Showing posts with label Colin Kaepernick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colin Kaepernick. Show all posts

October 9, 2025

Breaking Fake News Update (v23)

 Fake News Broke on October 9, 2025!


You heard it here first, folks: we've got more breaking fake news! 

If you've been paying attention, or even if you've been trying *not* to pay attention, it's hard to ignore the uproar over the NFL choosing Bad Bunny to headline the Super Bowl halftime show next year. Other than complaining about the officiating, particularly the entire team of refs being on the side of Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs, it's been a long time since the NFL was the focus of this much attention. 

Oh sure, folks are up in arms about the league's push to 'internationalize' what we call football - it's hard for some to have wings and beers for breakfast on a Sunday morning, after all - and about the 'sissification' of the league (especially kickoffs!!!) and the new 'safety' penalties that take all the joy out of the game according to he-men warrior-athletes like the FOTUS. 

House Speaker MAGA Mike Johnson (R-Ighteous Indignation) is the first person I saw who floated Lee Greenwood as an alternative to the Puerto Rican rapper, but I'm sure his name has been mentioned in MAGA circles quite a bit. Here's what Johnson had to say about the official choice, and his preference, starting with Bunny. 
Well, it sounds like he's not someone who appeals to a broader audience. And I think there's so many eyes on the Super Bowl. A lot of young, impressionable children. And I think, in my view, you would have Lee Greenwood or role models, doing that. Not somebody like this. 

Um, audience appeal? Really, Missing Speaker? Take a look at these stats for Bad Bunny: 


And what does Greenwood think about all of this? Here's what the NY Post reports:
I agree with Speaker Johnson. I would make a great performer for any Super Bowl show.
It's good that Greenwood said he'd take up the white right patriotic fight, but I have to wonder about some of his (very obviously) fake terms for performing. I mean, seriously? ICE agents arresting anyone who doesn't stand for the anthem??  If I were a betting kinda gal, I'd keep my money on the Bunny.

As always, if there's fake news, we'll break it for you!

February 22, 2019

TGIF 2/22/19

Count me among the folks who are happy that this week is over, and hopefully things can get back to normal starting tomorrow, whether I knock off that bottle of wine tonight or not!

Let's see how some other folks did, starting in the sports world.

We got news (I saw it last Saturday, so it counts for this week) that a confidential settlement had been reached by Colin Kaepernick and the NFL, which resolves the second most hated man in football's collusion lawsuit. Whether or not it leads to a job on an NFL team -- he hasn't played since the 2016 season - remains to be seen, but there are a number of teams that might as well take a chance on him as not. Some have speculated that maybe the Pats would take a chance on him, and that's probably the most logical since they're the most hated team in the NFL.  Maybe hate plus hate could be a match made in heaven?

Speaking of the Pats, news broke today that the team's owner, Robert Kraft, had been caught in a South Florida sting and is being charge with two misdemeanor counts of soliciting a prostitute. Rumor has it there's video - but rumor also has it that there are bigger fish to fry in the sting, which may include sex trafficking, although I've seen nothing long those lines mentioned in reference to Kraft. Categorical denials are coming from his people.

Also on the seedy side of the street? Singer/producer R Kelly has been charged with multiple counts of aggravated sex abuse. Kelly has been getting new attention for prior bad acts, it seems, after a six-hour documentary, Surviving R Kelly, recently aired. If the allegations are true, he deserves whatever punishment he gets.

September 7, 2018

TGIF 9/7/18

How was your week?

The president had an interesting one, it seems. First there was Fear, Trump in the White House, the new book by Bob Woodward, in which everyone who works for the president says the same stuff about him as my friends (on both ends of the political spectrum, to be sure).

You know: crazy town, elementary school understanding of issues, lots of name calling, lots of out-in-left-field idea like assassinating foreign leaders, and stuff like that. Did I mention name calling? That apparently goes both ways - administration folks calling Trump names, and of course the president doing his best keeping up with them.

The book is out on 9/11 - perhaps that's a particularly pointed jab at the president. I can almost hear the update from the Terrorism Alert Desk...

And then there was the weird op-ed from the anonymous senior official in the Trump administration, which came with this dramatic editorial note:
The Times is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers.
 From the author, we see things like this:
It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what's right even when Donald Trump won't.
The result is a two-track presidency. 
Um, OK, I guess.  There aren't a lot of details, or a lot of news.  It might even be a nothing burger, as Trumps like to say, except for all of the denying authorship and guessing who might have been the author. And the fact that the president things Jeff  - that would be Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III - might need to do some poking around.

That would make it much more interesting, for sure, especially since the haystack from which he'd need to find the needle could be as many as 4,000 presidential appointees and Senate-confirmed employees. Or, depending on your definition of 'senior official' it could be maybe a dozen or so.  Fun time, fun times.

Who else had an interesting week?  How about Nike? Just do it, someone said - stick with a tradition of  having athletes say controversial things, or have controversial athletes say non-controversial things, just like they've been doing all these years. And it seems to have worked out just fine.


After initial reaction from folks who were aghast at the selection of Colin Kaepernick as the face of the 30th anniversary Just Do It campaign, the stock fell a few points, and several people posted videos of themselves burning their Nike gear.

Which led to the best PSA ever.  Well, maybe not better than the crying Indian, or the first Smokey the Bear, but it's up there.

I expect this coming week will be calmer - Brett Kavanaugh will be confirmed and there'll be Democrats voting for him, I'm sure.

Barack Obama will make another speech, as will the president, both stumping for their desired outcome in the upcoming midterms.

The spectacle of protesters being dragged out of a Senate hearing room will be forgotten, quickly - probably almost as quickly as plaid shirt guy, the nonconforming Trump 'fan' who was replaced during the president's ramblin wreck of a rally in Montana.

TGIF, everyone.

September 5, 2018

Wondering on Wednesday (v146)

Let's ponder, let's wonder, about the op-ed that appeared in the NY Times this afternoon.

The piece was published anonymously, at the request of the author.  That person, a senior official, requested anonymity because his or her job would be in jeopardy otherwise.  The author's identity is known to the Times.
President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader. 
It's not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump's leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the house to an opposition hellbent on his downfall. 
The dilemma - which he does not fully grasp - is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to  frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
I would know. I am one of them.
Holy defending America, Batman. Holy resistance. Not that kind of resistance, the author points out - not the capital R kind, but the kind that seeks to have the president be successful, and at the same time honor their duty to country first. And the country needs protecting from Trump's worst instincts, it seems.

And, of course, there's that other thing, the thing we've known for a long time:
The root of the problem is the president's amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.
Here's one more, before we move on. After telling us that we'll be OK because "there are adults in the room", the author notes the following:
The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.
No wondering there, right?  I mean, that has seemed pretty clear all along.

Also something about which I don't have to wonder are these comments I saw on a post slamming Colin Kaepernick and Nike for the 30th anniversary #JustDoIt campaign. The comments from this person echo the comments of the anonymous senior administration official who penned the Times commentary.

Take a look:
Wow, one of the biggest problems in this country is poor, disrespectful communication. If we take the time to listen to one another, then maybe we can come to a place of mutual understanding.
...I understand how you feel about this protest and I respect your right to feel that way but respect my right  to see it from a different perspective. I have several family members that have served and retired from the military. My great uncle and my great grandfather served in WW2. While serving, they were not allowed to stay in the nice barracks because (those) were for whites only. While serving in the war they were called n@@ger over and over again. When they came home from the war they had to ride in the back of the bus; they couldn't drink at the nice water fountain or use the bathroom because it was for whites only; they couldn't eat in the dining area of the restaurants because it was for whites only.; they couldn't swim in the public FEDERALLY FUNDED pool or play in the park because it was for whites only. Many black soldiers were beat up for wearing their uniform in public and some were lynched for wearing their military uniform for the country they served.  My cousin served in Vietnam, came home and was murdered by the police for mistake in identity. The autopsy determined his hands were up because he had bullet wounds on the inside of is arms. Now the police are killing unarmed black men and going home to be with their families. 
I love America and choose to stand during the Anthem, however I understand and support their right to protest. That is our constitution and the very right our soldiers fought for.
 I have a question for you, if we took our flag and a human being and sat them in front of God, which one would God deem more important? The flag or human life?
This is not for the sake of arguing but to bring us to a place of mutual understanding. God bless you and your family. 
I've got to say, I don't think there's any wondering about the patriotism of the comment's author, or that of his family. Or about the choice God would make if presented with the choice this writer describes.

September 4, 2018

Standing for Something

No dream is too big. No challenge is too great. Nothing we want for our future is beyond our each. ~Donald Trump

To say nothing is saying something. You must denounce things that you are against or one might believe that you support things you really do not. ~Germany Kent

If you stand for something you will have people for you and people against you. But if you stand for nothing you will have nobody for you and nobody against you. ~ Maurice Saatchi

You must stand for something! It does not have to be grand, but it must be a positive that brings light to someone else's darkness. ~Anthony Carmona

I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct. I've been challenged by so many people and I don't, frankly, have time for total political correctness. ~Donald Trump

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.~Winston Churchill

Give to us clear vision that we may know where to stand and what to stand for - because unless we stand for something,we shall fall for anything. ~ Peter Marshall

It's not easy to stand up against your constituents or your friends or colleagues or your community and take a tough stand for something you believe is right. Because you always want to keep working and live to fight another battle and it might cost you your career. ~Caroline Kennedy

There's always opposition when you do something big. I do many things that are controversial. When people see it, they love it! ~Donald Trump

I want to stand for something, and it's probably going to be something that some people stand against. ~Blake Shelton

Don't believe that winning is really everything. It's more important to stand for something. If you don't stand for something, what do you win? ~Lane Kirkland

When you stand for something, you've got to stand for it all the way, not just half way.~ Kevin Gates

We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. ~Donald Trump

Image from Colin Kaepernick



November 4, 2017

Poll Watch: Taking a Knee

A recent HBO Real Sports/Marist poll assessed public sentiment on protests by professional athletes during the playing of the national anthem.

You'll recall that president Trump has made this a bigly darn deal, going so far as to suggest that kneeling players should be FIRED as if they were contestants on his ridiculous TV show.

Trump has done his unlevel headed best to get America fired up about this, and had some success in the beginning, for sure. I'm not sure whether it has anything to do with Trump, but friends of mine have sworn off watching the NFL because of the protests, so there has been an impact.

But what does public opinion show?  First, the gory details: the poll was conducted using landlines and cell phones 10/15 - 10/17. Respondents had to be at least 18 years of age. Cell phone numbers were randomly selected from all regions and were proportionally sampled; business phones were excluded. There's more, but you get the drift: it was designed to be random and statistically accurate.

Back in September 2016, when Colin Kaepernick was kneeling during the anthem, 52% of Americans felt that players should be required to stand for the anthem. But in the October poll, 51% say leagues should not require athletes to stand.

Here's some demographic data:
  • Percentages of those who think standing should not be required are up 7% in the Northeast and 5% in the West. 
  • In the Midwest and South, 50% think players should be required to stand.
  • By a large margin (76%), African Americans don't believe players should be forced to stand; this is up 28% over the previous survey.
  • Latinos (56%) and whites (54%) also fall on the 'not required' side; these numbers are consistent with the 2016 survey.

So, what else does the poll tell us?

We're OK with the protests, but we're torn on what they mean. 49% think they're disrespectful to the freedoms represented by the anthem; 46% think they're representative of the freedoms the anthem represents.

When it comes to what the anthem itself represents, 57% think it's a symbol of our rights and freedoms; 34% think it's a symbol of the sacrifice our military has made over the years, and 10% are unsure. Last year's results were different: 65%, 27%, and 8%, respectively.

And while we struggle a little trying to get our arms around what this all means, 52% of us think the athletes 'did the right thing' by kneeling or locking arms; 41% think it was the wrong thing to do.

And, the poll shows viewership seems to be steady. Marist first asked about viewership way back in 2009 - the Michael Vick returns from prison days. Back then, 56% said they followed the NFL at least a little.  In this year's poll, that has grown to 69%.

Now - back to president Trump.
  • 68% think he was wrong to criticize the players and call for them to be fired; 28% think he was right to do so.
  • We are split on whether the Vice President did the right thing with his 'spontaneous' (and by spontaneous, I mean totally planned) walkout of the Colts game last month.

In a PBS Newshour/Marist poll published earlier in October, Americans seemed to be more of one mind. (This poll followed the same general methodology as noted above).
  • 60% of us (and 67% of football fans) agree with the NFL that Trump's suggestion that the players should be fired were "inappropriate, offensive and divisive" while only 33% agreed with him.
Looking at the demographics, there's a clear connection between a person's politics and the extent to which they agree with the president.
  • 72% of Republicans, 67% of conservative or very conservative self-identifiers and 76% of Trump voters agree with Trump's position.
  • White Americans without a college degree, a key Trump demographic, are split; 45% agree with the president; 48% agree with the NFL.
What these two polls show, and most of the other ones as well, is that while president Trump does his darnedest to sway public opinion, he's not always successful.

Yay, us.

September 24, 2017

Trump in Transition (v21)

I keep thinking that I'm going to be able to retire the TiT theme; after all, Trump's been president for a few days over eight months now. 

Shouldn't he be done transitioning from a blowhard NYC real estate developing, serial bullying, failed reality TV show hosting, crowd-counting, name-calling, frequently golfing, constantly rallying, Hollywood elitist (with a bought-and-paid-for star on the Walk of Fame to prove it) who uses the government to pad the coffers of his family business by now? 

The last time I did a post in this theme was when Trump talked with his generals and decided that everyone else's transgender people shouldn't be allowed to serve our country because they were too expensive from a healthcare perspective - which, of course, was a complete lie, as are many of Trump's declarations. Screw your patriotism, you volunteers who stood up to defend our country. We don't need you, we don't want you, you cannot serve. Screw you.

And once again, Trump is on the 'screw your patriotism' bandwagon with his latest pronouncement that the NFL should fire anyone who does not stand for the national anthem. And, by extension, that Colin Kaepernick should continue to be unemployed. 

As a private individual, using his personal Twitter account, not his official POTUS account (which he ignores), Trump has been vocal on this subject for the past couple of days:
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), and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU'RE FIRED! Find something else to do.
Roger Goodell of NFL just put out a statement trying to justify the total disrespect certain players show to our Country. Tell them to stand!
If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place. Fire or Suspend!
...NFL attendance and ratings are WAY DOWN. Boring games, yes, but many stay away because they love our country. League should back U.S.
Those SONSOFBITCHES, they out to be FIRED! And we should BOYCOTT! And the NFL owners are FRIENDS OF HIS, dammit! And bloodthirsty supporters in Alabama LOVED what he said, yessiree they did! He's the PRESIDENT and don't you FORGET IT!  #AMERICAFIRSTGODDAMMIT! And those players, they're paid with TAXPAYER DOLLARS! And SCREW THE FIRST AMENDMENT! And SCREW YOU, black athletes! And SCREW YOU STEPH CURRY even though you play with a round ball not one of those funny ones! Just SCREW YOU!

And I JUMPED UP and SCREAMED JUST LIKE HOWARD DEAN!!!

No, really, I just sat here for a moment, after catching my breath - for that was quite the explosion of capital letters and exclamation points!  And, I thought, it's SAD (quoting the president, here).

 It's sad that he feels his personal patriotism, and the well-being of our country, are threatened by some athletes behaving differently, but respectfully, during the national anthem. 

It's sad that the president, who is divisive both in his own language and his administration's policies, seems to think that Americans need to be in lockstep in order to, well, be Americans. Will we be receiving national uniforms? Holding parades along the inauguration route? Are we going to have to learn a special salute? I'm willing to start now, I guess, or should we wait until the patriotic pictures are painted on buildings across the land?

I last stood for the national anthem (because that's what I was taught to do), last Friday night, at the symphony. Only at the first concert of the series do we get to hear the orchestra play it; they don't at every single performance. The audience, which trends older, sings along, and claps when it's over - not with a stanza or two to go, but when it's actually over. I assume anyone who was able stood, but I don't worry about whether they did or not, and I'm sure no one was waiting, pen and notepad ready, to take down the seat numbers of people who didn't and kick them out of the hall. 

I don't mind the kneeling or the raised fists. I mind the drunken shouting that passes for acceptable patriotism in stadiums and arenas across the land much more than I do the protests. My husband is not a fan of the kneeling, so much, but a raised fist doesn't bother him. 

Do I feel threatened, as our still-transitioning president appears to, by people who are willing to take a stand on a very public stage? 

Hardly. Truth be told, I'm encouraged by their actions, and by their patriotism
  • It IS patriotic to question your country and actions taken on her behalf by people in positions of authority.
  • It IS patriotic to ask your country to be better, to do better.  
  • It IS patriotic to ask your country to take a hard look in the mirror, and to try and think differently about things. 
  • It IS patriotic to ask others to consider doing these things, too. 
It's much more patriotic to do that than it is to stand, drunkenly or soberly, with or without removing your hat, with or without placing your hand on your heart, in a stadium shouting over the national anthem.

It's significantly more patriotic to do that, than to have an American flag waving between your cab and the trailer you're hauling, like the guy I saw on the NYS Thruway last week. The flag was in despicable condition - filthy dirty, gray with soot and road dirt, stained, the colors barely discernible. The ends were shredded; perhaps as much as a third of it had gone into the wind, and it was torn in several spots where the stripes were sewn together. It looked like something you'd find in a dumpster, to be honest. But the truck driver sure is patriotic - he's displaying the FLAG!

It's also a whole helluva lot more patriotic than standing on the world stage engaging in a third-grade, name-calling pissing match with foreign leaders, which is how president Trump spent the rest of last week.

Yeah, it's too early to retire this theme.

September 22, 2017

TGIF 9/22/17

Random thoughts as we cross off another Friday on the calendar:

Is it a thing now, for people to drive cars that are clearly so low on blinker fluid that their turn signals simply cannot signal their turns? (Asking for a friend.)

Now, on to more weighty subjects: Arizona Senator John McCain must truly be channeling his dear friend Ted Kennedy again. McCain and Kennedy were tied together in politics, and now in health -McCain's brain tumor is the same kind that Kennedy had.

Late this afternoon, McCain went on record as a no vote on the "last, best chance" for Republicans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. I can't help thinking that he's remembering the passion with which Ted Kennedy fought to bring health insurance to millions of Americans, even as he fought his own diagnosis, and that he can't imagine being responsible for taking health insurance away from millions of Americans.  Kudos to you, Senator McCain. Hopefully a couple of other Republican senators will follow in your footsteps and do the same.

News broke yesterday that the brain of Aaron Hernandez, the former New England Patriot who was convicted of murder and then took his own life in jail at the age of 27, was suffering from chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE. Based an examination of his brain tissue, he was at stage three of the disease (stage four is the max); his was the "most severe case they had ever seen for someone his age" according to attorney Jose Baez, who is suing the Pats and the NFL on behalf of Hernandez' daughter. This suit is outside the class action suit in which the NFL is paying a billion dollars to retired players from whom the league allegedly hid the risk of CTE. The league has promised a vigorous defense; the Pats have not yet responded.

Also, speaking of the NFL, Colin Kaepernick is still unemployed. There was an interesting discussion on WBUR's On Point radio show today (you can listen to the podcast here). Kaepernick is a better quarterback than many of the 28 starters and their backups - it's foolish, some say, to pretend that he's not qualified to play.

One thing is different now than it was in the past. Today, NFL players are not afraid to speak out in support of Kaep and are not afraid to show their own activist streaks. And some are even comfortable continuing to protest this season, after Kaep paved the way for them. There's more courage around speaking out, albeit silently, about injustice and discrimination and racism, which ARE a fact of life in America whether we're willing to admit it or not.

It's quite a bit different than it was a year ago, when Myke Tavarres was an unsigned rookie looking to make the team for the Philadelphia Eagles. As I noted in my post at that time, Tavarres announced his decision to participate in a protest, saying this:
In this situation, I've really got nothing to lose. I'm a rookie free agent, haven't signed any major contract, so there's not a lot of money on the line, I don't have any big endorsement deals on the line. Really what's at stake is my pride and what kind of man would I be and what kind of African-American would I be if I didn't stand my ground on this issue we have today?
Until his agent sat him down and read him the riot act, and Tavarres apologized for being a distraction.
I want to make change in this world but sitting down during the national anthem just isn't the best way to do it. With that being said, I do plan on finding a better way. 
He ended up being cut by the Eagles in 2016, and by the Saskatchewan Rough Riders of the CFL earlier this year.

Meanwhile, Kaep's jersey continues to be a best seller, even though he's not even in the league anymore. And I continue to be pretty darn sure that people are not standing in their living rooms during the national anthem.

TGIF.

September 21, 2016

My Middle-aged White Lady Perspective: Who Should Leave?

I think I've seen the Tomi Lahren video telling Colin Kaepernick he should leave America if he doesn't like it here, and oh by the way, that he sucks, come across my Facebook feed over 100 times. And tons of memes, and other angry posts echoing that sentiment. And every time I see the video, and the memes and the other angry posts I want to tell them the same thing: why don't YOU leave, if you don't like it here?

Here in America, where corporations deserve protected freedom of speech rights, athletes don't have the right to stay if they want to complain about their perceptions and beliefs about the treatment their fellow Americans receive?  And where a person who hasn't 'directly experienced' what they're protesting, or who 'has money' doesn't deserve to live here if they choose to protest?

People who are angry with the anthem protesters are quick to point out that America's soldiers fought for the flag, and for our country, and that it denigrates and belittles and makes a mockery of their sacrifice to protest the flag or the anthem. And while it is undeniable that nearly three million Americans have been killed or wounded, counted as military casualties of war, were those sacrifices made so that people who dare protest on a very visible and national stage should be told to get out of the country? Is that really the American ideal our soldiers took to battle?

Some will say the sacrifices were made by order not by choice, because many of those injured and lost were drafted; that they fought for their own lives as much as they did for our country. Others maintain that the majority of the battles we've fought since our founding were not so much defending our freedoms but instead, trying to give our freedoms to others around the world. And whether or not you believe either of those theories, can you deny that the people who fought the hardest for our freedoms were those who outlined them in our Bill of Rights and the Constitution?

Even many veterans say that, while they may disagree with the nature of the protest, the right to do it belongs to all Americans, including those who are dissatisfied with the government, or aspects of our culture, or with the police, or with institutionalized racism, or any of the many things about which we protest.

Further, I maintain that if we were to ask them, our veterans would more likely say they fought for the rights of Colin Kaepernick than those of Hobby Lobby and other corporations, would you agree?

The people who want anthem protesters to leave America, or who feel this is just one more insult and abomination of the Obama Administration might want to look at our history, and a couple of Supreme Court decisions  that contained language relevant to what we're looking at today. The cases were highlighted in this article on The New Yorker's web page last week.

The cases both involved children of Jehovah's Witness families who refused to salute the flag or pledge allegiance to it, those activities being incongruous with their faith. In both cases, the children were kicked out of school for their actions.

In the first case, 1940's Minersville vs. Board of Education,the family sued because they had to pay to educate their children at private schools, after they were expelled and because their First Amendment rights were infringed.The court ruled 8-1 that kicking the kids out of school for not pledging and saluting did not violate their freedoms of religion and speech. Writing the opinion, Justice Felix Frankfurter noted, among other things,
Conscientious scruples have not, in the course of the long struggle for religious toleration, relieved the individual from obedience to a general law not aimed at the promotion of restriction of religious beliefs... National unity is the basis of national security... The influences which help toward a common feeling for the common country are manifold. Some may seem harsh, and others no doubt are foolish. Surely, however, the end is legitimate.
Bottom line: your deeply held beliefs notwithstanding, all children must pledge their allegiance, or else. Sort of sounds like Tomi and The Memes, doesn't it?

The second case, West Virginia Board of Education vs. Barnette, was decided only three years later, in the build up to World War II. The decision this time? Six to three in support of the Barnette sisters that their expulsion was wrong. From the majority opinion, written by Justice Robert Jackson, we learn this (emphasis added):
To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous, instead of a compulsory routine, is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds.
What (slaps head as if in a V8 commercial)? How simple is that concept, that patriotism will not come to an end simply because Colin Kaepernick doesn't stand for the national anthem?
We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great.
Sitting or kneeling, raising a fist or linking arms during the National Anthem? Are those harmful acts, to others or to the State? Of course not. They're not harmful when done in the NFL, or in Major League Soccer, or in one of my local high schools.

They are acts that jeopardize nothing, other than perhaps some sponsorship dollars, maybe some beer sales if people actually get mad enough to stay at home instead of going to an NFL game. Staying at home, mind you, where no one will ever know whether they're patriotically standing for the anthem in their living room.
But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.  
The 'existing order' is that everyone stand, regardless of the fervor of their patriotism, or how much they truly value our freedoms, or the extent to which they believe those freedoms extend to all Americans. We have no idea, looking around, who really believes what, or who loves our country - except Colin Kaepernick and those who protest with him.

The substance of freedom is not kicking out those who would publicly protest the symbols of our country, rather than hiding in a corner somewhere out of sight, out of mind and airing their grievances to no one. No - that is the shadow of freedom Justice Jackson told us about in 1943.

From my middle aged white lady perspective, perhaps it's the people who cannot differentiate between the shadow and the substance who are the ones who should leave.

August 31, 2016

Quick Takes (v11): You Can't Have it All

Quick Takes
Myke Tavarres, an unsigned rookie linebacker trying to make the roster for the Philadelphia Eagles, announced Monday that he would join Colin Kaepernick in protesting racism and oppression in America by sitting during the national anthem at his next football game.

In a conversation with ESPN, he noted
Oh, I thought about it. Believe me, I definitely thought about it. And usually I'm front and center on the line with the rest of the guys, and that's since pre-K all the way up. Saturday's game, I stepped back, I was in the background and it didn't feel right to me at all, and so I will be taking a stand -- or sitting down -- for the fourth game.
We've got an issue in this country in this day and age, and I feel like somebody needs to step up and we all need to step up. We've got that right. There's just a lot going on that people don't want to talk about, and I feel like us as athletes, we're looked at as role models. and I feel like with Colin Kaepernick, he's doing a great job for standing up in what he believes in, and most people may not like that, but that's his opinion, he's entitled to it, and I respect him for doing it.
 In this situation, I've really got nothing to lose. I'm a rookie free agent, haven't signed any major contract, so there's not a lot of money on the line, I don't have any big endorsement deals on the line. Really what's at stake is my pride and what kind of man would I be and what kind of African-American would I be if I didn't stand my ground on this issue we have today?
Will there be backlash? Probably. I don't think anyone has bought my jersey, so I don't know if it's going to be burned, but it's a major issue and I'm definitely going to stand my ground for this one.
Definitely standing his ground, that is, until he had a talk with his agent after the ESPN interview hit the airwaves.  For we have learned that Tavarres plans to stand, and likely sing his heart out for the cameras, at Thursday's game.

Corey Williams, his agent, agreed that he advised his client to change his position.
Myke's goal is and will always be to make the Eagles' 53-man roster and help the team win a Super Bowl.
Here's the statement released by his agent.
I want to apologize for the distraction I've become for all of Eagle Nation. I feel passionate about racial issues going on in our country and I thought that sitting during the National Anthem would bring more awareness to the issue and encourage more constructive discussion to find solutions, but I feel I only made things worse. I want to make change in this world but sitting down during the national anthem just isn't the best way to do it. With that being said, I do plan on finding a better way. I'm young and I still have a lot to learn about saying and doing the right thing. For now, I will stay focused on football, but I will definitely look for opportunities to do what I can to prevent injustices. I am so blessed to be an American and I just feel a responsibility to do what I can to make thing better.
Make things better by sitting down and shutting up?

What that really means is, Myke Tavarres was given a choice: you can apologize for having an opinion, and try and have a career, with an agent that supports you, or you can go stand on your soapbox (or sit on it, as the case may be) and try to change the world.

And it appears it was made clear to the rookie that the best time to do the latter is when you're older. Out of football. When you're not worried about having endorsements. Or an agent. When you've exhausted your physical prowess and don't have anything else to offer the NFL, you go be a stand up guy, and have your pride.

Because trying to have it all: an agent, and a career, and an opinion, and the courage of your convictions? Yeah, that's not gonna work.