YOU'RE FIRED!

[Archon_Wing]

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

It's not to him though.

That's why it's a travesty and also why people suffering from a hurricane are merely just talking points.

 

[Lexicus]

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.

The vast majority of the freeze peach crowd only directs it against the "SJWs." Point to examples of Trump's government literally shutting down speech it disagrees with (ie, forbidding climate scientists to talk to reporters about certain things) and you're lucky if you even get a meh let alone the sort of outrage and slippery-slope invocations you get at the latest story about campus SJWs and their totalitarian ways.

I saw a very good quote recently in a Jacobin article, referring to the US political system: "we're better girded against a soft left than a hard right." I think that sums this whole free speech business up rather nicely.

 

[civver_764]

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?

I think you're wrong, but I applaud you for being more open-minded about this than most Democrats.

These situations aren't analogous. These NFL players are at work. You could argue that they get paid millions of dollars to be patriotic. I'm not saying that's the case, but you can make that argument. Therefore Trump is not saying they should get fired for their speech, but for not doing their jobs. You can even make the argument that it's good business advice. Their target audience are patriotic people, so it doesn't really make sense to antagonize those people from a business perspective. Additionally, some people aren't even saying that they should be fired, just that they will no longer be watching the NFL. That's definitely their right as a consumer.

An analogous scenario would be Trump saying they should lose their jobs for participating in a BLM rally outside of work. That's never gonna happen in a million years.

With the Charlottesville rally you also have people saying they shouldn't have even been allowed to have their rally, or justifying violence against these people. That's a whole different universe.

Also, the people that lost their jobs because of the Charlottesville rally were not millionaires. They are much more dependent on their income than these NFL players.

 

[Bamspeedy]

The link is dead.

[tinfoil hat]
It's a conspiracy, I tell you! Trying to cover it up!
[/tinfoil hat]

Here's the bbc story,

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40966800

In a Marist poll conducted this week, 62% of Americans believe they should remain "as a historical symbol", and somewhat surprisingly, 44% of African-American respondents agreed.

 

[bernie14]

i for one, don’t believe the nfl players should be punched it the face

 

[FriendlyFire]

I thought the call for boycott was backfiring ?

Trump warns the NFL’s business ‘is gonna go to hell’ if protests continue

The NFL is “in a really bad box,” President Donald Trump said Wednesday, warning that the professional football league risks going “to hell” if it doesn’t bar its players from protesting during the national anthem.
“All Goodell had to do was say there’s rules and you can’t do it, suspend him for a couple games, you would never have had this,” he said, according to an attendee. “Now you have this whole thing going, and it’s a very dangerous thing ‘cause we cannot let anyone disrespect our country like that.”

Trump reiterated Wednesday that the NFL is now in a tight spot.

“You cannot have people disrespecting our national anthem, our flag, our country, and that’s what they’re doing,” he told reporters. “And in my opinion, the NFL has to change. Or you know what’s gonna happen? Their business is gonna go to hell.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/27/trump-nfl-business-ratings-fail-243214

 

[Gori the Grey]

And Trump knows something about football leagues going to hell.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think you're wrong, but I applaud you for being more open-minded about this than most Democrats.

These situations aren't analogous. These NFL players are at work. You could argue that they get paid millions of dollars to be patriotic. I'm not saying that's the case, but you can make that argument. Therefore Trump is not saying they should get fired for their speech, but for not doing their jobs. You can even make the argument that it's good business advice. Their target audience are patriotic people, so it doesn't really make sense to antagonize those people from a business perspective. Additionally, some people aren't even saying that they should be fired, just that they will no longer be watching the NFL. That's definitely their right as a consumer.

An analogous scenario would be Trump saying they should lose their jobs for participating in a BLM rally outside of work. That's never gonna happen in a million years.

With the Charlottesville rally you also have people saying they shouldn't have even been allowed to have their rally, or justifying violence against these people. That's a whole different universe.

Also, the people that lost their jobs because of the Charlottesville rally were not millionaires. They are much more dependent on their income than these NFL players.

Players at work - This argument is a red herring, unless you're arguing that NFL players have a contractual obligation to stand for the anthem, which they don't, as I've already explained above. The only other justification for this argument is a belief that you don't have Constitutional rights anymore when you get to your workplace. Is that your position? If it is, you are incorrect. You always have your Constitutional rights, regardless of whether you are at work or not.

Patriotic- You could make that argument but its not a strong argument, and I think the fact that you opened the argument with the disclaimer "I'm not saying that's the case, but..." seems to be a red flag that you already know how weak of an argument it is. They absolutely do not "get paid millions of dollars to be patriotic". They get paid to play football. The owners pay them handsomely to do their job and don't hesitate to drop them like hot potatoes when they don't do their job. If being patriotic was part of the job and they weren't doing it, the owners would get rid of them. You might subjectively wish that being patriotic was part of their job, but that isn't the same as it actually being their job.

Business advice - Trump tried to become an NFL owner and failed, he also committed a string of poor business decisions that ultimately ran the debacle football league known as the USFL into the ground, including wild overspending and his disastrous business advice to compete directly with the NFL to force a merger. NFL owners aren't going to take advice from him on how to run their teams. He's demonstrably not qualified to give such advice as he was an utter failure in terms of managing football teams.

Target audience - I assure you that the NFL's target audience is everybody not just "patriotic people". There is a game this Sunday at 9:30 EST. Do you know where its being played? London. What was your point again?

As for the rest... Consumers' rights aren't relevant to why conservatives choose to defend Kluxers free speech but not the NFL players. Also, saying that the players shouldn't be allowed to protest has many similarities with saying the Kluxers shouldn't be allowed to protest, and the fact that you are doublethinking that kinda proves my point. Finally, whether a millionaire is more dependent on their income than a homeless person doesn't remotely explain why conservatives defend Kluxer's free speech but not NFL players, unless your position is that only poor people have Constitutional rights.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Pffft! Only Conservatives and Republicans have Constitutional rights!

 

[JollyRoger]

Since the league is subsidized by tax dollars, I don't think you on condition employment on compulsory patriotism.

 

[Berzerker]

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

It was posted in the confederate statue removal thread by someone else to show opinion was divided among blacks (44 - 40)

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

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.

When the left wingers whines about free speech all they really mean is to push their way of looking at truth down everybodys throath.

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.

There is only one subtle difference here from the left then. The left uses what you call high minded principles for the same goal - to silence and control everyone else through injection of guilt and fear.

 

[stinkubus]

LOL. The "left" doesn't make anyone experience guilt or fear. Take some responsibility for your own emotions.

 

[civver_764]

You guys push guilt like it's heroin...don't even pretend otherwise.

 

[FriendlyFire]

When the left wingers whines about free speech all they really mean is to push their way of looking at truth down everybodys throath.
There is only one subtle difference here from the left then. The left uses what you call high minded principles for the same goal - to silence and control everyone else through injection of guilt and fear.

That's right the left wing and our "Political correctness" is silencing everyones freedom, thoughts and right to peacefully protest.
Why is is Ok for Trump to say Globel warming is a hoax by China, Mexican are rapist, Obama is born in Kenya but not Ok for football players to knee during the national Anthem ?

During the eight years under Obama, the amount of BS that was peddled by the Right and freely disseminated and spread widely and unchallenged. Dont act so holy and innocent

 

[stinkubus]

You guys push guilt like it's heroin...don't even pretend otherwise.

No one else makes you, or anyone else, experience guilt. The emotion of guilt is a conflict of conscience for the person who experiences it.

 

[civver_764]

You all do it to each other, people on the right have by and large seen through those tricks.

 

[stinkubus]

I can't make a leftist experience guilt, either. I imagine most in the American right wing don't experience any guilt over the bigotry anyway.

 

[civver_764]

You can't personally "make" it happen but the left does tend to phrase things in a way which triggers existing guilt reflexes.

 

[stinkubus]

If someone says something to me that makes me experience guilt then maybe I'm doing something wrong? Why else would I experience it?