Standing during the Pledge or National Anthem

[TradeTheBeal!]

9 minutes ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

It's labeling... and IMO, a set-back.

 

Applies labels.

Decries "labeling"!

Edited September 29, 2017 by TryTheBeal!

[MEANDWARF]

11 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Its okay. We probably shouldn't expect white middle and working class people to give a damn anyway

You do realize they present the highest demographic in watching NFL games. Hence the reason for Ford Trucks, Lite Beer, and Viagara ads! 

(sarcasm)

[TradeTheBeal!]

It's always interesting to hear lifer military guys offer commentary on real-world employment practices out here in the great civilian meritocracy.

 

Its like if I picked up the phone and gave a NASA a call about their hiring practices based on my extensive car dealership and heavy metal band experience.

 

 

[Llevron]

15 minutes ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

Do you agree? IMO, it does nothing but make an ass out of the individual if they don't get the job and on the other hand it's probably held over their heads if they do get the job.

 

Ending these labels in all industries would do wonders, IMO.... I forgot who said it at an awards show last week but it was a female African-American Director who said she doesn't want to be known as the "First Black Woman to Win such and such Award"..... She said that just added to the fire.... we should be past that. How do we get past that? Labels create separation.

 

Do you not realize how what you are saying is coming off? 

 

[SemperFi Skins]

Just now, Llevron said:

 

Do you not realize how what you are saying is coming off? 

 

 

Maybe it's how you're interpreting it...

[Llevron]

22 hours ago, Jumbo said:

Questioning forms of hypocrisy ck may have within his beliefs and choices, and then as applied to his protesting of police brutality of people of color specifically, could be done in the context of how all of us as posters display our own hypocrisy in these conversations (which we "all" do, and many here do it "all" the time).

 

But it's still a worthwhile enough process when used to inform and expand discussion on the topic's actual foundation---in this case institutional prejudice and oppression in law enforcement driven or greatly influenced by race. If it is used primarily or solely to 'attack the messenger' or push a worldview agenda while not directly addressing the specific message..well we know that's bs for logical/rational argument, but it happens a lot anyway.

 

Credibility of the speaker is a real thing. It's fair to raise. It's a disingenuous and intellectually crippled tangent when presented with any suggestion the specific hypocrisy---if proven to be validly assigned--- serves as some automatic counter or definitive weakening/rejection of the original argument/claim being made.

But is makes for great distraction and dilution of the argument via side-arguemtns that "take up oxygen" as a tactic, when done with deliberation (something more common with the pros then the folks here--but some here do that, too, of course) or at least serves to move the topic to the different point the distractor wants to argue for their various reasons.

 

 

I think it's fine to claim hypocrisy and present the challenge in any case and argue if it exists. But when you extend that tangent, you're doing the discourse a disservice imo unless hypocrisy is the main topic. And every now and then note the comfy home it has in your own head as you castigate others for it. When we talk about liars and hypocrites, we aren't just tlaking about those "others" who are saying/doing things we really don't like, we are also talking about ourselves (ooooo so jack handy).

 

But we do get to genuinely compete and argue over who does it the most/least and that matters! 

 

 

 

Quoted again for relevancy 

 

!!!!!!!!

Edited September 29, 2017 by Llevron

[grego]

maybe the better question is, 'when do you end the rooney rule'?

 

there is some resentment about hiring preferences- to what extent, i dont know if its been polled. it all depends on who you ask. 

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

Maybe it's how you're interpreting it...

 

Thus me asking you if you are aware of how it comes off. It wont just be me that looks at that suggestion funny. I think you have been around long enough to figure that. 

[Gamebreaker]

12 hours ago, zoony said:

 

 

My take is that the average "white middle and working class sports fan" doesnt give two ****s about Kaepernick because theyre too busy putting in 10 hour workdays and trying to raise a family 6 days a week. 

 

They aren't working any harder or longer than anyone else. Considering public assistance statistics, probably less so. Tired of the BS stereotypes. 

[thebluefood]

As far as my take on this particular topic, I'm going to co-sign a quote from the great James Baldwin - one of my favorite authors and public figures from the Civil Rights Movement. 

 

[Gamebreaker]

46 minutes ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

It's labeling... and IMO, a set-back.

 

I think it's less about labeling, and more about the fact that we needed to have a Rooney Rule. I do think I see your point, coaches like Mike Tomlin, Tony Dungy and Jim Caldwell proven the notion that black coaches couldn't be successful was idiocy. Ozzie Newsome has proven for over a decade it doesn't matter what color you are you can be a successful GM. But then we always get these examples where the Norv Turners of the world seem to get way more chances to prove themselves, despite failing multiple times. Maybe it needs to be altered or adjusted, but until owners have a different mindset it will never be entirely unnecessary. 

[LD0506]

"................O'er the lan-and of the freeEEeee, and the home of the braaaaaaave"........... but not you, or you, and definitely not YOU!

 

 

These days challenge our souls as Americans and simply as human beings. How you respond is up to you and you will bear the responsibility, good or bad.

 

If you find yourself snapping back at people trying to make a point, perhaps the first person that needs looking at is yourself. IMO that goes for the left, right, D, R, white, black, me, you, whatever.

[grego]

14 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

. It got muddled because people didn't want to have a discussion about injustice and unequal treatment of marginalized persons,

 

someone should start a topic specifically about an issue. but there should be ground rules- (here are some that generally derail conversation)

no ad hominems. debate the topic, dont attack the poster.

no insults, veiled or otherwise.

no trolilng. 

no assuming the worst intentions about a poster

an acknowledgement of the valid points from the 'other' side

a commitment to find the right answer, which includes and acknowledgement that nobody knows all of the answers and a commitment to understand someone elses viewpoint

 

any other suggestions?

[SemperFi Skins]

2 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

I think it's less about labeling, and more about the fact that we needed to have a Rooney Rule. I do think I see your point, coaches like Mike Tomlin, Tony Dungy and Jim Caldwell proven the notion that black coaches couldn't be successful was idiocy. Ozzie Newsome has proven for over a decade it doesn't matter what color you are you can be a successful GM. But then we always get these examples where the Norv Turners of the world seem to get way more chances to prove themselves, despite failing multiple times. Maybe it needs to be altered or adjusted, but until owners have a different mindset it will never be entirely unnecessary. 

 

Now this I agree with. Great post!

[Llevron]

what does the Roney rule have to do with any of this? 

[Gamebreaker]

13 minutes ago, Llevron said:

what does the Roney rule have to do with any of this? 

 

Wait, what was this topic about again? Oh yeah, that **** Kapernick disrespecting the flag, that my President had no problem with people burning, and disrespecting my military, that I never served and don't really care about. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

21 minutes ago, Llevron said:

what does the Roney rule have to do with any of this? 

 

Absolutely nothing.

[The Sisko]

 

On 9/27/2017 at 11:16 AM, DallasCowboyFan156 said:

 

We don't want him. Besides, we already have a narcissist running our front office. Give him the Eagles. They were made for one another. They both have the same level of class.

Well, as a Skins fan I want him for you guys. I think he'd be the best owner, ever...from our perspective. ??

On 9/27/2017 at 2:27 PM, BenningRoadSkin said:

Damn, how PG County are some of you?

 

I was down in Oxon Hill.

Straight outta Seat Pleasant shawty! Bladensburg Mustangs...for my senior year anyway. I was in nowheresville FL before that. 

 

On 9/27/2017 at 2:34 PM, grego said:

...in terms of oppression, there has been plenty of it in plenty of places, but we only focus on the oppression that we choose to.

 

an estimated one million people were captured by the barbary pirates and forced into slavery (interesting to me as both a former marine and an englishman). pretty brutal stuff. 

It wasn't as bad as people try to make it sound nowadays. Their owners treated them well and they were happy members of their families.?

 

There are a number of reasons it's not talked about much. First, multiply the number of people affected by about 10-20 IIRC. Second, it wasn't based on racial inferiority as with the European slave trade. The Arabs would enslave any infidel and I'm pretty sure most of their slaves were sub-Saharan Africans.  Finally, in most cases Arab slaves were freed at some point if they converted and their children didn't inherit their status as slaves. All a slave of the Europeans got out of becoming a Xtian was being controlled and manipulated into being a good slave.

 

So ultimately your point comes across as saying "But what about 9-11?" to a holocaust survivor. Sure, both were wrong but they're in a different class of incidents altogether.

Edited September 29, 2017 by The Sisko

[Dan T.]

4 hours ago, LD0506 said:

Saw this, felt it belonged here............

 

[Air Force Academy Superintendent]

 

This is the kind of clear unequivocal statement I want to hear from those in positions of authority. Enough with the diversions and enough with the strawmen and way too ****ing enough with twisting the narrative to fit whatever bias you cling to, this guy gets it IMO and I was genuinely thankful to see this general in the branch I served in standing up and expressing a forceful opinion.

 

 

Lieutenant General Jay B. Silveria for President.

Edited September 29, 2017 by Dan T.

[grego]

46 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

 

 

 

It wasn't as bad as people try to make it sound nowadays. Their owners treated them well and they were happy members of their families.?

 

There are a number of reasons it's not talked about much. First, multiply the number of people affected by about 10-20 IIRC. Second, it wasn't based on racial inferiority as with the European slave trade. The Arabs would enslave any infidel and I'm pretty sure most of their slaves were sub-Saharan Africans.  Finally, in most cases Arab slaves were freed at some point if they converted and their children didn't inherit their status as slaves. All a slave of the Europeans got out of becoming a Xtian was being controlled and manipulated into being a good slave.

 

So ultimately your point comes across as saying "But what about 9-11?" to a holocaust survivor. Sure, both were wrong but they're in a different class of incidents altogether.

 

i would agree with some of those points, and others, there is probably room for debate. all slavery is bad, but some was worse than others is true, but, if i said it, well, i couldnt. i think there are good arguments as to who did what worse, but, ultimately we'll agree that its all oppression.

 

(i would add that the degree of oppression varies greatly upon who is telling it.)

 

i think any time you stand strongly against something (talking about rauf now), it is reasonable that people will say "ya? well, what about the plank in your own eye"? i think comparing what rauf was standing against with the ideology that he chooses (youve said you are familiar with this), one could argue very easily that the finger is pointed one way. 

Edited September 29, 2017 by grego

[LD0506]

12 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

Lieutenant General Jay B. Silveria for President.

 

Actually I don't want him for president, I want him right where he is, leading young people towards being solid, respectable members of the military. The job he does there can and should ripple out far beyond his own world, and have an effect.

 

 

[SemperFi Skins]

1 hour ago, Llevron said:

what does the Roney rule have to do with any of this? 

 

Equality.. best man/woman for the job.

 

but it doesn't mean anything if it doesn't fit your agenda.

[Llevron]

1 minute ago, SemperFi Skins said:

 

Equality.. best man/woman for the job.

 

but it doesn't mean anything if it doesn't fit your agenda.

 

What does that have to do with the NFL protests?

 

Gonna bring up black on black crime stats next? Or affirmative action? I bet I can guess you stance there too. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Posts with a clear agenda.

 

Decries agendas!

[The Sisko]

14 minutes ago, grego said:

I think any time you stand strongly against something (talking about rauf now), it is reasonable that people will say "ya? well, what about the plank in your own eye"? i think comparing what rauf was standing against with the ideology that he chooses (youve said you are familiar with this), one could argue very easily that the finger is pointed one way. 

Fair enough. However there is the issue of context. I don't think many, if any of the folks making this point are descended from Barbary slaves, nor did that trade take place here. Given that, raising this issue in a discussion about oppression here in the US is a lot like your child telling you what the neighbor's kid gets to do when you tell him he can't do something.