Red (White and Blue) Baiting

It appears the new tag word these days is "racist". If you don't agree with the official line, you're a racist. If you question what you're being told, then you're a racist.   If you're white (or Asian for that matter) and haven't publicly acknowledged and apologized your racial "privilege", then you're not just a racist, but one who supports a hidden racist system which has held others back while giving you all the breaks.

If you're white or Asian, did well in school, stayed out of trouble, and were generally successful in life, it was because of your racist privilege within a systematically racist system. Your success was the result of someone else being held down. It had nothing to do with your hard work in school or getting a job.

If you happen to be Hispanic or black, and you worked hard, overcame any of life's obstacles, got a good job (or even better, started your own business), then you betrayed your race. If you studied hard and did well in school, then you're guilty of "acting white". You did all this by adopting the mentality of the "oppressor class" (ie: whites or successful Asians). You were a "Uncle Tom" or whatever. 

 It had nothing to do with your desire to better your life, and by extension, your family's or even your community's. It had nothing to do with your determination, just as it had nothing to do with all those hours spent studying, working part time jobs, and effort to put yourself through college. Therefore, you have a obligation to renounce your success and use your influence and wealth to support those who wish to bring down the inherent racist system of the oppressors which made all your accomplishments possible.

Now, we have athletes refusing to stand for the national anthem. Instead, they turn their back or take a knee (long symbolic of submission). They make a fist and thrust it into the air as a sign of rebellion. We have Olympic hopefuls tell us they aren't interested in going to Tokyo to represent America, but, instead, to represent the all the "oppressed" of this nation because they "overcame" oppression. What has this nation done for them after all except send them to the Olympics?

 It seems to me that the very fact they were willing to put in the work that was required for their sport and now have the opportunity (and financial sponsorship) with the potential of making millions more through endorsements kinda defeats their argument don't you think?

No one is giving these athletes anything but the opportunity to prove themselves, and with effort and dedication, some made it. Yet, some of these sports entertainers (which, in truth, is what they are), who make millions, choose to kneel in disrespect during the playing of the National Anthem or turn their back on the flag and then complain when they are booed. Seems like they're talking out of both sides of their piggy bank. Poor me with all the endorsements, but it gets better.

Now we are starting to see individuals and a few groups like Black Lives Matter, calling for our flag to be changed. They claim that, somehow, the design and colors are "racist" (there's that button they keep pushing again). The flag, they maintain, represents white superiority.  According to the American Legion, the colors were chosen based on heraldic symbolism. The white stands for purity while the red represents hardiness and valor. The blue represents justice.

The 13 stripes stand for the original 13 colonies, while the stars represent each state. Officially, when the flag and its colors were adopted by the Marine Committee of the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia back on July 4, 1776 and adopted in 1777, the colors had no specific meaning. I guess they just liked the way it looked. But, as I said earlier, that's not all.

In addition to changing the flag for (as Coke executives infamously said) being "too white", the same folks want to change the National Anthem for the same reasons. In fact, some sporting venues have started playing "Lift Every Voice", which is the so-called "Black National Anthem" in lieu of the National Anthem. So, we're now expected to stand for this new "anthem" while taking a knee or turning our backs for our official National Anthem?  Not gonna happen as far as I'm concerned.  

There's nothing "racist" about the "Star-Spangled Banner", which was written by Francis Scott Key during the siege of Fort McHenry and the Battle of Baltimore, which was part of the War of 1812. In fact, if you read the lyrics, there's about our willingness to stand and fight for freedom; to defend, what was then a new nation. While the National Anthem is admittedly a difficult song to sing, and that may be reason enough to change it, there isn't anything "racist" about it.

Finally, to make matters worse, we are starting to see attempts to introduce something called "Critical Race Theory" (aka "CRT") which is supposed to replace the current academic curriculum  (which should be changed thanks to years of "dumbing down") and replace it with lessons allegedly designed to allegedly promote diversity, be it racial, religious, or gender, but at the expense of others.

 In short, CRT, which began as a academic theory about 40 years ago, claims that race and racism is part of an implied social contract which is biased towards whites (and Christians), and thus shapes not just the academics (especially in grades K-12), but also shapes the public's perception and conversation. As a result, non-whites are left out of the discussion.

The problem with CRT is that its sole purpose appears to be creating a false or distorted image of whites, society and, ultimately, the nation. However, this nation was created with the help of people from nearly every race, creed, religion, and gender on this planet. The building of America was, in the truest sense, a collaborative undertaking, and it still is.  We are still growing and evolving as a nation and society. That's something CRT and those who promote it fail to take into account.

Balance in academia, as in everything, is important. CRT does not offer balance. It lays out the same type of foundation that the Nazis and other authoritarian systems created in order to persecute a segment of the population. It reinforces the same mentality which alleges  "white superiority" and demands the need for whites to publicly acknowledge their "white guilt". And while you're at it, go ahead and denounce everything America has ever done and stood for. Being anti-American seems to be popular these days. 

There is no "white guilt" to acknowledge, just as there is no "white superiority". Each individual needs to take advantage of the opportunities available to them.  Slavery ended close to 200 years ago. Although Jim Crow laws (where they existed) ended in 1964, people of color managed to succeed before then, and they more than succeed nowadays. Look at any industry as proof.

The only racism I've seen of late has come from those accusing others of being racist. We see it in their message and by their actions, including defacing and destroying historical statues. Unfortunately, this form of racism also happens in schools as mentioned above, in the workplace, and now in politics. The media promotes it, albeit subtlety, and so do some churches or other organizations in high minority neighborhoods.

But that doesn't excuse the Tamir Rice or Andre Hill's of America. Their deaths (and those like them) are totally inexcusable. However, it wasn't racism which was at fault. It was poor policing skills and perhaps even incompetence. The same could be said of George Floyd. He was no saint and certainly not someone deserving a statue or mural, but that doesn't excuse his death. Breaona Taylor is in a similar boat. She didn't deserve to die, but she wasn't an innocent bystander either.

Bad behavior has results. Ignoring or not following instructions by a police officer is never a good idea, neither is running from them or thinking you're big and bad enough to take them on. Claims that fearing or refusing to do what an authority figure tells you is not a part of someone's "racial culture". That's an excuse, and a bad one at that.  Teach your children to respect authority figures at least enough to do as they're told. They might have a better outcome and live longer.

When it comes to sexual orientation, I don't think anyone really cares, especially people who are straight. The only ones who seem to have a chip on their shoulder are in the LGBQT community. From those I've spoken with, the only issue straights have is someone trying to make their orientation a big deal and wave it in everyone's face. I doubt anyone really cares. Just do your own thing and leave everyone else alone. 

America doesn't need more division. It needs to acknowledge the worth of each individual based on their actions and contribution to society. By the same token, society doesn't owe you anything because of any other factor than your willingness to work for what you want. Everyone should have the same opportunity, but no one should be guaranteed of the same outcome. There are those who are trying to divide America in as many ways as possible. A divided nation is a nation which is easy to manipulate and control.

Of course, America isn't perfect. We've faced some very serious issues in the past, but for the most part we've overcome most of them by working together. We still have some very serious problems, but many of those problems stem from the very people trying to divide us.  We have more in common than not. Where there are differences, we need to find ways to bridge them. Lastly, we need to restore America's Republic, and that means ending the Corporatocracy created by the Oligarchs. 

 

What is critical race theory?

Now is the time to stop playing the national anthem atsporting events

Macy Gray defends call for new flag: 'I love my country'

 

The NFL and Racism: Changing The Tune and Paying the Piper

The NFL has, for the last two years, done little to prohibit players from kneeling during the playing of the National Anthem. A sign of disrespect by most Americans. The result was more than just fans booing but a dramatic drop in game day attendance, team merchandise sales, and a huge loss in TV viewership. The solution for the networks was to stop showing the National Anthem in the hopes that viewers would return. The results have been mixed with the NFL, the teams, and the networks losing billions while long time fans have found life outside of football and other professional sports.

Now, on the heels of the COVID-19 virus which has already cost professional sports multi-billions of dollars, the NFL has decided to cut their proverbial wrists. They've decided to play a so-called "black national anthem" at the start of every Week One game; preceding our National Anthem. They are encouraging everyone---players, coaches, owners, and fans---to stand for the black national anthem, while kneeling for America's National Anthem. The lunacy is mind-blowing. This move will cost them huge swaths of fans, some forever, and more revenue than they can imagine.

Meanwhile, just to drive home the point of how out of touch many of these individuals have become, from the players and coaches, to the owners, player's union, to the President of the NFL, Roger Goodell, let's consider this. There are now mounting "demands" that some of the teams change their name and logo (and not just the Washington Redskins) which they claim are demeaning.

The majority of those complaining include groups on the Left who've started applying pressure not just on the NFL leadership or the owners, but on corporate sponsors like Nike, PepsiCo, and FedEx, making the "Redskins" name change solely a financial based decision and based on the opinion of Native Americans.

Polls conducted of Native Americans found that many weren't "offended" by the Washington "Redskin" team name or logo. Some felt it was intended to honor Native Americans. As an aside, it was a Native America who designed the logo. In 1971, Walter "Blackie" Wetzel, a member of the Blackfoot Tribe, came up with the logo, which his grandson, Lance, said brought a sense of Native pride. Wetzel grew up on the Blackfoot Reservation in Montana, and eventually became president of the National Congress of American Indians.

Lance went on to say that not only was his family upset by the change, so were members of the Blackfoot Nation and other tribes. He added that over the years the team brought in tribal singers and dancers, and incorporated Native American imagery onto team merchandize and advertising, which helped the tribe. Another classic example of Native Americans getting the short end of the stick...again?

So what do you do when you're dead wrong? Simply, you keep trying to get the result you want. So far that hasn't happened. I'm sure that at some point it will. They may eventually get the results they want or find some individual to use as their "proof". Maybe they'll interest Elizabeth Warren. I hear she has between 1/32 and 1/1024 Cherokee ancestry.

That just seems to be the way things are today doesn't it? Ignore what the people while continuing to push your agenda in a media echo chamber until everyone either tires of it and gives in or until someone else comes along with another issue who is louder than you are. Everyone (well, most everyone) these days is scared of being called some name like "racist", "privileged" or whatever. We can't seem to even agree to disagree and go with our lives. So, if we're to play this absurdity all the way out, what do you think we'd end up with? Let's consider some possibilities shall we, beginning with the NFL?

Okay, we have to face the face the owners of the Washington Redskins are caving to BLM and a minority of others and will change the team name and logo. A few suggestions I've seen are the "Red Tails" after the Tuskegee airmen's 99th Fighter Squadron of World War II. Some have recommended "Warriors" which provides a slight nod to Native Americans. Some more "creative" suggestions have included the Washington "Wussies" or "Grovelers", not to mention a few more colorful examples!

Of course, if the "Redskins" nickname is offensive, then we need to consider other team names like the Kansas City "Chiefs" (the term "Chief" is seen as being derogatory unless aptly deserved. Much like calling a black man "boy"), the Buffalo Bills (Buffalo Bill is now labeled a "racist"). The Dallas "Cowboys", Houston "Texans", and San Francisco "49ers" are all obvious. Their nicknames are references to groups who participated in the stealing of Native American land, so they have to go.

We have the "Raiders", "Vikings", and "Buccaneers" which could infer plunder and pillage, and of course, the slave trade which pirates of all sorts actively engaged in. Naturally we can't forget the New England "Patriots" which is blatant reference to old rich slave owning white men. If any go, it has to be that one! Green Bay's nickname, the "Packers" was for Acme Packing Company (formerly the Indian Packing Company), a meat processing business in Green Bay, Wisconsin. That might be offensive to vegans.

The Pittsburgh "Steelers", formerly the "Pirates", changed their name as a nod to the steel industry, then a major regional employer. They many want to rethink that one. After all, steel production creates a lot of air and water pollution, not to mention land destruction through ore mining. The pollution it puts out includes ammonia, cyanide, and naphthalene; all of which are highly toxic and cancer causing. I can see environmentalists getting bent out of shape if they realized the connection.

Most of the remaining nicknames pertain to animals, such as dolphins, eagles, and tigers. It would be a stretch, but a good argument could be made by some zealot that the images encourage the eradication of these animals through fishing, hunting, or captivity. Of course, it could be argued too that the use of these nicknames and symbols bring awareness to their plight. So, I'll leave these alone.

Nevertheless, out of the 32 professional NFL football teams, at least ten need to change their team nicknames and logos. After all, if a name and logo designed by a Native American and seen as a source of pride for Native Americans is seen as "offensive" by a small minority of rich individuals who aren't Native Americans, then there's no reason these other names and logos should be left intact is there?

While we're at it, let's look at professional baseball. The most obvious are the Cleveland "Indians" and Atlanta "Braves". No brainer. They're right up there with the "Redskins" and "Chiefs". They have to go. The San Diego "Padres" and Los Angeles "Angels" (not to mention the New Orleans "Saints") nicknames are offensive to atheists and agnostics (or not). They've need to go. The Texas "Rangers" are named after obvious wild west racist police officers. The San Antonio "Spurs" are, once more, about cowboys and land theft from Native Americans. The Milwaukee "Brewers" name was due to the German immigrants and breweries which sprung up in the region. So, because of Hitler, the Nazis, and all, that name has to be changed too.

The New York "Yankees" gotta go. These New England sailors were known for hunting whales, seals, and dolphins and for shipping slaves (that is, before 1808 when it was outlawed). Same argument for the Seattle "Mariners" and Los Angeles "Clippers". The "Clippers" also transported miners, settlers and cargo from the West Coast up to Native American Alaska and to Asia (mainly China), and returned with a lot of Chinese passengers, so that may need to be looked at.

The Pittsburgh "Pirates" fall into the same category as the "Vikings" and "Raiders" mentioned earlier. Some names which I'm sure the Left won't object to are the Los Angeles "Dodgers", Cincinnati "Reds" or Boston "Red Socks". As for the rest, they're a hodgepodge of animal, geographic, and random names which are open to interpretation.

Although I'm not a professional basketball fan (or a fan of college sports in general), a few team nicknames come to mind for immediate change. First is the Boston "Celtics" with its little leprechaun mascot. An insult to Irish everywhere, though it may not count since the Irish are historically white and thus automatically "racist". However, in their defense, many were sold as slaves by the British and Arabs. They were also the first indentured servants in America starting in 1607 at Jamestown.

The Philadelphia "76ers" is a reference to the American Revolution and Declaration of Independence, which was signed in Philadelphia in 1776. Again, old rich white men; many of whom owned slaves. This falls into the "no brainer" category as well. The Washington "Wizards", Orlando "Magic" and the Washington "Mystics" of the WNBA are obviously encouraging witchcraft and Satan worship. No need to say more.

The Golden State "Warriors" seem to be a positive wink at Native Americans. About the only ones who might object to that nickname are peace loving groups like Antifa. The Utah "Jazz" is kind of iffy. It could be considered an appropriation of black music, and thus culture, or it could be viewed as a recognition of it. Either way, a portion of all team sales needs to go to a fund for alleged "reparations" post haste.

As for the remaining team nicknames, most seem pretty harmless; names like "Knicks", "Nets", and "Thunder". But like anything, they can be made into something they're not and never were intended to be, much like the Washington "Redskins" nickname.

None of the names used by these professional sports teams were ever intended to offend or otherwise injury anyone or any group in anyway. More often than not, they were intended to celebrate those whom their teams were named after. Be it hard working blue collar men and women in the food processing or steel industries, or the courage and bravery of Native Americans, or sense of adventure and toughness of seafaring mariners, the Irish or Vikings.

The Native Americans didn't ask for Washington's owners to change anything. It was mostly a small group of overpaid loudmouth individuals. Lastly, but no less importantly, the playing of any anthem before that of the Star Spangled Banner---a song dedicated to the unity of every man, woman, and child in this country irrespective of their race, religion, origin, ethnic group, gender or any other factor---is a slap in the face of the American People and everything good this nation represents.

It's more deeply an insult to all those millions of men and women of all races who gave their lives for this country along with all my fellow disabled veterans. It disrespects the first responders of this country of all races, genders, orientation, and religion who come to our aid without regard to any other factor except our need. They put themselves in harm's way for our protection. Yes, there are a few "bad apples", but show me a group where there aren't. Nevertheless, the good far outweighs the bad. For this, you put nothing before it and you show your respect by standing for it.





9 in 10 Native Americans aren't offended by Redskins name



Warren Releases DNA Results, Challenges Trump Over Native American Ancestry



Wokism Erases Native American Who Designed the Redskins Logo



The World Counts: Steel Production


Indentured Servitude in British America

The Triumph of Evil as Good Does Nothing...Again: Protestors, Looters, and Reparations

The Irish born British political philosopher, Edmund Burke, is credited with saying "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". The quote, taken from a letter he had written around 1770 to a friend named Thomas Mercer, dealt with political apathy. Right now, we have dozens of public officials throughout the United States guilty of just that. They are allowing their towns and cities (some of which having the population of small countries) to be trashed and looted.

We're seeing people assaulted or even killed by piss-ant punks in the name of their "right" to protest. We're witnessing businesses being robbed; property vandalized or worse, burned to the ground. Yet, these officials still do nothing. Why? Are they afraid of making some group mad at them for enforcing the law? Are they worried about name calling like little kids on the playground at school?

I don't understand it. I really don't. They hide in their offices behind walls of security and pretend nothing is happening. They go to their upscale homes with manicured lawns each afternoon, safe behind taxpayer paid police officers while neighborhoods are being burned and looted. These are exactly the type of people that Edmund Burke was talking about some 200 years ago. They are the ones who've chosen to do little or nothing while anarchy is allowed to run rampant; while people are being robbed, beaten or killed. Violence only begets more violence.

Meanwhile, city councils sit back and do nothing too. Sure, they pander to the local media, but what is that really accomplishing? Maybe building up some brownie points to pull out for their next reelection where they can claim to be "tough" on crime or "supportive" of the protestors, depending on which way the wind happens to be blowing? These too are the people that Burke spoke about.

Oh, for what it's worth, I've notice that the cities and towns where the protests and looting have been the worse also tend to have a Democrat dominated local government, including mayor. I don't know if that means anything as I suspect incompetence and cowardice are non-partisan attributes.

For decades, at least going back to when Bill Clinton was President and certainly through the eight years of Obama, we heard nothing but how militant and organized the Right was, especially the "Tea Party", which was the bane of liberals everywhere. Yet, here we are in 2020 and I'm not seeing much of a response from the mean ole nasty Right-wingers are you? Where are all those homegrown militias the Left Wing media warned us about when you need 'em?

Right now, it's privileged Far Left snot nose kiddies playing at being revolutionaries. We see individuals barely old enough to shave throwing rocks or bricks at people and cars and actually expecting no one to say or do anything about it! We see young blacks ganging up on mostly lone white kids who are either just going from point "A" to point "B" or worse, thinking they're going to be accepted as part of the "big change" just because they're out in the street protesting. In most cases the only thing being "accepted" is their ass whooping as seen on social media the world over.

We see spoiled truants smashing windows and setting fires to buildings with the only real results being that people have lost a job and paycheck while the owners simply collect their insurance money and move to someplace a little safer. How does that "empower" anyone? How does that bring improvement to neighborhoods, especially those on the economic bubble which needs those jobs?

We see whites on bended knee begging for "forgiveness" for something they never did. Some are demented enough to don manacles while others kiss or wash the feet of imaginary victims. It's nauseating. This behavior is no more than a form of self-loathing by the emotionally or psychologically weak. Some simply buy off their "sins" with cash, credit cards, or other things.

Perhaps worse of all is the removal of statutes, which marks our collective past for good or bad. But it's not just statutes, it's books, movies, flags, and everything else which we share in common. Trying to destroy or rewrite history doesn't work. It never has. Don't believe me? Look at the old Soviet Union. Look at Communist China or Cuba. Take a look at Nazi Germany or the old Communist Bloc.

Nowadays, we've got sports figures condoning disrespect to the flag and National Anthem by "taking a knee". I guess they don't see all the good this country has done for them or people like them. If it wasn't for all that flag represents, they wouldn't have those multi-million salaries. Hell, they wouldn't have gone to college on "full ride" scholarships. Most wouldn't have been able to afford to go to school period if it wasn't for the taxes paid by the citizens of this country who are represented by that flag.

They seem to have forgotten that sports is just that...a game. It's merely a form of entertainment no different than movies or video games. It's a form of escapism. It isn't necessary to our way of life. It's the fans, hard working men and women, who make their elitist lifestyles possible. These jocks might consider showing them a little respect and stand for the flag and anthem. If they want to "protest", they should do it on their time not ours.

By the way, that flag and anthem also represents the millions of lives that have been lost or altered in countless wars and conflicts in service to this country. Without those men and women, there's no telling where these coddled rich jocks and their ilk would be right now. Destroying or defacing the memorials and graves of these fallen heroes is a scar on the soul of this nation.

As for blaming "white people" for slavery, that's pure BS. Slavery has existed since civilization began. It probably existed in one form or another since we fell out of the trees on some African savannah! Ever religion has condoned slavery. It's in virtually every religious text. Want to purge Confederate memorials, why not start with purging the Jewish and Christian symbols and religious texts first?

After all, those in the South and North who benefited from slavery saw it as a biblical directive. Even the Islamic Koran supported slavery. In fact, slavery is still practiced by some Muslim groups to this very day. You want reparations or apologies? Great. Start with God. After all, it's all written in his holy books.

Reparations presupposes that someone was "injured" and needs to be compensated in some way. Now, I don't know of any slaves in this country let alone slaveholders. In fact, no one's parents, grandparents, or even great grandparents either owned slaves or were slaves. There are damn few whose 2x great grandparents qualify. We also cannot apply the morals and values of today to events of a bygone era.

We need to remember that the United States was not responsible for slavery. We were, however, one of the first to end it. Slaves were prohibited from being imported into this country in 1807 and slavery was formally ended on January 1, 1863 with the "Emancipation Proclamation". Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, and the Dutch brought slavery to these shores long before there was a U.S. of A.

In addition, the native peoples of this continent engaged routinely in slavery and had for centuries. Even after the arrival of Europeans, they continued to use slaves. In fact, they even sold slaves to the Europeans. Eventually, Europeans were even captured and enslaved by native tribes just as they were in turn. Everyone was fair game!

Meanwhile, back in Africa, African tribes were attacking and capturing rival tribes and enslaving them (not to mention local troublemakers or those they were envious of). Later, they turned it into a business by selling them to other tribes, or European and Arab merchants. Many an African tribal chief became very wealthy thanks to the sale of human beings, but I don't hear the Left talking about this. Why do you suppose that is? Why isn't anyone asking them for reparations or apologies?

As for the Arab merchants (who also dealt in Asian slavery), it wasn't uncommon for them to capture ships with Europeans onboard and sale them into slavery. In fact, Boko Harem, al Qaeda, ISIS, al Nursa and others are still engaged in the slave business to fund terrorism. The big difference these days is that they prefer young Christian girls who are sold into sex slavery.

An interesting aside is that some Europeans sold other Europeans into slavery, albeit illegally. This was especially true of those individuals didn't speak the language or know the laws. I'm not talking about indentured servitude now. I'm talking about actual slavery. I should know. It happened to some of my ancestors. It was often the Irish, Welsh or Scots who were sold to the Arab merchants by the British who, in turn, sold them to other Arabs or Asians. Slavery was perhaps the first truly global business.

As for this country, it has done more than any nation to make up for the failings of its past, be it in terms of equal housing, voting or holding office, owning businesses, serving in the military, etc. Perhaps the greatest gift this country has bestowed is that of education. The minorities in this country are afforded the best educated in the world, and they receive the lion's share of scholarships and grants.

The ongoing protests in this country right now is over a perceived abundance of white police brutality toward blacks; not Asians, not Hispanics, and not Native Americans. Could it be that whites simply make up the majority of police officers in this country because they're largest demographic? As an aside, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, white males are actually now an official minority in this country.

Could there be a culture, especially among young males, which encourages a distrust of authority figures (including teachers), which in turn encourages them to ignore or flee from police officers, not to mention resisting or fighting with them? Play stupid games, win stupid prizes (including wooden boxes). Wouldn't it make more sense to just do as told and then take it to court with a lawyer? I rather be temporarily inconvenienced than permanently dead. Maybe too change should come from within.

As for the looting, that doesn't help their cause. It makes them into criminal punks looking for an excuse to steal and destroy property which simply reinforces the stereotype they claim they're trying to change. Lastly, playing in traffic. Yes, they have a right to protest; more power to them. But they don't have a right to block streets or highways. None whatsoever. Who among them is going to be responsible for delaying an ambulance with a heart attack victim, fire truck racing to save someone's home, a police officer going to an accident or a husband taking his expectant wife to the Emergency Room? Will those financially backing these protestors accept responsibility? I seriously doubt it.

Meanwhile, do motorists have an obligation to stop? Well, yes in the sense that they don't want to injure or kill anyone, even an idiot with a sign, if they can help it. But if they are surrounded or feel endangered or even threatened, do they have a right to protect themselves? I would think they would be entitled to the same rights as to when someone breaks into their home, but that's just a guess. I know what I would do to protect myself or others with me.

So, as Burke said, all that's required of good people is to do nothing for evil to triumph; evil, which I might add includes violence, looting, or the destruction of property. Meanwhile, mayors and other elected officials sit and twiddle their thumbs. Perhaps we should give them a reason to do something rather than to do nothing. Want to know more? Check out the links below.




These are all the cities where protests and riots have erupted over George Floyd's death


It's a cult: Thousands of Whites Grovel In Front of Blacks Begging For Forgiveness


Total Humiliation: Thousands of Whites Kneel in Front of Blacks asking for Forgiveness for being White Devils

The Bible and slavery

Yazidi sex slaves raped by dozens of ISIS fighters reveal five years of hell to charge abusers with war crimes


Slavery in 21st Century Islamism


The White Slaves of Barbary

African Slave Traders
https://www.thoughtco.com/african-slave-traders-44538

Player's Kneel Down: Loss of Fans and Revenue for Team Players and the NFL

Well, here we go again. It's just about football season and rather than talking about a given team's prospects of winning their division, or who got picked up (or dropped), salary caps, stadium updates, fantasy teams and all that other fun "sporty" stuff, we're once again dealing with what appears to be a recurring blight on America's favorite sport, namely the refusal of some players to show America respect during the playing of our National Anthem.

Last year, this alleged "silent protest" directed at the United States, was initiated by San Francisco's QB, Colin Kaepernick among others who later joined in. The protest spread throughout the league like chicken pox. While most players stood to honor America, a decidedly few chose to either sit on the bench, kneel, or kneel with giving the old "Black Power" fist salute, which would seem to indicate that this "protest" was less about policy decisions and more about race. Last year, most NFL coaches, managers, and owners took the coward's way out and simply took no action (a few actually joined in) There were a few who told their player's that if they wanted to play, they were to stand; they could cover their heart with the hand or not, but they would stand. A tiny few number of players simply elected to come onto the field after the playing of the National Anthem, which, I guess, was ok too.

This year, the protest has been kicked off by Seattle Seahawks' Michael Bennett, who called on white players to join in order to play down the protest's racial aspect. Some players have elected to take a knee in a circle and (presumably) offer up some sort of football prayer which most likely included something about not getting cut or seeing their merchandise marketability decline. There's been a few who've been blatantly disrespectable by setting on an exercise bike, doing calisthenics, or pretending to be looking at a playbook. A few owners, coaches, and team managers have stepped up again and said they would not tolerate their player's disrespectfulness toward the flag and what it stands for. Naturally, there has been some who claim to stand by their players and respect their actions. As for the National Football League Commissioner Roger Goodall, he has publicly stated he disagrees with the choice of kneeling but supported the player's "right to protest".

Interestingly, after Kaepernick's protest began to spread, fans voiced their opinions too. The overwhelming majority of them booed those who dishonored the flag. Sales of player specific merchandise also plummeted. Teams with large numbers of kneeing players saw their attendance take a sharp decline. Tens of thousands of fans began switching channels, which apparently will continue to happen. While one would think that the teams owners, coaches, and the NFL would have gotten to together over the summer to address this as a financial issue and stop the hemorrhage of fans and money, but they didn't. I guess they thought (or hoped) that that 2016 season was simply an aberration. However, TV networks were a little quicker on the uptake. As viewership declined, so did advertising revenue. So, in a clever little move, several of the television networks simply stopped including the playing of the National Anthem in their broadcasts. Some also ignored or simply didn't address the topic when discussing those players; focusing strictly on their role as players.

As an aside, colleges, high schools, and in a few cases, junior high schools and unaffiliated leagues saw their players starting to emulate what they were saw on TV or read in sports columns. In many cases the players were copying what they had seen and or heard about without any real understanding as to the meaning beyond witnessing their favorite player(s) do it. Of course, it brought them some attention and what jock didn't like attention, especially if it came from the opposite sex? Touchdown! Shall we go for two extra points or just one?

So, here we are, at the start of a new season with another chance to get back to watching football and talking about stats. But it looks like it's not be folks. I know that some you have no problem with the players taking a knee during the National Anthem. Most of you are probably still in the kitchen looking for the bottle opener or chips and dip, so it's over by the time you get into the TV room anyway. As I said earlier, some networks are simply opting out of even showing the opening salute, so the issue actually becomes a nonstarter for all concerned. As for the players, almost everyone who participated in the protests saw their marketability drop, meaning that they lost money...big money, as did the teams who permitted it, the NFL, and the television networks. Kaepernick, whose stats were never all that great to begin with, was cut by San Francisco, and has yet found a team willing to pick him up. Actions always have consequences.

Seattle's Michael Bennett, who has evidently picked up the preverbal sword Kaepernick fell on, is calling for more white players to join in the protests in order to give it "more legitimacy", and hopefully, more support from the fans. I don't think that's going to happen (I need to stress that Seattle isn't the only team doing it this season. At this point, it seems that all of the teams will be affected). Let me tell you why. This so-called "protest" was originally tied to the Black Lives Matter movement and "social injustice" within the black community (with the increasing violence of BLM, there has been an obvious distancing between the "protesting" players and BLM). White players don't have a dog in this fight, and really neither does anyone else.

The fact they are playing a sport for a living, making six or seven figures salaries, lifetime health coverage and having to play...err..."work" for a decade or two tops. Yeah, there are injuries, but they are covered by the best hospitals and doctors in the business. I would also find it hard to believe that many of the black players within the NFL support the action of the BLM. I would imagine they would rather see improvements in the quality of education and creation of more minority owned businesses. As for those players who are on the fence about what to do, they've all seen what happened to the finances of other players (the Bronco's Brandon Marshal lost a very lucrative endorsement deal) not to mention their decline in popularity among fans and coaches.

Now, I'm sure there are some who say these players have a "right" to free speech, and that includes a right to freedom of expression. Well, normally, I would agree. I think that the First Amendment is perhaps that most important "right" we have. But, just like you can't scream "fire" in a crowded theater, there are restrictions to that freedom. NFL players are just like many of you---you're an employee. That means you likely work for a corporate business of some sort. Now, most people don't realize that that the Bill of Rights, where we find the various Amendments, are not automatic.

That's right, your "rights" are restricted by your corporate employer. These players were signed to do a specific job, just like you were. When these players put on their uniform and walk out on the field, they cease being ordinary citizens. They are hired employees retained to do a job. Their personal opinions or beliefs are really of no interest. They represent their team, their fellow teammates, their coaches, managers, and, of course, the owners, as well as the National Football League. So, when they come out on the field and decide to make a political statement---regardless of their intent---it is reflected back on all those just mentioned.

To put it another way, when these "employees" come out in their "business attire" and make a political statement which is seen by the ticket buying public and the viewers at home (and indirectly, the advertisers) as offensive, it's not just bad business, but it reflects on the entire team all the way up the chain to Mr. Goodall. For better or worse, kneeling or pretending to be doing something else (or even not pretending), during the play of our National Anthem is like giving America-- especially the military, veterans, and first responders, including emergency room doctors and nurses, and the rest of America (and especially the fans who shelled out big bucks to watch a sporting event, not a political event) "the bird".

If you, as an employee, want to protest something that's not work related, you don't do it on company time, in the company's uniform, and in front of their customers. If you, as an player, have a political gripe that's great. I'm glad you're interested in something other than financial portfolio, arm candy, or avoiding jail during the off season. However, do it on your own time---not your teammate's or the coaches and owners, not the NFL's, and sure as hell not on our time as fans.



Roger Goodall said a bunch of nothing about players kneeling during National Anthem



NFL's Michael Bennett said a White Player Needed to Kneel During the Anthem


Browns players kneel in prayer during National Anthem