YOU'RE FIRED!

[stinkubus]

you might be surprised at the poll, I was when I saw only %44 of blacks wanted to remove the statue of Lee in Virginia

I'd love to read that. Do you have a link?

 

[metalhead]

Then you have been all along preaching to the choir since I have never made such a claim.

This is totally dishonest, because even though you didn't make the claim, this was your intent in posting the video. Because there is no other discernible purpose in posting it; if you agree with what the guy is saying, you can type those words into the little box on your screen and discuss it.

It's not mechanical's fault that disagreeing with black people makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't, when they're wrong. But I don't come here to watch videos. I care about the opinions of the people here because I can discuss them with the people who hold the opinions. Hiding behind a video is stupid, because if I take down the video, then mechanical can just be like, "Oh well, that's just the guy in the video's opinion, I don't agree with it, etc."

It's not a path to productive discussion, in other words, and in this case has the added bonus of trying to use the race of the person in the video for cover. "Oh look, this black guy is criticizing black communities, see I was right about them all along! He's black, he would know!"

 

[Bamspeedy]

I'd love to read that. Do you have a link?

Blacks are split, 44% say the statues should remain, 40% say remove them.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont#page=11ent/misc/usapolls/us170814_PBS/NPR_PBS NewsHour_Marist Poll_National Nature of the Sample and Tables_August 17, 2017.pdf

Report hosted on PBS/NPR, and the BBC has talked about the poll, so it's not just FOX and Brietbert talking about it.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Agreed. One should never have to apologize for following the rules.

I would disagree with that; US history is brimming with rules that human decency demanded be broken. In this case, though, I took the coach's comment to mean that any of his players were free to stand for the anthem, or not, as they chose to.

 

[stinkubus]

LOL literally no one other than Villeneuva was allowed out the tunnel. Any Steelers' players who wanted to kneel most certainly were NOT given that option.

 

[EgonSpengler]

From what I've been reading, staying in the clubhouse/tunnel was a group decision, intended to be a display of esprit de corps and not a 'boycott', and was a compromise between the players who wanted to protest and those who didn't. It's easy to see how people misinterpreted it, though. I'm not sure how staying in the tunnel was meant to appear neutral, but otoh, I don't know what would appear neutral. One article I read said that, after Villanueva got caught out in the open, some of his teammates wanted to join him, but were prevented by stadium personnel who were clearing the tunnel to get the pregame performers off the field, so I guess their idea of maintaining some sort of united front didn't last but a few minutes anyway.

 

[Zkribbler]

Blacks are split, 44% say the statues should remain, 40% say remove them.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-cont#page=11ent/misc/usapolls/us170814_PBS/NPR_PBS NewsHour_Marist Poll_National Nature of the Sample and Tables_August 17, 2017.pdf.

The link is dead.

 

[warpus]

I will never understand why some guy not standing for the anthem warrants national attention.

It's a sporting event, get over it

 

[civver_764]

It's a sporting event, get over it

I know right, how hard is it to stand for the national anthem?

 

[Lexicus]

I know right, how hard is it to stand for the national anthem?

How hard is it to just not care whether people stand or not?

 

[civver_764]

They clearly want people to care. I'm just giving them the attention they crave.

 

[warpus]

I know right, how hard is it to stand for the national anthem?

It's not like it's a law that you have to stand while it's playing. The U.S. isn't a fascist state as far as I know.

How hard is it to ignore people who don't stand?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Taking a knee during the anthem is against NFL rules though. In the NFL rulebook it says all teams must play the anthem before each game and all players and coaches must be on the field and standing at attention silently facing the flag until the anthem is completed. Penalties for failing to comply with this rule include suspensions, fines, and loss of draft picks for teams.

So it seems to me that if Goodell were actually interested in doing his job instead of playing politics, the Steelers (since they were obviously the worst offenders) should be losing their draft picks and their entire team except Villanueva should be suspended and fined.

Close, but not exactly. I'll explain below.

Sorry, I was wrong to say it was in the rulebook. It is in the NFL Game Operations Manual page 62 and 63.

As you point out... its not in the rulebook, its in the operations manual so "against the rules" is a stretch. It's more like "against guidelines" which is a little different.

More importantly, there is some nuance in the language that I want to draw your attention to:

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.

So first, notice that it says the players "should stand at attention, face the flag..." etc., not "must" or "shall". The use of the word "should" is not an accident. It is well understood to indicate recommended or suggested but not mandatory. In other words, they (the players) don't have to do it if they don't want to.

Now you will of course notice that it also says that "all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem." This is not a suggestion, it is mandatory, so the Steelers were clearly not complying with the guidelines. However, and this is the most important part, the manual goes on to state that "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..." etc. Notice again that it says "may" not "will", "shall" or "must". So again, Goodell has no obligation whatsoever to impose fines or anything else and is completely within his rights to ignore the Steelers actions if he so chooses. Furthermore, he has no right whatsoever to penalize anyone for kneeling as its not mandatory that they stand under the plain language of the manual.

http://www.snopes.com/must-nfl-players-stand/

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/for-petes-sake/article175221581.html

http://time.com/4955704/nfl-league-rulebook-a62-63-national-anthem-rule/

 

[Sommerswerd]

I'm making a separate post for this so its clear that I'm not directing it at any one person, but I have to say that it hasn't escaped my attention that when it came to the free speech rights of a bunch of Nazis and Kluxers demonstrating and ideologically similar folks wanting to give speeches on campuses and such... We were treated to endless passionate defenses of those folks under the auspices of people being "passionate about free speech rights" and so forth.

Now where is all that fire and passion for the free speech rights of the NFL players?? And I don't want lukewarm, grudging acknowledgments of their rights... that won't do... not from people claiming to be "passionate" and similar about freedom of speech. I want the same, knock-down, drag out, 1000 word diatribes about slippery slopes and such. I want the free speech enthusiasts to be out here declaring that all those people condemning the NFL kneelers are against free speech and oppressing peoples free speech rights and worse than fascists, and everything else you guys said about the so-called SJWs that were protesting the Nazi's and Kluxers.

What I suspect though... is what I've often repeated here, ie "don't like the who, not gonna like the how, regardless". In other words as I've said before "Defend the free-speech rights of whomever you like." People defend Kluxers etc, because despite the fact that they don't personally subscribe to everything the Kluxers etc are about, they recognize (consciously or subconsciously) that the Kluxers etc are political/ideological allies against the hated liberals/Democrats/SJWs etc. So they are compelled to jump to their defense, and use "free speech" as an excuse to defend their political allies.

What do y'all think?

 

[warpus]

I thought this was America. You should be able to lie down if you want.

 

[civver_764]

It's not like it's a law that you have to stand while it's playing. The U.S. isn't a fascist state as far as I know.

No one is saying he should go to jail, tone it down with the hyperbole would ya?

How hard is it to ignore people who don't stand?

They don't want to be ignored. They want everyone to see them say "hey look at me! I think the national anthem is racist! I think this country is racist!" This is a clear attempt to provoke people, they can't act surprised that pepole are provoked. Do we live in clown world?

 

[stinkubus]

When right wingers start whining about free speech what they really mean is that they want to be able to say anything they want without consequence.

 

[Sommerswerd]

When right wingers start whining about free speech what they really mean is that they want to be able to say anything they want without consequence.

But they aren't whining about it here... that's my point... once again the doublethink on display.

 

[bathsheba666]

Is there no upside at all to the shocking realisation that Trump doesn't like seeing black people on their knees?

 

[stinkubus]

Oh they are very much opposed to free speech rights for those they disagree with. My point was there is no high minded principle at work. They want to be free to spew their bile and silence everyone else. The more extreme of their ilk for willing to resort to violence to do so.