In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Bizarre New Rules for Protesters
kimi
Member Posts: 44,723 ✭✭✭
Your comments on the following article, please. Here's a young guy, Danny Westneat, who has in his article for today, given every appearance of trying to get the bigger picture about the situation he has written about, but he just does not get it. That has to be the answer, plain and simple, unless he's just playing dumb and is on a fishing expedition of some sort, unless he is trying to be a wise guy. This, based on the last sentence of his column, "What could it be? Someday we?ll probably look back and realize the answer was right in front of our noses." Yes, Danny, the answers you and others seek are right in front of your noses, 24/7...and you folks just don't get it.
I would greatly appreciate any comments that you might have regarding what he has written about.
Danny Westneat's latest article in this morning's Seattle Times:
Bizzare New Rules for Protesters
So let?s see if we can get some of the new ground rules straight:
If you take a knee during ?The Star-Spangled Banner,? you are so disrespectful to the country that you are a ?son of a b?-.?
But if you march through the streets with the Confederate battle flag, an actual symbol of secession, you might be ?very fine people.?
Or this: If you raise a fist before a pro football game, you should be fired.
But if you raise a torch as you goose-step around chanting ?Jews will not replace us,? well, you?re maybe not someone to have over to dinner. But you?re also just out there harmlessly exercising your rights to free speech.
Do we have the new rules about right?
It?s all a little confusing. It?s almost as if some Americans are encouraged to express themselves, to protest, to inflame if their views are strongly-enough held. While others are told to sit down and shut up. Or rather, to stand up and shut up.
What explains the different treatment of the two groups? Racking brain here.
Perhaps Seattle Seahawks lineman Michael Bennett, rather than doing his black-power salute after he sacks the quarterback, should instead try lighting a tiki torch and sieg-heiling. Maybe that would go over better?
Seriously, there?s no greater symbolic snub of the American flag than waving around the Rebel flag. That goes beyond being disappointed in America ? that?s saying you don?t even believe in America. At least this America.
That gets a presidential shrug and days of equivocating. While the football players get days of insults and calls for them to be fired
Oh right, the football players are rich. That must be it.
?If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL, or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect our Great American Flag (or Country)?? tweeted the billionaire president, who wrote an entire book called ?Crippled America? about how screwed up things are here.
Continuing on with the bewildering new protest rules: If you storm into town halls, shout down your elected representatives and even hang some of them in effigy, you might get a rousing tweet about your efforts.
?The Tea Party is filled with great Americans. Despite being mistreated by everyone, including @GOP, they will continue to fight on,? Trump tweeted back in 2013.
Fair enough. Protesting the actions of your government is American. So then why is Michael Bennett, who is also protesting the actions of his government, consigned to being a son of a b?- who should be fired?
Maybe for Bennett?s next quarterback sack dance he could try waving one of those liberty snake flags, with the words ?don?t tread on me.? Probably wouldn?t work ? seems there?s something different about NFL and NBA players speaking out. Can?t quite place our finger on what that difference might be. Anyone?
There?s more. After a Milo Yiannopoulos speech got canceled at Cal-Berkeley in February ? not because the university censored the right-wing provocateur, but because protesters overwhelmed the venue ? the president forcefully went to bat for free speech:
?If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view ? NO FEDERAL FUNDS??
Yet now he?s bashing a sports league senseless precisely because it isn?t squelching political speech (much of it occurring in publicly funded stadiums, by the way).
Oh well, our commander-in-chief doesn?t have time to spell out every little meaning and nuance for us ? he?s got Puerto Rico to save.
Besides, we probably don?t need too many more clues from him to puzzle out the distinctions between a bring-back-the-Confederacy protest and an NFL or NBA protest, and why he of all people might take it a little easy on the former yet go hard, day after day, on the latter.
What could it be? Someday we?ll probably look back and realize the answer was right in front of our noses.
Danny Westneat?s column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/new-rules-some-protests-are-more-equal-than-others/
I would greatly appreciate any comments that you might have regarding what he has written about.
Danny Westneat's latest article in this morning's Seattle Times:
Bizzare New Rules for Protesters
So let?s see if we can get some of the new ground rules straight:
If you take a knee during ?The Star-Spangled Banner,? you are so disrespectful to the country that you are a ?son of a b?-.?
But if you march through the streets with the Confederate battle flag, an actual symbol of secession, you might be ?very fine people.?
Or this: If you raise a fist before a pro football game, you should be fired.
But if you raise a torch as you goose-step around chanting ?Jews will not replace us,? well, you?re maybe not someone to have over to dinner. But you?re also just out there harmlessly exercising your rights to free speech.
Do we have the new rules about right?
It?s all a little confusing. It?s almost as if some Americans are encouraged to express themselves, to protest, to inflame if their views are strongly-enough held. While others are told to sit down and shut up. Or rather, to stand up and shut up.
What explains the different treatment of the two groups? Racking brain here.
Perhaps Seattle Seahawks lineman Michael Bennett, rather than doing his black-power salute after he sacks the quarterback, should instead try lighting a tiki torch and sieg-heiling. Maybe that would go over better?
Seriously, there?s no greater symbolic snub of the American flag than waving around the Rebel flag. That goes beyond being disappointed in America ? that?s saying you don?t even believe in America. At least this America.
That gets a presidential shrug and days of equivocating. While the football players get days of insults and calls for them to be fired
Oh right, the football players are rich. That must be it.
?If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL, or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect our Great American Flag (or Country)?? tweeted the billionaire president, who wrote an entire book called ?Crippled America? about how screwed up things are here.
Continuing on with the bewildering new protest rules: If you storm into town halls, shout down your elected representatives and even hang some of them in effigy, you might get a rousing tweet about your efforts.
?The Tea Party is filled with great Americans. Despite being mistreated by everyone, including @GOP, they will continue to fight on,? Trump tweeted back in 2013.
Fair enough. Protesting the actions of your government is American. So then why is Michael Bennett, who is also protesting the actions of his government, consigned to being a son of a b?- who should be fired?
Maybe for Bennett?s next quarterback sack dance he could try waving one of those liberty snake flags, with the words ?don?t tread on me.? Probably wouldn?t work ? seems there?s something different about NFL and NBA players speaking out. Can?t quite place our finger on what that difference might be. Anyone?
There?s more. After a Milo Yiannopoulos speech got canceled at Cal-Berkeley in February ? not because the university censored the right-wing provocateur, but because protesters overwhelmed the venue ? the president forcefully went to bat for free speech:
?If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view ? NO FEDERAL FUNDS??
Yet now he?s bashing a sports league senseless precisely because it isn?t squelching political speech (much of it occurring in publicly funded stadiums, by the way).
Oh well, our commander-in-chief doesn?t have time to spell out every little meaning and nuance for us ? he?s got Puerto Rico to save.
Besides, we probably don?t need too many more clues from him to puzzle out the distinctions between a bring-back-the-Confederacy protest and an NFL or NBA protest, and why he of all people might take it a little easy on the former yet go hard, day after day, on the latter.
What could it be? Someday we?ll probably look back and realize the answer was right in front of our noses.
Danny Westneat?s column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/new-rules-some-protests-are-more-equal-than-others/
What's next?
Comments
And the NFL DARES to say they don't want "politics in sports".
[xx(]
Instead that decided to stay and thereby they condoned the behavior.
The dollar meant more to the fans then the disrespect by the players.
Why should we or anyone need a permit to protest?
I just don't understand that?
But one could make the point that we need a "permit" AKA the governments permission for about everything else we do. [B)]
Navybat you bring up a point that I don't understand.
Why should we or anyone need a permit to protest?
I just don't understand that?
But one could make the point that we need a "permit" AKA the governments permission for about everything else we do. [B)]
Typically in a downtown area, during working hours, or even on a weekend (remember the cancelled San Francisco park rally?) you need to file for a permit. Even parades need permits.
Some places don't need permits, of course, like in small towns, etc. But you don't have NFL games in "small towns". San Francisco, LA, San Diego, Seattle, Baltimore, etc. you need a permit to hold a rally or protest in public areas.
And to SW0320, it's very expensive to go to an NFL game. And they didn't buy tickets expecting to see "flag disrespect". They bought them to see a football game. (Or maybe a fight. [:D]) And by the way, many fans DID leave the game after the "protest".
Many people are confused about the rights our Constitution enumerates.
We don't go out and disturb everybody else when we don't get our way like the whiny * piece of s***liberal do
Conservatives through the Obama Administration didn't take to protesting and disrupting everybody's life because we weren't getting our way. Hell no we decided to vote in our president that represents us.
Now the whiny * liberals think they should get their way even though they are not the majority. They don't believe in We the People. They believe in we the needy few that won't work and contribute to better the United States
They believe in saying f*** you the people that actually built this country and is contributing to its well-being, and say hey, you got to give it to us our way. Even though the majority of the people don't want it that way
The problem with the Liberals is they just don't care about the majority of the people in United States and what they wants, they only care about what they want.
And they're just like a f****** two year old that doesn't get their way so we'll start throwing a temper tantrum. f****** immature pieces of s***
quote:Originally posted by SCOUT5
The issue with the NFL isn't about exercising one's right to free speech. Apples to oranges comparisons aren't worth discussion.