Is there any mechanism whereby we can discuss the intersection of politics/current events and sports

[fowl_mood]

I have great respect for Ward and many others on this board because I know they care about sports. He's one of my favorite posters. But, so many of the most skilled and prolific posters have bailed out of fear, or weariness, or thinking we can go on with sports as usual.

I'm just not sure that's going to happen anytime soon.

So if I have been rude, I apologize. I don't think you have to apologize for having a different opinion, or having an opinion. Or, at least, you did not have to at another time.

 

[ClowneyPosse]

Perhaps you will not get tired if it on actual sports. They are intertwined now. Cannot be separated. The BLM thing is expected; the social justice causes on every Jersey is madness.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si...-lives-matter-painted-court-sidelines-orlando

BLM day, presented by MLB. Every team incorporating black colors. Or something similar, its coming.

 

[king ward]

Perhaps you will not get tired if it on actual sports. They are intertwined now. Cannot be separated. The BLM thing is expected; the social justice causes on every Jersey is madness.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si...-lives-matter-painted-court-sidelines-orlando

No, if that's the way actual sports is going, I won't get tired of it because I won't be watching it.

 

[fowl_mood]

No, if that's the way actual sports is going, I won't get tired of it because I won't be watching it.

Me neither. Might join you on the course.

 

[king ward]

Open, vigorous, respectful discussion. No personal attacks. No name calling.

Impossible expectation without vigilant moderators. The lower run of posters won't be able to adhere to it.

 

[paladin181]

Impossible expectation without vigilant moderators. The lower run of posters won't be able to adhere to it.

Some of the more reasonable ones will occasionally get caught up in it too. I don't understand the need for political strife amongst the common man.

 

[Lurker123]

Some of the more reasonable ones will occasionally get caught up in it too. I don't understand the need for political strife amongst the common man.

It's as addictive as it is destructive.

How many times have you stared at someone in disbelief as they prattle on about a political topic and said to yourself " this person is smarter than this, I know they are".

 

[paladin181]

It's as addictive as it is destructive.

How many times have you stared at someone in disbelief as they prattle on about a political topic and said to yourself " this person is smarter than this, I know they are".

Or told yourself "I'm not even going to respond to this nonsen-- wait, WHAT did he just say?"

 

[fowl_mood]

It's as addictive as it is destructive.

How many times have you stared at someone in disbelief as they prattle on about a political topic and said to yourself " this person is smarter than this, I know they are".

The other night my smartest, most accomplished friend confided to me he believes in one of the conspiracy (not racial or gender) theories floating around on the net. I was floored, but should not have been. People are riled up.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

So cancel culture, created by the left, is only available to the left, and all other speech is canceled.

Right.

But to stay with your basic idea, let's cancel cancel culture. I'm all for that. Right now it's all about protect players, completely ignore the fans. That will change. This hyper political society will wear on Americans.

It's funny. In the olden days of small mom and pop businesses like a family-owned hardware store, that store sold goods like hardware at prices the owner established. But then, if ANOTHER hardware store opens up across the main street or a block down the road, and THAT store sold hardware that was better built, more dependable, or it was the same but priced lower, the townsfolk would eventually start doing their business at THAT other store.

And the first Mom and Pop at the first store, either had to make adjustments to be more competitive with the other store, or risk going out of business. If they couldn't keep the 2nd option from happening, then the store closes and the day comes when we're all standing together, and we say, "hey remember that little hardware store? What was it's name? Whatever happened to that??".


I guess today we call that "cancel culture". Used to be, it was simply called good ole fashioned American capitalism. Go figure....

A citizen choosing to vote and support a politician is called a "constituent" practicing his/her civic duty as a citizen. A citizen choosing to NOT vote or support a politician is simply called a practitioner of "cancel culture". Isn't that interesting?

I always thought - like capitalism - the open practice of choosing who to support and who to NOT support in politics was just basic Americanism that goes back to the Constitution and what the founding fathers wanted for this nation, regarding rights and freedoms of its citizens. Now, I guess the conservative right - since the people bringing the term up is always attributing it to the liberal left - are once again choosing to re-interpret the Constitution into what THEY think it should represent.

Just like what they once did when they were the conservative left, and decided that the Constitution meant they could enslave people. Isn't that funny how that works?

 

[Conway Gamecock]

Batgirl seems to always have a knack for what to post at the right time.

Well, she HAS raised children of her own.......

 

[hillstosea]

It's as addictive as it is destructive.

How many times have you stared at someone in disbelief as they prattle on about a political topic and said to yourself " this person is smarter than this, I know they are".

Did just that the other day

 

[Lurker123]

I guess today we call that "cancel culture". Used to be, it was simply called good ole fashioned American capitalism. Go figure...

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

 

[paladin181]

It's funny. In the olden days of small mom and pop businesses like a family-owned hardware store, that store sold goods like hardware at prices the owner established. But then, if ANOTHER hardware store opens up across the main street or a block down the road, and THAT store sold hardware that was better built, more dependable, or it was the same but priced lower, the townsfolk would eventually start doing their business at THAT other store.

And the first Mom and Pop at the first store, either had to make adjustments to be more competitive with the other store, or risk going out of business. If they couldn't keep the 2nd option from happening, then the store closes and the day comes when we're all standing together, and we say, "hey remember that little hardware store? What was it's name? Whatever happened to that??".


I guess today we call that "cancel culture". Used to be, it was simply called good ole fashioned American capitalism. Go figure....

A citizen choosing to vote and support a politician is called a "constituent" practicing his/her civic duty as a citizen. A citizen choosing to NOT vote or support a politician is simply called a practitioner of "cancel culture". Isn't that interesting?

I always thought - like capitalism - the open practice of choosing who to support and who to NOT support in politics was just basic Americanism that goes back to the Constitution and what the founding fathers wanted for this nation, regarding rights and freedoms of its citizens. Now, I guess the conservative right - since the people bringing the term up is always attributing it to the liberal left - are once again choosing to re-interpret the Constitution into what THEY think it should represent.

Just like what they once did when they were the conservative left, and decided that the Constitution meant they could enslave people. Isn't that funny how that works?

There is a difference here, though in which an outraged minority makes a claim, and demand a person is fired from their job. The employer, in fear of upsetting this vocal minority, accedes to the demand, with no evidence the claim is true. This isn't the Constitutional process you spoke of, it is cancel culture, it is mob rule. It is a culture in which the majority have their way of lives dictated by an emotional angry mob. That is precisely the antithesis of Constitutional. People voting for who they like is excellent. That is (or should be) encouraged. Mob rule is toxic. It is just angry emotion and people capitulate to it to get it to go away. Cancel culture completely ruins lives, often times over a false claim, because logic and restraint are not in the emotional mob. If you can't see the difference in having someone punished outside the law almost instantly in today's information age, and people deciding to boycott a store after seeing the truth of a claim, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Expro19]

Me neither. Might join you on the course.

Me too, let's do it....

 

[king ward]

There is a difference here, though in which an outraged minority makes a claim, and demand a person is fired from their job. The employer, in fear of upsetting this vocal minority, accedes to the demand, with no evidence the claim is true. This isn't the Constitutional process you spoke of, it is cancel culture, it is mob rule. It is a culture in which the majority have their way of lives dictated by an emotional angry mob. That is precisely the antithesis of Constitutional. People voting for who they like is excellent. That is (or should be) encouraged. Mob rule is toxic. It is just angry emotion and people capitulate to it to get it to go away. Cancel culture completely ruins lives, often times over a false claim, because logic and restraint are not in the emotional mob. If you can't see the difference in having someone punished outside the law almost instantly in today's information age, and people deciding to boycott a store after seeing the truth of a claim, then I don't know what to tell you.

Insightful, nuanced, elucidating, and perceptive.

 

[world famous 3rd base hecklers]

I will say this...every time I'm at a ballgame and the National Anthem comes on I see people walking around, drinking beer and on their phones. I'd say that's worse...Kap was trying to bring some injustice to the forefront.

So the players were walking around, drinking beer and on their phones?

The fans you pointed out walking around, drinking beer and on their phones, may have been the ones who don't really care to stand in silent...

I tend to ignore them...

But for for your buddy Kap, it all started out as out pouting for losing his started job... He sat on the bench and when the league fined him for not standing for National Anthem, about 3 weeks later of pouting, he decided to kneel and add injustice to his list... It was more his injustice of losing his starting job....

 

[Conway Gamecock]

From what I've read, it was not Kaepernick's intention to disrespect the flag/country by taking a knee. Still, IMO, taking a knee was not well-thought-out, and, at minimum, was perceived to be disrespectful.

Kind of like BLM in my opinion. Good intentions on the part of many, but again IMO, a bad slogan in the end.

I agree with the first part. The idea is, not only military soldiers have the responsibility to defend our rights and freedoms. ALL US citizens have that responsibility, because this is a nation of its citizens, and the greatest power of governing this nation falls in the hands of its citizens, not the politicians (autocracy) or the military (stratocracy).

Our freedoms and rights and liberties were hard to come by, and they were won mostly NOT by a military, but by a Republican Militia made up of farmers and colonialists. In other words, by what would become this nation's civilian citizenship.

What this means to those who truly understand what powers the Constitution gives its citizens, is that what Kaepernick and other NFL players did in kneeling in the presence of the flag is EXACTLY what US soldiers do, when they join the military, go off to a foreign land, fight in wars and possibly kill other men or even lose their own lives.

Kaepernick and the others saw what they perceived to be abuses of power and authority, and violations against the constitutional rights of African-American citizens by the law enforcement. That is NOT what the American flag nor the people it represents, is supposed to stand for. So they knelt - not to disrespect what the flag stands for, but to DEFEND what it stands for. To get the attention of the people towards what they perceived to be these abuses and violations.

So I fully support that action, because to NOT support it is the EXACT SAME as NOT supporting the American soldiers who go off to fight in foreign wars. They are fighting for the SAME EXACT THINGS - just one group is wearing a military uniform, and the other is not.

But what I think was done wrong, was Kaepernick and the other player's choices to use NFL venues and games as the stage for their protests, without first consulting the NFL and getting them on the same page with them. By not doing that, it put the NFL into a corner, and made them have to REact instead of PROact to the demonstrations.

The NFL has always tried to work with and in support of the NFLPA in social issues and causes, and there's no doubt that they would have tried to do so here, but they weren't given much chance by Kaepernick. He took it upon himself as if the entire NFL league was his to use and weaponize for his cause, without anyone else's voice in the matter.

As a result, I think the demonstrations backfired a bit. It made him and the others seem to be rogue demonstrators. Plus just kneeling to get people's attention is just the first step. Once you have their attention, you then need to move up to more directly relevant measures, like initiating talks and discussions with major law enforcement agencies, getting Congressional hearings conducted and getting them involved. Making actual meaningful progress towards getting chances done.

Again, having the NFL backing you up helps a great deal in that regard. But after 2-3 years of just kneeling and doing nothing but kneeling, it started rubbing raw the very people who's attention you wanted to get.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

I think you so totally fail to get the TRUE gist of what it means, that it's very sad that you are an American Citizen.

Regardless of whether it is products on a hardware store shelf, or whether it is some ideological platform of some politician, the TRUE point of the comparison is simple freedom of speech and/or expression. The very first Right in the Bill of Rights as amendments to the US Constitution. BOTH actions are citizens' attempts to engage that Right.

I'm talking about Constitutional rights of US citizens, and you can only think of hammers and pliers. The educational system in this country has truly gone to the dogs.....

 

[Rollerdude123]

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

People vote with their wallet for all sorts of reasons, which is their right.

I know folks that will stop going to a store because the bathrooms aren’t as nice as they like, or because the owner’s wife is too “friendly.”

the problem is many people think their own reasons for not supporting a business are legit and proper, but often view someone else’s reasons for not supporting a business as suspect or silly.

there is a town not far from me, back in the early 1990s, that had a small, longtime restaurant that Almost was shut down because the locals thought the owner wasn’t supportive of the Iraq war. The owner was born in a foreign country. Some gossip started a rumor that he didn’t support the war. He almost lost his business and a dozen locals almost lost their job. To this day people still call him crude names because of a rumor that he didn’t support American action in Iraq. What that had to do with his food? Nothing.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

There is a difference here, though in which an outraged minority makes a claim, and demand a person is fired from their job. The employer, in fear of upsetting this vocal minority, accedes to the demand, with no evidence the claim is true. This isn't the Constitutional process you spoke of, it is cancel culture, it is mob rule. It is a culture in which the majority have their way of lives dictated by an emotional angry mob. That is precisely the antithesis of Constitutional. People voting for who they like is excellent. That is (or should be) encouraged. Mob rule is toxic. It is just angry emotion and people capitulate to it to get it to go away. Cancel culture completely ruins lives, often times over a false claim, because logic and restraint are not in the emotional mob. If you can't see the difference in having someone punished outside the law almost instantly in today's information age, and people deciding to boycott a store after seeing the truth of a claim, then I don't know what to tell you.

I got it. So people voting for who they like is excellent, you say. People NOT voting for who they dislike, or voting for someone ELSE that they like better, is cancel culture. Citizens who are supposed to be represented by people, who are so offended by what that person does or says he/she represents, demanding that those people be removed from their positions is "mob rule".

Gee thanks. You just repeated what my above post says. Not sure why you felt you needed to do that.....

Never knew the colonialists who revolted against the British were establishing cancel culture. Thank God for THAT "mob rule", am I right???

 

[scbirdhunter]

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

Sounds exactly like a guy who posted here the other day that he would drive further to go to Home Depot than a closer Lowes because the Home Depot owners support the President as opposed to the Lowes owners. Classic cancel culture, right?

(I won't call out this cancel culturist by name, lets just say he post all day, every day.) I also couldn't care less where he shops, he can do whatever he likes & should shop wherever he wants. People who support & don't support a specific point of view/political position do this every day, but now its become the new buzz word for a certain group of people who engage in the same acts they whine against.

 

[Rollerdude123]

Sounds exactly like a guy who posted here the other day that he would drive further to go to Home Depot than a closer Lowes because the Home Depot owners support the President as opposed to the Lowes owners. Classic cancel culture, right?

(I won't call out this cancel culturist by name, lets just say he post all day, every day.)

That’s not cancel culture because....

well, because... well. Uh..........

 

[fowl_mood]

I agree with the first part. The idea is, not only military soldiers have the responsibility to defend our rights and freedoms. ALL US citizens have that responsibility, because this is a nation of its citizens, and the greatest power of governing this nation falls in the hands of its citizens, not the politicians (autocracy) or the military (stratocracy).

Our freedoms and rights and liberties were hard to come by, and they were won mostly NOT by a military, but by a Republican Militia made up of farmers and colonialists. In other words, by what would become this nation's civilian citizenship.

What this means to those who truly understand what powers the Constitution gives its citizens, is that what Kaepernick and other NFL players did in kneeling in the presence of the flag is EXACTLY what US soldiers do, when they join the military, go off to a foreign land, fight in wars and possibly kill other men or even lose their own lives.

Kaepernick and the others saw what they perceived to be abuses of power and authority, and violations against the constitutional rights of African-American citizens by the law enforcement. That is NOT what the American flag nor the people it represents, is supposed to stand for. So they knelt - not to disrespect what the flag stands for, but to DEFEND what it stands for. To get the attention of the people towards what they perceived to be these abuses and violations.

So I fully support that action, because to NOT support it is the EXACT SAME as NOT supporting the American soldiers who go off to fight in foreign wars. They are fighting for the SAME EXACT THINGS - just one group is wearing a military uniform, and the other is not.

But what I think was done wrong, was Kaepernick and the other player's choices to use NFL venues and games as the stage for their protests, without first consulting the NFL and getting them on the same page with them. By not doing that, it put the NFL into a corner, and made them have to REact instead of PROact to the demonstrations.

The NFL has always tried to work with and in support of the NFLPA in social issues and causes, and there's no doubt that they would have tried to do so here, but they weren't given much chance by Kaepernick. He took it upon himself as if the entire NFL league was his to use and weaponize for his cause, without anyone else's voice in the matter.

As a result, I think the demonstrations backfired a bit. It made him and the others seem to be rogue demonstrators. Plus just kneeling to get people's attention is just the first step. Once you have their attention, you then need to move up to more directly relevant measures, like initiating talks and discussions with major law enforcement agencies, getting Congressional hearings conducted and getting them involved. Making actual meaningful progress towards getting chances done.

Again, having the NFL backing you up helps a great deal in that regard. But after 2-3 years of just kneeling and doing nothing but kneeling, it started rubbing raw the very people who's attention you wanted to get.

"So I fully support that action, because to NOT support it is the EXACT SAME as NOT supporting the American soldiers who go off to fight in foreign wars"

No. Just no. That is a slap in the face of all people in the military and has no moral equivalence. Soldiers give up life and limb and years for their country despite any grievances they carry around. Kneeling athletes develop grievances and push them on everyone. It's not really about country at that level. It's about personal and political complaint. That is much different than carrying the weight of an entire country on your shoulders. It's a cause, perhaps a good one. But it's not the same in any way.

I agree the right to kneel exists. I reject the analogy you put forth regarding it

 

[scbirdhunter]

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/03/trump-calls-for-a-boycott-of-att-to-force-big-changes-at-cnn.html

Would this be cancel culture? Just wondering. If so, I bet you're just seething mad, screaming at the top of your lungs.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

"So I fully support that action, because to NOT support it is the EXACT SAME as NOT supporting the American soldiers who go off to fight in foreign wars"

No. Just no. That is a slap in the face of all people in the military and has no moral equivalence. Soldiers give up life and limb and years for their country despite any grievances they carry around. Kneeling athletes develop grievances and push them on everyone. It's not really about country at that level. It's about personal and political complaint. That is much different than carrying the weight of an entire country on your shoulders. It's a cause, perhaps a good one. But it's not the same in any way.

I agree the right to kneel exists. I reject the analogy you put forth regarding it

No one soldier carries the entire weight of an entire country on their shoulders. You should be ashamed of yourself. Find me one single soldier who joins the military to fight in a war for the entire weight of an entire country. You know only about fighting in wars from the various Marvel Comics movies you've watched.

If US citizens cared about the "entire country", then you wouldn't be here criticizing other US citizens for doing what they believe is right. That is not "caring" for them.

Soldiers go fight in wars for their friends and families and loved ones. For the people and the way of life that they grew up knowing and embracing.

And that's good enough, dude. That is far far sufficient. No need to turn it into a superhero movie by saying that people go fight and die in wars for others they do not even know, when them going and fighting and dying in wars for others who THEY KNOW and LOVE is MORE than good enough to justify it. And believe me, that IS MOST DEFINITELY personal for soldiers. Family and loved ones don't get any more personal.

Sure, there have been the rare emotional events like the bombing of pearl harbor or the 9/11 terrorist attacks to drive people to enlist, but even the declaration of war against other nations generally bring about concerns about the personal ways of life for each citizen being under attack and in danger. THAT is why we go fight. 99% of the rest of the time, no one from South Carolina goes join the military and fights because they are afraid that the way of life for citizens in New York or Wyoming is in danger. That's just the way it is. And that's always been good enough - citizens in New York and Wyoming can join up too.

When the US Constitution was ratified, there WAS NO Federal army. At least not much to speak of. Washington D.C. only had an army of about 600. Even though we won the War of Independence, there were still British soldiers manning several forts throughout our new country, and we couldn't get them out, because we didn't have a big enough force.

We won our right of independence not behind a federal army. It was behind a Republic Militia of farmers and common citizens who left their families to fight. Those militia volunteers picked up their muskets and returned to their farms after the war was over, and most likely the prospect of them returning was considered about 30% of the chance they fought the first time, and even that wasn't so sure-fire. If Great Britain didn't already have other issues closer at home in Europe with Spain and France, and they decided to regroup their armies and return to the colonies for Round #2, we'd probably still be speaking with British accents today.

Not every assault on our Constitutional rights and freedoms come from outside our borders, from foreign entities. The 2nd Amendment doesn't exist for Russians, or Chinese, or ISIS. And it doesn't exist for members of the Federal Military, either. Every citizen has the responsibility to defend and protect our rights and freedoms, and protest (1st Amendment) against abuses and violations of those rights.

That is NOT a slap in the face of anyone, except people who oppose those rights and freedoms. I guess I can put you with that crowd, then??

 

[world famous 3rd base hecklers]

Can anyone tell me where is the injustice that these millionaires are seeing or feeling in this country???

I don't see any slaves in this country, unless your a young girl and being kidnapped and entrapped into sex trafficking as slaves in and out of this country, but we won't talking, because that doesn't fit the narrative under racism...

NBA Restart: ‘Black Lives Matter’ to be painted on sidelines of courts in Orlando


https://www.masslive.com/celtics/20...ainted-on-sidelines-of-courts-in-orlando.html


Report: NBA to let players replace names on jerseys with social justice statement in Florida

https://sports.yahoo.com/nba-let-pl...mfucHB9-A4f9HtViSPc8kYehJNK4zvOs&guccounter=2

 

[ClowneyPosse]

I'm not sure that's as good a comparison as you think. In one case, people are going to another store because of cost or quality.

In the "cancel culture", people are going to other stores because the owner's views on how to address racial inequalities, which has nothing to do with the products.

https://fortune.com/2016/06/10/donald-trump-boycott/

It seems you're an awfully lot like those people you complain about.

 

[paladin181]

TIL: Cancel culture took on a really broad meaning in some people's minds. On both sides of it.

 

[MowerDave]

So, sports?

 

[anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7]

I agree with the first part. The idea is, not only military soldiers have the responsibility to defend our rights and freedoms. ALL US citizens have that responsibility, because this is a nation of its citizens, and the greatest power of governing this nation falls in the hands of its citizens, not the politicians (autocracy) or the military (stratocracy).

Our freedoms and rights and liberties were hard to come by, and they were won mostly NOT by a military, but by a Republican Militia made up of farmers and colonialists. In other words, by what would become this nation's civilian citizenship.

What this means to those who truly understand what powers the Constitution gives its citizens, is that what Kaepernick and other NFL players did in kneeling in the presence of the flag is EXACTLY what US soldiers do, when they join the military, go off to a foreign land, fight in wars and possibly kill other men or even lose their own lives.

Kaepernick and the others saw what they perceived to be abuses of power and authority, and violations against the constitutional rights of African-American citizens by the law enforcement. That is NOT what the American flag nor the people it represents, is supposed to stand for. So they knelt - not to disrespect what the flag stands for, but to DEFEND what it stands for. To get the attention of the people towards what they perceived to be these abuses and violations.

So I fully support that action, because to NOT support it is the EXACT SAME as NOT supporting the American soldiers who go off to fight in foreign wars. They are fighting for the SAME EXACT THINGS - just one group is wearing a military uniform, and the other is not.

But what I think was done wrong, was Kaepernick and the other player's choices to use NFL venues and games as the stage for their protests, without first consulting the NFL and getting them on the same page with them. By not doing that, it put the NFL into a corner, and made them have to REact instead of PROact to the demonstrations.

The NFL has always tried to work with and in support of the NFLPA in social issues and causes, and there's no doubt that they would have tried to do so here, but they weren't given much chance by Kaepernick. He took it upon himself as if the entire NFL league was his to use and weaponize for his cause, without anyone else's voice in the matter.

As a result, I think the demonstrations backfired a bit. It made him and the others seem to be rogue demonstrators. Plus just kneeling to get people's attention is just the first step. Once you have their attention, you then need to move up to more directly relevant measures, like initiating talks and discussions with major law enforcement agencies, getting Congressional hearings conducted and getting them involved. Making actual meaningful progress towards getting chances done.

Again, having the NFL backing you up helps a great deal in that regard. But after 2-3 years of just kneeling and doing nothing but kneeling, it started rubbing raw the very people who's attention you wanted to get.

Interesting interpretation and spin.

 

[Conway Gamecock]

Interesting interpretation and spin.

What's your interpretation and spin? And while you're at it, please spin how we can have this argument about US Citizens protesting about injustice being disrespectful towards our military soldiers, and yet not speak one word of outrage about the new story going around about Trump being in the know about Putin's Russia paying out bounties to the Taliban for actually killing US soldiers in Afghanistan.

And not one damn word either way from our President. Not even lip service, more for our citizens than even warning towards his buddy in Moscow. All the high and mighty incrimination from the resident Patriots here over US citizens expressing their constitutional rights, but yet not one single word about any of that? Disgusting....

 

[ClowneyPosse]

What's your interpretation and spin? And while you're at it, please spin how we can have this argument about US Citizens protesting about injustice being disrespectful towards our military soldiers, and yet not speak one word of outrage about the new story going around about Trump being in the know about Putin's Russia paying out bounties to the Taliban for actually killing US soldiers in Afghanistan.

And not one damn word either way from our President. Not even lip service, more for our citizens than even warning towards his buddy in Moscow. All the high and mighty incrimination from the resident Patriots here over US citizens expressing their constitutional rights, but yet not one single word about any of that? Disgusting....

Could you imagine the outrage if this happened during Obama's administration? Ironically, the trump supporters will find a way to rationalize it. Something like, it is Obama's fault because he didn't warn trump... something clever like that.

 

[anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7]

What's your interpretation and spin? And while you're at it, please spin how we can have this argument about US Citizens protesting about injustice being disrespectful towards our military soldiers, and yet not speak one word of outrage about the new story going around about Trump being in the know about Putin's Russia paying out bounties to the Taliban for actually killing US soldiers in Afghanistan.

And not one damn word either way from our President. Not even lip service, more for our citizens than even warning towards his buddy in Moscow. All the high and mighty incrimination from the resident Patriots here over US citizens expressing their constitutional rights, but yet not one single word about any of that? Disgusting....

Interesting. I've never said anything about the anthem boycott being disrespectful toward our military soldiers.
Not sure why you're bringing up Aghanistan. That seems more like distracting than spinning...

 

[Conway Gamecock]

Interesting. I've never said anything about the anthem boycott being disrespectful toward our military soldiers.
Not sure why you're bringing up Aghanistan. That seems more like distracting than spinning...

Maybe you just can't read.

You're the one that used the word "spin". I asked you to provide your own "spin" that would counter/dispute/expose my "spin" - you know, to actually discuss - and then I asked you, since I was in the mood, to "spin" as you call it, the other topic.

Both topics are actually associated with each other, you know. One involves the perceived disrespect by several here of US soldiers, through the deployment of constitutional right, and the other involves the financial compensation by a foreign government to another for the killing of US soldiers, which I was always under the impression would be "disrespectful" to those soldiers as well, but for some reason has NOT elicited any response from the current sitting President, nor from those same several posters here, that I mentioned above.

I have a funny feeling though, that you will choose to refrain from spinning on that.....

 

[king ward]

.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/03/trump-calls-for-a-boycott-of-att-to-force-big-changes-at-cnn.html

Would this be cancel culture? Just wondering. If so, I bet you're just seething mad, screaming at the top of your lungs.

It isn't cancel culture until things get - uh - canceled, even obliterated, jobs get lost, and people get ruined. Boycotts have gone on throughout history. The conservatives haven't learned how to do "cancel culture" because they aren't activists by nature. Probably wouldn't be that good at it anyway, being too preoccupied with supporting their families and other aspects of day-to-day living to make it work.

 

[anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7]

Maybe you just can't read.

You're the one that used the word "spin". I asked you to provide your own "spin" that would counter/dispute/expose my "spin" - you know, to actually discuss - and then I asked you, since I was in the mood, to "spin" as you call it, the other topic.

Both topics are actually associated with each other, you know. One involves the perceived disrespect by several here of US soldiers, through the deployment of constitutional right, and the other involves the financial compensation by a foreign government to another for the killing of US soldiers, which I was always under the impression would be "disrespectful" to those soldiers as well, but for some reason has NOT elicited any response from the current sitting President, nor from those same several posters here, that I mentioned above.

I have a funny feeling though, that you will choose to refrain from spinning on that.....

I don't need to spin either. I disagree with your interpretation, and that's exactly what it is.

 

[Rollerdude123]

It isn't cancel culture until things get - uh - canceled, even obliterated, jobs get lost, and people get ruined. Boycotts have gone on throughout history. The conservatives haven't learned how to do "cancel culture" because they aren't activists by nature. Probably wouldn't be that good at it anyway, being too preoccupied with supporting their families and other aspects of day-to-day living to make it work.

That’s awful spin. LOL

conservatives aren’t activists by nature. Heck, I admit they aren’t great at it but they try awfully hard.

I knew you lived with your head in the sand, but I didn’t know it caused brain damage.live and learn.

 

[king ward]

That’s awful spin. LOL

conservatives aren’t activists by nature.

I knew you lived with your head in the sand, but I didn’t know it caused brain damage.live and learn.

See there, the quintessential example of the "civil" post. And in answer to a post that is logically irrefutable at that.

 

[Rollerdude123]

See there, the quintessential example of the "civil" post. And in answer to a post that is logically irrefutable at that.

Lying to yourself is a terrible thing.