12thHawkDawg wrote:Good morning Hawk Sista!
Thank you for taking the time to consider this post. I have traveled the world and find it fantastic that you and I can respectfully express ourselves without the "man" coming down on us. This is just not the case elsewhere.
I hope we can keep all the negativity in the world off the NFL playing field and concentrate on having a great game to experience. The NFL is good at bringing people together. The color of your skin or your political views do not matter to the NFL. On the field in Seattle, everyone is equal and works toward one goal: beating the 49ers... ha!
Have fun!
12thHawkDawg
NorthHawk wrote:Be careful about putting limits on how you define patriotism. Your version may be different from others.
Some think a true patriot is one who sees a wrong within their society or country and is willing to sacrifice himself (in some manner) to better it.
Others see true patriots as only those willing to die when their country calls them to duty a la Pat Tillman in a foreign land.
And there are other viewpoints, too.
Both noted examples are correct and both should be celebrated as the intent is to better the world we all live in.
CK chose the former to try to make his mark.
That it bothers so many might just mean he hit a nerve with some.
Granted, nobody likes sports and politics to be mixed, and it's not my first choice, but how much bigger a venue to choose than in the most popular sport in the country?
Seahawks4Ever wrote:I respect YOUR right to speak up for and DEFEND Old Glory that you fought for! I can understand the "concept" that burning our flag is an "expression" of speech and therefore protected speech, , I just cannot think that any true patriot would even consider actually burning Old Glory. Just because it may be legal to do something doesn't mean that one should do it!
edit; In other words, I myself can think of no good reason to disrespect the flag, I would hope that one would find another way to raise attention to their cause.
yoder wrote:As somebody once said on this forum, Sunday Football used to be my sanctuary from politics. Can't remember who, but it was a damn good quote!
monkey wrote:Yes, it once was, but the players themselves, who were told by activists that they had to use their platform, to speak out, (the way the activists wanted them to, of course), or else they were immoral, (a lie!) brought in the politics.
Now, there is no escape.
vahawker wrote:I think if he had "only" knelt during the anthem things would be different, but his socks, the idiot shirt, and kneeling during Military Day before the Chargers game(although given his stance he really had no choice) took things beyond what many people could accept. Let's not forget that he is not on an NFL roster because HE chose not to be when he opted out of his contract. Quite possible, likely even, that the 49ers would have cut him, but we will never know. Now he says he will no longer kneel, to the cynic, that smacks of hypocrisy and further diminishes his stature in people's eyes. I applaud what he has done in the community(rarely mentioned in stories abut him) and for putting his time and money where his mouth is. My father fought his way across the Pacific Islands to give him the freedom of that protest. He also fought to give the owners the right to protest his protest by refusing to sign him to play for them.
kalibane wrote:The Kaepernick thing has been instructive. The way people react to it almost without fail tells us way more about the person reacting to him than it does about Kaepernick himself.
Some of the things he's done are cool (the actual charity work); some of the things he's done exhibit questionable education (the Castro shirt, not voting); some of the things he's done are blown completely out of proportion and turned into rank propaganda (the pig socks, I know more people who don't like cops than do regardless of race, age, gender or political affiliation); and most of it boils down to the fact that he wasn't really seeking the attention. He made a personal choice that a reporter noticed and then turned it into a big story.
Now you have a country full of people ready to claw each other's eyes out over something that wasn't even a universal practice in the NFL until 2009 when the Dept. of Defense started paying for these pre-game ceremonies to be staged. That is not to say that players didn't stand prior to 2009 but it wasn't a "requirement" and no one was scanning the field or checking the locker room for people who didn't line up with their hand over their heart.
This whole thing is a clusterF@*# of epidemic proportion and more indicative of our highly polarized political climate that it is saying anything about how good or bad a person or role model Colin Kaepernick is.
monkey wrote:Oly, that really was a terrific and well written response, much of which I agree with; but you're underestimating the activists influence, you underestimate just how much time and money they spend trying to get celebrities to echo their talking point$.
kalibane wrote:Kaepernick didn't divide us Riv. We were already divided.
You don't have one actual recorded instance of him espousing violence against police or getting into an altercation with an Officer himself (verbal or otherwise) and IMO it's blowing things out of proportion to use socks to dismiss someone entirely out of hand. If those socks, something you'd find at Spencer's Gifts, are what you are holding on to to make Kaepernick the villain and dismiss the issues he's talking about there is something wrong.
Black people have more distrust built around cops and the government than other parts of the population and it's earned. The Supreme Court just unanimously struck down gerrymandered districts in North Carolina because they were drawn to disenfranchise the black voters. Voting Laws have been struck down in Wisconsin, NC, Texas, Alabama and more because they were racially discriminatory. There consent decrees in dozens of cities because police have been found on a systematic level to have targeted and unfairly treated black citizens. The Justice Department is actively trying to roll back civil rights protections. This didn't happen 40-50 years ago. It's happening today. But instead looking at the big picture and seeing why Kaepernick might be seeing these things and being upset, not reacting to them perfectly but understanding that he might have valid feelings of resentment... forget all that because... socks. He's mad at what he perceives as systematic violence against people who look like him. You're mad at socks.
NorthHawk wrote:I think in today's world anything that is even remotely political in nature is divisive.
The extremes on both sides seem to drive the agendas and that creates contempt and closes minds of each side.
The result is the compassionate and understanding members (not necessarily moderates, but those who are rational
enough to see the other opinion) on each side are being marginalized in this world dominated by sound bites and "Breaking News".
RiverDog wrote:I can agree with a lot of that, but I'll add to your comments that a lot of our divisiveness is driven by the media.
NorthHawk wrote:I'm probably not alone, but I yearn for a party that is pragmatic.
Both the left and right have good ideas. We need someone or political party who takes those good ideas and puts them together into a single platform for voter approval.
Unfortunately, ideologues seem to be running the shows these days with little room for consideration of outside ideas. It's a problem not for American politics alone as the
divides are becoming more apparent everywhere in western democracies. At least that's how I see it.
monkey wrote:The irony is, pragmatism is EXACTLY what got the current president, who you and so may others hate so much, elected!
A whole bunch of people who are sick and tired of the political fights and tantrums decided to throw their weight behind a guy who said that he would put our interests ahead of other countries and even ahead of politics. Middle America, fly over country, got tired of their pragmatism and common sense being ignored by both parties, and elected someone who least resembles a typical politician.
In not saying that's good or bad, just that it happened.
NorthHawk wrote:I think he CLAIMED to be pragmatic, but his actions seem more in keeping with the ideology of his political handlers like Bannon.
jshawaii22 wrote:and as long as he's not a starter for us, I'm good with that. Lets move on to real football.
I wasn't a Trump supporter, I'm a Ted Cruz guy myself, but you're right that so far, his actions have been much better than I was expecting. I figured he'd drift back to being the New York lib he's been most of his life, but his cabinet appointments, his actions towards Israel, and now, thankfully his pulling out of that horrible Paris accord, have all been much better than I could have ever expected.
So far, he's been mostly terrific. All the stupid reports of chaps even etc..., I just ignore that nonsense, it's lies driven by a media that hates him passionately.
He's going too be re elected easily in the next election because his policies are already having a positive effect on our economy.
I haven't been this happy with a president since Reagan.
Oh brother, your part of 38%!!
Yes
Then I'm not sure you have any room to judge. Just one man's opinion, though.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests