What do these meatheads want ? A protest to celebrate inequality ?
I'm not a sports fan myself, but my guess would be is that what they want is to be able yo enjoy watching a football game without a bunch of irrelevant and offensive political
bullshit being injected into it.
"Peaceful protest". That's what Trump and his supporters claim they wanted. You are showing that was another lie.
We are happy that the players managed to not attack the fans.
We still are unhappy that they are insulting the nation and it's citizens, at a sporting event.
That you find this confusing, is because of problems in your head, not ours.
There we go. You were offended over a show of unity. As I said.........not happy.
When you support the narrative that the nation is systemically wacist, you insult the nation and it's citizens, at least the white ones.
Doing that, is not a "show of unity" but a divisive political statement and an insult to the fans.
None of those fans, should ever return to that stadium.
Don't. That's their right. Telling others to shut up though is not.
Correct. The League has the Right to say what they want.
If they want to insult the nation and it's citizens, and their fans, that is their right.
Nothing I said, indicated that I thought they should be deprived of their right to speech.
My point was, that the op was wrong. The fans were not booing a "show of unity" but booing a divisive political statement that was very insulting to them.
Would you like to address my comment about the op? Or is that not the type of shit that interests you?
It's sad that you see unity as political.
Who were the ones who made it political first by kneeling or remaining in the locker room for the National Anthem?
You can't have it both ways. If you're going to bring attention to an injustice with political speeches and gestures then you can't very well complain if the response to that is political.
What do these meatheads want ? A protest to celebrate inequality ?
I'm not a sports fan myself, but my guess would be is that what they want is to be able yo enjoy watching a football game without a bunch of irrelevant and offensive political
bullshit being injected into it.
"Peaceful protest". That's what Trump and his supporters claim they wanted. You are showing that was another lie.
We are happy that the players managed to not attack the fans.
We still are unhappy that they are insulting the nation and it's citizens, at a sporting event.
That you find this confusing, is because of problems in your head, not ours.
There we go. You were offended over a show of unity. As I said.........not happy.
When you support the narrative that the nation is systemically wacist, you insult the nation and it's citizens, at least the white ones.
Doing that, is not a "show of unity" but a divisive political statement and an insult to the fans.
None of those fans, should ever return to that stadium.
Don't. That's their right. Telling others to shut up though is not.
Correct. The League has the Right to say what they want.
If they want to insult the nation and it's citizens, and their fans, that is their right.
Nothing I said, indicated that I thought they should be deprived of their right to speech.
My point was, that the op was wrong. The fans were not booing a "show of unity" but booing a divisive political statement that was very insulting to them.
Would you like to address my comment about the op? Or is that not the type of shit that interests you?
It's sad that you see unity as political.
Who were the ones who made it political first by kneeling or remaining in the locker room for the National Anthem?
You can't have it both ways. If you're going to bring attention to an injustice with political speeches and gestures then you can't very well complain if the response to that is political.
Do you have any clue when it was that Kaepernick started kneeling? 9/16 under Obama. He was sitting before that, under Obama.
And? Kaepernick conveyed his disdain for America when he started kneeling. Whoever is/was the current sitting president is irrelevant.
I didn't see politics mentioned at all last night. Did you?
Whatever happened last night,
you made the
discussion political when you brought up Trump and his supporters.
I quote:
"Peaceful protest'. That's what Trump and his supporters claim they wanted. You are showing that was another lie."
You made it political before Correll did.
What did I say wrong there? The accusations was that last night's show of unity was political. Point it out.
Problem is, you made your remark about Trump and his supporters BEFORE Correll made his remark about the display being a political statement.
I did. That doesn't make the display political.
If the display was not political then what did it have to do with Trump or his supporters?
I explained that.
You explained what it had to do with Trump? When?
I don't believe you've explained anything. What you did was
assume that all the booers and those who support them are Trump supporters and in turn assume that they booed
because they're Trump supporters.
There are two primary reasons people are criticizing these displays:
1.) They do not agree that expressing disdain for your country is the right way to highlight an injustice.
2.) They do not want to see or hear social justice displays or speeches or alternative anthems when they came to watch a sports event.
As for peaceful protests, conservatives want peaceful protests and they are right to do so. This does not mean they want to see a protest at a football game, even if it is peaceful.
By all means, protest peacefully. But keep it in the streets where it belongs (but not blocking traffic).
The NFL approved it so it belongs. All the same you don't have to get permission to protest.
It doesn't belong just because they approved it. And they only approved it because they didn't want everyone calling them racists. And people would have.
A lot of this crap with the NFL and other associations and corporations getting on board the Racial Justice Crazy Train is because they got shamed into it and they didn't want to lose customers.
Here's a problem that a lot of critics of the racism mania have: While some officers shoot suspects unjustifiably, most do. And the ones that shoot unjustifiably do not necessarily do so because they're racist. Also, stats show that blacks are more likely to get shot. I don't doubt that. But while racism may be a factor in some cases, the one glaring major contributing factor that SJWs overlook is the number of crimes blacks commit.
I posted a table in a discussion the other day from an FBI site citing murder statistics. For the year 2016, whites committed 3,156 murders and blacks committed 3,196. Think about that: Whites are 76% of the population and blacks are 13% but blacks only committed
40 fewer murders than whites for that year out of a total of 6,676 murders between them (the actual total number of murders is slightly higher but the others were committed by Hispanics and other non-white/non-African Americans and the difference is negligible).
Has it not occurred to anyone on the left that this might be a factor as to why blacks have more encounters with police? Has it not occurred to anyone on the left that black suspects are more likely to resist arrest? Has it not occurred to anyone on the left that the current anti-cop attitude being pushed on us may also be a factor? And don't tell me they're not anti-cop, they're just anti-bad-cop when you have mothers coaching their elementary school-age children to chant "**** the police".
www.theguardian.com
