that most of us do not. They are on the world stage and have access to powerful people who can effect changes. People with influence. Rather than drawing criticism and getting a lot of nobodies worked up and angry, they should be using their celebrity status to make the connections to get the job done.
Post by: Lucifer on September 27, 2017, 08:29:10 AM
I get why so many black people are upset. Racism is a problem. Until recently I thought it was getting much better, but I was wrong. We do need to see changes in our country.
Understand the problems in racism have been accelerated right after BHO took office. He used it and promoted it to achieve his agenda.
The recent hammering on racism is brought to you by the Alt Left Progressives. Go read "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky to see the playbook currently in play.
Post by: gerhardt on September 27, 2017, 08:39:44 AM
Understand the problems in racism have been accelerated right after BHO took office. He used it and promoted it to achieve his agenda.
The recent hammering on racism is brought to you by the Alt Left Progressives. Go read "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky to see the playbook currently in play.
What? You're insane.
Post by: Lucifer on September 27, 2017, 08:46:55 AM
What? You're insane.
Yea, right. ::)
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on September 27, 2017, 09:08:50 AM
Post by: bflynn on September 27, 2017, 09:24:14 AM
Racism is a problem.
Being one of those white christian "conservative" males who are supposedly the core problem of racism, I disagree. Race really is the last we think about or care about. I don't care what color your skin is or what your background is. Can you get the job done that I need done, can you accomplish the tasks set in front of you. That is what is important to me.
If racism is a problem, then quit talking about the blame or the effect and start talking about how it happens. If you think the system is broken then identify what is broken and we'll fix it. But don't dump it on my lap and try to tell me it's my problem because frankly I don't give a damn about your whiny ass problems, I have enough of my own. I think the problem is a broken culture - one that glorifies crime, violence, a quick buck and disregard for others and one in which I have no influence. So if you want to fix racism, start with fixing the culture in your own back yard.
Post by: invflatspin on September 27, 2017, 09:30:41 AM
Why bother to have rules? Lib/progs don't have to pay attention to them.
Post by: Anthony on September 27, 2017, 09:51:40 AM
I think at this point it is worth noting that the disrespect shown in various forms at NFL games is already addressed in the NFL players agreement. I don't have the wording, but there is a prohibition against any kind of display during the playing of the anthem. I believe that the teams are also supposed to be present on the field for the anthem, so the team that didn't show up is in violation of the NFL policy statement in place.
Why bother to have rules? Lib/progs don't have to pay attention to them.
Correct, there are rules for their conduct during the national anthem, but the NFL is choosing not to enforce their own rules. They fear the players, and their reaction to any enforcement. The NFL could have stopped this at the beginning, and thought it would just fade away. Now they are powerless, and while I don't think they will go under, I do think their ratings, and revenue will be negatively affected. Probably not enough to matter though, but I do hope they realize that a lot of their fans, and former fans don't like it.
Post by: invflatspin on September 27, 2017, 09:55:41 AM
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on September 27, 2017, 10:51:08 AM
What? You're insane.
No you are.
"The police acted stupidly"
"If I had a son he'd look like Trayvon"
Post by: gerhardt on September 27, 2017, 11:30:56 AM
Correct, there are rules for their conduct during the national anthem, but the NFL is choosing not to enforce their own rules. They fear the players, and their reaction to any enforcement. The NFL could have stopped this at the beginning, and thought it would just fade away. Now they are powerless, and while I don't think they will go under, I do think their ratings, and revenue will be negatively affected. Probably not enough to matter though, but I do hope they realize that a lot of their fans, and former fans don't like it.
Eh, the dummies who pay a premium for the games will return. Or not. Think NASCAR. Either way I don't really care. Beer and chip companies buy the ads, but I don't buy beer or chips. I'm sure I buy something from some company who supports them, but again, that's between them and the NFL.
I'd go to my son's city league games several years ago. I had a friend in the PR office at the university who used to get me tickets to take the family to some college football and basketball games, but she left for another job, so I haven't seen anything sports-related in a few years, and never paid a dime for a ticket.
Post by: gerhardt on September 27, 2017, 11:32:30 AM
Post by: Number7 on September 27, 2017, 11:40:18 AM
What? You're insane.
Whenever a progressive is confronted by facts, the automatic reaction is to accuse the other of being crazy.
Congrats. You are using the playbook you claim to not know about.
Post by: Lucifer on September 27, 2017, 11:46:41 AM
Lucy and his fondling buddy Eppy are the root of the problem. Without people like them this thread wouldn't exist.
Care to explain?
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on September 27, 2017, 03:39:27 PM
Lucy and his fondling buddy Eppy are the root of the problem. Without people like them this thread wouldn't exist.
I sure the fuck hope you are not referring to me.
Post by: Lucifer on September 27, 2017, 04:13:45 PM
I sure the fuck hope you are not referring to me.
He was. He can't add anything substantive to the discussion, so we get his usual drive by insult.
Post by: Anthony on September 27, 2017, 05:59:28 PM
Post by: nddons on September 27, 2017, 08:33:47 PM
So you can get past your anger, think about it and understand it from another perspective. Try my shoes on for a day or two.What? Oh boo hoo. I've never known a Marine to play the victim. Ever. Everyone has a story. Everyone. But most of us just move on to try and make tomorrow a better day.
But then again you got me wondering....(see post #7 and below)
Whatever these disrespectful protests are supposed to represent - and if you take Kappernick at his word, the protests are against this country - then there is nothing that can be done to fix their issues in our lifetimes.
In the mean time, the players, with the consent of the league and the owners, have taken the single most unifying thing provided by sports and turned it into a divisive slap in the face to the majority of the very same customers that pay their bills. It's moronic.
Post by: Number7 on September 28, 2017, 04:20:01 AM
There is nothing the liberal blacks won't destroy with their never ending make-believe, evils of America bullshit.
The press play along like the mindless idiots they are and the race whores make money off of it.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on September 28, 2017, 05:38:03 AM
Post by: Anthony on September 28, 2017, 07:31:24 AM
Sports, theater, concerts, TV shows,etc are supposed to be escapes from politics, now the left has politicized them also. They are working at ruining everything.
Agreed. I haven't watched Network TV, or modern, mainstream Hollywood movies in a long time. They can't help but insert their Liberal/Progressive agenda into EVERYTHING. Rush (our Rush, not Limbaugh) had a good post on this some time ago. Now the NFL has allowed the players to inject progressive, hate America politics into football, so now I won't watch that. I am down to Bogey movies, and Mr. Ed re-runs. :) Mr. Ed is much smarter than anyone on Network TV today.
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 07:44:14 AM
Talk about being easily triggered by something so trivial.
You guys sound worse than a bunch of thin skinned millennials.
Post by: invflatspin on September 28, 2017, 07:46:39 AM
How fecking STUPID do you have to be to stir up literally millions of paying customers? I know liberals think they are soooooo much smarter than us hicks in the sticks but really - what kind of brain-dead idealist do you have to be to go along with this crap. And yes - it is crap. No one advances their cause by poking their finger in the eye of the customer.
There was a time, before Kaperdick that I could support some of the goals and injustice that the minorities are talking about in their dealings with LEO. I have no love for LEO, and would nominally be on the side of those oppressed(of any color). I'm a big fan of individualism, idealism, live and let live, stay the hell out of my life, and generally have nothing to do with the donut-brigade. However, it strikes me that the minorities in question have made this a thousand times worse. Now, whenever I see or hear of a confrontation between a minority and a cop, I'm prolly gonna be MORE persuaded that the cop is in the right and the minority is causing trouble.
Nice job NFL. You've moved me from some modicum of compassion and support for the 'oppressed' minority, to supporting the LEO and by extension the govts that employ them, and turned me away from your nasty, disgusting, and anti-American show of petulance. Go feck yourselves, you deserve everything that's coming your way.
Post by: Lucifer on September 28, 2017, 07:56:51 AM
Wow.
Talk about being easily triggered by something so trivial.
You guys sound worse than a bunch of thin skinned millennials.
You mean like all of the outcry from the Progressives when a woman who owned a bakery refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding? Day after day the MSM had 24/7 coverage of progressives crying about this "injustice".
Post by: Anthony on September 28, 2017, 08:02:17 AM
You mean like all of the outcry from the Progressives when a woman who owned a bakery refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding? Day after day the MSM had 24/7 coverage of progressives crying about this "injustice".
It is OK when they complain, complain, complain, and cry, and whine about their issues. The Media does the same thing as you note, but when we even COMMENT on something that bothers us, we are the snowflakes? Wow, they are delusional.
Post by: Number7 on September 28, 2017, 08:34:00 AM
Wow.
Talk about being easily triggered by something so trivial.
You guys sound worse than a bunch of thin skinned millennials.
WOW. Talk about having nothing to add so you just shit the bed and pretend it sounds smart.
When did you graduate from stupid and cowardly, to stupid, cowardly and offensive?
Post by: Lucifer on September 28, 2017, 08:58:04 AM
Wow.
Talk about being easily triggered by something so trivial.
You guys sound worse than a bunch of thin skinned millennials.
While we're on this topic, want to discuss how those "easily triggered" are all upset about statues of Civil War heros, or how they are upset about a statue of Columbus, or statues of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington?
Strange how that topic never cam up until just a few weeks ago, then all of the sudden the media was again 24/7 denouncing the "injustice".
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 09:48:22 AM
You mean like all of the outcry from the Progressives when a woman who owned a bakery refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding? Day after day the MSM had 24/7 coverage of progressives crying about this "injustice".What do I care if someone decides not to bake a cake? That's up to the baker.
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 09:48:43 AM
WOW. Talk about having nothing to add so you just shit the bed and pretend it sounds smart.
When did you graduate from stupid and cowardly, to stupid, cowardly and offensive?
Thank you for proving my point!
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 09:55:59 AM
While we're on this topic, want to discuss how those "easily triggered" are all upset about statues of Civil War heros, or how they are upset about a statue of Columbus, or statues of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington?You raise a very valid point. Civil war heroes(?) should be revered and we as the descendants of that time should pay homage to the lessons learned from 140 years ago. If we don't learn and grow from our history, how can we ensure we don't repeat the same mistakes?
Strange how that topic never cam up until just a few weeks ago, then all of the sudden the media was again 24/7 denouncing the "injustice".
So, on that topic, what are we to do when known racists, white supremacists, and Nazis use those same statues as symbols of their cause?
Post by: invflatspin on September 28, 2017, 09:59:23 AM
What do I care if someone decides not to bake a cake? That's up to the baker.
Several left-leaning states have said it's not up to the baker, it's up to the consumer, and that the baker had to bake a cake, or no cake baking at all. Further, they've enforced it with a ban on the baker earning a living.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-to-take-case-on-baker-who-refused-to-sell-wedding-cake-to-gay-couple/2017/06/26/0c2f8606-0cde-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.270d1358cdf9
Your supposed indifference rings hollow.
Post by: Little Joe on September 28, 2017, 10:02:58 AM
You raise a very valid point. Civil war heroes(?) should be revered and we as the descendants of that time should pay homage to the lessons learned from 140 years ago. If we don't learn and grow from our history, how can we ensure we don't repeat the same mistakes?Ignore them as they are irrelevant. Making such a big deal about it just gives them the exposure they are looking for.
So, on that topic, what are we to do when known racists, white supremacists, and Nazis use those same statues as symbols of their cause?
On the other hand, when pro football players give the finger to the flag and the National Anthem, it inspires their young admirers to do the same.
They would get more sympathy from me if they went on a hunger strike or something. Especially if they were allowed to carry through to the end.
Post by: Sleepingsquirrel on September 28, 2017, 10:11:33 AM
Ignore them as they are irrelevant. Making such a big deal about it just gives them the exposure they are looking for.
On the other hand, when pro football players give the finger to the flag and the National Anthem, it inspires their young admirers to do the same.
They would get more sympathy from me if they went on a hunger strike or something. Especially if they were allowed to carry through to the end.
I am sympathetic to the injustice perceived or real , not the forum and method they choose.
Post by: invflatspin on September 28, 2017, 10:16:18 AM
Somewhat like we admonish the muslims who don't vocally disavow terrorism done in the name of their religion, I consider that the far right advocates for segregation and supremacy be allowed to demonstrate, and that I be vocal in my opposition to their goals.
Where the comparison to the players in the NFL breaks down is when the sponsorship backing is taken into account. There are no billion dollar advocates standing behind the contemptible racist using civil war statues to make their point. There are no major media outlets advocating their misguided point. There are no or very few financial sponsors aligning with their idiocy. All the moneyed interest in the NFL makes this a much more unpalatable show of disrespect. Further to the point, the NFL players might have a valid argument about racial inequality in treatment by the police. But - unless and until the minority ADMITS that they are part of the problem(minority murder rates, violent crime, rioting, looting, criminal assault, rape - all higher in minority representation), they will get no sympathy from me, or most other consumers of NFL programming.
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 11:29:12 AM
Several left-leaning states have said it's not up to the baker, it's up to the consumer, and that the baker had to bake a cake, or no cake baking at all. Further, they've enforced it with a ban on the baker earning a living.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-to-take-case-on-baker-who-refused-to-sell-wedding-cake-to-gay-couple/2017/06/26/0c2f8606-0cde-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.270d1358cdf9
Your supposed indifference rings hollow.
After cursory reading, it sounds like the baker in question denied baking a cake based on anti-discrimination laws in the state of Colorado. How did anyone find out why the baker denied services?
It sounds like SCOTUS will hear the case, so we will find out if a first amendment claim can supercede a state's anti discrimination law. Should be entertaining to see how it plays out.
Post by: Lucifer on September 28, 2017, 11:31:29 AM
You raise a very valid point. Civil war heroes(?) should be revered and we as the descendants of that time should pay homage to the lessons learned from 140 years ago. If we don't learn and grow from our history, how can we ensure we don't repeat the same mistakes?
So, on that topic, what are we to do when known racists, white supremacists, and Nazis use those same statues as symbols of their cause?
How so? I don't see any connection whatsoever between a confederate statue of Robert E Lee and what White Supremist or Nazi's stand for.
The ancient Navajo tribes used a symbol that resembled the swastika used by the Nazis. Should we assume from that the Navajos favored the same ideals as Nazis?
Post by: nddons on September 28, 2017, 11:42:49 AM
After cursory reading, it sounds like the baker in question denied baking a cake based on anti-discrimination laws in the state of Colorado. How did anyone find out why the baker denied services?Should be entertaining as hell when the baker goes bankrupt after paying the legal fees necessary to bring a case all the way up to SCOTUS, all because the plaintiff didn't move on and chose a baker happy and willing to make them a cake.
It sounds like SCOTUS will hear the case, so we will find out if a first amendment claim can supercede a state's anti discrimination law. Should be entertaining to see how it plays out.
Post by: MarkZ on September 28, 2017, 02:22:00 PM
Should be entertaining as hell when the baker goes bankrupt after paying the legal fees necessary to bring a case all the way up to SCOTUS, all because the plaintiff didn't move on and chose a baker happy and willing to make them a cake.
Okay, so I decided to look into this a bit more. After all, it's yet another issue that has you fellas triggered, so it must be important.
Turns out that the baker flatly denied the discussion of providing services a gay couple, and stated the reason for doing so was because their sexual orientation conflicted with his religious beliefs. Jack Phillips had to apply for a license to own and operate Masterpiece Cakeshop as a business of public accommodation in the state of Colorado. By doing so, Mr. Phillips agreed to abide by the public accommodation laws of the State of Colorado. He violated those laws. Past legal precedence states that such public accomodation laws do not constitute violation of the first amendment.
Had Mr. Phillips at least talked to the gay couple, and then regretfully declined services due to inability to provide them (as opposed to denying any conversation based on sexual orientation), there wouldn't be an issue. And I would be okay with that.
But Mr. Phillips didn't do that, and is now trying to claim that the law doesn't apply to him because it impinges on his first amendment rights to free speech and religion. Yeah, I don't see it that way. He owns a public business where the laws are crystal clear. Don't discriminate based on race, gender, or orientation. He could have denied services without being so blatantly obvious about it. But, like many of the right-wingers on this forum, he wasn't thinking clearly because he was operating with too much egotistical emotion. He not only denied services, he evangelized his beliefs to the gay couple. I remember reading somewhere that pride is a deadly sin, well so be it.
If he wants to spend every dollar he has to fight this, it's his right as a citizen. I don't pity him, because it screams of stupid pride.
It'll be entertaining to see how the SCOTUS rules on the case.
Post by: Number7 on September 28, 2017, 05:09:31 PM
It also happened and the same officials completely ignored the video proving it happened.
The same thing happened and was videoed where a homosexual owned bakery refused to bake a cake celebrating traditional marriage and was on film in a diatribe demanding the customer get out and not come back.
Progressives LIVE in a world of never ending double standards and love to ignore their hypocrisy.
It gets worse every day.
Post by: bflynn on September 28, 2017, 05:38:10 PM
For the socialists who favor criminalizing religious choice, would you ever consider the same penalty for a muslim baker that refuses to bake a cake for a Jew?
Not exactly the same situation. The Christian baker does not object to the person, they object to a specific event. A better comparison would be a Muslim baker who refused to sell a cake for a bar mitzvah, but otherwise would sell other products to a Jewish person.
I have no problem with that.
Post by: invflatspin on September 28, 2017, 06:31:22 PM
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/broncos-stand-during-anthem-starting-194332627.html
Jacksonville likely will fold but some may holdout.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/4d66609d-d921-3acc-9d78-760073e7d86e/after-taking-a-stand-by.html
Post by: invflatspin on September 28, 2017, 06:43:24 PM
I'm not of the faithful variety, but far be it from me to require one who does follow their faith to insist they do business with an unprotected class like gays. Unless of course, one has decided to make being gay(which is a life choice) a protected class.
As it relates to other religious, we already know and accept that the life choice of religion is a protected class, so the muslim baker would be required to bake the jew a cake, simply because he is jewish. Not sure if the muslim would be required to bake the cake for the bris, or maybe the bat-mitzva, but he cant' deny the cake simply because the buyer is a jew.
Post by: Jim Logajan on September 28, 2017, 07:44:19 PM
Jack Phillips had to apply for a license to own and operate Masterpiece Cakeshop as a business of public accommodation in the state of Colorado. By doing so, Mr. Phillips agreed to abide by the public accommodation laws of the State of Colorado. He violated those laws. Past legal precedence states that such public accomodation laws do not constitute violation of the first amendment.
Sounds like the "public accommodation" law forces a prior restraint on a first amendment right (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof) if one wants to sell cakes.
As to legal precedence, how would you answer the question to this hypothetical:
Suppose instead of selling cakes he was giving public speeches but only men were allowed in on Monday night speeches and only women on Saturday morning speeches. The speeches to the two sexes are different. He goes to rent a hall owned by the city. Would he or the city be violating public accommodation laws that ban discrimination based on sex?
Post by: bflynn on September 29, 2017, 02:49:53 AM
Sounds like the "public accommodation" law forces a prior restraint on a first amendment right (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof) if one wants to sell cakes.
Jim, I found your reply confusing, so I'm going to restate it to see if I understand it -
Mark suggested that Phillips had to give up his 1A right as part of his agreement to operate a business. You say that this amounts to a religious test in order to conduct business and therefore is a law prohibiting the free exercise thereof and in violation of 1A. I think you are exactly correct. I suspect there are a great number of things Mr. Phillips would refuse to make a cake for, including Nazis, a celebration for an abortion and a Satan cake. A celebration of homosexuality is just one in a list.
We should be aware that ADF, the non-profit representing Mr. Phillips, has a history of presenting these cases as freedom of speech or freedom of artistic representation, a position they have consistently lost with. Their arguments in the past have been non-starters to me and I question their competency in doing this work. I expect Craig & Mullins v Masterpiece Cakes to be equally inconclusive because the core issue is not being addressed.
Post by: Little Joe on September 29, 2017, 03:07:08 AM
Broncos kneeling folds:I have no problem with them locking arms while standing. In fact, I think that was a good idea.
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/broncos-stand-during-anthem-starting-194332627.html
Jacksonville likely will fold but some may holdout.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/4d66609d-d921-3acc-9d78-760073e7d86e/after-taking-a-stand-by.html
But what it shows me is that all the while those players, and the liberals that were supporting them were saying that ""We" don't get it", as a matter of fact it was them that didn't get it. I have no problem with them expressing their opposition to certain social wrongs. But I did have a big problem with the way the went about it. Slapping good people in the face is not the way to get their cooperation.
But I'm still done with Pro Football, and most pro sports.
Post by: bflynn on September 29, 2017, 04:41:13 AM
Slapping good people in the face is not the way to get their cooperation.
I tend to think that they're not really interested in cooperation. The Left is building themselves up to justifying a purge. It doesn't matter if your crime is being white, being male, being southern or being Christian...they want it all torn down, they want everyone else ushered to the showers while they press the button and take pictures.
Post by: Lucifer on September 29, 2017, 08:18:04 AM
Post by: LevelWing on September 29, 2017, 09:59:06 AM
Okay, so I decided to look into this a bit more. After all, it's yet another issue that has you fellas triggered, so it must be important.I recommend you read David French's take on this, written after the SCOTUS granted certiorari earlier this summer:
Turns out that the baker flatly denied the discussion of providing services a gay couple, and stated the reason for doing so was because their sexual orientation conflicted with his religious beliefs. Jack Phillips had to apply for a license to own and operate Masterpiece Cakeshop as a business of public accommodation in the state of Colorado. By doing so, Mr. Phillips agreed to abide by the public accommodation laws of the State of Colorado. He violated those laws. Past legal precedence states that such public accomodation laws do not constitute violation of the first amendment.
Had Mr. Phillips at least talked to the gay couple, and then regretfully declined services due to inability to provide them (as opposed to denying any conversation based on sexual orientation), there wouldn't be an issue. And I would be okay with that.
But Mr. Phillips didn't do that, and is now trying to claim that the law doesn't apply to him because it impinges on his first amendment rights to free speech and religion. Yeah, I don't see it that way. He owns a public business where the laws are crystal clear. Don't discriminate based on race, gender, or orientation. He could have denied services without being so blatantly obvious about it. But, like many of the right-wingers on this forum, he wasn't thinking clearly because he was operating with too much egotistical emotion. He not only denied services, he evangelized his beliefs to the gay couple. I remember reading somewhere that pride is a deadly sin, well so be it.
If he wants to spend every dollar he has to fight this, it's his right as a citizen. I don't pity him, because it screams of stupid pride.
It'll be entertaining to see how the SCOTUS rules on the case.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448990/three-thoughts-masterpiece-cakeshop-cert-grant
Post by: nddons on September 29, 2017, 10:10:07 AM
I recommend you read David French's take on this, written after the SCOTUS granted certiorari earlier this summer:David French's article paints an entirely different picture from Mark's take on the case. Hmmm. I wonder why.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448990/three-thoughts-masterpiece-cakeshop-cert-grant
Mark, do you have evidence that the baker didn't want to serve gays in general, or was that your preconceived notion?
Post by: Anthony on September 29, 2017, 10:37:33 AM
I tend to think that they're not really interested in cooperation. The Left is building themselves up to justifying a purge. It doesn't matter if your crime is being white, being male, being southern or being Christian...they want it all torn down, they want everyone else ushered to the showers while they press the button and take pictures.
I agree. We already have soft Tyranny in the form of our Politically Correct culture which doesn't allow certain thoughts, nor words. All controlled by the cabal of government, media, education, and larger corporations, supported by both Democrats, and establishment Republicans. The elitist few pulling the strings are the ones that benefit, and maybe some of their pawns.
Post by: bflynn on September 29, 2017, 10:41:44 AM
Mark, do you have evidence that the baker didn't want to serve gays in general, or was that your preconceived notion?
It has to be either be his perception or his uninformed notion. The baker explicitly did serve homosexuals every item except custom wedding cakes.
Personally I like the suggestion that he should put a clause of artistic license in his contract and then say "you'll get what I make" and then make something very inappropriate to a wedding - like a scene from hell with flames rising up to burn the couple on top. If you want to compel an artist then you're taking your chances with what they produce.
Post by: bflynn on September 29, 2017, 10:54:18 AM
I recommend you read David French's take on this, written after the SCOTUS granted certiorari earlier this summer:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448990/three-thoughts-masterpiece-cakeshop-cert-grant
French's take on this is completely wrong. He is going down the Forced Speech route, something that has been argued multiple times by the same people (ADF) who have take Mr Philip's case and they have lost that argument every time. It has been ruled that an artist, being a professional, cannot discriminate because they don't like the art they're being asked to create. Now I disagree with that and the compulsion aspect is especially weird because what do you do if the artist cannot produce the art through lack of inspiration, lack of motivation or failure of technique?
The issue that ADF keeps avoiding is the religious compulsion. The State has established a belief which contradicts Christian teachings and that belief has become mandatory in order to run a business. You cannot compel someone to violate their religion, all you can do is persecute them for failure to comply
That amounts to a religious test to be a business owner and it is inherently unAmerican.
Post by: Number7 on September 29, 2017, 12:17:41 PM
If fat boy directs movies then he should be COMPELLED to make a film that violates his every belief.
THe court would never find against a liberal, however. Only Christians are subject to forced labor.
Post by: nddons on September 29, 2017, 12:38:18 PM
Wouldn't it infuriate the liberals if a Christian filmmaker DEMANDED Michael Moore direct a Scripturally correct Biblical movie that violates every one of his bigoted notions about Christianity then sue his fat ass for refusing.EXCELLENT ANALOGY.
If fat boy directs movies then he should be COMPELLED to make a film that violates his every belief.
THe court would never find against a liberal, however. Only Christians are subject to forced labor.
Post by: invflatspin on September 29, 2017, 12:51:15 PM
Wouldn't it infuriate the liberals if a Christian filmmaker DEMANDED Michael Moore direct a Scripturally correct Biblical movie that violates every one of his bigoted notions about Christianity then sue his fat ass for refusing.
If fat boy directs movies then he should be COMPELLED to make a film that violates his every belief.
THe court would never find against a liberal, however. Only Christians are subject to forced labor.
You are an evil thinker! Just my kinda guy. 8)
Wish I had the millions to hire him for my new remake of The Robe. Or Jesus of Nazareth. Or The Ten Commandments. See his head asplode.
Post by: Anthony on September 29, 2017, 02:02:03 PM
You are an evil thinker! Just my kinda guy. 8)
Wish I had the millions to hire him for my new remake of The Robe. Or Jesus of Nazareth. Or The Ten Commandments. See his head asplode.
When you remake Ben Hur, let me know! :)
Post by: invflatspin on September 29, 2017, 02:25:54 PM
Post by: Jim Logajan on September 29, 2017, 04:46:20 PM
Jim, I found your reply confusing, so I'm going to restate it to see if I understand it -
Mark suggested that Phillips had to give up his 1A right as part of his agreement to operate a business. You say that this amounts to a religious test in order to conduct business and therefore is a law prohibiting the free exercise thereof and in violation of 1A. I think you are exactly correct. I suspect there are a great number of things Mr. Phillips would refuse to make a cake for, including Nazis, a celebration for an abortion and a Satan cake. A celebration of homosexuality is just one in a list.
We should be aware that ADF, the non-profit representing Mr. Phillips, has a history of presenting these cases as freedom of speech or freedom of artistic representation, a position they have consistently lost with. Their arguments in the past have been non-starters to me and I question their competency in doing this work. I expect Craig & Mullins v Masterpiece Cakes to be equally inconclusive because the core issue is not being addressed.
You have correctly restated the point I was attempting to make. (My hypothetical deals with a real case, BTW, and probably confused my point.)
One other item of note is that Christianity has considered homosexuals (and other "sexual perverts") sinners for centuries. Discriminating against homosexuals in the sense of not wishing to associate with or otherwise do business with anyone who is known to be homosexual is an exceedingly well established religiously motivated action.
Post by: MarkZ on September 29, 2017, 05:59:09 PM
You have correctly restated the point I was attempting to make. (My hypothetical deals with a real case, BTW, and probably confused my point.)In its State Law regarding any discrimination by businesses in the state, Colorado includes sexual orientation. A business (or a business owner acting as a representative of that business) cannot discriminate based on the sexual orientation of the client. So we will find out of a person's first amendment rights, when acting as a representative of a public business, can supercede the anti discrimination laws of a state.
One other item of note is that Christianity has considered homosexuals (and other "sexual perverts") sinners for centuries. Discriminating against homosexuals in the sense of not wishing to associate with or otherwise do business with anyone who is known to be homosexual is an exceedingly well established religiously motivated action.
Post by: Jim Logajan on September 29, 2017, 06:51:09 PM
In its State Law regarding any discrimination by businesses in the state, Colorado includes sexual orientation. A business (or a business owner acting as a representative of that business) cannot discriminate based on the sexual orientation of the client. So we will find out of a person's first amendment rights, when acting as a representative of a public business, can supercede the anti discrimination laws of a state.
(1) Business and other volitional activities have always been guided by the religious beliefs of the adherents, otherwise they would serve no earthly guidance or value to believers. Therefore the state's very act of making "business" activities distinct from "religious" activities establishes the foundation needed to allow it to brush aside any constraints (i.e. 1st amendment) on its authority to regulate said activity. I don't know how often the consequence of that secularization of "business" activities is recognized as beginning and ending the debate. It should BE the debate.
(2) I believe it is well established law that the limits placed on the federal government by the U.S. constitution apply to state laws, so I don't see the state law aspect as a way around the constraint.
So what I think we will find out is how many SCOTUS justices see this as a religious freedom issue, a secular issue, a free speech issue, or social justice issue.
Post by: invflatspin on September 29, 2017, 10:37:04 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-nba-issues-memo-urging-teams-stand-national-anthem-023852614.html
Post by: bflynn on September 30, 2017, 02:53:07 AM
In its State Law regarding any discrimination by businesses in the state, Colorado includes sexual orientation. A business (or a business owner acting as a representative of that business) cannot discriminate based on the sexual orientation of the client. So we will find out of a person's first amendment rights, when acting as a representative of a public business, can supercede the anti discrimination laws of a state.
So you say that in order to conduct business in the State of Colorado, one must not hold beliefs which say that homosexual marriage is a sin which must be not be associated with?
Doesn't that mean the State of Colorado has established a religious belief and in doing so has created a defacto religious test which must be passed to be permitted to conduct business in the state?
Post by: Username on September 30, 2017, 06:35:27 AM
A business (or a business owner acting as a representative of that business) cannot discriminate based on the sexual orientation of the client.But didn't the owners say that they would be happy to bake them any cake but just not that one? They are not discriminating against the sexual orientation of the client, but the content of the cake. I believe that they would also refuse to bake the same cake for a straight couple. Discrimination against the sexual orientation of a cake should be OK.
Post by: Lucifer on September 30, 2017, 06:39:28 AM
What's next? People with tattoos? Will getting a tattoo make someone eligible to become a protected class?
Post by: Anthony on September 30, 2017, 06:57:40 AM
This whole "protected class" bullshit is just yet another product brought to us by the progressives.
What's next? People with tattoos? Will getting a tattoo make someone eligible to become a protected class?
If I IDENTIFY as a protected class, does that make me one?
Post by: Lucifer on September 30, 2017, 08:50:41 AM
If I IDENTIFY as a protected class, does that make me one?
Of course not! Unless, that is, you take up the progressive ideology.
Post by: invflatspin on September 30, 2017, 07:27:45 PM
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/heres-what-steelers-plan-to-do-during-the-national-anthem-on-sunday-vs-ravens/
Butts on field, standing.
Apparently the backlash to their political disrespect in Pittsburgh was - massive.
Post by: MarkZ on September 30, 2017, 07:32:39 PM
But didn't the owners say that they would be happy to bake them any cake but just not that one? They are not discriminating against the sexual orientation of the client, but the content of the cake. I believe that they would also refuse to bake the same cake for a straight couple. Discrimination against the sexual orientation of a cake should be OK.
Nope. That wouldn't have been an issue, and you're confusing this case with a different one.
Post by: MarkZ on September 30, 2017, 07:33:14 PM
This whole "protected class" bullshit is just yet another product brought to us by the progressives.
What's next? People with tattoos? Will getting a tattoo make someone eligible to become a protected class?
Maybe. Maybe not.
It is, however, state law in Colorado.
Post by: Lucifer on September 30, 2017, 08:25:13 PM
Maybe. Maybe not.
It is, however, state law in Colorado.
Having tattoo's in Colorado makes someone a protected class?
Post by: Username on October 01, 2017, 08:03:26 AM
Nope. That wouldn't have been an issue, and you're confusing this case with a different one.
Maybe I'm confused. Are there two similar Colorado gay cake issues? The original issue that's going to the Supreme Court said:
"In July 2012, Craig and Mullins visited Masterpiece, a bakery in Lakewood, Colorado, and requested that Phillips design and create a cake to celebrate their same-sex wedding. Phillips declined, telling them that he does not create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs, but advising Craig and Mullins that he would be happy to make and sell them any other baked goods." Court of Appeals No. 14CA1351
Post by: MarkZ on October 01, 2017, 08:13:44 AM
Having tattoo's in Colorado makes someone a protected class?I thought we were talking about homosexuals. Now you want to talk about tattoos?
In Colorado, sexual orientation is considered a protected class.
Post by: Lucifer on October 01, 2017, 08:27:00 AM
I thought we were talking about homosexuals. Now you want to talk about tattoos?
I answered your post. Holding a cohesive conversation is not one of your strong points.
In Colorado, sexual orientation is considered a protected class.
Which is my point. Where does it stop? Soon we will have everyone identifying as a protected class.
Post by: Anthony on October 01, 2017, 09:41:44 AM
Which is my point. Where does it stop? Soon we will have everyone identifying as a protected class.
It doesn't stop. We keep getting more, and more divided by whatever people can think of next. Race, gender, sexual orientation, economic status, ethnicity, religion, etc. The focus on our differences, rather than our vast similarities is the tool by which the left has gained, and holds power. They are nothing without Identity Politics, and lies.
Post by: MarkZ on October 01, 2017, 12:08:06 PM
I answered your post. Holding a cohesive conversation is not one of your strong points.You're right. It's exceedingly difficult to hold a cohesive conversation when your counterpart is easily triggered, emotional, and changes the conversation topic to suit his or her narcissistic bluster. By the way, who brought up baking cakes? (If you can't figure it out, that was a rhetorical question)
Which is my point. Where does it stop? Soon we will have everyone identifying as a protected class.
A protected class exists because we still have moronic neanderthals can't accept the fact that we have multiple ethnicities, genders, and sexually oriented folks that all deserve the same exact rights and equal treatment. And until those morons realize that systemic discrimination still exists, then these "protected classes" will just continue to grow. They're there because people won't recognize that these folks have just as many rights as you or I do. And those same people are trying to hide behind whatever cop out (in this case religion) they can muster up.
As for the original topic: it's all smoke and mirrors. Colin Kaperrnick took a knee last year during the anthem. Big deal. He wasn't disrespectful, he was quiet about his protest. When it came time for him to do his JOB (play football), he did so with no disruption to his team or the game. Triggered conservatives were beside themselves crying about patriotism. Then, people moved on and the issue ebbed away in the general ADHD that is our modern society.
In fact, nobody said anything about it until Trump went off about it at a rally.
The timing of Trump's rant was genius. North Korea is laughing at us, Puerto Rico is dying, and an administration that keeps bungling the tasks and jobs at hand is now losing its base because Trump talked to "the other side." Now, instead of covering the real news and goings on of our world, people think it's big news whether or not players stand, link arms, or do the cha-cha during the national anthem. We might as well check in on how the Kardashians are doing, since we care so much about trivial shit.
But yeah, we should be pissed that some athletes chose the a forum (whether it's right or not) they could get a message across. Apparently it worked, and Trump's deflection worked, because it has y'all triggered about it.
Post by: MarkZ on October 01, 2017, 12:16:37 PM
Maybe I'm confused. Are there two similar Colorado gay cake issues? The original issue that's going to the Supreme Court said:
"In July 2012, Craig and Mullins visited Masterpiece, a bakery in Lakewood, Colorado, and requested that Phillips design and create a cake to celebrate their same-sex wedding. Phillips declined, telling them that he does not create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs, but advising Craig and Mullins that he would be happy to make and sell them any other baked goods." Court of Appeals No. 14CA1351
From the same document:
Quote
¶27       Section 24-34-601(2)(a), C.R.S. 2014, reads, as relevant here:
It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of . . . sexual orientation . . . the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation . . . .5
It doesn't matter if Mr. Phillips offered to give them something else.
Post by: Little Joe on October 01, 2017, 12:28:32 PM
From the same document:You must be assuming that the baker would have sold that disputed cake to one of his straight customers. I don't think that would be true.
It doesn't matter if Mr. Phillips offered to give them something else.
Post by: MarkZ on October 01, 2017, 12:36:30 PM
You must be assuming that the baker would have sold that disputed cake to one of his straight customers. I don't think that would be true.Uh, what disputed cake? Did they want it in a certain shape? Or maybe with some weird messages?
i apologize, but I'm not following what point you were trying to make.
Post by: LevelWing on October 01, 2017, 12:56:18 PM
And those same people are trying to hide behind whatever cop out (in this case religion) they can muster up.Religion is a cop out? Seriously? You really believe that the state should be able to force someone to abandon their religious principles and sell a product or service? The point about selling them other goods was showing that they weren't discriminating against them because they were gay, but their request for a wedding cake violated the owner's religious beliefs. You're essentially saying that one's religious belief's don't matter if it conflicts with a "protected class."
As for the original topic: it's all smoke and mirrors. Colin Kaperrnick took a knee last year during the anthem. Big deal. He wasn't disrespectful, he was quiet about his protest. When it came time for him to do his JOB (play football), he did so with no disruption to his team or the game. Triggered conservatives were beside themselves crying about patriotism. Then, people moved on and the issue ebbed away in the general ADHD that is our modern society.Many do in fact find it disrespectful. There are a number of ways he could've protested but he chose to kneel during the national anthem to make a statement. We can get into a bunch of other issues around whether or not it was right, what he's protesting against, etc. But we're now discussing this because of the manner in which he chose to protest.
In fact, nobody said anything about it until Trump went off about it at a rally.Incorrect.
Post by: Lucifer on October 01, 2017, 02:44:45 PM
You're right. It's exceedingly difficult to hold a cohesive conversation when your counterpart is easily triggered, emotional, and changes the conversation topic to suit his or her narcissistic bluster.
Wow, talk about being easily triggered...... But then again, you seem to master the art of projection.
A protected class exists because we still have moronic neanderthals can't accept the fact that we have multiple ethnicities, genders, and sexually oriented folks that all deserve the same exact rights and equal treatment. And until those morons realize that systemic discrimination still exists, then these "protected classes" will just continue to grow. They're there because people won't recognize that these folks have just as many rights as you or I do. And those same people are trying to hide behind whatever cop out (in this case religion) they can muster up.
So what rights do these protected classes not have? Are you trying to imply the constitution excludes certain individuals?
As for the original topic: it's all smoke and mirrors. Colin Kaperrnick took a knee last year during the anthem. Big deal. He wasn't disrespectful, he was quiet about his protest. When it came time for him to do his JOB (play football), he did so with no disruption to his team or the game. Triggered conservatives were beside themselves crying about patriotism. Then, people moved on and the issue ebbed away in the general ADHD that is our modern society.
But your media, the MSM, are the ones that pumped the story furiously. Story after story from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, WashPo and the NYT among others.
So if it was no big deal, then why did the LIBERAL media run with it and non stop coverage? Do you think there was an agenda there? Or are you going to tell us the progressives and MSM have no agenda? Really?
In fact, nobody said anything about it until Trump went off about it at a rally.
Really? See Above. The MSM pumped it 24/7.
The timing of Trump's rant was genius. North Korea is laughing at us, Puerto Rico is dying, and an administration that keeps bungling the tasks and jobs at hand is now losing its base because Trump talked to "the other side." Now, instead of covering the real news and goings on of our world, people think it's big news whether or not players stand, link arms, or do the cha-cha during the national anthem.
Wow, right down the line with the liberal talking points! Right on cue! Of course it's all garbage (your talking points) but hey, you do obey your master well.
But yeah, we should be pissed that some athletes chose the a forum (whether it's right or not) they could get a message across. Apparently it worked, and Trump's deflection worked, because it has y'all triggered about it.
Again, more liberal speak. "Dog whistles" and "triggering". The MSM puts it out and the good progressives just keep saying it over and over hoping it comes true.
Can't wait to see your new focus words next week. ::)
Post by: Lucifer on October 01, 2017, 02:54:35 PM
Enjoy.
https://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2017/10/01/there-are-no-oppressed-people-in-america-n2389130
Quote
Never before have so many claimed to be so oppressed and mistreated over so little as Americans in 2017.
We have men who have gotten extraordinarily wealthy and famous playing a game who protest the flag of the nation that put them not just in America’s wealthiest 1%, not just in the global 1%, but in the historical 1% of everyone who has ever lived.
Quote
Do you realize the stunning level of self-absorption and self-deception that it takes to believe you’re oppressed in America?
Quote
However, there are an awful lot of sad, weak people who claim the tiny molehills in front of them are mountains so they can feel better about themselves.
Please don't let this article "trigger" you............
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 01, 2017, 03:39:35 PM
A protected class exists because we still have moronic neanderthals can't accept the fact that we have multiple ethnicities, genders, and sexually oriented folks that all deserve the same exact rights and equal treatment.
I'm here to tell you that the only way to establish "same exact rights and equal treatment" in such cases requires obliteration of liberties, not protection of them. I'm not kosher (ahem) with that at all.
I've noticed that moronic behavior is its own "reward" and sacrificing freedom of association is not only not necessary, but counter-productive to the evolution of civil society. But tiresomely, people like yourself just don't believe that despite clear evidence to the contrary.
The goal of "same exact rights" in this case required an invention of a concept, "public accommodation," that has a definition that differs depending on what law is in play. Colorado has one, the ADA another, and the Civil Rights Act had yet another. People in the "public accommodation" class are arbitrarily getting their right to associate obliterated while others are not. Consider:
If a straight couple went to a gay baker and asked for a wedding cake and the baker declined, saying "Sorry, I don't do wedding cakes that support breeders," I presume that the straight couple is also a protected class, correct? [First heard a lesbian at a party refer to us straights as "breeders" about 25 years ago. Not sure how prevalent the term still is.]
If a couple of sexual orientation X puts an ad in the newspaper asking for bids from bakers to bake them a cake, but says bakers of sexual orientation Y need not apply, are they within their rights? How and why would your answer change if they privately made a decision not to take their business to such bakers? Why are their neanderthals actions not being prohibited? If there were a way to know when that private discrimination occurs, would you want it to be used by government so as to ensure "same exact rights"? I just want to know how consistent you are and how wedded you are to that goal?
Post by: bflynn on October 01, 2017, 06:50:06 PM
Maybe. Maybe not.
It is, however, state law in Colorado.
Can it be a law either in Colorado or in the US?
Would you agree that Colorado has created a law which attempts to compel a certain behavior with regards to services offered for homosexual weddings?
Would you also agree that there are some people who have a religious belief that lending support to a homosexual wedding in any way would cause them to offend their God?
Then if we put these two together, Colorado has made a law which attempts to compel people to violate their faith at the cost of having their business shut down. If you don't have the religious belief that the State demands that you have then you must hide your belief or be forced out of business.
I posted this on the previous page - but explain why this is not a religious test to conduct business in Colorado. Also explain why Mr Phillip's rights under 1A, the Civil Rights Act of 1965 AND the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment are not protected against Colorado's law?
Not that it is likely to matter. ADF is making a forced speech argument, the same argument they have lost several times before. It is highly unlikely they will win on the basis of their argument.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 01, 2017, 07:11:57 PM
Post by: Lucifer on October 01, 2017, 07:54:45 PM
I'm wondering how we feel about marrying several spouses? How about brothers marrying sisters? Cousins getting married?
Just call them “protected classes” and everything becomes AOK.
Post by: invflatspin on October 02, 2017, 06:27:27 AM
Lots of team owners have begun to worry. The Cowpokes ratings in the DFW market are abysmal.
Post by: invflatspin on October 02, 2017, 06:33:23 AM
Looks like another win in the making for Trump.
Never gets old. MAGA
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2017/10/01/nfls-week-4-sees-more-kneeling-during-national-anthem.html
Post by: Anthony on October 02, 2017, 07:46:21 AM
Post by: Number7 on October 02, 2017, 07:59:15 AM
The national anthem protests are all about hypocrisy and nothing about equality. The proof of that is in the truth.
The shit bags that are 'protesting' oppression and being oppressed are no t only among the one-percent in America. Those pathetic pansies are among the one-percent WORLDWIDE. How oppressed is that? You only have to ask a fucking progressive asshole and they'll begin to spout nothing but bullshit to defend an indefensible position, while attacking everyone refuses to bow down with them, at the same time.
Fuck the NFL and their pansy players.
Fuck the progressives trapped in their pathetic echo chamber that ignores all reality to push their agenda of hate.
Fuck the pathetic snowflakes that can't think for themselves and expect us to respect their ignorance.
Fuck them with your wallet and keep doing it until they shut up and go away.
Post by: invflatspin on October 02, 2017, 08:03:17 AM
I'm wondering how we feel about marrying several spouses? How about brothers marrying sisters? Cousins getting married?
I know it's not the popular thing to do as a conservative, but I have no problem with gay marriage, or polygamy. Provided all parties are adults, and go willingly and knowingly into the union, and everything is disclosed up front, it's all good with me.
However, marital fraternity has very well defined and supported medical evidence that it produces severe birth defects, and negatively affects IQ, and many robust genetic markers. Cousins to the same, but lesser effect. The studies on lowered intelligence, and reinforcing negative genetic traits in muslims who engage in Consanguinity(inter familial marriage) is widely known, but rarely spoken of because of the sensitivity to political and theological constraints. For that reason, the state may have standing to prohibit marriage, or at the least prohibit procreation from within some familial boundaries. Alternately, the state could disavow any support, specifically medical support for fraternal offspring. Go ahead and marry your sister/brother, but if you have a kid, it's not gonna be taken care of by the state.
Post by: MarkZ on October 02, 2017, 08:24:25 AM
I know it's not the popular thing to do as a conservative, but I have no problem with gay marriage, or polygamy. Provided all parties are adults, and go willingly and knowingly into the union, and everything is disclosed up front, it's all good with me.You put it better than I could. Well stated.
However, marital fraternity has very well defined and supported medical evidence that it produces severe birth defects, and negatively affects IQ, and many robust genetic markers. Cousins to the same, but lesser effect. The studies on lowered intelligence, and reinforcing negative genetic traits in muslims who engage in Consanguinity(inter familial marriage) is widely known, but rarely spoken of because of the sensitivity to political and theological constraints. For that reason, the state may have standing to prohibit marriage, or at the least prohibit procreation from within some familial boundaries. Alternately, the state could disavow any support, specifically medical support for fraternal offspring. Go ahead and marry your sister/brother, but if you have a kid, it's not gonna be taken care of by the state.
Post by: jb1842 on October 02, 2017, 08:52:46 AM
I know it's not the popular thing to do as a conservative, but I have no problem with gay marriage, or polygamy. Provided all parties are adults, and go willingly and knowingly into the union, and everything is disclosed up front, it's all good with me.
As a conservative, I feel the same way. I would also assume that most conservatives, at least the ones I know, also feel that way. But it doesn't fit the media/liberal narrative that we are all evil.
Post by: Anthony on October 02, 2017, 09:52:16 AM
I know it's not the popular thing to do as a conservative, but I have no problem with gay marriage, or polygamy. Provided all parties are adults, and go willingly and knowingly into the union, and everything is disclosed up front, it's all good with me.
I am the same, and I know a lot of other conservatives, and libertarians that feel the same way. As long as they don't push an agenda on me which requires not only acceptance, but also celebration/promotion, then I am fine with it. Live, and let live.
Post by: nddons on October 02, 2017, 10:00:58 AM
An open letter to the NFL players,
You graduated high school in 2011. Your teenage years were a struggle. You grew up on the wrong side of the tracks. Your mother was the leader of the family and worked tirelessly to keep a roof over your head and food on your plate. Academics were a struggle for you and your grades were mediocre at best. The only thing that made you stand out is you weighed 225 lbs and could run 40 yards in 4.2 seconds while carrying a football. Your best friend was just like you, except he didn’t play football. Instead of going to football practice after school, he went to work at McDonalds for minimum wage. You were recruited by all the big colleges and spent every weekend of your senior year making visits to universities where coaches and boosters tried to convince you their school was best. They laid out the red carpet for you. Your best friend worked double shifts at Mickey D’s. College was not an option for him. On the day you signed with Big State University, your best friend signed paperwork with his Army recruiter. You went to summer workouts. He went to basic training.
You spent the next four years living in the athletic dorm, eating at the training table. You spent your Saturdays on the football field, cheered on by adoring fans. Tutors attended to your every academic need. You attended class when you felt like it. Sure, you worked hard. You lifted weights, ran sprints, studied plays, and soon became one of the top football players in the country. Your best friend was assigned to the 101st Airborne Division. While you were in college, he deployed to Iraq once and Afghanistan twice. He became a Sergeant and led a squad of 19 year old soldiers who grew up just like he did. He shed his blood in Afghanistan and watched young American's give their lives, limbs, and innocence for the USA.
You went to the NFL combine and scored off the charts. You hired an agent and waited for draft day. You were drafted in the first round and your agent immediately went to work, ensuring that you received the most money possible. You signed for $16 million although you had never played a single down of professional football. Your best friend re-enlisted in the Army for four more years. As a combat tested sergeant, he will be paid $32,000 per year.
You will drive a Ferrari on the streets of South Beach. He will ride in the back of a Blackhawk helicopter with 10 other combat loaded soldiers. You will sleep at the Ritz. He will dig a hole in the ground and try to sleep. You will “make it rain” in the club. He will pray for rain as the temperature reaches 120 degrees.
On Sunday, you will run into a stadium as tens of thousands of fans cheer and yell your name. For your best friend, there is little difference between Sunday and any other day of the week. There are no adoring fans. There are only people trying to kill him and his soldiers. Every now and then, he and his soldiers leave the front lines and “go to the rear” to rest. He might be lucky enough to catch an NFL game on TV. When the National Anthem plays and you take a knee, he will jump to his feet and salute the television. While you protest the unfairness of life in the United States, he will give thanks to God that he has the honor of defending his great country.
To the players of the NFL: We are the people who buy your tickets, watch you on TV, and wear your jerseys. We anxiously wait for Sundays so we can cheer for you and marvel at your athleticism. Although we love to watch you play, we care little about your opinions until you offend us. You have the absolute right to express yourselves, but we have the absolute right to boycott you.
We have tolerated your drug use and DUIs, your domestic violence, and your vulgar displays of wealth.
We should be ashamed for putting our admiration of your physical skills before what is morally right.
But now you have gone too far. You have insulted our flag, our country, our soldiers, our police officers, and our veterans. You are living the American dream, yet you disparage our great country. I am done with NFL football and encourage all likeminded Americans to boycott the NFL as well.
Franklin Cox
Author
"Lullabies for Lieutenants" Silver Medal - Military Writers Society of America
"Marist Football: Inside the War Eagle Tradition"
Atlanta, GA 30305
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 02, 2017, 02:32:48 PM
Post by: Mr Pou on October 03, 2017, 05:20:23 AM
Saw something today about Annhesier Busch thinking about pulling advertising. Look at who advertises on football games, they are companies that are targeting the same folks that elected Donald Trump as our President. Lots of booing at games yesterday and fans brought signs also. These guys need to understand that most of us are getting tired of having everything we consider entertainment politicized and we do not intend to spend our money on these things if they are. I go to the movie for entertainment, the theater for entertainment, sports for entertainment. I'd prefer it stay that way.
I think many of these players enjoy antagonizing the fans, but what they don't realize, is they're biting the hand that feeds them. Without fans, most of these guys would be asking "Would you like fries with that?"
Post by: Little Joe on October 03, 2017, 05:22:24 AM
I think many of these players enjoy antagonizing the fans, but what they don't realize, is they're biting the hand that feeds them. Without fans, most of these guys would be asking "Would you like fries with that?"That reminds me of something an Atlanta Braves baseball player said years ago during the baseball strike:
"Why should I care what the fans think; they don't pay my salary".
Post by: Lucifer on October 03, 2017, 05:40:13 AM
I think many of these players enjoy antagonizing the fans, but what they don't realize, is they're biting the hand that feeds them. Without fans, most of these guys would be asking "Would you like fries with that?"
See a common thread here? Look at our elected Representitives. Same mentality. Hollywood Elitist? Same.
Post by: Rush on October 03, 2017, 06:38:53 AM
I am the same, and I know a lot of other conservatives, and libertarians that feel the same way. As long as they don't push an agenda on me which requires not only acceptance, but also celebration/promotion, then I am fine with it. Live, and let live.
Agree with you guys. I will probably always vote with conservatives because my stand on second amendment rights and economic theory outweighs who can marry whom, for survival of the nation. If it comes to a shooting war and I must participate I will side with the right. Mostly because they are way more realistic with (again) basic survival. Leftist economics is the fastest way to starvation. The left wants to shut down coal energy which is the ONLY form of energy ( except sometimes nuclear if the plant's not in the down cycle) that has a 30 day cushion. In national emergencies, war, natural disasters, I want the power to stay on. Practical realism matters more than liberal hurt feelings so I lean right even though technically I am a libertarian.
But there are two things I side strongly with the left in spirit although not in some of their ideas about how to bring social change. One is who can marry whom. I think it is none of the government's business if you want to marry someone of the same gender. I also have come round to think the same about polygamy as long as you don't use welfare and my taxes to support your many wives. Haven't given interfamily marriage much thought but give me a second......
Okay now I have. I must apply the same libertarian philosophy to that too and say the government has no right to make marrying your brother illegal (gag, I just vomited a little in my mouth). Bear with me here. Making it illegal to procreate with your sibling would be similar to making it illegal to procreate if you are mentally retarded or simply an impoverished inner city black or impoverished low IQ hillbilly. Yeah wouldn't it be great to prevent all those genetic inferior results from propagating down the line but that's eugenics and I cannot go there because it violates my own prime directive: Individual Liberty.
However but, these people have no right to take my tax dollars to support the genetically inferior results and damaged progeny, so let nature take it's course. You marry your brother and have a baby with a birth defect? Not my problem, pay your own medical bills.
The problem with this position is forced socialism - this is why I am against socialized medicine. Economic collectivism combined with freedom to do anything you want forces others to pay for your consequences. The result of that will be to destroy the productive segment and that is bad for everyone.
So I find myself believing that if you are going to force socialism on me, then indeed you must prohibit interfamily marriage and why stop there? Prohibit anyone not earning a certain level of income from reproducing. If you can't support your own kids, you cannot create them in the first place.
So pick which world you want? One of individual liberty AND individual responsibility? Or restrictions on your liberty but forcing others to pay when you have a problem.
The reason I am not a leftist is because they want to have their cake and eat it too - the liberty to do anything they want, but have somebody else to finance the consequences.
Oh I said two things... the other is the drug war but I'll save that for another time.
Post by: Lucifer on October 03, 2017, 09:26:00 AM
Of course the players don't care. It's not as if that car dealer pays their salaries or anything like that. ::)
Post by: invflatspin on October 08, 2017, 10:46:12 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/08/vice-president-mike-pence-leaves-colts-49ers-game-after-players-reportedly-kneel.html
What a tool.
Post by: bflynn on October 08, 2017, 02:50:47 PM
Post by: Little Joe on October 08, 2017, 03:47:00 PM
But now I am hearing that "Kraperdick" (good name) is claiming he didn't' really say that he would not Kneel.
Post by: MarkZ on October 08, 2017, 05:23:14 PM
Post by: Number7 on October 08, 2017, 06:02:23 PM
It is often futile to try and talk sense to a progressive who is immersed in his personal sense of superiority, while utterly ignorant of the truth.
Post by: invflatspin on October 08, 2017, 06:49:00 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/cbs-reporter-sparks-uproar-mistakenly-235821729.html
Post by: invflatspin on October 08, 2017, 06:51:26 PM
Post by: Little Joe on October 08, 2017, 07:35:09 PM
Great PR stunt by the VP. Way to keep attention focused on something so stupid.Don't you think the whole kneeling shit is a PR stunt? But it's only bad when a Republican does it huh?
Post by: invflatspin on October 08, 2017, 08:05:25 PM
Post by: LevelWing on October 08, 2017, 11:49:40 PM
Quote from: Eric Reid/NBC Bay Area
"He knew our team has had the most players protest," Reid told NBC Sports Bay Area. "He knew that we were probably going to do to it again. This is what systemic oppression looks like. A man with power comes to a game, he tweets a couple things out and leaves the game with an attempt to thwart our efforts."
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Vice-President-Pence-Leaves-NFL-Game-49ers-Players-Protest-National-Anthem-449986733.html
Regardless if this was a PR stunt by the Vice President or not, if the players are going to kneel in protest then the Vice President has the right to leave if he so chooses. It's a two-way street.
Eric Reid is right, however, in that the 49ers are the team that has the most players kneeling and were likely to do it again, so this shouldn't have been a surprise to the Vice President. Systemic oppression? I think not.
Post by: MarkZ on October 09, 2017, 05:43:31 AM
Don't you think the whole kneeling shit is a PR stunt? But it's only bad when a Republican does it huh?I’m a Chicago Blackhawks fan. Have you been to the United Center? Check out what happens during the National Anthem. It might make your conservative heads pop.
Seeing what gets the hard right all hot and bothered is quite telling. A bunch of athletes kneeling (another word for that could be genuflecting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genuflection)) doesn’t get me worked up or make me lose sleep. Let these guys have their quiet protest. It’s only gotten more media coverage because POTUS decided to make it an issue. Pure distraction. This story was on its way to the briar patch and would have fizzled on its own, kind of like it did last season. Only now, the VP kept it alive with his insertion into the fray.
Again, keeping the focus on distractions.
And, like good little minions, it has their loyal supporters all riled up in fake patriotism and mock rage. The opposition is sufficiently distracted from real problems because they can’t resist any attempt to make this administration look bad.
So...mission accomplished!
Post by: MarkZ on October 09, 2017, 05:46:37 AM
If Pence was going to leave a game where there would be “disrespect,” and he knew that the 49ers had the most “disrespectful” players, what did he hope to accomplish by even attending this game?
Eric Reid is right, however, in that the 49ers are the team that has the most players kneeling and were likely to do it again, so this shouldn't have been a surprise to the Vice President. Systemic oppression? I think not.
Post by: Little Joe on October 09, 2017, 05:54:43 AM
Seeing what gets the hard right all hot and bothered is quite telling. A bunch of athletes kneeling (another word for that could be genuflecting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genuflection)) doesn’t get me worked up or make me lose sleep.So, if it doesn't get YOU worked up, then it is ok, huh?
Well it doesn't get me worked up when a baker refuses to bake a cake honoring gay marriage, even though I am 100% if favor of allowing gay marriage and I think the government has no place restricting WHO one marries.
It seems to me that liberals get worked up a whole lot more often and more violently than conservatives. But their extreme hypocrisy has them point out triggers of the right and purposely trigger those things the right objects to. I'd like to see a list of "triggers" that get each side going and see which list is longer.
Post by: Lucifer on October 09, 2017, 06:13:06 AM
It's all just a big PR stunt (as Mark recites his talking points) and Mark now says Americans have fake patriotism and mock rage.
Ever notice how the progressives get triggered whenever they see displays of patriotism by average Americans? How many times in the news do we read articles where someone puts an American flag in their front yard only to have the progressive neighbors go apeshit and demand it come down because of some obscure homeowner rule? How many times have the progressives demanded that schools stop playing the national anthem before class?
Maybe Mark can articulate to us why progressives hate displays of patriotism and why such displays trigger progressives?
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 06:29:02 AM
Let these guys have their quiet protest. It’s only gotten more media coverage because POTUS decided to make it an issue. Pure distraction. This story was on its way to the briar patch and would have fizzled on its own, kind of like it did last season. Only now, the VP kept it alive with his insertion into the fray.
Again, keeping the focus on distractions.
So...mission accomplished!
I get where you're going so I'd like to know - do you think the goal they have is being met? Do you have any data showing that this protest is producing a change in the cop/racial minority divide? I don't know because I don't care, but if it's having any effect, sure has been lost on me.
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 06:32:27 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2017/10/09/jerry-jones-gives-cowboys-players-ultimatum-stand-for-anthem-or-sit-for-game.html
Wear the star, respect the flag. I'm betting if he sees and disrespect someone is going to the locker room.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 09, 2017, 07:07:20 AM
If Pence was going to leave a game where there would be “disrespect,” and he knew that the 49ers had the most “disrespectful” players, what did he hope to accomplish by even attending this game?
Maybe because he was the Governor of Indiana and Peyton Manning was having his statue unveiled and because he had planned to attend because of that? I know, the logic of that is probably too much for you. ;)
Post by: MarkZ on October 09, 2017, 07:14:22 AM
I get where you're going so I'd like to know - do you think the goal they have is being met? Do you have any data showing that this protest is producing a change in the cop/racial minority divide? I don't know because I don't care, but if it's having any effect, sure has been lost on me.Yes, Colin Kaepernick made headlines last year with his stunts. And then the news withered away on its own merits. Look at the other sports, at other athletes. This protest was akin to the Occupy protest we saw years ago: much ado about nothing. Until, of course, POTUS 45 made it an issue.
I think the goal is distraction, yes. It’s just my opinion on the matter. We have so much turmoil going on at home and abroad, yet THIS is a major issue of the day? THIS is what we have our nation’s leaders spending their time on? Of course, it would be obtuse to assume that this is the only thing having our administration’s undivided attention. However, when a man holds the office of POTUS, the electorate pays attention to what he says. He can drive an issue, or allow it to wither on its own merits.
No, I don’t think athletes kneeling during the national anthem is going to change things. People are not going to stand up and say, “wow, these fellas have a great point: we should listen!” But I do think that with the other issues going on, this is a stroke of genius on the part of the administration. Keep everyone talking about this idiocy, so that the focus can remain away from other issues. Our current POTUS, with his pedigree in dramatic reality TV, knows how to obfuscate and divert attention.
Post by: MarkZ on October 09, 2017, 07:22:26 AM
Maybe because he was the Governor of Indiana and Peyton Manning was having his statue unveiled and because he had planned to attend because of that? I know, the logic of that is probably too much for you. ;)I could believe that logic, then why make a point of leaving by tweeting it immediately after departure? Why not stay above the fray, if that’s the real reason for attendance?
Why? Because doing so wouldn’t make for good TV, maybe?
Post by: Lucifer on October 09, 2017, 07:31:44 AM
Our current POTUS, with his pedigree in dramatic reality TV, knows how to obfuscate and divert attention.
Let's drill down a bit. You seem to think the current POTUS "knows how to obfuscate and divert attention" as you put it.
How would you characterize a president commenting on police matters in several states as it possibly relates to matters of race without knowing all of the facts of each episode? Could we say that was in order to obfuscate and divert attention?
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 08:24:55 AM
No, I don’t think athletes kneeling during the national anthem is going to change things. People are not going to stand up and say, “wow, these fellas have a great point: we should listen!” But I do think that with the other issues going on, this is a stroke of genius on the part of the administration. Keep everyone talking about this idiocy, so that the focus can remain away from other issues. Our current POTUS, with his pedigree in dramatic reality TV, knows how to obfuscate and divert attention.
I will opine that for some, including me - it's had the opposite of the expected or desired result. I am in NO WAY a supporter of LEO, but now - after the spectacle being made in the NFL, I'm thinkin that yeah - maybe some folk do need a good beat-down to get the point across. If anything, I'm going to give LEO more leeway than I usually would because it seems there is a thread going through a certain part of the populace that just doesn't understand what words mean. Know what I mean?
Post by: LevelWing on October 09, 2017, 08:39:25 AM
I think the goal is distraction, yes. It’s just my opinion on the matter. We have so much turmoil going on at home and abroad, yet THIS is a major issue of the day? THIS is what we have our nation’s leaders spending their time on? Of course, it would be obtuse to assume that this is the only thing having our administration’s undivided attention. However, when a man holds the office of POTUS, the electorate pays attention to what he says. He can drive an issue, or allow it to wither on its own merits.I don't think it was a distraction from current issues but I do think that Trump knew what he was doing by getting into the NFL mess. He just turned so many Americans against the NFL; sales are down, attendance is down and ratings are down because he said that NFL players who knelt weren't being patriotic. They were being disrespectful to our nation's flag. Nobody wants to be called unpatriotic. Not to mention that nobody wants politics injected into sports. That's a great way to alienate 50% of your fan base right from the start. The mid-terms are next year and the Democrats are vulnerable, especially in the Senate. Every time Trump does something, or the Republicans fail to do something, the Democrats do something that make Trump and the Republicans seem not so bad.
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 08:45:02 AM
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/shock-poll-nfl-now-least-liked-sport-core-fans-down-31/article/2636837
Hoping this will be reflected in player salaries, but owners being the dumbasses they are, might not affect them all that much. Advertisers are taking notice.
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 09:57:56 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/09/anti-trump-espn-host-calls-for-fans-to-boycott-nfl-advertisers.html
Escalating. Whew, now that she's made her point, I will go on ATT, watch the game, while sipping a Dr Pepper, and shopping for a new Ford.
Post by: bflynn on October 09, 2017, 01:23:48 PM
ESPN host calls on fans to boycott Cowboys.
Was that because of the anthem thing or just because they suck?
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 02:50:52 PM
Was that because of the anthem thing or just because they suck?
Anthem thing. Not having watched, I can't help you with the suck thing.
Post by: jb1842 on October 09, 2017, 03:10:52 PM
ESPN host calls on fans to boycott Cowboys.
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/09/anti-trump-espn-host-calls-for-fans-to-boycott-nfl-advertisers.html
Escalating. Whew, now that she's made her point, I will go on ATT, watch the game, while sipping a Dr Pepper, and shopping for a new Ford.
And she just got suspended for it.
Post by: Little Joe on October 09, 2017, 03:29:37 PM
And she just got suspended for it.Of course she did. Because she was calling for boycotting ESPN advertisers. Not for any altruistic reasons, or for calling Trump a white racist.
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 03:52:22 PM
Post by: MarkZ on October 09, 2017, 04:03:48 PM
Pfft, two week suspension. It's ok, my cancellation of ESPN is for a lifetime.You’re canceling something you never watch? Cool.
Post by: jb1842 on October 09, 2017, 04:15:21 PM
Of course she did. Because she was calling for boycotting ESPN advertisers. Not for any altruistic reasons, or for calling Trump a white racist.
No argument from me on that point.
Post by: invflatspin on October 09, 2017, 06:07:48 PM
You’re canceling something you never watch? Cool.
Cancelled a while back. Didn't watch it(past tense).
Post by: invflatspin on October 10, 2017, 12:38:45 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NFL could vote as soon as next week on a rule change that would require players to stand for the national anthem -- effectively putting an end to the contentious protests that have broken out during the playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner."
Fox News obtained a letter on Tuesday sent by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to the league's owners confirming the rule change would be discussed.
“We live in a country that can feel very divided. Sports, and especially the NFL, brings people together and lets them set aside those divisions, at least for a few hours. The current dispute over the National Anthem is threatening to erode the unifying power of our game, and is now dividing us, and our players, from many fans across the country,” Goodell wrote.
Goodell wrote he and the NFL believed players should stand for the national anthem.
“It is an important moment in our game. We want to honor our flag and our country, and our fans expect that of us,” Goodell wrote.
That should set the fox amongst the chickens.
Post by: LevelWing on October 10, 2017, 12:42:37 PM
Post by: Little Joe on October 10, 2017, 12:52:35 PM
The problem is that it's akin to being sorry for getting caught. Ratings are down, profits are down and attendance is down and the NFL is trying to recover from that. If they believed that players should honor the flag and country then they would've said that from the start instead of doubling down.Too late for me. The fact that they backed down in the face of financial repercussions does nothing to gain my respect back. I have actually been enjoying my Sundays recently doing things that are healthier for me, both physically and mentally. Sitting on a couch, drinking beer, getting alternately pissed and ecstatic is no longer my Sunday pastime.
Post by: invflatspin on October 10, 2017, 01:24:17 PM
Choose wisely. 8)
Post by: invflatspin on October 10, 2017, 08:13:43 PM
Post by: MarkZ on October 11, 2017, 05:04:25 PM
They should foster more patriotism, like these good old boys! (https://twitter.com/astros/status/917504561912442880)
Post by: Lucifer on October 11, 2017, 07:29:11 PM
Boy, I’m sure glad that the NFL finally solved that problem. I’d hate to see teams allowing athletes to disrespect our flag, or anthem.
They should foster more patriotism, like these good old boys! (https://twitter.com/astros/status/917504561912442880)
Nice display of your bigotry there Marcy.
Post by: Mr Pou on October 12, 2017, 04:23:07 AM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/11/all-pro-running-back-sued-after-defaulting-on-loan/106522990/
Which begs the questions:
1.) WTF? The guy makes millions a year, why the hell does he need a $2.4M loan?
2.) And why the hell can't he pay the note?
What these guys piss away in one year, properly invested, would keep a normal guy going forever. Which brings me back around to swearing off the NFL, we are truly worshiping false idols.
Post by: Lucifer on October 12, 2017, 05:29:57 AM
Slight aside, but:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/11/all-pro-running-back-sued-after-defaulting-on-loan/106522990/
Which begs the questions:
1.) WTF? The guy makes millions a year, why the hell does he need a $2.4M loan?
2.) And why the hell can't he pay the note?
What these guys piss away in one year, properly invested, would keep a normal guy going forever. Which brings me back around to swearing off the NFL, we are truly worshiping false idols.
These guys are paid millions not because of their high business acumen, but because they play a game well. In the majority of cases they have never seen these sums of money and have no ideas on how to manage or invest it. Then comes all the people who are willing to help them.
I'm sure someone convinced this fellow the loan was a great idea. And I'm sure a loan broker made out quite handsomely and the bank will make out just as well. And now you have an attorney involved who will get his cut.
What's the old saying about a fool and his money?
Post by: Little Joe on October 12, 2017, 08:09:52 AM
Slight aside, but:While I agree with your sentiment, there are many good reasons to borrow money when you have plenty. If I can borrow at 3 or 4% while my money is earning 6-7-10% or more, I will borrow all I need for depreciating assets.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/11/all-pro-running-back-sued-after-defaulting-on-loan/106522990/
Which begs the questions:
1.) WTF? The guy makes millions a year, why the hell does he need a $2.4M loan?
2.) And why the hell can't he pay the note?
What these guys piss away in one year, properly invested, would keep a normal guy going forever. Which brings me back around to swearing off the NFL, we are truly worshiping false idols.
But as you say, the question is why didn't/couldn't he pay it back?
You are also correct about us worshiping false idols, with regards to these gifted, musclebound freaks of nature.
Post by: bflynn on October 12, 2017, 09:00:57 AM
While I agree with your sentiment, there are many good reasons to borrow money when you have plenty. If I can borrow at 3 or 4% while my money is earning 6-7-10% or more, I will borrow all I need for depreciating assets.
Just out of curiosity, you do realize this is the exact thinking that lead to the Great Depression in 1932, right? And not that far from the "big oops" of '07.
Post by: Little Joe on October 12, 2017, 09:10:52 AM
Just out of curiosity, you do realize this is the exact thinking that lead to the Great Depression in 1932, right? And not that far from the "big oops" of '07.I'll agree that line of thinking occurred during the run-up to those events, but are you really saying that is what caused both of those events?
That "line of thinking" also preceded just about every successful venture throughout modern history.
Post by: bflynn on October 12, 2017, 11:03:36 AM
I'll agree that line of thinking occurred during the run-up to those events, but are you really saying that is what caused both of those events?
That "line of thinking" also preceded just about every successful venture throughout modern history.
Well, not excessive borrowing by itself, but it did incite selloffs when leveraged investors were spooked by a small market downturn and then turned it into a massive market downturn. Collective leveraging is itself a systemic risk and more leveraging creates more risk. The risk reduces tolerance for downturns.
Post by: Mr Pou on October 13, 2017, 04:48:25 AM
Well, not excessive borrowing by itself, but it did incite selloffs when leveraged investors were spooked by a small market downturn and then turned it into a massive market downturn. Collective leveraging is itself a systemic risk and more leveraging creates more risk. The risk reduces tolerance for downturns.
True, but as Little Joe says, borrowing can be very enticing. We needed a new car this year, and I was going to pay cash, but the manufacturer had a 0% special at the time. Yeah, sure, I'll use your money for free[1].
[1] And of course that money isn't really free, it's just baked into the price of the vehicle. So, if you do pay cash, you're really leaving money on the table.
Post by: Little Joe on October 13, 2017, 05:38:32 AM
Well, not excessive borrowing by itself, but it did incite selloffs when leveraged investors were spooked by a small market downturn and then turned it into a massive market downturn. Collective leveraging is itself a systemic risk and more leveraging creates more risk. The risk reduces tolerance for downturns.In other words, "too much of a good thing . . . "
But if managed correctly, leverage can be a powerful and productive tool.
Post by: asechrest on October 13, 2017, 06:49:19 AM
True, but as Little Joe says, borrowing can be very enticing. We needed a new car this year, and I was going to pay cash, but the manufacturer had a 0% special at the time. Yeah, sure, I'll use your money for free[1].
[1] And of course that money isn't really free, it's just baked into the price of the vehicle. So, if you do pay cash, you're really leaving money on the table.
I've got 1.75% on one of my auto loans. They make only $800 on me over 6 years, and that's if I don't pay it off early.
Post by: Lucifer on October 13, 2017, 07:57:06 AM
The government is keeping interest rates artificially low in order to get people to buy high ticket items, but even more importantly it drives investors into the stock market casino as there are no other options available to make anything on savings. This is one reason we are seeing the stock market at record levels as its way oversold.
So enjoy your cheap money buying cars and houses, the downside is your future savings are taking it up the ass. Personally I would rather have interest rates being determined by the market rather than government interference, but that would go against Wall Street.
Post by: asechrest on October 13, 2017, 12:03:51 PM
Personally I would rather have interest rates being determined by the market rather than government interference, but that would go against Wall Street.
Would that involve eliminating the central bank?
Post by: Lucifer on October 13, 2017, 12:52:20 PM
Would that involve eliminating the central bank?
Not really. A very complex issue at best.
Post by: asechrest on October 13, 2017, 01:46:54 PM
Not really. A very complex issue at best.
Not that I know much about it or the ramifications thereof, but the central bank typically doesn't set an interest rate. Rather, they use their powers to move the interest rate toward a target. So perhaps we'd just remove the central bank's authority to do that? We then remove some ability to affect the economy in theoretically positive ways in time of economic crisis, though.
Post by: Lucifer on October 13, 2017, 02:52:20 PM
Not that I know much about it or the ramifications thereof, but the central bank typically doesn't set an interest rate. Rather, they use their powers to move the interest rate toward a target. So perhaps we'd just remove the central bank's authority to do that? We then remove some ability to affect the economy in theoretically positive ways in time of economic crisis, though.
The fallacy is the central bank is not influenced by the government, which is a fantasy. The Fed operates behind closed doors and is heavily influenced by government as well as Wall Street.
There has been several attempts to audit the fed, but that receives a lot of pushback not only from the Fed itself but also congress. Wonder why?
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 13, 2017, 07:44:35 PM
Post by: Lucifer on October 13, 2017, 08:01:54 PM
I would be one happy dude if a money market account we’re paying just 5% now.
You and several million folks. But if that were to happen the stock market would see a major correction and Wall Street would take a hit. Also those cheapo car loans and cheapo mortgages would disappear.
Putting this genie back in the bottle won't come easy, if ever.
Post by: Anthony on October 15, 2017, 06:16:46 AM
You and several million folks. But if that were to happen the stock market would see a major correction and Wall Street would take a hit. Also those cheapo car loans and cheapo mortgages would disappear.
Putting this genie back in the bottle won't come easy, if ever.
We went through some pain under the early years of Reagan coming off the disasters Carter years of high interest rates, and high inflation. Remember stagflation? Mostly due to the Media, I don't think we have the resolve as a society to do that again.
Post by: Lucifer on October 15, 2017, 06:29:25 AM
We went through some pain under the early years of Reagan coming off the disasters Carter years of high interest rates, and high inflation. Remember stagflation? Mostly due to the Media, I don't think we have the resolve as a society to do that again.
We are too far in now. Take away the cheap money and a domino event happens.
Post by: Lucifer on October 15, 2017, 06:37:49 AM
Post by: Anthony on October 15, 2017, 07:03:21 AM
Post by: Little Joe on October 15, 2017, 09:09:06 AM
The stock markets scare the hell out of me, and I still believe we have higher inflation than the government indexes are showing.The stock markets have been scaring the hell out of me for about the past 20 years. Especially the period between around 2007 to 2011. But my IRAs are now around 3 or 4 times what they were then. Every time my panic level exceeded my rational thought process, I would talk to my financial adviser and he would convince me to "stay the course". I figure he has way more than earned his commissions by telling me NOT to sell.
But I still panic when I think what will happen if the Dem's gain control, or if the R's don't grow a spine and take action.
Post by: Lucifer on October 15, 2017, 09:50:40 AM
The stock markets scare the hell out of me, and I still believe we have higher inflation than the government indexes are showing.
The stock market is nothing more than a casino. Place your bets and hope to win.
There is a major correction looming and when it hits the losses will be staggering. For the young investor who has time on his side he’ll ride it out, but retirees will take a huge hit.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 15, 2017, 10:05:04 AM
The stock markets scare the hell out of me, and I still believe we have higher inflation than the government indexes are showing.
The Government never takes into account package inflation. Ice cream would be a great example. How many companies still offer half gallons of ice cream? Many packages shrink without the price going down. If you don't take that into account you are missing quite a bit of inflation.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 15, 2017, 10:06:26 AM
Post by: Anthony on October 15, 2017, 11:22:06 AM
The Government never takes into account package inflation. Ice cream would be a great example. How many companies still offer half gallons of ice cream? Many packages shrink without the price going down. If you don't take that into account you are missing quite a bit of inflation.
Good point. Anybody that does grocery shopping KNOWS there is higher inflation than is being stated. Also my property, and real estate taxes have gone way up, much higher than the annual rate of inflation. Some of the toll roads in my area have seen double digit inflation. They go up every six months no matter what.
Post by: nddons on October 15, 2017, 03:23:41 PM
I’m a Chicago Blackhawks fan. Have you been to the United Center? Check out what happens during the National Anthem. It might make your conservative heads pop.What the fuck are you talking about? I was a Blackhawks season ticket holder from 1985-1993 and 2006-2011. The National Anthem in the United Center is the ultimate celebration of patriotism. It started in about 1985, and gained new life in the first game after the start of the first Gulf War in 1991. It has carried through in every home game since then.
Seeing what gets the hard right all hot and bothered is quite telling. A bunch of athletes kneeling (another word for that could be genuflecting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genuflection)) doesn’t get me worked up or make me lose sleep. Let these guys have their quiet protest. It’s only gotten more media coverage because POTUS decided to make it an issue. Pure distraction. This story was on its way to the briar patch and would have fizzled on its own, kind of like it did last season. Only now, the VP kept it alive with his insertion into the fray.
Again, keeping the focus on distractions.
And, like good little minions, it has their loyal supporters all riled up in fake patriotism and mock rage. The opposition is sufficiently distracted from real problems because they can’t resist any attempt to make this administration look bad.
So...mission accomplished!
As for genuflecting, knock off that bullshit. Genuflecting is a sign of respect and honor. Those who kneel at the national anthem are demonstrating disrespect and dishonor, of the ONE moment in a sporting event that is supposed to bring us all together as Americans.
I for one have no use for overpaid snowflakes who consider themselves more important than anyone else. Screw them all.
Post by: bflynn on October 15, 2017, 04:39:56 PM
The stock market is nothing more than a casino. Place your bets and hope to win.
There is a major correction looming and when it hits the losses will be staggering. For the young investor who has time on his side he’ll ride it out, but retirees will take a huge hit.
I disagree - if you treat it as a casino then it will act like one. But I have never known a casino where you could have a 30 year winning streak. A correction is a test. It is not the final exam.
Besides, there is always a major correction looming. Sometimes the doomsayers get enough people be believe it and make it come true.
My opinion is that we're in good shape, but things will probably change when Dems take charge. Not because we are doomed to have a correction or because the market is completely random - it is provably not - but because when Dems take over, they are going to be dead set on advancing their socialist agenda and that is going to scare the crap out of all the money people.
They want and believe we must have a government controlled and government paid for medical care system and that is going to initially run us 2 trillion dollars a year more, increasing to 4-7 T extra within 5 years. The health care industry has grown from 12% of GDP 10 years ago to 19% today, but will be 30+% 5 years after the Dems take it over. Forget about not being able to afford to get sick, we won't be able to afford to be healthy either.
Post by: Mr Pou on October 16, 2017, 04:21:36 AM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/15/colin-kaepernick-collusion-claim-against-nfl-owners/766348001/
[1] Yes, the stock market is risky, but it's the only game in town with the Fed giving away money for nothing. Serfs R us.
Post by: nddons on October 16, 2017, 05:20:16 AM
To bring this back to football[1], look what Kaepernick is doing now! What a TOTAL loser.Translation: Entitled snowflake demands someone pay him $28.8 million despite his childish and disruptive actions which will cost the team and the league untold millions of dollars of lost revenues.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/15/colin-kaepernick-collusion-claim-against-nfl-owners/766348001/
[1] Yes, the stock market is risky, but it's the only game in town with the Fed giving away money for nothing. Serfs R us.
Only in America.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 16, 2017, 05:30:24 AM
Post by: Mr Pou on October 16, 2017, 06:45:56 AM
I decided to take a stand and now I'm upset due to the consequences of taking said stand. ::)
Which means he doesn't think past the end of his nose.
Post by: invflatspin on October 16, 2017, 07:01:05 AM
Post by: Mr Pou on October 16, 2017, 07:25:44 AM
I heard the QB for Packers went down. Kapernick might have been considered for the job a few weeks ago. Now, there is no way in hell that anyone is going to hire this ass-clown.
Yes, with this latest move he erased any chances of ever working in the NFL again. Hope he invested his earnings instead of blowing them on Escalades for his posse.
Post by: Anthony on October 16, 2017, 07:33:21 AM
Post by: Lucifer on October 16, 2017, 07:56:12 AM
Now some of the college players are taking a knee. I didn't think that would happen.
Smart, very smart.
Think it ever crosses the minds of these imbecile jocks that the NFL recruiters are watching and taking notes?
Post by: Number7 on October 16, 2017, 08:12:38 AM
He will get fired if this doens't resolve soon, because the owners are smart enough to realize that they have to sacrifice his head to get this under control.
Fans have already begun to find better things to do with their Sunday afternoons than invest it in a bunch of fucking pansy, snowflake, America haters.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 16, 2017, 08:34:32 AM
I decided to take a stand and now I'm upset due to the consequences of taking said stand. ::)You mean you're taking a knee to support your stand?
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 16, 2017, 08:35:33 AM
When this all falls apart it will be because the price the owners are paying for collapsing attendance and viewership is higher than the cost of offending the snowflake players. It will be all about money and nothing else. Goodell made that clear with his bullshit statement last week.
He will get fired if this doens't resolve soon, because the owners are smart enough to realize that they have to sacrifice his head to get this under control.
Fans have already begun to find better things to do with their Sunday afternoons than invest it in a bunch of fucking pansy, snowflake, America haters.
I'll bet Condi Rice is really happy she decided not to run the NFL after W retired.
Post by: invflatspin on October 16, 2017, 09:42:46 AM
eight
Seven on the 49ers, and one Raider.
the Saints kneeled in unison before the anthem, and were roundly booed by the crowed. Eight players ruining NFL for millions of fans, and many thousands of regular people who will shop elsewhere. Idiots.
Post by: Number7 on October 16, 2017, 11:06:32 AM
I'll bet Condi Rice is really happy she decided not to run the NFL after W retired.
She would haven smarter than to let it get this bad.
Post by: LevelWing on October 16, 2017, 11:23:52 AM
To bring this back to football[1], look what Kaepernick is doing now! What a TOTAL loser.Collusion is going to be very hard to prove. Good luck. The statements from his girlfriend reference the Baltimore Ravens owner won't help his case any.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/15/colin-kaepernick-collusion-claim-against-nfl-owners/766348001/
[1] Yes, the stock market is risky, but it's the only game in town with the Fed giving away money for nothing. Serfs R us.
Post by: nddons on October 16, 2017, 12:56:40 PM
I heard the QB for Packers went down. Kapernick might have been considered for the job a few weeks ago. Now, there is no way in hell that anyone is going to hire this ass-clown.I don't know. They've hired dog killers, rapists, domestic abusers and drug users. If he's talented, which he's not, he would get hired.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 16, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
She would haven smarter than to let it get this bad.
True, but I can imagine what the "press" would be calling her.
Post by: Mr Pou on October 17, 2017, 05:23:55 AM
Post by: Anthony on October 17, 2017, 06:23:19 AM
I don't know. They've hired dog killers, rapists, domestic abusers and drug users. If he's talented, which he's not, he would get hired.
I hate animal abusers, but to be "fair" to Michael Vick, he paid his debt to society, and seemed to live his life decently once out of jail.
Kaepernick was going to be given a shot by the Baltimore Ravens, but his activist, Muslim, radio host girlfriend ruined that.
Quote
Former Baltimore Ravens linebacker Ray Lewis said that his former team was close to signing quarterback Colin Kaepernick before the free agent's girlfriend posted a tweet ridiculing Lewis and Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti.
"We were going to close the deal to sign him," Lewis said on Showtime's Inside the NFL on Tuesday night. "Steve Bisciotti said, 'I want to hear Colin Kaepernick speak to let me know that he wants to play football.' And it never happens because that picture comes up the next day."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/ravens/2017/09/06/ray-lewis-ravens-backed-off-colin-kaepernick-after-girlfriends-tweet/636586001/
Post by: nddons on October 17, 2017, 11:32:07 AM
I hate animal abusers, but to be "fair" to Michael Vick, he paid his debt to society, and seemed to live his life decently once out of jail.He may have paid his debt to society, but that doesn't mean that I need to employ him. A scumbag is still a scumbag. Would you employ a child rapist if he did his time in prison?
Kaepernick was going to be given a shot by the Baltimore Ravens, but his activist, Muslim, radio host girlfriend ruined that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/ravens/2017/09/06/ray-lewis-ravens-backed-off-colin-kaepernick-after-girlfriends-tweet/636586001/
As for Kaepernick, I'll bet the collusion lawsuit was already in play, and girlfriend's sabotage was a means to an end. Why work to make $14 million when you can rake in $28 million in damages?
Post by: LevelWing on October 17, 2017, 12:06:42 PM
He may have paid his debt to society, but that doesn't mean that I need to employ him. A scumbag is still a scumbag. Would you employ a child rapist if he did his time in prison?Wouldn't his girlfriend's message be necessary proof that there was no collusion? He was going to be signed but then his girlfriend sent that message and the Ravens backed out, rightfully so.
As for Kaepernick, I'll bet the collusion lawsuit was already in play, and girlfriend's sabotage was a means to an end. Why work to make $14 million when you can rake in $28 million in damages?
Post by: Anthony on October 17, 2017, 06:17:54 PM
Wouldn't his girlfriend's message be necessary proof that there was no collusion? He was going to be signed but then his girlfriend sent that message and the Ravens backed out, rightfully so.
That's what I think.
Post by: nddons on October 17, 2017, 06:42:44 PM
Wouldn't his girlfriend's message be necessary proof that there was no collusion? He was going to be signed but then his girlfriend sent that message and the Ravens backed out, rightfully so.Could be. They'd better get a jury stacked with BLM activists to get the outcome they desire.
Post by: Number7 on October 17, 2017, 07:08:49 PM
He wants to stay relevant and the center of attention.
Once people started to tune out the National Felons League and ignore their oppression, he started to quickly lose attention.
Post by: invflatspin on October 18, 2017, 08:40:09 AM
Bye NFL for good. You chose you loose.
Post by: invflatspin on October 24, 2017, 05:04:58 PM
http://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2017/10/24/dallas-cowboys-damontre-moore-dan-bailey-mike-nugent-release-sign-injury-protest/
Hmmmmmm.
Post by: invflatspin on October 25, 2017, 02:58:56 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2017/10/25/waiter-mlb-catcher-bruce-maxwell-made-up-story-about-service-refusal-over-anthem-protest.html
aaaahhhhahhahhahaaaaaaa!!!
Post by: nddons on October 25, 2017, 03:32:42 PM
LIAR!!Is it any wonder why race relations have fallen down the toilet since, say, 2009? We used to make fun over at POA and here about the people who cried RACIST! at every turn. Now, it's not only pathetic, it's reckless and no one will even pay attention any more.
http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2017/10/25/waiter-mlb-catcher-bruce-maxwell-made-up-story-about-service-refusal-over-anthem-protest.html
aaaahhhhahhahhahaaaaaaa!!!
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 25, 2017, 09:03:59 PM
Is it any wonder why race relations have fallen down the toilet since, say, 2009? We used to make fun over at POA and here about the people who cried RACIST! at every turn. Now, it's not only pathetic, it's reckless and no one will even pay attention any more.
Pacist!
Post by: invflatspin on October 28, 2017, 08:36:16 AM
Post by: Username on October 28, 2017, 09:28:23 AM
Post by: Number7 on October 28, 2017, 12:10:34 PM
Post by: Little Joe on October 28, 2017, 12:34:08 PM
With SO MANY nfl players with criminal convictions, convicts running the prison is an applicable phrase.That's why the players are so mad. The truth hurts.
Post by: nddons on October 28, 2017, 01:28:52 PM
I think that the original phrase "inmates running the asylum" is more appropriate.Not for the NFL. They've had over 300 NFL players arrested since 2010.
Post by: invflatspin on October 28, 2017, 04:04:13 PM
BLACK football players on multiple teams insult the entire country by kneeling during the anthem. No one is suspended. No one faces any punishment or job action at all.
There's your racial equality.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/yuli-gurriel-suspended-five-games-racist-gesture-wont-serve-world-series-200532038.html
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 28, 2017, 04:27:05 PM
WHITE Houston baseball player suspended for 5 games for making the slant eyes with his fingers. While in the dugout. Offends ONE player(and maybe by extension the nation of Japan?)
BLACK football players on multiple teams insult the entire country by kneeling during the anthem. No one is suspended. No one faces any punishment or job action at all.
There's your racial equality.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/yuli-gurriel-suspended-five-games-racist-gesture-wont-serve-world-series-200532038.html
Insulting an entire multiracial country like the U.S. is technically an equal-opportunity insult and therefore racially neutral.
Post by: Little Joe on October 29, 2017, 06:35:05 AM
I said I had no sympathy for those millionaire jocks that want to insult the Flag and Country that I love to point out a social problem. She got really pissed and said that mistreatment of blacks by cops is wrong and good for those players for taking a stand. I just sort of shut up and bottled it up.
But I got to thinking about other ways they could demonstrate their poor little hurt feelings.
-They could refuse to take the field for a few minutes before the first kick-off.
-They could all take a knee on their first possession of the game.
-Or my personal favorite, they could invite (free tickets to) about 50 cops and 50 poor black kids to stand on the sidelines with interlocked arms. Maybe 50/50 on each sideline for a total of 200 cops and kids.
Any other ideas how they could respectfully show their cause?
My problem isn't so much that I disagree with what they are trying to say. I just completely disagree with the way they are saying it. Poking me in the eye doesn't do much to help me see their point of view. But I do think they are being total hypocrites and are doing nothing to address the real problems.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2017, 07:51:06 AM
Your wife is believing the media, BLM, Democrat false narrative.
Post by: jb1842 on October 29, 2017, 08:31:41 AM
LIAR!!
http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2017/10/25/waiter-mlb-catcher-bruce-maxwell-made-up-story-about-service-refusal-over-anthem-protest.html
aaaahhhhahhahhahaaaaaaa!!!
And he was just arrested for pulling a gun on a pizza delivery driver!
Post by: invflatspin on October 29, 2017, 11:03:24 AM
Yup, this guy is making a real statement about respecting minority rights. What an asshat.
Post by: invflatspin on October 29, 2017, 11:05:55 AM
Any other ideas how they could respectfully show their cause?
My problem isn't so much that I disagree with what they are trying to say. I just completely disagree with the way they are saying it. Poking me in the eye doesn't do much to help me see their point of view. But I do think they are being total hypocrites and are doing nothing to address the real problems.
Yes, I have an idea. Take it outside your JOB location. Do whatever you want, however you want on your own time. When you have the jersey on, it's game time. Focus on that, and leave the politics for later.
Post by: Username on October 30, 2017, 07:54:30 AM
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 30, 2017, 08:23:07 AM
Yes, I have an idea. Take it outside your JOB location. Do whatever you want, however you want on your own time. When you have the jersey on, it's game time. Focus on that, and leave the politics for later.
Tell that to other "entertainers" like musicians who use the captive paying audience to receive their brilliant take on current affairs.
Post by: invflatspin on October 30, 2017, 08:40:09 AM
Tell that to other "entertainers" like musicians who use the captive paying audience to receive their brilliant take on current affairs.
Ok, I will. When they appear on national TV, and start their diatribe I'll get right on that. If someone paid for a ticket to one of these jerks, then that's on them to request a refund.
Post by: Rush on October 30, 2017, 07:47:53 PM
I just got into another "mini" fight with my Hot, Crazy, Smart wife.
I said I had no sympathy for those millionaire jocks that want to insult the Flag and Country that I love to point out a social problem. She got really pissed and said that mistreatment of blacks by cops is wrong and good for those players for taking a stand. I just sort of shut up and bottled it up.
But I got to thinking about other ways they could demonstrate their poor little hurt feelings.
-They could refuse to take the field for a few minutes before the first kick-off.
-They could all take a knee on their first possession of the game.
-Or my personal favorite, they could invite (free tickets to) about 50 cops and 50 poor black kids to stand on the sidelines with interlocked arms. Maybe 50/50 on each sideline for a total of 200 cops and kids.
Any other ideas how they could respectfully show their cause?
My problem isn't so much that I disagree with what they are trying to say. I just completely disagree with the way they are saying it. Poking me in the eye doesn't do much to help me see their point of view. But I do think they are being total hypocrites and are doing nothing to address the real problems.
Your wife, like most people on board with this "mistreatment of blacks by cops" cause, is completely missing the point.
It's not about race. AT ALL. It's about a failed system and set of laws which has caught both cops and citizens in a horrible trap. The poor are the most victimized and blacks tend to be poor at higher rates hence they are disproportionately affected, especially inner city blacks who ended up there due to a series of historical events some racist and some not racist, in fact desegregation itself was one link in that chain (moved the business owner blacks out of the city). The biggest causes of this mess are: 1) the failed war on drugs 2) the shutting down of manufacturing in our cities 3) the welfare state; all of which create fatherless babies who are raised with no proper male role model and then funneled into the criminal justice system by either getting involved in drug trade themselves (for lack of any other work) or being wrongly snitched out by someone trying to reduce their own jail time. That systemic problem affects poor whites too and the cops, with good intentions of trying to protect the innocent (blacks are the victims of black crime more than any others) the cops are fumbling around using bad methods with a set of dysfunctional laws - the laws themselves are what are racist not the cops! (Opioids were made illegal because those horrible Chinese were smoking it and going around raping white women, marijuana was made illegal because those horrible Mexicans were smoking it and cocaine was made illegal because blacks were getting high and going around raping white women - or so went the hysteria.)
The players that take a knee suffer from terminal stupidity. They can't see these root causes so they bleat about "racist cops". They are disrespectful idiots and will do more to hurt than help their cause, even though they are correct that blacks are jailed too much - what they are ignoring is that poor whites are also jailed too much and then there are the huge millions of innocent patients being hurt more and more by the ever tightening tourniquet on (legal) painkiller supply. They can't see the big picture, they thrive on hatred, they don't care to learn facts and look for solutions, they want to make white people bad guys and black people only victims and THAT right there is the REAL racism going on here.
Post by: invflatspin on October 31, 2017, 12:03:37 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/31/man-says-mississippi-police-pointed-guns-at-him-his-family.html
I point this out for two reasons. I am not from CA, but another state and was recently in CA to do some renovation on houses I own there. As a white man, by myself in my car, I was also stopped after leaving my house, and the police was very calm, and very polite about the whole thing. He checked my DL, reg, and insurance, and said he stopped me because there was a report of burglars at a vacant house, and my car, and single white driver fit the description. He asked me if I was at that house, I reply that I was, as I am the owner, and doing renovation. We had the address, and he has access to property records, and I asked him to go ahead and look up the county property records, and compare it to my photo ID. He looked in the back of my SUV, saw a bunch of paints, painting materials, trim, light fixtures, etc looked at my paint stained hands, and dirty clothes and said 'no, that's ok I can see you've been working, drive safe' and that was the end of it.
In this case, we have a black family, presumably with kids, driving legally and when pulled over were accosted by many heavily armed cops, removed from their car at gunpoint, and cuffed, all in front of their kids. I don't know how old the kids are, but if they were young, imagine their fright, and if they were older, imagine their anger and hate directed at the cops who were persecuting their parents.
I have to consider what the person reporting the crime said to the police in that case; 'it was a black man, and he was at a vacant house, and he just drove away'. cop hears 'black man', 'vacant house', 'drove away' and made a lot of presumptions. So - it happens, and lets not minimize it. But - having said that, there is a proper forum for this kind of behavior on the part of cops, and the NFL anthem is not the place or time.
Post by: Rush on October 31, 2017, 07:35:22 PM
I will mildly disagree with Rush here. This article is an example of what goes on sometimes with cops and minorities.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/31/man-says-mississippi-police-pointed-guns-at-him-his-family.html
I point this out for two reasons. I am not from CA, but another state and was recently in CA to do some renovation on houses I own there. As a white man, by myself in my car, I was also stopped after leaving my house, and the police was very calm, and very polite about the whole thing. He checked my DL, reg, and insurance, and said he stopped me because there was a report of burglars at a vacant house, and my car, and single white driver fit the description. He asked me if I was at that house, I reply that I was, as I am the owner, and doing renovation. We had the address, and he has access to property records, and I asked him to go ahead and look up the county property records, and compare it to my photo ID. He looked in the back of my SUV, saw a bunch of paints, painting materials, trim, light fixtures, etc looked at my paint stained hands, and dirty clothes and said 'no, that's ok I can see you've been working, drive safe' and that was the end of it.
In this case, we have a black family, presumably with kids, driving legally and when pulled over were accosted by many heavily armed cops, removed from their car at gunpoint, and cuffed, all in front of their kids. I don't know how old the kids are, but if they were young, imagine their fright, and if they were older, imagine their anger and hate directed at the cops who were persecuting their parents.
I have to consider what the person reporting the crime said to the police in that case; 'it was a black man, and he was at a vacant house, and he just drove away'. cop hears 'black man', 'vacant house', 'drove away' and made a lot of presumptions. So - it happens, and lets not minimize it. But - having said that, there is a proper forum for this kind of behavior on the part of cops, and the NFL anthem is not the place or time.
I'm not saying profiling never happens, I'm saying actual racial prejudice in individual cops is not the root cause of the problem. Aside from a few actual racists, and they do exist and I deplore them, I believe most people are not, however because history, socioecominc status, etc., have forced blacks into a situation where they have a higher rate of crime, I think it does often happen that cops either consciously or unconsciously profile based on a misguided sense of statistical likelihood. Even black cops do this. Everyone also profiles white males when it's a lone serial killer or sniper, because statistically that's who it's usually been. Doesn't make it right to persecute innocent people because of it. I can't speak to that incident with the family because I don't know anything about the situation.
Post by: nddons on October 31, 2017, 10:00:47 PM
I'm not saying profiling never happens, I'm saying actual racial prejudice in individual cops is not the root cause of the problem. Aside from a few actual racists, and they do exist and I deplore them, I believe most people are not, however because history, socioecominc status, etc., have forced blacks into a situation where they have a higher rate of crime, I think it does often happen that cops either consciously or unconsciously profile based on a misguided sense of statistical likelihood. Even black cops do this. Everyone also profiles white males when it's a lone serial killer or sniper, because statistically that's who it's usually been. Doesn't make it right to persecute innocent people because of it. I can't speak to that incident with the family because I don't know anything about the situation.I don't think that there's any misguided sense of statistical likelihood at all. When your life is on the line, as every LEO's life is when he goes to work, I'm sorry, but you have to go with the statistics. It's too bad, but the reality is that the majority of urban crime is committed by minorities. I don't care about socioeconomic bullshit; a large segment of our community has lost any care for what is right and what is wrong. That's on them.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on November 01, 2017, 05:45:43 AM
Post by: Anthony on November 01, 2017, 05:49:23 AM
ESPN is losing so many subscribers they may not be able to afford their NFL contract.
GOOD!!! Extreme liberal/progressive bias has consequences!
Post by: invflatspin on November 01, 2017, 08:27:15 AM
I don't think that there's any misguided sense of statistical likelihood at all. When your life is on the line, as every LEO's life is when he goes to work, I'm sorry, but you have to go with the statistics. It's too bad, but the reality is that the majority of urban crime is committed by minorities. I don't care about socioeconomic bullshit; a large segment of our community has lost any care for what is right and what is wrong. That's on them.
Ya-but - according to every jurisdiction in the nation - each citizen, in each encounter is to be treated exactly the same. Historical statistics be damned. Frankly, I have to buy-in to this philosophy, or each time a cop talks to a minority - there is a presumption of guilt by skin color. This cannot be sanctioned. If an LEO can't or won't subscribe to this, they need to turn in their badge, and go back to flipping burgers. This is the danger and the concern of all one group of minorities, and why they are pushing back.
No matter the encounter type, and no matter the skin color, each stop/encounter with LEO should be the same. That guy that got tumbled in the back of the police van until he was dead is a perfect example. All the talk about that was AFTER the guy was in cuffs, but I go back to why the cop decided to grab him up in the first place. Of course, the cop used his skin color to profile. This is wrong, no matter how many stats are used to justify LEO misbehavior.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on November 01, 2017, 08:48:54 AM
Ya-but - according to every jurisdiction in the nation - each citizen, in each encounter is to be treated exactly the same. Historical statistics be damned. Frankly, I have to buy-in to this philosophy, or each time a cop talks to a minority - there is a presumption of guilt by skin color. This cannot be sanctioned. If an LEO can't or won't subscribe to this, they need to turn in their badge, and go back to flipping burgers. This is the danger and the concern of all one group of minorities, and why they are pushing back.
No matter the encounter type, and no matter the skin color, each stop/encounter with LEO should be the same. That guy that got tumbled in the back of the police van until he was dead is a perfect example. All the talk about that was AFTER the guy was in cuffs, but I go back to why the cop decided to grab him up in the first place. Of course, the cop used his skin color to profile. This is wrong, no matter how many stats are used to justify LEO misbehavior.
Courts and juries presume innocence.
Cops presume guilt.
Post by: invflatspin on November 01, 2017, 09:02:06 AM
Courts and juries presume innocence.
Cops presume guilt.
Nope. Every training dept, in every town, county, state, fed LEO program must teach equal treatment law enforcement methods. It's fed mandated. I believe, in most states now there is an annual class(maybe online, maybe canned presentations) or seminars on equal treatment that have to be run to retain a badge. I know in my county there is a requirement that every badged officer has to take the training each year. Not sure about other states/counties.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on November 01, 2017, 09:22:09 AM
Nope. Every training dept, in every town, county, state, fed LEO program must teach equal treatment law enforcement methods. It's fed mandated. I believe, in most states now there is an annual class(maybe online, maybe canned presentations) or seminars on equal treatment that have to be run to retain a badge. I know in my county there is a requirement that every badged officer has to take the training each year. Not sure about other states/counties.
I'm not talking about training. I'm taking about function.
Cops don't go around looking to exonerate people. Everyone to them is a perp until proven otherwise.
Post by: Little Joe on November 01, 2017, 10:46:48 AM
Ya-but - according to every jurisdiction in the nation - each citizen, in each encounter is to be treated exactly the same. Historical statistics be damned. Frankly, I have to buy-in to this philosophy, or each time a cop talks to a minority - there is a presumption of guilt by skin color. This cannot be sanctioned. If an LEO can't or won't subscribe to this, they need to turn in their badge, and go back to flipping burgers. This is the danger and the concern of all one group of minorities, and why they are pushing back.I do see your point, but the solution then would be to treat all white people as badly as they treat the worst black people. The alternative is to ask the cop to risk his life for the sake of fairness. But it ain't going to happen. After a cop gets assaulted a few times by an angry minority who "assumes" he is being discriminated against, that cop is going to treat those minorities as an elevated risk of assault.
No matter the encounter type, and no matter the skin color, each stop/encounter with LEO should be the same. That guy that got tumbled in the back of the police van until he was dead is a perfect example. All the talk about that was AFTER the guy was in cuffs, but I go back to why the cop decided to grab him up in the first place. Of course, the cop used his skin color to profile. This is wrong, no matter how many stats are used to justify LEO misbehavior.
It isn't politically correct, but I think the burden to prove you are not a threat is on those that are perceived to be a threat. A little politeness and cooperation without the attitude would go a long way.
Post by: bflynn on November 01, 2017, 11:21:31 AM
After a copgetsgot assaulted a few times by an angry minority who "assumes" he is being discriminated against, that copis goinghas started to treat those minorities as an elevated risk of assault.
FTFY...
Post by: Jim Logajan on November 01, 2017, 01:19:40 PM
I don't think that there's any misguided sense of statistical likelihood at all. When your life is on the line, as every LEO's life is when he goes to work, I'm sorry, but you have to go with the statistics. It's too bad, but the reality is that the majority of urban crime is committed by minorities. I don't care about socioeconomic bullshit; a large segment of our community has lost any care for what is right and what is wrong. That's on them.
Speaking of statistical likelihoods and the use thereof to justify behavior and policies, consider this chart from bls.gov when considering relative dangers and alleged policies:
(https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/images/2004/oct/wk1/art05.gif)
Or this one, derived from BLS 2015 data, which seems to show some improvement over 11 years (from this article: https://qz.com/410585/garbage-collectors-are-more-likely-to-die-on-the-job-than-police-patrol-officers/ (https://qz.com/410585/garbage-collectors-are-more-likely-to-die-on-the-job-than-police-patrol-officers/)):
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/the_deadliest_jobs_in_america_fatal_injuries_per_100000_workers_chartbuilder.png?w=1280)
Post by: invflatspin on November 01, 2017, 04:02:49 PM
I do see your point, but the solution then would be to treat all white people as badly as they treat the worst black people. The alternative is to ask the cop to risk his life for the sake of fairness. But it ain't going to happen. After a cop gets assaulted a few times by an angry minority who "assumes" he is being discriminated against, that cop is going to treat those minorities as an elevated risk of assault.
It isn't politically correct, but I think the burden to prove you are not a threat is on those that are perceived to be a threat. A little politeness and cooperation without the attitude would go a long way.
I think we're gonna hafta stay in our own zones on this one. The default treatment should be courtesy, respect, and presumption of innocence right from the first words out of LEO mouth. "May I see some ID please?" or "Are you in need of assistance?" or "Would you stand still so I can check you for weapons?" Depending on what goes on next, the cop can ratchet up the roid-rage scale. If a cop asks me for ID when I'm out in public, and not driving a car, I will politely decline unless or until he has prob cause: "we had a report of a white guy fitting your description wearing those type of clothes accosting women and flashing their junk". In the case of a Terry stop, this is well-trodden ground, and the citizen has already lost this battle, so even if I say no you may not check me for weapons, he's going to do it anyway. Might as well consent. Way, way too many cops walk around looking for confrontation, fight, arrest, harassment, etc. It just cost two cops in UT their jobs, and far more of those type of hard-ass twats should be tossed out.
If I show my ID, and the cop starts in on questioning, like - what are you doing, where are you going, etc - I will simply provide a positive defense(as req by law now) and ask for my civil rights to be respected; "officer I claim innocence of whatever you are investigating, and will be consulting a lawyer at this time". Trust in the legal system, what's left of it. If the cop wants to make an arrest, he's gonna make an arrest. I sure as hell am not going to help him by blathering on. If he makes an arrest, I'm golden because no more questioning until my mouthpiece arrives. Further - insisting on a lawyer cannot be used as evidence of commission of a crime. SCOTUS has said so.
Post by: Little Joe on November 01, 2017, 04:12:03 PM
Speaking of statistical likelihoods and the use thereof to justify behavior and policies, consider this chart from bls.gov when considering relative dangers and alleged policies:Suppose those statistics were reworked to show "fatal accidents" vs "fatal interactions inflicted by belligerent people"?
(https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/images/2004/oct/wk1/art05.gif)
Or this one, derived from BLS 2015 data, which seems to show some improvement over 11 years (from this article: https://qz.com/410585/garbage-collectors-are-more-likely-to-die-on-the-job-than-police-patrol-officers/ (https://qz.com/410585/garbage-collectors-are-more-likely-to-die-on-the-job-than-police-patrol-officers/)):
(https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/the_deadliest_jobs_in_america_fatal_injuries_per_100000_workers_chartbuilder.png?w=1280)
It is one thing to accidentally cut yourself with a chain saw and another to be cut with a switch blade.
Post by: nddons on November 01, 2017, 04:44:08 PM
Ya-but - according to every jurisdiction in the nation - each citizen, in each encounter is to be treated exactly the same. Historical statistics be damned. Frankly, I have to buy-in to this philosophy, or each time a cop talks to a minority - there is a presumption of guilt by skin color. This cannot be sanctioned. If an LEO can't or won't subscribe to this, they need to turn in their badge, and go back to flipping burgers. This is the danger and the concern of all one group of minorities, and why they are pushing back.I'm NOT saying LEOs should be denying anyone's Constitutional rights, or go full Boss Hog. I'm saying that they ought to have their spidy senses turned on if the situation dictates.
No matter the encounter type, and no matter the skin color, each stop/encounter with LEO should be the same. That guy that got tumbled in the back of the police van until he was dead is a perfect example. All the talk about that was AFTER the guy was in cuffs, but I go back to why the cop decided to grab him up in the first place. Of course, the cop used his skin color to profile. This is wrong, no matter how many stats are used to justify LEO misbehavior.
Listen, I'm not an LEO. But I know a number of them, none of which I would EVER consider to have a racist bone in their body. Still, in the right environment, they are fully aware of a heightened level of risk.
I was mugged by a black guy with a gun in the stairwell of a parking garage in the River North neighborhood of Chicago in 1987 or so, heading to my car after work. I'm 6'3" and 250, played college football and was scared shitless. Afterwards I was so pissed I couldn't drive until I calmed down. CPD was worthless. It changed my life. I'll never be a victim again.
Post by: Jim Logajan on November 01, 2017, 06:02:21 PM
Suppose those statistics were reworked to show "fatal accidents" vs "fatal interactions inflicted by belligerent people"?
It is one thing to accidentally cut yourself with a chain saw and another to be cut with a switch blade.
Note the death rate of bartenders and ask yourself whether they die on the job because they are slipping on a spilled beer and impaling themselves on swizzle sticks or at the hands of belligerent drunks?
Consider:
Blacks are statistically more likely to commit crimes than whites.
Men are statistically more likely to commit crimes than women.
But I can't think of a whole lot of situations where there is some exigent danger where those stats are somehow relevant to any cop's decision in determining probable cause.
Post by: bflynn on November 01, 2017, 06:28:21 PM
Ya-but - according to every jurisdiction in the nation - each citizen, in each encounter is to be treated exactly the same. Historical statistics be damned. Frankly, I have to buy-in to this philosophy, or each time a cop talks to a minority - there is a presumption of guilt by skin color. This cannot be sanctioned. If an LEO can't or won't subscribe to this, they need to turn in their badge, and go back to flipping burgers. This is the danger and the concern of all one group of minorities, and why they are pushing back.
No matter the encounter type, and no matter the skin color, each stop/encounter with LEO should be the same. That guy that got tumbled in the back of the police van until he was dead is a perfect example. All the talk about that was AFTER the guy was in cuffs, but I go back to why the cop decided to grab him up in the first place. Of course, the cop used his skin color to profile. This is wrong, no matter how many stats are used to justify LEO misbehavior.
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of officers do initiate each contact the same. After "sir, may I see some ID" is answered with "Get stuffed you white cracker", it stops being the same. Even what you do and what I do will result in different outcomes for you and me. Sometimes even just the body language or situation will result in a different initiation, so it is different from the beginning. If you assume that is racism then you have a problem, not the necessarily the officer.
I was flipping through the radio today and paused on Rush for a couple of minutes - he asked "What if the Klan reorganized as a religion?" It struck me as an interesting question because the beliefs that set them apart are really beliefs about life. Are you going to stop them and say "your religion is invalid, you cannot hold a belief that races are different?"
To be clear because I have to be, I despise the Klan. But I also grew up in the South and we understand them. They are sad people with what I consider to be twisted beliefs. But then, I consider Islam to be a twisted belief too and we allow that, heck the left even bends over backwards to excuse their violence and hatred as the normal for Islam. What's the difference?
The fact is, you cannot stop people from practicing discrimination because we humans have discriminated to stay alive. We learned to eat the dark berries, not the green ones. We learned to stop when being hunted, to group up for defense. Discriminating against other things in our environment is in our genetics.
Post by: invflatspin on November 01, 2017, 08:29:01 PM
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of officers do initiate each contact the same. After "sir, may I see some ID" is answered with "Get stuffed you white cracker", it stops being the same.
Example given, the black family couple were surrounded, guns drawn, removed from car, handcuffed. Tell me this - when the first cop hit the lights, the guy pulled over and sat quietly in their car. He called for backup, pulled his gun, and pretty sure some colorful language was used from the start. Really, if the guy wasn't black it would have gone like my stop. Sorry, but I'm gonna stand on my principles on this. Start by treating everyone the same, using courtesy, and I'm betting things would go much smoother. A lot less of the 'get stuffed you white cracker'. BTW, being an asshat to the LEO isn't nice, but also isn't against the law, so I also don't see a problem with anyone of any race to say that. I would follow it up with 'what the fuck for? Am I under arrest?' If the answer is no, then conduct the Terry stop, feel the citizen up, then go roust someone else.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on November 02, 2017, 04:44:48 AM
Example given, the black family couple were surrounded, guns drawn, removed from car, handcuffed. Tell me this - when the first cop hit the lights, the guy pulled over and sat quietly in their car. He called for backup, pulled his gun, and pretty sure some colorful language was used from the start. Really, if the guy wasn't black it would have gone like my stop. Sorry, but I'm gonna stand on my principles on this. Start by treating everyone the same, using courtesy, and I'm betting things would go much smoother. A lot less of the 'get stuffed you white cracker'. BTW, being an asshat to the LEO isn't nice, but also isn't against the law, so I also don't see a problem with anyone of any race to say that. I would follow it up with 'what the fuck for? Am I under arrest?' If the answer is no, then conduct the Terry stop, feel the citizen up, then go roust someone else.
So what do you propose as a solution to the problem. My son posts about every black shot by a cop yet never seems to suggest a solution.
Post by: Little Joe on November 02, 2017, 05:21:28 AM
I can't think of a whole lot of situations where there is some exigent danger where those stats are somehow relevant to any cop's decision in determining probable cause.Maybe not relevant to determining probable cause, but wholly relevant to self preservation.
Post by: Rush on November 02, 2017, 09:34:19 AM
Unjustified racist feelings on the part of cops is not one of the biggest root causes. Cops are going to "profile" consciously or not, morally right or not, legally or not, and whether or not they are inherently racist, as long as blacks are statistically more likely to be a criminal. That's never going to change until you fix why blacks commit more crime in the first place.
Why are blacks statistically more likely to be criminals? That's where our focus needs to be. Focusing all our attention on training cops to treat everyone equal is just trying to treat the symptom, and not very effectively, and ignoring the disease. The disease is a threat to all of us.
Post by: nddons on November 02, 2017, 09:38:23 AM
There is no solution until you go to the root causes and fix them.Well said, Rush.
Unjustified racist feelings on the part of cops is not one of the biggest root causes. Cops are going to "profile" consciously or not, morally right or not, legally or not, and whether or not they are inherently racist, as long as blacks are statistically more likely to be a criminal. That's never going to change until you fix why blacks commit more crime in the first place.
Why are blacks statistically more likely to be criminals? That's where our focus needs to be. Focusing all our attention on training cops to treat everyone equal is just trying to treat the symptom, and not very effectively, and ignoring the disease. The disease is a threat to all of us.
Post by: Number7 on November 02, 2017, 04:12:17 PM
Their wholesale lies (which is what progressives teach these days) lay the foundation for the rising tide of anti establishment violence and are using these brainwashed young adults to do the things the progressive academics lacked the courage to do, which is change the country.
The youngest generation will be the ones that throw the current crop of useless, lying, dishonest, hypocrites of the academic progressive left, to the curb. They are the ones that will and are currently beginning to deny common core. That's just a start but it will grow. They are the ones that rejected the tranny Michelle and her/him/it's pathetic school lunch idiocy.
Once the younger generations turn their backs on the bullshit of the progressive academics, their ability to brainwash will drip away and so will they.
When that happens, much of the violent behavior will start to seem as stupid and pointless as it is.
Post by: invflatspin on November 02, 2017, 04:44:49 PM
1) Govt, can only be a crutch. It cannot be the ultimate, and complete solution.
2) Self-worth and self-motivation are needed to fix sociological issues.
3) Those attributes need to be instilled at an age well before early teens. From K-5 are the most crucial years of development.
4) The natural family unit, no matter the color of the people in it is the best case for early child development. (this is in complete contravention of 'it takes a village')
5) Hard work are both four letter words, but they pay off in the long run. (ask me how I know).
6) Of all the nations on the planet, the US is by FAR the best case and best place to advance from nothing to wealth and happiness. We are the penultimate location for a rags-to-riches/fame potential. (ask me how I know) (see 95% of NFL minorities)
7) Too many people are whining about the minutia of every day life. Which tells me that all their Maslowian needs have been met, and some are actually spending their free time finding ways to be insulted/upset/denigrated. Wait for some real damage before opening the pie hole and complaining.
8 ) If one wants to help others, then help them directly. A persons time is far and away the most precious resource. Go somewhere, do something, with some people. If you help them even a little it's moving the needle in the right direction.
9) Never, ever call LEO unless there is imminent peril that one cannot handle by themselves(like spouse abuse). LEO is rarely a solution for anything and often makes simple problems worse, or more complex.
10) If someone else called LEO a) affirm a defense; "I didn't do whatever you are investigating" b) Say the word "I want a lawyer". Then stop talking to anyone, including cell mates, CO/guards, police, DA, etc. They are not your friend.
I will call these the 10 commandments. So let it be written, so let it be done.
Post by: Jim Logajan on November 02, 2017, 10:48:29 PM
6) Of all the nations on the planet, the US is by FAR the best case and best place to advance from nothing to wealth and happiness. We are the penultimate location for a rags-to-riches/fame potential. (ask me how I know) (see 95% of NFL minorities)
So is the U.S. the best or second best? ???
Who's in first?
Post by: Little Joe on November 03, 2017, 05:12:35 AM
So is the U.S. the best or second best? ???Utopia.
Who's in first?
But only liberals believe it exists.
Post by: Anthony on November 03, 2017, 06:12:40 AM
Of course the elitist, Totalitarian Left wants the rank and file leftists to believe Utopia is both attainable, and desirable. This is how they are motivated, and controlled.
Post by: invflatspin on November 03, 2017, 07:01:54 AM
So is the U.S. the best or second best? ???
Who's in first?
For religious fanatics some form of heaven, or whatever the 'great beyond' one believes in. For non-believers I guess it would be Beirut, or maybe Caracas, possibly Cairo. Take your pick. 8)
Post by: invflatspin on November 03, 2017, 07:10:00 AM
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news/nfl-tv-ratings-cbs-nbc-fox-espn-sponsors-anthem-protests-kaepernick-goodell-papa-johns-schnatter-mnf-tnf-snf/1ev0o829z5cen1qna0rgai7fuw
Once again reminding all that Neilson is now calculating attendance with the added average viewer at sports bars, and not just one set, and also including estimated streaming content from all those people watching on their PDA. In Aug there was an assumption that ratings would have a nice big bump this year as those markets were counted in the ratings roll-up. So, the actual 6.2% decline, is apples-to-apples more like 8-10% decline if we back out the sports bar and streaming capture.
GFY NFL. You have angered sooooooo many long time football fans who were a solid and moderately wealthy clientele. And you pissed right on their head.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on November 03, 2017, 07:11:23 AM
So is the U.S. the best or second best? ???I believe it is a fairly common error to think that ultimate and penultimate mean the same thing. I noticed that, too. But I think his meaning is clear. :)
Who's in first?
Post by: Anthony on November 03, 2017, 07:17:05 AM
7) Too many people are whining about the minutia of every day life. Which tells me that all their Maslowian needs have been met, and some are actually spending their free time finding ways to be insulted/upset/denigrated. Wait for some real damage before opening the pie hole and complaining.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
Yes, as a society most of the Maslowian needs have been met, so they have the arrogant LUXURY of looking around for things in which to be offended, and protested. It gives their lives some type of sick meaning, and a feeling of self importance, and self righteousness. GET A FREAKIN LIFE!
Yul Brenner would be proud. :)
Post by: bflynn on November 03, 2017, 07:42:36 AM
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/10/nfl-hell-several-stadiums-nearly-empty-anthem-protest-backlash-rolls-week-7-photos/
Post by: Anthony on November 03, 2017, 07:57:29 AM
Post by: Lucifer on November 03, 2017, 08:38:59 AM
Oh, they are feeling it alright, and the money from sponsors, and advertisers is dwindling. This is the way to protest! Economically.
Maybe Pelosi and Schumer should sponsor a bill, call it the “Affordable NFL Support Bill” and require everyone buy season tickets, and of course those who can’t afford the tickets give them subsidies for said tickets.
Post by: invflatspin on November 03, 2017, 08:39:17 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/cbs-sports-chairman-thursday-night-games-diluting-overall-ratings-195352254.html
Thinks that the problem with ratings and attendance is having Thursday night, and games from England.
How do people like this keep their mega-salary job? Is being incompetent synonymous with being in liberal media or entertainment? Cuz, it sure seems that way.
Post by: nddons on November 03, 2017, 08:51:21 AM
Post by: Jim Logajan on November 03, 2017, 09:50:19 AM
I believe it is a fairly common error to think that ultimate and penultimate mean the same thing. I noticed that, too. But I think his meaning is clear. :)
I had recently written some work-related emails where I used "penultimate" per its correct meaning, which probably made me sensitive to the incorrect usage. Naturally it doesn't help that my post was not explicit in stating the word usage problem.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on November 03, 2017, 12:28:59 PM
I had recently written some work-related emails where I used "penultimate" per its correct meaning, which probably made me sensitive to the incorrect usage. Naturally it doesn't help that my post was not explicit in stating the word usage problem.'
\
In my neighborhood, using "penultimate" in a sentence would get your ass kicked. ;)
Post by: jb1842 on November 03, 2017, 02:49:32 PM
I may just go get my first Papa John's pizza. Good for them for calling out the NFL.
Don't do it. Your toilet will thank you.
Post by: nddons on November 05, 2017, 06:42:19 AM
Don't do it. Your toilet will thank you.Ha! Duly noted. Plus we have some damn good real pizza here in Milwaukee.
Post by: jb1842 on November 05, 2017, 08:03:43 AM
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on November 05, 2017, 08:21:03 AM
It may sound crazy but my go to pizza is Costco.
Whenever we would go shopping at Costco we always walked out with a Peperroni pizza. Good stuff.
Post by: LevelWing on November 05, 2017, 09:16:43 AM
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/21277983/mark-cuban-says-warriors-draymond-green-owes-apology-remark-team-owners
NBA player Draymond Green is saying that Mark Cuban, and others, shouldn't use the term "owner" because it implies they own people. Mark Cuban responded by saying that he owns equity, not people and it's wrong for Draymond Green to make that assertion.
We're now at the point where owning a company is offensive because it has the term "own" in it. Aside from that, the word "chairmen" has a legal component to it, such as the "chairman of the board" and is not appropriate for all situations.
Post by: nddons on November 05, 2017, 09:25:43 AM
Not related to the NFL, but related to sports:Maybe we should start an era where we don't give a shit if people are offended, and instead of asking for an apology, the appropriate response would be to just tell the offending party to go fuck themselves.
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/21277983/mark-cuban-says-warriors-draymond-green-owes-apology-remark-team-owners
NBA player Draymond Green is saying that Mark Cuban, and others, shouldn't use the term "owner" because it implies they own people. Mark Cuban responded by saying that he owns equity, not people and it's wrong for Draymond Green to make that assertion.
We're now at the point where owning a company is offensive because it has the term "own" in it. Aside from that, the word "chairmen" has a legal component to it, such as the "chairman of the board" and is not appropriate for all situations.
Oh, wait. That era lasted from about 1776 to 1988 or so.