Trump and his cabinet/buffoonery- Get your bunkers ready!

[TradeTheBeal!]

This "on the clock" angle is incredibly silly.  It's cool to disagree with Kap's strategy on grounds of tradition, but let's keep it real.

 

The kneeling thing is thoughtful, peaceful and apparently very, very effective.  Makes me proud to be an American, really.

[redskins59]

38 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Question:  Do you feel like it is okay for an employee to protest or make whatever while they are "on the clock"?  

 

Ii would not be okay where I work.

But it is okay if you work for the NFL, NBA, NHL, etc.  They allow protests.  You have commissioner Goodell using words like "divisive" to describe Donald Trump.  He has not made such statements about Colin Kaepernick.  So for the NFL, protesting by kneeling down is totally fine. The majority of players are black (who are affected the most by police brutality, white supremacy, etc) , so NFL has to show support for their employees.  

If the NFL does not show support for their black employees, I am sorry to say, but they would be acting like a bunch of white supremacists.

[Bang]

Roger Goodell should NOT hold Colin Kaepernick, a private citizen, to the standards expected of the President of the United states.

And neither should anyone else. Roger Goodell has no business, and has kept it not the league's businsss what his players, as private citizens do with their freedoms of speec h.

Donald trump threatened a private business.. or a league of 32 of them.. . over political speech.

the implications are completely against what this country and that flag he's wrapped his fat ass in stands for. 

What is in the water these days that this needs explaining?

 

~Bang

 

[twa]

Just now, Cooked Crack said:

The action isn't against any rules though. Let them cook. We don't need the head of our Executive branch using his sway to call for people to be fired.

 

His actions aren't against any rules either.

We don't need members of pro teams using the anthem stage for protest time either.

 

Or we can just let everyone do as they want whenever.

 

 

[AJ*]

2 minutes ago, Bang said:

Roger Goodell should NOT hold Colin Kaepernick, a private citizen, to the standards expected of the President of the United states.

And neither should anyone else.

What is in the water these days?

 

~Bang

 

 

That's the sad thing. A player taking a knee in a silent, peaceful protest because he doesn't think America is living up to its standards gets raked over the coals. Meanwhile, we have an idiot who ran for President last year that insulted everyone under the sun, including the disabled, mocked a POW's service because he was "captured" in effect spitting in the faces of all POWs, called for a Muslim ban while thousands of Muslims serve in our armed forces fighting for freedom and "freedom of religion" and that guy gets rewarded with the Presidency. This country is so ass-backwards and hypocritical it's ridiculous.

[TheGreatBuzz]

12 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

The action isn't against any rules though. Let them cook. We don't need the head of our Executive branch using his sway to call for people to be fired.

That did not answer my question.  For the record, again, I don't agree with Trumps statement as the President.  But I do agree with his statement if he had said it as a private citizen. 

4 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

 

Ii would not be okay where I work.

But it is okay if you work for the NFL, NBA, NHL, etc.  They allow protests.  You have commissioner Goodell using words like "divisive" to describe Donald Trump.  He has not made such statements about Colin Kaepernick.  So for the NFL, protesting by kneeling down is totally fine. The majority of players are black (who are affected the most by police brutality, white supremacy, etc) , so NFL has to show support for their employees.  

If the NFL does not show support for their black employees, I am sorry to say, but they would be acting like a bunch of white supremacists.

I do know the NBA suspended a player like 20 years ago for not standing.  I don't know of anything more recent.  I know the NFL said they encouraged people to stand but it wasn't required.  

 

That last statement is way out of line.  I don't support what CK did.  Does that make me a white supremacist?  I'm pretty sure a few owners have come out saying their players must stand.  Are they white supremacists?

[redskins59]

10 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

That did not answer my question.  For the record, again, I don't agree with Trumps statement as the President.  But I do agree with his statement if he had said it as a private citizen. 

I do know the NBA suspended a player like 20 years ago for not standing.  I don't know of anything more recent.  I know the NFL said they encouraged people to stand but it wasn't required.  

 

That last statement is way out of line.  I don't support what CK did.  Does that make me a white supremacist?  I'm pretty sure a few owners have come out saying their players must stand.  Are they white supremacists?

 

It isn't out of line.  I was talking about the NFL that employs many black players.  It has nothing to do with you.  You as an individual can believe that kneeling down is major disresepect. 

    If you employ black players and don't support them for a cause they feel is important(police brutality), you tell me, how should I feel about the owner?  A lot of them are acting like politicians though.  If you own a team in Kansas, you better act like you support the White Supremacist president. Which would mean that, yes, you are acting like a White supremacist.

[Cooked Crack]

27 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

That did not answer my question.  For the record, again, I don't agree with Trumps statement as the President.  But I do agree with his statement if he had said it as a private citizen. 

I do know the NBA suspended a player like 20 years ago for not standing.  I don't know of anything more recent.  I know the NFL said they encouraged people to stand but it wasn't required.  

 

Why does it matter about being on the clock if the employer doesn't care? Why are we even discussing "on the clock" when it's fine with the clock holder?

 

29 minutes ago, twa said:

 

His actions aren't against any rules either.

We don't need members of pro teams using the anthem stage for protest time either.

 

Or we can just let everyone do as they want whenever.

That bum is blurring the lines. A President and his spokesperson calling for private citizens to lose employment over speech is not a good precedent. It's inviting government over reach. Especially seeing as how many people are riding with Trump on this. He's not a normal putz yelling about protesters.

 

They should just get rid of the anthem at sports (except for the Olympics).  That way we can silence this speech.

[TheGreatBuzz]

6 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

 

It isn't out of line.  I was talking about the NFL that employs many black players.  It has nothing to do with you.  You as an individual can believe that kneeling down is major disresepect. 

    If you employ black players and don't support them for a cause they feel is important(police brutality), you tell me, how should I feel about the owner?  A lot of them are acting like politicians though.  If you own a team in Kansas, you better act like you support the White Supremacist president. Which would mean that, yes, you are acting like a White supremacist.

So owners must support their players and their views?  What if they disagree with them?  What if it is something the players support that you don't?  And regarding Kansas, I haven't seen the Chiefs owner say anything that makes him acting like a White Supremacist.  Honest question, was this just a random example or was this chosen to make a point based on something that happened that I missed?

1 minute ago, Cooked Crack said:

Why does it matter about being on the clock if the employer doesn't care? Why are we even discussing "on the clock" when it's fine with the clock holder?

 

What if the employer does care?  That is my question.  Has every owner said their players can protest?  If I remember correctly, a few owners said a while back that their players must stand.  Have they reversed?  If not, then the question matters.  And if they have, then I am still interested in your opinion had they not.

 

And yes, Trump is a bum/putz/a lot of other bad things.

[Cooked Crack]

Just now, TheGreatBuzz said:

What if the employer does care?  That is my question.  Has every owner said their players can protest?  If I remember correctly, a few owners said a while back that their players must stand.  Have they reversed?  If not, then the question matters.  And if they have, then I am still interested in your opinion had they not.

They can terminate the contract if their jimmies are so rustled. I wouldn't like it but it's not my team. Players are within their rights to protest and owners are within their rights to cut folks. If the government is pushing that then it's a separate issue.

[TheGreatBuzz]

1 minute ago, Cooked Crack said:

They can terminate the contract if their jimmies are so rustled. I wouldn't like it but it's not my team. Players are within their rights to protest and owners are within their rights to cut folks. If the government is pushing that then it's a separate issue.

Gotcha.  So you would disagree with an owner cutting a player for protesting but totally support their right to do so.  I'm glad to hear that.  You aren't that different than I am.  I totally disagree with the protest but support their right to do so.  They just have to deal with any potential consequences (like losing their jobs).  And said owner would have to deal with potential lost revenue if you stopped supporting them.  

 

I actually think the way Obama expressed his feelings here was perfect.  Unfortunately he is no longer our POTUS.  

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2016/09/29/president-obama-colin-kaepernick-protests-veterans/91260824/

 

But free speech is free speech.  And that causes me to struggle when the President condemns statements that I DON'T agree with.  I like hearing him say it, but should he be?  

[Kilmer17]

I like it when our politicians stay out of sports and our athletes stay out of politics. 

[redskins59]

26 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

So owners must support their players and their views?  What if they disagree with them?  What if it is something the players support that you don't?  And regarding Kansas, I haven't seen the Chiefs owner say anything that makes him acting like a White Supremacist.  Honest question, was this just a random example or was this chosen to make a point based on something that happened that I missed?

What if the employer does care?  That is my question.  Has every owner said their players can protest?  If I remember correctly, a few owners said a while back that their players must stand.  Have they reversed?  If not, then the question matters.  And if they have, then I am still interested in your opinion had they not.

 

And yes, Trump is a bum/putz/a lot of other bad things.

 

It is a fact that the police treats blacks differently in this country.  It is not a view, but to me a fact.  If the owners see differently, then they are idiots.   

The Kansas thingie was just an example. 

[Cooked Crack]

1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

I like it when our politicians stay out of sports and our athletes stay out of politics. 

Our reality TV stars are now our politicians. Athletes are as qualified as the President to discuss politics. (Probably more so)

 

21 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

But free speech is free speech.  And that causes me to struggle when the President condemns statements that I DON'T agree with.  I like hearing him say it, but should he be?  

He should not. The President should know better about getting into peaceful speech by private citizens. You can express displeasure without crossing that line. "I do not agree with police brutality but I do not believe kneeling is the best way to get your point across." That took 0 effort to write and would not ring alarms like fire them SOBs.

[c slag]

9 hours ago, StillUnknown said:

 

Once again, a tweet for all occasions 

If Trump actually happens to show up at a Redskins game I hope he gets booed loudly

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

1 minute ago, c slag said:

If Trump actually happens to show up at a Redskins game I hope he gets booed loudly

He could have probably started on a couple of those teams. 

[Hersh]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

That did not answer my question.  For the record, again, I don't agree with Trumps statement as the President.  But I do agree with his statement if he had said it as a private citizen. 

 

You understand that the problem here is that he isn't some private citizen? You understand the problems of the person who is considered the most powerful person in this country is calling for employers to fire people over a protest that he, POTUS, doesn't agree with?

24 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

I like it when our politicians stay out of sports and our athletes stay out of politics. 

 

Why should athletes stay out of politics? Should they just shut up and entertain you?

[TheGreatBuzz]

15 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

 

It is a fact that the police treats blacks differently in this country.  It is not a view, but to me a fact.  If the owners see differently, then they are idiots.   

The Kansas thingie was just an example. 

I'm not arguing that.  I'm talking about the manner in which players choose to protest said treatment.

2 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

Our reality TV stars are now our politicians. Athletes are as qualified as the President to discuss politics. (Probably more so)

Refer to the Doomsday thread that someone will eventually start.  We are going to need it.

 

This makes me believe both sides haven't invested enough in education.

Quote

He should not. The President should know better about getting into peaceful speech by private citizens. You can express displeasure without crossing that line. "I do not agree with police brutality but I do not believe kneeling is the best way to get your point across." That took 0 effort to write and would not ring alarms like fire them SOBs.

And I wish he would have said that.  My difficulty is in the below (totally made up) situation.

 

POTUS:  "I totally disagree with and completely condemn the statement by famous actor John Smith that a women's place is in the kitchen and if a child turns out not being raised correctly, it is the fault of the women because that is their job."

 

Now in this situation, I agree with what POTUS has said.  But should he be using his position to make a statement regarding someone else's exercise of free speech?  I like to say yes because I agree with what he said.  It gets more difficult when I don't.  But rights are easy to defend when you agree with them.  The real test is when you don't.

3 minutes ago, Hersh said:

You understand that the problem here is that he isn't some private citizen? You understand the problems of the person who is considered the most powerful person in this country is calling for employers to fire people over a protest that he, POTUS, doesn't agree with?

 

 

 

Yes.  I have stated Trump is a moron.  But there is a bigger picture here.

 

Quote

Quote

Why should athletes stay out of politics? Should they just shut up and entertain you?

 

While they are on the clock, yes.  For certain paychecks you give up certain rights.  That is a fact of the world we live in.

[StillUnknown]

13 minutes ago, c slag said:

If Trump actually happens to show up at a Redskins game I hope he gets booed loudly

 

he only showing up to places where his base is 90% of the crowd

[Hersh]

7 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Yes.  I have stated Trump is a moron.  But there is a bigger picture here.

 

While they are on the clock, yes.  For certain paychecks you give up certain rights.  That is a fact of the world we live in.

 

I don't think you could be more wrong with these two statements and it absolutely is not the fact of the world we live in. 

 

First, it has nothing to do with Trump is a moron or some genius. It has to do with a POTUS trying to shut down a form of peaceful protest he doesn't agree with and call for people to be fired. This is COMPLETELY against everything this country is supposed to be about. 

 

Second, why should a person's job dictate whether they should be able to speak their mind or not? Why should it be of relevance to you at all? That's really a terrible perspective to have. They are as much a person as you are. You don't give up your rights. Maybe their are consequences to one's actions, but that doesn't mean you give up your rights. Gigantic difference. 

[Bozo the kKklown]

Glad you all are seeing @TheGreatBuzzviews for how shallow and deluded they are.

[twa]

6 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think you could be more wrong with these two statements and it absolutely is not the fact of the world we live in. 

 

First, it has nothing to do with Trump is a moron or some genius. It has to do with a POTUS trying to shut down a form of peaceful protest he doesn't agree with and call for people to be fired. This is COMPLETELY against everything this country is supposed to be about. 

 

Second, why should a person's job dictate whether they should be able to speak their mind or not? Why should it be of relevance to you at all? That's really a terrible perspective to have. They are as much a person as you are. You don't give up your rights. Maybe their are consequences to one's actions, but that doesn't mean you give up your rights. Gigantic difference. 

 

I would guess he is not trying to get them fired or shut down the protests...hell he probably wants them to expand.

 

fits right into his shtick

[PleaseBlitz]

Let's not forget that a draft dodger is giving patriotism lessons. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

12 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

I don't think you could be more wrong with these two statements and it absolutely is not the fact of the world we live in. 

 

First, it has nothing to do with Trump is a moron or some genius. It has to do with a POTUS trying to shut down a form of peaceful protest he doesn't agree with and call for people to be fired. This is COMPLETELY against everything this country is supposed to be about. 

 

Second, why should a person's job dictate whether they should be able to speak their mind or not? Why should it be of relevance to you at all? That's really a terrible perspective to have. They are as much a person as you are. You don't give up your rights. Maybe their are consequences to one's actions, but that doesn't mean you give up your rights. Gigantic difference. 

As for the "First", it is totally about if Trump is right.  Pretty much every sane minded person thinks Trump is wrong here.  But what if a respectable President had done something similar regarding a famous person's statement or protest that the majority of America didn't agree with?  That is my point.

 

As for the "Second", it is relevant to me because of my job.  I know I gave up certain rights for my paycheck.  I know I have probably skirted some rules of my job by statements I have posted here.  It's also why I try to refrain from posting to much personal info here so I will be less likely to get caught.  

10 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Glad you all are seeing @TheGreatBuzzviews for how shallow and deluded they are.

As I said, it is easy to defend rights when they are being exercised for something you agree with.  The real test is when you don't agree.

 

What exactly is shallow and deluded about my views?

 

 

 

I will continue this conversation in the morning.   Please don't construe this as me leaving the conversation.  But I need to get some sleep.  I have watch in the morning.

[Hersh]

2 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

As for the "First", it is totally about if Trump is right.  Pretty much every sane minded person thinks Trump is wrong here.  But what if a respectable President had done something similar regarding a famous person's statement or protest that the majority of America didn't agree with?  That is my point.

 

As for the "Second", it is relevant to me because of my job.  I know I gave up certain rights for my paycheck.  I know I have probably skirted some rules of my job by statements I have posted here.  It's also why I try to refrain from posting to much personal info here so I will be less likely to get caught.  

 

 

Any POTUS making a statement that someone should be fired over a protest is in the wrong. Stop trying to create some theoretical. It's a really bad look to do that. It can't be understated how out of line this was. A President attempting to suppress protests like this is wrong. Period. 

 

Second, exercising one's rights doesn't mean there aren't consequences as it relates to one's job. I doubt the public would say to you, shut up and do whatever your job is, and if they did, they would be just as in the wrong. Can you imagine people saying that to people with other professions?