Context and intention. In a stadium where everyone is standing and everyone else on the sideline is standing, and it is generally accepted that one stands for the flag during the anthem, kneeling is deliberately intended to have a contrary intent.
That can’t be it, because those who are pushing that this is unpatriotic aren’t using either context or intention.
IMHO making a political protest without worrying that the government is going to kidnap you and beat you to death in a backroom IS respecting the US national anthem.
And what did he say his intention was?
(post shortened, underline added)
Did you provide your own seemingly pointless anecdote for demonstration purposes, or are you simply starting a new Pelosi-ism to attack Trump with?
p.s. Captain Yossarian never existed. It was Joseph Heller who actually wrote the words attributed to Yossarian. Credit where credit is due and all that.
p.p.s. The asshole Kaepernick’s NFL career is over. He is now free to kneel anywhere he wishes, and at any time he wishes. Buh-bye Kaepernick.
Ahem,
the
NFL
owners
have
agreed
to
fine
their
own
TEAMS
if
players or personnel
do
not
show
respect
for
the
anthem.
The kidnapping of someone, or beating someone to death, seems to be your personal fantasy.
I’m not sure of that.
No, but I can compel an employee to serve a customer wearing a MAGA hat.
Threatening people to be patriotic “or else” is a poor selling point for patriotism.
"Please (and by please, I mean under penalty of law) stand for your 15 minutes of admiration of Supreme (taco) president trump!
Maybe he should have caused an accident on day 665? Just sayin…
Maybe Haiku?
it is not respect
to stand before an idol
protest is respect
Beginning in 2009 players were required to come out of the locker room for the anthem. If not for this sort of attempt at maximizing the marketing of feel good patriotism, would this have ever been a huge issue?
I see the changes now as a grudging reversion to a more sane era.
I would like to point out that having players stand for the anthem originally started so the owners could get advertising dollars from the Armed Services then were shamed into not accepting the money. It was about $$$ and not patriotism.
bolding mine.
Since you typed that instead of:
stand
up
during
you’re not in a good position to be criticizing anybody for having personal fantasies.
Alternately we could crack down on corrupt police departments …
Something got fouled up with your formatting, you might want to ask a mod to fix that for ya.
In any case, if you note the post you were replying to, he did not say that he was expecting someone to be kidnapped or beaten to death. He does not expect that because we live in a country that has the first amendment and a healthy respect for allowing people to speak out against the govt.
There are other places and times when speaking out against the government resulting in sanction from the govt, up to and including being tortured to death was and is very much a reality, not a fantasy.
Seems like someone ought to send a copy of Justice Robert Jackson’s opinion from West Virginia Board of Education v Barnette:
*The case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intellectually and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.*I repeat, IT DOES NOT MATTER IF IT IS DISRESPECTFUL OR NOT. It doesn’t matter what the hell you do in church, or at funerals, or whatever other stupid example you give. The protocol, and this is said at every damn game, even a child knows it, is to stand during the national anthem. Not kneel. Not kneel or stand. Stand. You pointedly don’t do that, it’s going to give bad optics and be subject to misinterpretation.
There is more ambiguity in remaining seated. Maybe you’re back hurts. Maybe you’re just lazy. Who knows. Being lazy often goes unnoticed. When you kneel, that’s making a deliberate statement. I’m not doing the protocol. On purpose.
ALL that matters is perception.
All that other stuff Kap did? Great, good for him. You aren’t going to get misinterpreted by giving to a charity, or talking to the press, or whatever. This just plain had bad optics, it’s plainly obvious. Sure, it got people talking. Are black people better off because of it? I seriously doubt it. I sure know Kap isn’t better off.
Perceptions will never change if you don’t challenge them.
- I don’t think he did it to benefit himself.
- Congrats for pointing out that adverse advertising works. The “perception” you keep pointing out was nothing more than a campaign to misdirect people from the issue he was trying to talk about.
Yeah, he’d have to be an idiot. And he is. And given that he’s stated he’d stand if he were given a contract today, I’m pretty sure he doesn’t think it was worth it.
So, you’re saying that, on September 1st, everyone booing was already brainwashed by whatever conspiracy campaign you’re talking about?
This’ll get you a warning, doorhinge. It’s expressly against the rules to say that another poster is deriving some sort of gratification from their posts or positions. Ick.
I’m sorry-did you miss post #97?
Okay, so you’re saying every single person booing on Sept 1 read a hit piece on Colin Kaepernick? Well, that’s a nice theory.