Fans "boo" moment of national unity

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Do not use a phrase like "conspiracy theory" when you clearly don't know what that is.

And clearly you prove again you have no idea what a conspiracy theory means.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nixon-Kennedy? Widespread voter fraud in Chicago? That WASN'T the GOP...that was the Democratic Party!

Joe Kennedy bought W. Virginia for his boy.

Both parties have a history cheating back when and cheating now.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Poor Republicans. Can't cheat & are so sad.

Requiring picture id to vote is not cheating

It's not necessary.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The people are protesting against the right of the players to protest.

What the people are protesting, is having paid for a simple entertainment, and been given a very much unwanted and offensive political display that is not relevant to the entertainment that they paid for, nor appropriate as part of it. It's a bit like ordering an ice cream sundae, and having the server add Tabasco sauce to it. Tabasco sauce is fine, in the right context, but not on an ice cream sundae.

You do understand, don't you, that mainstream Americans, including sports fans, are generally not favorable toward criminals and terrorists, and are not particularly interested in seeing political displays supportive of such filth, especially as part of non-political entertainment that they have paid to see; right?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Bi-partisan? Bullshit. The Republican party's voter suppression activities targets minorities.

How RealDave?

tell us how voter id targets minorities?

Apparently, he thinks that minorities are too stupid to know how to obtain valid ID. Never mind that the same ID that they apparently cannot obtain in order to vote, is the ID required to buy liquor or tobacco, or to apply for welfare.

 

[dblack]

The people are protesting against the right of the players to protest.

What the people are protesting, is having paid for a simple entertainment, and been given a very much unwanted and offensive political display that is not relevant to the entertainment that they paid for, nor appropriate as part of it. It's a bit like ordering an ice cream sundae, and having the server add Tabasco sauce to it. Tabasco sauce is fine, in the right context, but not on an ice cream sundae.

You do understand, don't you, that mainstream Americans, including sports fans, are generally not favorable toward criminals and terrorists, and are not particularly interested in seeing political displays supportive of such filth, especially as part of non-political entertainment that they have paid to see; right?

Hmm... but I bet you're just fine with gung-ho military exhibitions at your sporting events, eh?

I don't buy the "we don't want politics at our football games" bullshit. The objection to the protests isn't about it being an inappropriate venue. It's the subject matter the rednecks are pissed off about.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The players have the right to protest. The fans have the right to voice their displeasure over said protest. What players need to understand is that they are paid to play a sport...not to talk politics. If they decide that politics are more important than sports then they shouldn't be shocked when they no longer have a fan base...and consequently no longer have a revenue source to pay them the obscene amounts of money they currently receive. They have the right to protest. I have the right to ignore them and spend my money elsewhere.

An employer has the right to expect that an employee will act in the interests of the employer,and refrain from publicly engaging in behavior, while on the clock, that is damaging to the employer.

Athletes or other entertainers, who offend their audience, are acting in a manner that damages their employer.

 

[Mac-7]

Apparently, he thinks that minorities are too stupid to know how to obtain valid ID.

Bush called that the soft (liberal) bigotry of low expectations

 

[pknopp]

The players have the right to protest. The fans have the right to voice their displeasure over said protest. What players need to understand is that they are paid to play a sport...not to talk politics. If they decide that politics are more important than sports then they shouldn't be shocked when they no longer have a fan base...and consequently no longer have a revenue source to pay them the obscene amounts of money they currently receive. They have the right to protest. I have the right to ignore them and spend my money elsewhere.

An employer has the right to expect that an employee will act in the interests of the employer,and refrain from publicly engaging in behavior, while on the clock, that is damaging to the employer.

Athletes or other entertainers, who offend their audience, are acting in a manner that damages their employer.

That's the way I see it when Trump is calling people names like a ten year old.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No, they don't. Government workers are paid with revenue raised by taxation and they don't sell a product. You can't be this stupid.

This is JackassStarkey that you are addressing. Yes, he really is that stupid.

 

[22lcidw]

The players have the right to protest. The fans have the right to voice their displeasure over said protest. What players need to understand is that they are paid to play a sport...not to talk politics. If they decide that politics are more important than sports then they shouldn't be shocked when they no longer have a fan base...and consequently no longer have a revenue source to pay them the obscene amounts of money they currently receive. They have the right to protest. I have the right to ignore them and spend my money elsewhere.

An employer has the right to expect that an employee will act in the interests of the employer,and refrain from publicly engaging in behavior, while on the clock, that is damaging to the employer.

Athletes or other entertainers, who offend their audience, are acting in a manner that damages their employer.

That's the way I see it when Trump is calling people names like a ten year old.

This from the Prog funded Netflix Cuties Pedo fluffers.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

The people are protesting against the right of the players to protest.

What the people are protesting, is having paid for a simple entertainment, and been given a very much unwanted and offensive political display that is not relevant to the entertainment that they paid for, nor appropriate as part of it. It's a bit like ordering an ice cream sundae, and having the server add Tabasco sauce to it. Tabasco sauce is fine, in the right context, but not on an ice cream sundae.

You do understand, don't you, that mainstream Americans, including sports fans, are generally not favorable toward criminals and terrorists, and are not particularly interested in seeing political displays supportive of such filth, especially as part of non-political entertainment that they have paid to see; right?

Hmm... but I bet your just fine with gung-ho military exhibitions at your sporting events, eh?

I don't buy the "we don't want politics at our football games" bullshit. The objection to the protests isn't about it being an inappropriate venue. It's the subject matter the rednecks are all pissed off about.

Not very ingenuous of you to assume he would be fine with a "gung-ho" military exhibition at a sporting event and then criticize him for it.

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't want to see it. But that's me, I'm not big on military parades anyway. It was a cheesy propaganda tactic used by the USSR and China and I see no need for pointless grandstanding.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Did you reach that conclusion through transcendental meditation?

Did you hear about the hippie who declined anesthesia when having dental work done?

He wanted to transcend dental medication.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Requiring picture id to vote is not cheating

In fact, the very point of it is to prevent cheating.

 

[dblack]

The people are protesting against the right of the players to protest.

What the people are protesting, is having paid for a simple entertainment, and been given a very much unwanted and offensive political display that is not relevant to the entertainment that they paid for, nor appropriate as part of it. It's a bit like ordering an ice cream sundae, and having the server add Tabasco sauce to it. Tabasco sauce is fine, in the right context, but not on an ice cream sundae.

You do understand, don't you, that mainstream Americans, including sports fans, are generally not favorable toward criminals and terrorists, and are not particularly interested in seeing political displays supportive of such filth, especially as part of non-political entertainment that they have paid to see; right?

Hmm... but I bet your just fine with gung-ho military exhibitions at your sporting events, eh?

I don't buy the "we don't want politics at our football games" bullshit. The objection to the protests isn't about it being an inappropriate venue. It's the subject matter the rednecks are all pissed off about.

Not very ingenuous of you to assume he would be fine with a "gung-ho" military exhibition at a sporting event and then criticize him for it.

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't want to see it. But that's me, I'm not big on military parades anyway. It was a cheesy propaganda tactic used by the USSR and China and I see no need for pointless grandstanding.

Well, we get two or three threads on this shit every week - but I've never seen anyone complaining about fighter jet flyovers. I smell rank hypocrisy.

 

[BothWings]

I've addressed it over and over. If you want people to vote with a picture I.D. give them one when they register to vote.

Voting is one of the most important rights acknowledged in this country. What you are wanting is for people to have to go through another step now to vote even though they already did everything they are required to do to vote.

So you are willing to have your vote nullified all because getting a photo i.d. is too onerous a task for you?
You don't think anything of your vote, do you.

Indeed... Its almost as if theyd want illegal aliens and spies to vote in our elections or something.

 

[Oldestyle]

With a voter I.D. card anyone is entitled to vote.

Really? Voter I.D.s are issued whether you are legally entitled to vote or not?
That seems like a giant hole in the system.

That's one way of covering for voter fraud.

The only problem we have had with voting fraud was by the GOP in North Carolina but even that was caught.

Nixon-Kennedy? Widespread voter fraud in Chicago? That WASN'T the GOP...that was the Democratic Party!

Are we discussing 60 years ago or recently? The GOP didn't cheat in North Carolina?

The GOP enforced existing election laws. The Democrats flat out STOLE an election!

 

[JakeStarkey]

With a voter I.D. card anyone is entitled to vote.

Really? Voter I.D.s are issued whether you are legally entitled to vote or not?
That seems like a giant hole in the system.

That's one way of covering for voter fraud.

The only problem we have had with voting fraud was by the GOP in North Carolina but even that was caught.

Nixon-Kennedy? Widespread voter fraud in Chicago? That WASN'T the GOP...that was the Democratic Party!

Are we discussing 60 years ago or recently? The GOP didn't cheat in North Carolina?

The GOP enforced existing election laws. The Democrats flat out STOLE an election!

Answer: who, where, how, and when.

 

[Oldestyle]

With a voter I.D. card anyone is entitled to vote.

Really? Voter I.D.s are issued whether you are legally entitled to vote or not?
That seems like a giant hole in the system.

That's one way of covering for voter fraud.

The only problem we have had with voting fraud was by the GOP in North Carolina but even that was caught.

Nixon-Kennedy? Widespread voter fraud in Chicago? That WASN'T the GOP...that was the Democratic Party!

Are we discussing 60 years ago or recently? The GOP didn't cheat in North Carolina?

The GOP enforced existing election laws. The Democrats flat out STOLE an election!

Answer: who, where, how, and when.

You don't know the history of the Nixon - Kennedy race...do you, Jake? Why doesn't that surprise me! Who? Joe Kennedy! Where? Illinois and Texas! How? JFK's father paid off the Daley political machine in Chicago to stuff the ballot boxes and LBJ's political machine did the same thing in Texas! When? 1960!

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

The people are protesting against the right of the players to protest.

What the people are protesting, is having paid for a simple entertainment, and been given a very much unwanted and offensive political display that is not relevant to the entertainment that they paid for, nor appropriate as part of it. It's a bit like ordering an ice cream sundae, and having the server add Tabasco sauce to it. Tabasco sauce is fine, in the right context, but not on an ice cream sundae.

You do understand, don't you, that mainstream Americans, including sports fans, are generally not favorable toward criminals and terrorists, and are not particularly interested in seeing political displays supportive of such filth, especially as part of non-political entertainment that they have paid to see; right?

Hmm... but I bet your just fine with gung-ho military exhibitions at your sporting events, eh?

I don't buy the "we don't want politics at our football games" bullshit. The objection to the protests isn't about it being an inappropriate venue. It's the subject matter the rednecks are all pissed off about.

Not very ingenuous of you to assume he would be fine with a "gung-ho" military exhibition at a sporting event and then criticize him for it.

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't want to see it. But that's me, I'm not big on military parades anyway. It was a cheesy propaganda tactic used by the USSR and China and I see no need for pointless grandstanding.

Well, we get two or three threads on this shit every week - but I've never seen anyone complaining about fighter jet flyovers. I smell rank hypocrisy.

Fighter jet flyovers at football games?