- This topic has 120 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 6 months ago by redblack.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 29, 2016 at 9:15 am #859324
dobroParticipant“This one is just you saying ‘nonsense’ over and over.”
Twice, actually. Both times referring to actual nonsense.
“So when a protest strikes against the anthem, it is against the country.”
The protest is not striking against the anthem and, even if it were,the anthem is not the country, no matter your opinion.
“It’s the same as burning a flag, except there won’t be charges of arson. I doubt Kaepernick and others meant that, but it’s what they’re saying.”
The protest is clearly not the same as (or has any relation to) burning a flag and, for anyone with the slightest understanding of what Kapernick is talking about, that’s clearly NOT what he’s saying. To your credit, you say you doubt that’s what K is saying, but then go ahead and contradict your own knowing.
So, yes, nonsense. Cogent enough?
September 29, 2016 at 11:39 am #859345
JTBParticipantIt’s true, the flag is a symbol for the nation. It is not a symbol for the various Armed Forces who all have their own flag.
As symbolic of the nation, it represents the collective spirit of those who have fought and died to protect the country; those who fought and died to oppress and destroy others; those who committed acts of civil disobedience to gain the right to vote, to end segregation, to end discrimination based on gender, sexual preference; ordinary people who work hard and try to raise families. There is a positive spirit that underlies all of that and it is aspirational. To insist it honors only military service is at best incomplete. At worst, it is vulgar nationalism.
So Kaepernick has made clear he believes the national tolerance for racial injustice is not in keeping with the true spirit of this nation and we need to do something about it so everyone can feel genuinely included in a positive way by the American spirit. Another way of looking at it is to say it’s a call to purge the negative, mean-spirited, selfish forces in society that perpetuate racism, but I’d rather accentuate the positive.It’s clear his call has struck a chord with men and women playing sports at the professional, college and high school level. So now people who are uncomfortable with this ugly side of our country and would prefer to ignore it are being invited to take a closer look. That’s good. Very good.
To get a look at how revolutionary this is, take a look at this website and watch the video of a Nebraska Cornhusker who has set off a discussion about racial injustice, patriotism, and civil disobedience in a state of people largely tone deaf about racism. He’s having a meeting with the governor next week to discuss his protest, a meeting that will be widely covered by the state and possibly some national press. Go Big Red
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by JTB.
September 29, 2016 at 1:55 pm #859378
waynsterParticipantlets just say this get over…. it its everyone’s right to protest… as its yours to disagree with this… it will end whether right or wrong its only in the eye of the beholder….
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by waynster.
September 29, 2016 at 7:17 pm #859417
JKBParticipantBottom line is that a political statement is being made during the national anthem.
I think that’s inappropriate. Here on this particular forum, I am outnumbered and outshouted.
September 30, 2016 at 8:12 am #859475
dobroParticipant“Bottom line is that a political statement is being made during the national anthem. I think that’s inappropriate.”
Thank you. Statement one is a fair reading of what’s happening during the anthem and statement two is a true statement of your opinion, to which you are roundly entitled.
“Here on this particular forum, I am outnumbered and outshouted.”
Well, there are certainly people who disagree with your opinion. I guess if we go back and count up the posts there may be more that disagree than agree. Characterizing it as being “outnumbered and outshouted” gives it a bit of the Trumpesque “this debate is rigged” feel, but I’m sure no one meant to hurt your feelings.
September 30, 2016 at 4:55 pm #859531
mark47nParticipantTo borrow from the debates…Law and Order (x25). And I forgot…Wrong! (x3.87×10^1000)
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by mark47n. Reason: Messed up scientific notation
September 30, 2016 at 5:04 pm #859536
mark47nParticipantI can’t believe that this discussion, and I use the term loosely, has gone on so long!
The National Anthem is not an old tradition, don’t assign too much meaning to it, we didn’t adopt it until the 1930’s, as pointed out earlier.
The flag CAN be burned and this has been protected under the 1st Amendment by the Supreme Court.
And the 1st Amendment allows you, me or Kaepernick to freely express ourselves in the public square. You don’t need a “venue”. It doesn’t, however protect you from the consequences of the expression, namely JKB’s outrage that someone dares to protest during the anthem. So, JKB, be outraged, it’s your right. Express that rage! But don’t expect to be free of the consequences. Also, the commentary about his hair was a cheap and ridiculous shot and adding the bit about the mohawk doesn’t stop it from appearing as racist.
September 30, 2016 at 5:33 pm #859543
JKBParticipantMark, it’s lovely that you were able to vent your spleen. I’m sure you were suffering from holding that in.
September 30, 2016 at 7:31 pm #859551
JoBParticipantJKB.. not much spleen in Mark’s remarks..
I can’t think of one thing said that i disagree with in any way..feel free to be outraged.. but don’t expect me to join you
as i tried to point out earlier
I have much larger targets for my outrage..
like.. the behavior that Kaeperncik is protestingSeptember 30, 2016 at 7:45 pm #859553
JKBParticipantWell, that’s two. Anybody else?
September 30, 2016 at 8:34 pm #859563
mark47nParticipantIf you want to know what it looks like when I vent my spleen you can reference some of my other posts.
You commented not on modifications to his hair ( such as a mohawk) but on the very nature of his hair. That is as unacceptable as criticizing one’s skin, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, etc. These are things that one has no control over (if you think that being gay is a choice then, pray tell, when did you choose to be straight?) So why would you bother comment on it or choose to judge someone by it? These are aspects that we, as a society, have agreed are off limits. What does his hair, with respect to this topic, have to do with anything?
September 30, 2016 at 8:35 pm #859564
mark47nParticipantOh, and, with respect a as to m e holding it in; I don’t hold in calling racist crap racist.
September 30, 2016 at 9:08 pm #859569
JKBParticipantAh, now it comes out. Mark, piss off.
To be more precise: claims require proof. Accuse me of racist speech? Show it.
I’ll remind you that criticism or ridicule of a public figure is well accepted.
And that you yourself just offered the First Anendment defense of Kaepernick’s speech. Which I’m not impressed by, because if “not technically illegal” is all you can say, that’s pretty lame. Here I’ll just note that if your own argument applies to K’s protest, it applies to my comment.
Finally, my compliments to nearly everyone for responding correctly – with no comment at all. One throwaway line that merited no discussion. Don’t try to build a Federal case out of it.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by JKB.
October 1, 2016 at 3:19 am #859594
JanSParticipantIn an interview that will air on Tuesday, 10/4, 8pm PDT on 60 minutes sports/Showtime:
JON WERTHEIM: Is there any sense that the message may have veered a little off course and this became about the national anthem and the reverence for the flag and not about aggressive policing and sort of racial injustice and law enforcement?
DOUG BALDWIN: Of course. That’s what we saw happen is the debate was not about racial injustice or things going on in our communities that pertain to law enforcement. It became about the national anthem and about disrespecting the military, which, as Colin stated a number of times and as we’ve all stated numerous times it’s not about that. It’s about getting the message across that things in our community that are going to need to change.
October 1, 2016 at 4:01 pm #859666
dobroParticipantThis is an insightful comment on this issue from a letter to the editor in a California newspaper…
America is not a song. America is not a flag. America is not a religion.
America is not a political party. America is not a lifestyle, a preference, an entitled class, race or sex.
America is a set of obligations. America requires that we sing or decline to sing. That we stand or refuse to stand. America requires an understanding that patriotism is not in the eye of the beholder but in the heart of the individual. America requires that we look beyond ourselves. America requires a constant and assiduous attention to the human rights of all its citizens.
America is, in short, a lot of hard work with plenty to go around.
JAMES MARTIN
Santa Rosa
October 1, 2016 at 4:57 pm #859675
mark47nParticipant“To be more precise: claims require proof. Accuse me of racist speech? Show it.”
What is and isn’t racist is not objective, it’s based on ones perspective i.e. where one stands. It’s my opinion and I’ll stand by it. Also note that I said this: “Also, the commentary about his hair was a cheap and ridiculous shot and adding the bit about the mohawk doesn’t stop it from appearing as racist.” I’m saying that your comment appears to be racist, not you. I don’t know you at all. I only know you by your posts here and the reverse applies. If you continued to make comments that could be interpreted that way, especially after it was pointed out, I would stop saying your comments were racist and, instead, say that you were racist.
“I’ll remind you that criticism or ridicule of a public figure is well accepted.”
Go ahead and ridicule him. Bear in mind, what you said, while ridiculing him is what I’m criticizing (see above).
“And that you yourself just offered the First Anendment defense of Kaepernick’s speech. Which I’m not impressed by, because if “not technically illegal” is all you can say, that’s pretty lame. Here I’ll just note that if your own argument applies to K’s protest, it applies to my comment.”
I don’t understand what you’re trying to get across here. would you prefer if I say that everything that Kaepernick has done, relative to his mode of protest is legal, as is flag burning? Fine. It’s all legal. Your dispute about it not being the appropriate venue is also flawed as you are stating your personal opinion with nothing to support it. Besides, you don’t have to be impressed by it.
And, my favorite, telling me to “piss off”. Way to bolster your credibility. Clearly I offended you but did you alter your perspective as to the comment in question? Did you perceive how it could be interpreted in a manner that is contrary to your intent? I don’t know about that. What you did do was lash out at me. I’m not afraid, not addressing what I said only indicts you, not me. I can say, that as a white male (a common and favorite phrase these days), I’ve certainly been accused of saying racist things. My intent wasn’t racist but the interpretation on the other side was in disagreement. I’ve learned to consider not only my audience but how what I say and especially write will be interpreted. Will the intent be misconstrued? My whole point was that, when you do your proofreading perhaps you should also change your perspective. Unless my interpretation as what you were after…but I don’t think it is.
October 1, 2016 at 10:03 pm #859704
JKBParticipantKOMO news is reporting a peaceful BLM demonstration tonight, where “demonstrators dispersed a bit before 11pm”. It’s 9:56 as I write this.
Maybe JanS can explain, after citing a 10/4 interview even though it’s only 10/1 now.
Must be a Daylight Saving Time thing.
October 1, 2016 at 10:25 pm #859707
dobroParticipant“In an interview that will air on Tuesday, 10/4, 8pm PDT on 60 minutes sports/Showtime…”
notice the “will air” in the sentence? I’ve seen the Baldwin clips, too, and they are from an interview, already taped, that will air on 10/4.
Sorry, but you need to read better.
October 1, 2016 at 11:39 pm #859719
JKBParticipantTake it easy… There was a comment earlier about recognizing sarcasm; this was simple humor. I’d suppose the KOMO one was an editing error. And yes, I know the DST switch isn’t for another month.
October 2, 2016 at 12:10 am #859726
JanSParticipantto be frank, there is no way that could have been construed as sarcasm on your part. Sounded like a serious question to me….maybe you need to point out your sarcasm when written.
October 2, 2016 at 7:37 pm #859762
JKBParticipantOf course my post was not sarcasm; I never said it was.
I did refer to being told to recognize sarcasm when it occurs. You should have understood that, since it was you who said it.
Maybe telling me how to read and write isn’t the best choice.
October 3, 2016 at 9:30 am #859814
cwitParticipantJKB – people probably didn’t respond to your comment about his ‘fro’, not because it didn’t merit discussion, but because it was without merit.
That doesn’t stop it from being considered casual racism.
October 3, 2016 at 10:03 am #859824
shaze25ParticipantJKB- Did you ever consider that maybe you as a white person shouldn’t be instructing how black people should be protesting in the face of injustice?
I think the tension here is because when you are instructing others how they should protest when they are wronged, you are either denying that they are being wronged or taking a position of authority over them. I hope you can see that both cause issues. I think it serves much better if we sit back and listen before being outraged.
October 3, 2016 at 8:38 pm #859889
JKBParticipantWell, the rightness of what I say probably shouldn’t depend on my color.
Slightly nuanced point: I’m trying to say “don’t mess with the national anthem”, not “here’s how you should present yourselves”. The difference is hard to convey, especially in this format, and would certainly affect how the message is received.
Listen before being outraged? Who does that? Yeah, I wish that was more common.
October 5, 2016 at 4:04 pm #860035
redblackParticipanti’m gonna break the rules here and address JKB directly:
i understand that you feel beleaguered here. but, for my part, i bear you no ill will. WSB forums has always been like a dysfunctional and argumentative family, and, like it or not, you’re part of our family. so is smitty. so is HMC.
having said that, i think a lot of us zero in on the fact that you tend to get defensive and attack others’ posting style; or perceived bile; or a conspiracy of liberal piling-on – rather than addressing the substance of the argument.
it’s really not personal, and i, for one, give everyone in WSB forums the benefit of the doubt. unless he or she is a stark raving idiot, of course,
and you don’t fit that particular bill.i think a lot of us are just waiting for you to make a solid argument and defend your position that kaepernick is wrong to draw attention to american police brutality against the black community by sitting for the national anthem. so far, all i’ve read from you toward that end are vague utterances of nationalism.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.