Standing during the Pledge or National Anthem

[TradeTheBeal!]

I'd just like to point out that what was actually said was "prison" not "asylum".  Asylum is very much a humorous cliche used often along the lines of "you don't have to be crazy to work here...".

 

"Inmates running the prison" is a slip that betrays the fact that Mr. McNair considers his employees to be people of a criminal nature.  It's pathetic.

[Springfield]

So, what if he simply said, “We can’t let the players dictate our own policies.”  Then said they have to stand for the anthem.

 

Would the be acceptable?

[spjunkies]

2 minutes ago, Springfield said:

So, what if he simply said, “We can’t let the players dictate our own policies.”  Then said they have to stand for the anthem.

 

Would the be acceptable?

 

Some of the owners likely had that notion during the meeting. He chose to make an off the wall comment and has to deal with the backlash.

[TheGreatBuzz]

2 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

That's because you love to keep your head in the sand.

Yup.  Thats me.  Totally closed minded with no interest in learning.

 

Get outta here with that crap.

2 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

betrays the fact that Mr. McNair considers his employees to be people of a criminal nature.  It's pathetic.

I still think that is a stretch based off one comment.

Edited October 28, 2017 by TheGreatBuzz
Spelling

[grego]

12 hours ago, Gamebreaker said:

I have never heard the phrase “inmates running the asylum” used it in any context with a workforce that is predominantly white, or predominantly of people with a high amount of academic success or wealth. I’ve never heard administrators at an Ivy League school call students who didn’t agree with a new rule or guideline “inmates”. I’ve never heard of a tech firm consider their highly skilled workforce as “inmates” either. 

 

In the case of sports, I heard it used in relation to NFL and NBA players. But not MLB or NHL players. Now why is that?  Are my personal experiences with that phrase simply that, my personal experience, or is there a larger, hidden meaning at play? 

 

Just now I decided to look up what the terms origins come from and wow, I don’t think many people who’ve ever used the term know about the 1920s movie it’s origin is traced back to. 

 

I thought that was an interesting point. The last time I heard the phrase - or, I'm sure, used it myself -  was talking about the evergreen college situation where the students quite literally took over the school. 

I Googled it to see what came up. Outside of a few references to McNair, it was almost all links to a book computer tech til page four or five. Then it talks about the federal government, evergreen, Dems saying it about the GOP,then a couple of other situations at Yale and ucsc - that one actually  involved a black student group. 

Still, it's a term that is used when individuals take control over from those who are in charge and is appropriate in terms of its accuracy. 

I wouldn't think twice about using it, but I know why I'm saying it and what I'm saying. 

To your point, I don't know if there's a better way to look into its use, but it appears that it's used in lots of situations. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

7 hours ago, Springfield said:

So, what if he simply said, “We can’t let the players dictate our own policies.”  Then said they have to stand for the anthem.

 

Would the be acceptable?

 

As it turns out, he wasn't even talking about the players.  Crazy right?!?

 

[Springfield]

[dav87sc]

14 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

It IS completely amazing how all of the money going into the Foundation just stopped dead when she lost.. It's also completely bull****. Clinton Foundation brought in less in 2016, WHEN SHE WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, than in any other year.... on purpose... so that there wouldn't be any questions about pay to play. Which, in retrospect, was dumb since you and the others who are so easily misled are going to accuse them of it anyway.

Nice excuse you make for them that is was purposeful "so there wouldn't be any questions."  The fact that the donations fell off drastically when Clinton Cash (which I have not bought or read), was published, in 2015, and called her entire time as SOS into question about pay to play, speaks directly against your point.

 

I find the blind following of Hillary as some pure as driven snow champion of everyone quite informative.  I have yet to see any semblance of anyone willing to recognize or accept any of her faults.  You can disagree and not think she is corrupt, but I think you are as easily mislead(willingly, imo) or are intentionally unwilling to accept any position other than her as some great political Savior.

 

btw, I don't think any country or entity would be so obvious as to only donate in the election year, in the huge sums we are talking about.  These things happen over time and with advanced planning.  She was in effect campaigning since 2007.

 

Honestly, I don't get it(and probably never will), why the Democratic party platform changing/morphing to a socialist form of government and the willingness of people to accept that as the ideal form of government.  It is not what this country was founded on and is not what this country should aspire to.  And no, I am no saying go back to the ideals of blacks or POC as being 3/5 of a person.  I am talking about forms of government.

 

I think your willingness to see people who disagree with that and as holding to founding principles (as to type of government setup) as easily misled, naive, or (enter every put-down I have heard on this board because I am a conservative) or the enemy,  shows how far down the path of us/them things have gone.

-Dav87sc

Edited October 29, 2017 by dav87sc
double pasted by accident

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Lmao

[dav87sc]

@skinny21

I will accept not having all the information.  I understand now, she started a program that he went through and graduated from.  I even think it is admirable she (and hopefully all representatives) maintain contact with members from their community and are willing to be supportive in the hardest of times.

 

Maybe the timing of the call was such that it happened to be at the time they were in the car together. okay.

 

Do you think there was intention on Trumps part to sound hurtful or disrespectful?  Again, listening to the tape of the other call he made, I think he sounded human and at a loss for words(I don't think there are adequate words in any of those calls).  What did Representative Wilson have to gain, besides finding another reason to publicly bash the opposing party POTUS?  How does this serve Sgt Johnson's widow and family?

 

If she really thought it came off bad, why didn't she pick up the phone and call him and tell him, in an effort to get a better response?

Going public like she did, turned this into a spectacle.  That is what I have an issue with.

 

I am not arguing that he may have been less than eloquent in his wording.

 

As far as media and deflections, save it.  There are 10 times as many liberal publications at any given moment as the conservative side.  By my sense of math, that means there are at least 10x as many opportunities for information skewed toward the liberal perspective or outright liberal speaking points.  I say at least, because the liberal outlets are generally bigger and have larger staff and contributor numbers.  The main stream media outlets have abandoned any pretense at being anything other than democrat party supporters.

-Dav87sc

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Uh...this still the Pledge of Alllegiance thread right?

[TradeTheBeal!]

Glittering Steel Presents!

 

 

[Springfield]

What does Hillary Clinton have to do with any of this?

[Hersh]

3 hours ago, dav87sc said:

@skinny21

I will accept not having all the information.  I understand now, she started a program that he went through and graduated from.  I even think it is admirable she (and hopefully all representatives) maintain contact with members from their community and are willing to be supportive in the hardest of times.

 

Maybe the timing of the call was such that it happened to be at the time they were in the car together. okay.

 

Do you think there was intention on Trumps part to sound hurtful or disrespectful?  Again, listening to the tape of the other call he made, I think he sounded human and at a loss for words(I don't think there are adequate words in any of those calls).  What did Representative Wilson have to gain, besides finding another reason to publicly bash the opposing party POTUS?  How does this serve Sgt Johnson's widow and family?

 

If she really thought it came off bad, why didn't she pick up the phone and call him and tell him, in an effort to get a better response?

Going public like she did, turned this into a spectacle.  That is what I have an issue with.

 

I am not arguing that he may have been less than eloquent in his wording.

 

As far as media and deflections, save it.  There are 10 times as many liberal publications at any given moment as the conservative side.  By my sense of math, that means there are at least 10x as many opportunities for information skewed toward the liberal perspective or outright liberal speaking points.  I say at least, because the liberal outlets are generally bigger and have larger staff and contributor numbers.  The main stream media outlets have abandoned any pretense at being anything other than democrat party supporters.

-Dav87sc

 

 

Have any actual links/facts to back this up this claim?

4 hours ago, dav87sc said:

Nice excuse you make for them that is was purposeful "so there wouldn't be any questions."  The fact that the donations fell off drastically when Clinton Cash (which I have not bought or read), was published, in 2015, and called her entire time as SOS into question about pay to play, speaks directly against your point.

 

I find the blind following of Hillary as some pure as driven snow champion of everyone quite informative.  I have yet to see any semblance of anyone willing to recognize or accept any of her faults.  You can disagree and not think she is corrupt, but I think you are as easily mislead(willingly, imo) or are intentionally unwilling to accept any position other than her as some great political Savior.

 

btw, I don't think any country or entity would be so obvious as to only donate in the election year, in the huge sums we are talking about.  These things happen over time and with advanced planning.  She was in effect campaigning since 2007.

 

Honestly, I don't get it(and probably never will), why the Democratic party platform changing/morphing to a socialist form of government and the willingness of people to accept that as the ideal form of government.  It is not what this country was founded on and is not what this country should aspire to.  And no, I am no saying go back to the ideals of blacks or POC as being 3/5 of a person.  I am talking about forms of government.

 

I think your willingness to see people who disagree with that and as holding to founding principles (as to type of government setup) as easily misled, naive, or (enter every put-down I have heard on this board because I am a conservative) or the enemy,  shows how far down the path of us/them things have gone.

-Dav87sc

 

You clearly didn't read election related threads in here if you think Hillary got a pass on things from her most ardent supporters here. Will you link to the Democratic party platform morphing to back a socialist form of government? 

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on what this country was founded on and on Washington's thoughts as he shaped the initial government after becoming POTUS. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by Hersh

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

4 hours ago, dav87sc said:

Nice excuse you make for them that is was purposeful "so there wouldn't be any questions."  The fact that the donations fell off drastically when Clinton Cash (which I have not bought or read), was published, in 2015, and called her entire time as SOS into question about pay to play, speaks directly against your point.

I didn't make an excuse. This was stated by the foundation back in 2016. No more money would be accepted from foreign governments, Bill and Hillary would be hands off, programs would be scaled back. It would take 5 minutes to look up but that's significantly longer than just making up whatever you want the facts to be and I know being wrong is kinda uncomfortable so I don't expect you to seek out anything that might educate you on the subject (or any subject).

 

4 hours ago, dav87sc said:

I find the blind following of Hillary as some pure as driven snow champion of everyone quite informative.  I have yet to see any semblance of anyone willing to recognize or accept any of her faults.  You can disagree and not think she is corrupt, but I think you are as easily mislead(willingly, imo) or are intentionally unwilling to accept any position other than her as some great political Savior.

 

btw, I don't think any country or entity would be so obvious as to only donate in the election year, in the huge sums we are talking about.  These things happen over time and with advanced planning.  She was in effect campaigning since 2007.

I don't give a damn about Hillary dude. I'll give you plenty of legit, fair criticisms of her, Bill, the foundation, and the DNC. I'm just not going to pretend like fake **** is real on account of I'm not stupid.

 

4 hours ago, dav87sc said:

Honestly, I don't get it(and probably never will), why the Democratic party platform changing/morphing to a socialist form of government and the willingness of people to accept that as the ideal form of government.  It is not what this country was founded on and is not what this country should aspire to.  And no, I am no saying go back to the ideals of blacks or POC as being 3/5 of a person.  I am talking about forms of government.

Ah... the socialist boogeyman. Outside of healthcare, what else has been "socialized" lately? If you enjoy the fact that if you happened to be driving your kids to public school on a public road and got hit by a public bus, that public emergency vehicles are going to take you to a public hospital and, even if you don't have insurance they're not going to let you die, then you sometimes enjoy socialism. Sometimes it makes sense for the government to provide service to it's citizens with the taxes they pay, sometimes it doesn't.

 

On the subject of healthcare specifically, what's the problem exactly? You don't like the idea of paying for other people's healthcare? Got news for you brother... THAT'S HOW INSURANCE WORKS. Everyone puts their money in a big pot and when you need it, the people overseeing that pot decide how much you can have. Of course if you take out the $100 billion dollars of profit that insurance companies make and just pay for the actual healthcare, the money you're putting into the pot would be a lot less and the money you get back is going to be a lot more. Every other developed country provides healthcare to it's citizens at a fraction of the cost. But, like many things with the GOP, the very rich are writing their policy and they've come up with some ****amamy scare tactic to make you fight against your own best interest so that a few super wealthy people can get slightly richer.

 

4 hours ago, dav87sc said:

I think your willingness to see people who disagree with that and as holding to founding principles (as to type of government setup) as easily misled, naive, or (enter every put-down I have heard on this board because I am a conservative) or the enemy,  shows how far down the path of us/them things have gone.

I didn't call you "easily misled" because you disagree with me and I didn't call you any of the other stuff you just decided to throw in there. There are plenty of people I disagree with (well, pretty much everyone on some subject I'm sure) who I think have perfectly valid views that I just happen to see another way. I don't care about conservative or liberal or blue or red or donkeys or elephants (but don't even pretend that your side isn't the one who fosters division with the whole "enemy" outlook). I called YOU easily misled because that's what you are.

 

P.S. "Holding to founding principles"? My ass. Trump and his base have absolutely no principles whatsoever outside of "screw the libs".

[ClaytoAli]

They are shifting the conversation. Either they are making an intentional mistake or they like the world the way it is and don't want it to change (AKA MAGA). 

[ClaytoAli]

Per Duane Brown:

 

During a Saturday morning phone interview with PFT (which preceded the meeting between McNair and the team), Brown recalled an occasion during his rookie year of 2008, when Barack Obama was elected the nation’s first African-American president.

“He came to talk to the team,” Brown said regarding the owner. “He was visibly upset about it. He said, ‘I know a lot of y’all are happy right now, but it’s not the outcome that some of us were looking for.’ That was very shocking to me.”

Brown added that McNair also addressed the team after the scandal that forced Donald Sterling to sell the L.A. Clippers, when racist remarks Sterling made in private became very public.

“The message was more to be careful who you have private conversations with, because things that you think are confidential can spread like wildfire,” Brown said. “In my mind, it would probably have been better if he said ‘don’t be a racist’ instead of ‘be a racist in private and make sure it doesn’t get out.'”

Brown’s reference to Sterling comes at a time when some league insiders are wondering whether McNair ultimately may have to sell the Texans. I asked Brown if he thinks it would ever come to that.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/10/28/duane-brown-recalls-other-quotes-from-bob-mcnair-that-caused-concern/

 

Edited October 29, 2017 by ClaytoAli

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

4 minutes ago, ClaytoAli said:

“He came to talk to the team,” Brown said regarding the owner. “He was visibly upset about it. He said, ‘I know a lot of y’all are happy right now, but it’s not the outcome that some of us were looking for.’ That was very shocking to me.”

He's an 80 year-old, rich, white billionaire. Not a shocker that he would have wanted a Republican president.

[skinsmarydu]

On 10/27/2017 at 10:53 PM, TheGreatBuzz said:

I'm sorry but you are wrong.  Not much makes me uncomfortable.  And I don't believe I have anything to "cop" to.  

 

You are right.  The players are not inmates.  Neither are the Sailors who I've used that phrase with.  And probably not any other time it's been used.  I'm sorry but so far from what I hear here and read online, I'm becoming more convinced that this is guilty until proven innocent regarding racism.

I was charged with "Willful Destruction to Government Property" for a sunburn that kept me from <get this> painting my ship.  I challenged, being that a human cannot be "property".  My CO was one of the greatest humans on earth, I also escorted his pee for a test.  He went for a run every day at lunchtime, and hated to be saluted as he hustled the outer weather decks.

He also sided with me on that charge, said I was right, ownership of another human was tantamount to slavery.  He also let me go off a RILOA for missing ship's movement later that same year in a hurricane as well . (I mustered with the divers, and fished with the Master for 2 days.)  Yes, that's all verified.

There are times when doing the right thing IS WHAT YOU DO.

 

 

[Mooka]

8 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

Have any actual links/facts to back this up this claim?

 

 

Sean Hannity told him.

 

Rush Limbaugh told me the same thing in 1987... errr.... yesterday. 

 

 

[Bozo the kKklown]

19 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Yup.  Thats me.  Totally closed minded with no interest in learning.

Well yeah, and you are showing it in this thread.

[Springfield]

24 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Well yeah, and you are showing it in this thread.

 

I disagree.  I think that Buzz it quite rational in most cases, this included.

[nonniey]

1 hour ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Well yeah, and you are showing it in this thread.

Actually to me the one poster that comes across to me as the most close minded in this forum seems to be  well......you. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by nonniey

[Bozo the kKklown]

Just now, nonniey said:

Actually to me the one poster that comes across to me as the most closed minded in this forum seems to be  well......you. 

tbh, coming from you I am totally okay with that.

[visionary]