Fire the kneelers ... challenge question:

[Pogo]

Declining to follow puppet orders, however, is not an action. It's the absence of an action.

Standing up because the national anthem is playing is an action. Doing nothing is not.

There goes your point. Wave byebye.

If you think so ... You'd still be looking for another job/contract ... Bye-bye, don't let the door hit ya on the way out ...

Non sequitur. Ten yards.
Penalty is declined, fourth down. Time to punt.

 

[BlackSand]

Non sequitur. Ten yards.
Penalty is declined, fourth down. Time to punt.

It doesn't matter whether or not I punt ... The best you can do is a fair catch ... You aren't fielding it any better than where I put it ...

.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The fans will decide. Money talks.

Average Football "fans" can't afford tickets to a game and are too addicted to beer and chips to boycott anything.

They are mostly fake patriots anyways who didn't say a goddamn thing when GOP congress refused to follow constitution in 2016.

Commercial time income is determined by ratings.

 

[Pogo]

Non sequitur. Ten yards.
Penalty is declined, fourth down. Time to punt.

It doesn't matter whether or not I punt ... The best you can do is a fair catch ... You aren't fielding it any better than where I put it ...

.

Offsides. Five more yards plus you have to stand for the Pago Pago national anthem.

 

[BlackSand]

Offsides. Five more yards plus you have to stand for the Pago Pago national anthem.

It doesn't matter if you want to try playing the game, bribing the officials and running the cheerleaders out on the field.
Your team sucks and the ref's cannot make up the difference ...

.

 

[TheDude]

For those of you who think the NFL players protesting during the national anthem should be fired, would you also support a team owner who threatened to fire any players who refused to protest? Who didn't kneel?

Why or why not?

Ah, normalizing bad behavior huh? Nothing else to see here.

 

[Pogo]

Offsides. Five more yards plus you have to stand for the Pago Pago national anthem.

It doesn't matter if you want to try playing the game, bribing the officials and running the cheerleaders out on the field.
Your team sucks and the ref's cannot make up the difference ...

Illegal use of apostrophe. Five more yards. Safety dance.

 

[dblack]

For those of you who think the NFL players protesting during the national anthem should be fired, would you also support a team owner who threatened to fire any players who refused to protest? Who didn't kneel?

Why or why not?

Ah, normalizing bad behavior huh?.

What do you mean?

 

[BlackSand]

Illegal use of apostrophe. Five more yards. Safety dance.

I can see where you would try to find some safety in that ...

.

 

[Reasonable]

For those of you who think the NFL players protesting during the national anthem should be fired, would you also support a team owner who threatened to fire any players who refused to protest? Who didn't kneel?

Why or why not?

The NFL is a business. I believe the owners have the rigjt to fore any worker publicly protesting on company time at the workplace, causing the company millions in revenue.

Let the NFL continue doing what they are doing. When they have destroyed their fan base, lost their tax exempt status, and salaries have been slashed they will eventually change...

Trumpet thinks trump’s influence will get rid of the NFL. Too damn funny..
No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.
Funny how frauds like you talk a good game about loving and respecting the Constitution but pick and choose which amendments you don’t like.

 

[BlackSand]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners don't have the ability to take away their first amendment rights.
They also don't have the obligation to provide them with a venue to exercise those rights ...

.

 

[dblack]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

 

[TheDude]

For those of you who think the NFL players protesting during the national anthem should be fired, would you also support a team owner who threatened to fire any players who refused to protest? Who didn't kneel?

Why or why not?

The NFL is a business. I believe the owners have the rigjt to fore any worker publicly protesting on company time at the workplace, causing the company millions in revenue.

Let the NFL continue doing what they are doing. When they have destroyed their fan base, lost their tax exempt status, and salaries have been slashed they will eventually change...

Trumpet thinks trump’s influence will get rid of the NFL. Too damn funny..
No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.
Funny how frauds like you talk a good game about loving and respecting the Constitution but pick and choose which amendments you don’t like.

That's like saying an employee can tell an employer to get fucked, because it's their first amendment right to do so, and the employer cannot fire them. Seriously "Reasonable", you're a misguided person.

 

[Papageorgio]

That the are politicizing football is my issue, I don’t watch football for political awareness, nor do I care what athletes do in their off time, nor do I care about their politics. They are paid to entertain. If they want to get involved with politics, great, not while they are working. If they want to do that, fine but I won’t watch it, it is what I pay for.

Exactly. Now my sport is baseball but I feel the same way. And that's why I've never stood for, or paid any attention to, that national anthem jingo-robot shit there at a baseball game.

Not that it prevents me from attending a game but I do recognize that it's irrelevant to inject political shit into it so I agree that it has no business being there.

As I've pointed out I played many a Little League baseball game with no national anthem at all, and amazingly it had no effect on the game whatsoever. Who knew.

Let’s hope that Congress cuts all sports corporate welfare. I tire of taxpayers supporting billionaires.

Actually the NFL specifically sent $723,000 (and change) of that Pentagon Pimp money back, once the scandal was exposed. Far as I know they're the only pro sport to send that pimp money back.

That was taxpayer money. You got your refund, right? Yeah me neither.

It is more than that, it’s in the billions, the federal government has helped finance local stadiums in the form of grants for specific purposes.

True but that's a different thing and has nothing to do with injecting politics into the sports.

You think it gives them the idea that they can pimp for it on that basis?

Campaign donations, big corporations getting tax breaks, getting money from the government. It’s all pimping.

 

[Pogo]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners don't have the ability to take away their first amendment rights.
They also don't have the obligation to provide them with a venue to exercise those rights ...

Yet another thing they don't have is the obligation to trot their personnel out like marionettes to perform marketing marionettitry, when the frickin' game hasn't even started yet.

 

[Pogo]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

 

[BlackSand]

Yet another thing they don't have is the obligation to trot their personnel out like marionettes to perform marketing marionettitry, when the frickin' game hasn't even started yet.

They don't have to come out ... They can stay home for all I care.
You are correct the owners don't have the obligation to do as you describe ... But they can require it if that strikes their fancy.

If the players have problems with the requirements the boss puts in place ... They are free to be the individuals they prefer at their own expense, and not at the owner's expense.

.

 

[BlackSand]

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

Yeah ... Will the spirit of the first amendment be testifying for the defense or the prosecution ...

.

 

[dblack]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

The spirit

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

Just what do you think the spirit of the First Amendment is? (The part I cut out was merely an accusation of hypocrisy. Which I get and agree with - both sides tend to be selective when it comes to supporting individual rights.)

 

[Pogo]

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

The spirit

No the owners can’t take away their first amendment rights and if they would try they’d lose in court.

The owners aren't responsible for the players first amendment rights. The First amendment protects us from laws that violate freedom of speech. It doesn't protect us from being fired by employers, or boycotted by fans, who don't like what we have to say.

He's talking about the spirit of the First Amendment. The part of the post you cut out about choosing which Amendments you like, kinda made that point.

Just what do you think the spirit of the First Amendment is? (The part I cut out was merely an accusation of hypocrisy. Which I get and agree with - both sides tend to be selective when it comes to supporting individual rights.)

The "spirit" I regard as the idea that anybody can express their opinion without its being either suppressed by Authority (in the reactive) or coerced by Authority (in the initiative). That pretty much calls out "fire the sumbitches" and tossing Earnest Starr in jail. It also calls out the idea of injecting national anthems into sporting events where it has no function, just because some demagogue wants to milk mob mentality.