[The Immortal Goon]

So kneeling during the anthem is just not what the government pays for.

Nor could it be. Disrespecting the flag is completely covered under the "free speech" that the right was, a moment ago, screeching and crying about endlessly.

Michael Bennet could come out and burn the American flag during the anthem and it would be protected speech. This is not to say that his boss couldn't fire him, but the President of the United States can't force someone in a private business to be fired—again, just as the rightwing blubbering crybabies are constantly harping on.

Trump had been suckered into a guy who owned a stadium's cynical hope to pad his pockets with suckers that would pay to keep it open all year around:

The ideas behind the USFL were conceived in 1965 by New Orleans businessman David Dixon, who saw a market for a professional football league that would play in the summer, when the National Football League and college football were in their off-season. Dixon had been a key player in the construction of the Louisiana Superdome and the expansion of the NFL into New Orleans in 1967.[1] He developed "The Dixon Plan"—a blueprint for the USFL based upon securing NFL-caliber stadiums in top TV markets, securing a TV deal, and controlling spending—and found investors willing to buy in.

More than likely this whole current thing is Trump still butthurt that he was one of the suckers and that his frivolous lawsuits to try and skim money from the NFL resulted in him having to split $3 between all the team owners in the rival shell league he had ponied up for:

In 1985, the USFL voted to move from a spring to a fall schedule in 1986 to compete directly with the NFL. This was done at the urging of New Jersey Generals majority owner Donald Trump and a handful of other owners as a way to force a merger between the leagues. As part of this strategy, the USFL filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the National Football League in 1986 , and a jury ruled that the NFL had violated anti-monopoly laws. However, in a victory in name only, the USFL was awarded a judgment of just $1, which under anti-trust laws, was tripled to $3.[2] This court decision effectively ended the USFL. The league never played the 1986 season, and by the time it folded, it had lost over US$163 million.

[Drlee]

BTW rugby? what the hell is a scrum dumbest thing ever.

Oh no, you did not just say that.

When I was a young soldier I was assigned to a unit near Nuremberg Germany. It was a combat arms unit populated with Vietnam returnees and well trained others. Suffice it to say we were not pussies. So.

A local college heard that we were having an open house at our Kasserne and challenged us to a rugby match. We thought we would dispose of these local yokels and go have a nice day. Seriously. I got the shit kicked out of me. And they don't stop every 30 seconds for Gatoraid and a rest. There is no suit of armor. When we saw the other guys come onto the field we knew we were in for it. They looked like about five miles of bad road. There was one little skinny guy on their team who picked me up (I was about 185 at the time) and stuffed me like a rag doll. We did OK and got in a few good licks but in the end I would have much rather played against the Dallas Cowboys that that crew from near Schwabach.

[Finfinder]

@Drlee

Yea when I was in college the rugby guys were known for being tough, they drank as tough as they played.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

My favourite American Football commentator is Mike Carlson, who once remarked "it's strange how the US Air Force can do a fly-by at a stadium timed to the second, but can't tell the difference from the air between a legitimate target and an Afghan wedding ..."

[Kaiserschmarrn]

It is. People watch sports to forget about day-to-day life. Throwing it back in their face makes their investment in sports a negative experience. That's why ratings are plummeting. I only got 3 games this year. I'll enjoy it FWIF, but the Raiders are going to move to Las Vegas. Everyone says that Mark Davis is going to get taken under the bleachers and won't be an owner within 5-10 years of moving to Las Vegas. Probably true. However, I think the blowback from fans on this is going to be huge. They'll stick with Trump to a significant degree.

There was an article on the National Review lamenting that Trump has re-ignited the flames, as according to the author conservatives were already winning this. These people really have no clue.

It sure is. There is absolutely no upside.

At the end of the day these teams are businesses. Toys for rich people certainly but they still have to pay the freight. Imagine the uproar if McDonald's people did these protests. I am all for the players using their notoriety to further their political beliefs. Nothing more American than that. But on their own time. And then only with a modicum of discretion.

A personal experience.

Some time ago I was contemplating hiring a consultant to work with me in my consulting business. I had my eye on one guy who seemed to fit the bill. But when I looked at his facebook page (he friended me) I was astonished. It does not matter which side of the political spectrum he was on but suffice it to say that I could not have someone posting such divisive and inflammatory ideas and opinions and then representing my company to people who would certainly disagree. So I passed on him.

What would I have done if I discovered his behavior after I hired him? Probably let him go. Is this counter to the notion of free speech? IT sure is. But here is the thing.

Once upon a time, one's political opinions had little scope. A few friends and family knew what we thought politically but that was about it. When I was young is was thought rude to talk politics, sex and money in polite society. Not today. A great many people feel compelled to post their deepest political and religious beliefs on social media. And under their real names. It is one thing to post more or less anonymously here but deliberately and publicly under one's own name? Outrageous. And not without consequences as witness my nearly employee.

So I am all for free speech. At appropriate times, appropriate places and in appropriate ways. But frankly when I turn on the golf tournament for a couple of hours of pastoral bliss I do not want to see some shit head foisting his political views on me between holes.

I think the bold bit is an important difference. Today, many people seem to feel that they can or even should take sides publicly. The increasing polarisation adds to this, but it seems that fields have become more homogeneous in terms of politics, and there is an assumption that everybody is on the same page anyway. Some conservative academics, for instance, claim that it is common in academic circles to assume that everybody is a liberal anyway, so that it's non-controversial and safe to espouse liberal political views, even if they would be regarded as divisive under normal circumstances.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

There is an enormous difference between spoiled, rich athletes quietly kneeling for a few moments and athletes ripping apart American flags, setting the pieces on fire, and then pissing on the charred remains. It's very easy to ignore people kneeling as long as you enjoy the sport.

The funniest part about all of this are the people in rage mode with a "chop off their head!" attitude towards the players doing this, and then the people taking this as some sort of rallying cry against Trump while ignoring how they, too, are also helping to throw politics into sports and ruin it for the rest of us.

Ultimately, the NFL sucks. College football has always been far more fun to watch.

[Rich]

Waiting patiently for Maz, Hindsite, and Other “free-speech” advocates to strongly condemn Trump for trying to end freedom of speech in the NFL.

I'm all in for free speech. I'll happily attend a rally where we burn the Union Jack, the Stars and Stripes, a Bible and a Koran. I support free speech for racists and that includes Orthodox Jews, Muhammadans with their support for the genocider Prophet and the racists of Black Lies Matter. And remember this kneeling is all in support of Black lies Matter. Blacks are more likely to be killed by American police than Whites, now why is that I wonder. In the last year two thirds of the people shot and killed by British Police were Muslims. Again why is that? Because British police are deranged Muslim haters who can't resist gunning down anyone in a Taqiyah? No its because Muslims make up a huge percentage of life threatening British who need to be gunned down as quickly as possible.

Its exactly the same with American Blacks, they get killed more than Whites(on average) because they are more of a threat to Police and law abiding citizens (on average).

Just because Jeremiah Wright is a hate filled racist doesn't mean his free speech should be banned. No not even if his hateful propaganda lies led to innocent White people getting killed.

[Hindsite]

The right to free speech is secondary to patriotism obviously, and everybody should respect the country and the flag like Trump does.

Also, anytime you hear the national anthem you have to behave properly, kneeling is definitely inappropriate behaviour in this case.

Time magazine says that the NFL 2017 Rule Book makes no mention of the national anthem. But the game operations manual does.

Here’s what the game operations manual says regarding the national anthem, according to an NFL spokesperson:

The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem.

During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking.

The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.

It’s important to note the use of the word “may” here. The NFL is not considering punishing fines on players or teams who choose to kneel or stay in the locker room during the national anthem, the spokesperson says.
http://amp.timeinc.net/time/4955704/nfl ... source=dam

The only section that could potentially apply to anthem protests in the rules (not to be confused with the policies) comes under the section on player equipment, uniforms and player appearance. Rule 5, Section 4, Article 8 (found on page 23), deals with "personal messages." Here's how that rule begins:

"Throughout the period on game-day that a player is visible to the stadium and television audience (including in pregame warm-ups, in the bench area, and during postgame interviews in the locker room or on the field), players are prohibited from wearing, displaying, or otherwise conveying personal messages either in writing or illustration, unless such message has been approved in advance by the League office. Items to celebrate anniversaries or memorable events, or to honor or commemorate individuals, such as helmet decals, and arm bands and jersey patches on players’ uniforms, are prohibited unless approved in advance by the League office."

While this does address "conveying personal messages," the entirety of the rule is related to uniforms and wearing items that convey personal or political messages. It does not at any point mention behavior that conveys personal or political messages, outside of prohibiting players from "orally promoting equipment, apparel, or other items that carry commercial names or logos/identifications of companies," unless approved in advance.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2017 ... 699886001/

Here is the full article in the NFL Playing Rules and note the phrases -- "which relate to political activites or causes" and "noncontroversal"-- that was not included by the MSM.

ARTICLE 8. PERSONAL MESSAGES. Throughout the period on game-day that a player is visible to the stadium and television audience (including in pregame warm-ups, in the bench area, and during post game interviews in the locker room or on the field), players are prohibited from wearing, displaying, or otherwise conveying personal messages either in writing or illustration, unless such message has been approved in advance by the League office. Items to celebrate anniversaries or memorable events, or to honor or commemorate individuals, such as helmet decals, and arm bands and jersey patches on players’ uniforms, are prohibited unless approved in advance by the League office. All such items approved by the League office, if any, must relate to team or League events or personages. The League will not grant permission for any club or player to wear, display, or otherwise convey messages, through helmet decals, arm bands, jersey patches, or other items affixed to game uniforms or equipment, which relate to political activities or causes, other non-football events, causes or campaigns, or charitable causes or campaigns. Further, any such approved items must be modest in size, tasteful, non-commercial, and noncontroversial; must not be worn for more than one football season; and if approved for use by a specific team, must not be worn by players on other teams in the League.
http://operations.nfl.com/media/2646/20 ... -rules.pdf

So it appears that the Commissioner is selectively choosing what kind of freedom of speech he will allow and what rules to enforce. In his opinion the "unapproved in advance" kneeling at the singing of the national anthem is not "conveying a personal message" nor is it intended for "a political activity or cause." He regards this disrespect for the National anthem and the flag as completely "acceptable and noncontroversial."

[Beren]

So it appears that the Commissioner is selectively choosing what kind of freedom of speech he will allow and what rules to enforce. In his opinion the "unapproved in advance" kneeling at the singing of the national anthem is not "conveying a personal message" nor is it intended for "a political activity or cause." He regards this disrespect for the National anthem and the flag as completely "acceptable and noncontroversial."

It's an NFL issue and they deal with as they wish. If the government doesn't like it so much, they should withdraw their support, but the president shouldn't make such a childish fuss and tweet about it like crazy.

[Hindsite]

It's an NFL issue and they deal with as they wish. If the government doesn't like it so much, they should withdraw their support, but the president shouldn't make such a childish fuss and tweet about it like crazy.

However, the President is right and the Commissioner is wrong.

The President's main job is Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in defense of the U.S. Constitution and the Nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I believe he has a duty to speak up in opposition to any disrespect for our nation, which includes disrespect for our National Anthem and our Flag.

As a twenty year veteran of the U.S. Army, I also feel offended and disrespected by any action that disrespects our Nation, National Anthem, and Flag, which I proudly saluted during my service. If they wish to make a political statement, they could do it in a more appropriate time and place without offending so many people. Their actions are not bringing people together as some seem to think. It is causing division and hatred to surface.

[Beren]

Maybe Trump should share his views on NFL referees too, then let's discuss if he's right or wrong.

[colliric]

... It's disrespectful to the country, the sport's tradition, the sporting organisation's charter and veterans watching the game to be a bitch about not liking the National Anthem of any country related to that sporting contest. Even Usain Bolt stopped to listen properly to the US Anthem because it IS HARDCORE OLYMPIC TRADITION... Athletes have been doing it since they started playing them for the Medal ceremonies. It's tradition.

Though to be honest with you, we Australians are smart enough not to have our Anthem sung at every single game of AFL(or NRL)football. Only the major ones like the finals and the Anzac Day clash.

Your tradition is before every game, so fuck you, stand to attention, listen for a minutes and shutthefuckup till after the music finishes.

Don't give these disrespectful BLM idiots an American example to follow. We only sing ours a couple of times a yeah, and I don't want to see this shit here, especially on Anzac Day.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

The funniest part about all of this are the people in rage mode with a "chop off their head!" attitude towards the players doing this, and then the people taking this as some sort of rallying cry against Trump while ignoring how they, too, are also helping to throw politics into sports and ruin it for the rest of us.

Stephen Colbert explained how retarded it is to think kneeling during anthems/songs is disrespectful:

Colbert shared one of Trump's tweets from Monday that said, "The issue of kneeling has nothing to do with race."

"Wrong," Colbert said. "Kneeling during the national anthem has everything to do with race, just like your presidency. Those players are protesting racial injustice. They're not protesting the American flag. Saying that kneeling is a protest against the flag is like saying Gandhi's hunger strikes were a protest against snacking."

They're free to raise a fist, lock arms, or kneel if they want. It's nonviolent protest. I'm not surprised emotional, jingoistic chauvinists are confused on that point and make it a big issue, even if they don't watch NFL and none of this affects them beyond having a reason to satisfy their shared victimhood fetish by crying and blubbering about this non-issue.

Non-issue.

[Wellsy]

It seems to be another case of not really disagreeing with the means, but actually the ends. Disagree with any means no matter how minor because don't like what it brings to mind which one disagrees with I suspect.

EDIT:

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

I hereby want to express how sad your disrespect for AMERICA is, @Wellsy. Sad! I'm writing a post to you because I'm a big fucking baby and I need something to blubber about to fulfill my need to feel a victim because I'm too stupid to not be driven to emotional outbursts over a bunch of rich athletes bending their legs. I'm so angry that I might even use my caps lock again!

*Rants and drools phlegm-spittle while yelling about patriotism, anthems, symbolism, veterans being disrespected by kneeling people*

[blackjack21]

My favourite American Football commentator is Mike Carlson, who once remarked "it's strange how the US Air Force can do a fly-by at a stadium timed to the second, but can't tell the difference from the air between a legitimate target and an Afghan wedding ..."

Well, most people don't bring AK-47s and RPG launchers to a wedding. Apparently, it's de riguer in Muslim countries. By the way, it was Barack Obama who green-lighted that action. Should we try Obama for war crimes?

There was an article on the National Review lamenting that Trump has re-ignited the flames, as according to the author conservatives were already winning this. These people really have no clue.

They really don't. The only ones who are more clueless are leftists who think they have a chance of scoring points on Trump. Already, we're seeing economic fallout.

It's an NFL issue and they deal with as they wish. If the government doesn't like it so much, they should withdraw their support, but the president shouldn't make such a childish fuss and tweet about it like crazy.

A lot of you weren't saying that when Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, were weighing in on the Redskins "controversy" about whether they should change their name. Indeed, when Democrat political appointees at the Patent & Trademark office cancelled the Redskins trademark, many of you were applauding.

Trump is just expressing his personal opinion, just like Barack Obama. The issue is that NFL fans are more with Trump than they are with the NFL. Trump is making them choose between politicizing football and their fan base, which is a very expensive choice. It is already costing the NFL. Again, this is something Trump supporters WANT to see, just as Obama supporters WANT to see the Redskins forced to change their name. Whereas, Obama and the Democrats took on the league indirectly with the brain injury "controversy," Trump has done so directly. The league is against Trump, but the fans are with him.

Pittsburgh Store Selling Steelers Gear Facing Boycott, Fan Anger

They're free to raise a fist, lock arms, or kneel if they want. It's nonviolent protest. I'm not surprised emotional, jingoistic chauvinists are confused on that point and make it a big issue, even if they don't watch NFL and none of this affects them beyond having a reason to satisfy their shared victimhood fetish by crying and blubbering about this non-issue.

Who's crying? I think it is absolutely hilarious. Trump keeps tweaking the establishment and winning. I absolutely love it.

So let's ask ourselves, Bulaba Jones: Should the NFL allow Aldon Smith to be reinstated? Was he treated unfairly by the police, because he is black? Or should the NFL back up law enforcement and demonstrate that it has a duty to help uphold the law and public morals when upper income blacks get out of line? Is it okay for football players to smoke pot, or should the NFL suspend them if it finds exogenous cannabinoids in their system?

The NFL put itself in a position to play moral arbiter, and its fans are not happy with this. What the Steelers did, except for Villaneuva, is against the NFL's own rules. They chose to enforce rules about conduct outside of a football stadium with Aldon Smith, but allow a direct violation of their stated rules by entire teams within the stadium with no consequences. Trump is getting them to maneuver themselves into a position they cannot defend.

Aren't you the one crying, because you are now on the losing end of a cultural war launched by America's political left?

Back into the Trump vortex America goes, where the president fuels a divisive debate

Trump has benefited from growing polarization in America; his most ardent fans love him in large part for the enemies they share. But he also has fueled the move to the poles.

This is one of the few reporters that seem to have even a marginal clue about what is going on. It's remarkable that others are so utterly clueless.

Trump launched this while trying to save Luther Strange's candidacy. It didn't work for Strange, but it's working for Trump.

The Latest: A bewildered Strange wishes Moore well

But he quickly shifted to his own bewilderment at the race he just finished. "We're dealing with a political environment that I've never had any experience with," he {Luther Strange} said.

"I'm telling you, the political seas and winds in this country right now ... are very hard to navigate, very hard to understand."

The other part of this that will be on Trump's radar is this:

Propelled by evangelical voters, Moore consolidated support from a number of anti-establishment forces, including former White House strategist Steve Bannon.

The establishment wanted him gone, but now they cannot control Bannon.

Roy Moore Wins Alabama’s GOP Senate Primary

Mr. Trump’s inability to deliver victory to Mr. Strange suggests he won’t be able to reliably harness the antiestablishment political movement that he unleashed within the GOP and rode to the White House in the 2016 campaign.

It also shows that Trump cannot win re-election with the establishment as his partner in re-election. His success with NFL fans demonstrates that he needs his base to win again. He cannot join the establishment he ran against and win again.

Mr. Bannon, speaking at the Moore victory rally Tuesday night, said this was just the beginning of a drive to challenge establishment Republicans like Mr. Strange and Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, who just announced he wouldn’t seek re-election. “You’re going to see in state after state after state…people who follow the model of Judge Moore,” Mr. Bannon said.

People don't seem to get the same basic theme: people are tired of the establishment and its propaganda machine. The NFL is part of that, and we've had enough of pink breast cancer themes, political correctness, and TV controversies about football player's private lives. If we wanted a soap opera, we'd watch one.

[Heisenberg]

I like how Trump supporters prove that their billionaire God Emperor is a plucky underdog by redefining "The Establishment™" to mean literally anyone who is not Trump. Now, he's "taking on" that bastion of the US political establishment, the... NFL? Next week, he'll "take on" McDonald's for disgracefully reducing the amount of high fructose corn syrup in its buns, destroying The Establishment™ once and for all!

I can't wait for the day when America is returned to good, honest, salt-of-the-earth billionaire con-men, just as the good Lord intended.

[Decky]

I can't wait for the day when America is returned to good, honest, salt-of-the-earth billionaire con-men, just as the good Lord intended.

Well that's who founded the country after all (if you account for inflation).

[Unperson-K]

Nazis violently trying to oppose the removal of a statue to a pro-slavery general are 'fine people'. Athletes peacefully protesting racial injustice are 'sons-of-bitches'. The world according to Trump.

The NFL is part of that, and we've had enough of pink breast cancer themes

Apparently, Trumpists also think raising awareness and money for breast cancer treatment and research is a bad thing. White supremacists good, peaceful protest bad, breast cancer awareness bad. What a sick world view.

[The Immortal Goon]

[quote=“Blackjack21”]Aren't you the one crying, because you are now on the losing end of a cultural war launched by America's political left?[/quote]

I’m trying to imagine which cultural war that was launched by America’s political left you could be talking about...