The Liberal Assault on the NFL

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Since we can't mention politics in the current events thread on the NFL, I'll start a thread here.

If you weren't following over there- I'll do my best to bring you up to speed- but in the meantime, I'll just point out that I'm right about the fact the left politicizes everything.  And IMHO, it's the beginning of the end of the NFL as we know it.  


The NFL now has a "Vice President for Social Responsibility", so you can pretty much stick a fork in the league- it's done.  You see, it's not about domestic violence- it's about emasculating the sport.

espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11531293/roger-goodell-nfl-create-social-responsibility-role-help-domestic-violence-social-issues

The commissioner announced that Anna Isaacson will be the league's vice president for social responsibility -- a new position -- in addition to her current role as the league's vice president of community affairs and philanthropy.

Just the kind of moonbattery the left would embrace, but...

Terry O'Neill, the president for the National Organization of Women (NOW), issued a statement that the NFL's hires are "a step in the right direction -- but it's not enough."

It never is, Roger. It never is.

[djAdvocate]

Haliburton should get one of those.  it is good for PR.

meanwhile, the rot continues.

[chiver78]

thank you for starting this thread over here where it belongs.

I think you're off in outer space with this opinion, but you can definitely rant in the Politics board about it.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2014 11:16:37 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Liberals were involved in this how? The league created this position on their own. She's not there to police anything, she's there to do damage/spin control.

Keep grasping at those straws though, you might get something one day.

anyone who thinks that the NFL gives two f(*ks about liberalism should seek counseling, imo.

[973beachbum]

So I have to stop watching sports if I'm a liberal?

Who wants to tell the NFL and MLB?  They are going to love this!

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 16, 2014 11:21:30 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

thank you for starting this thread over here where it belongs.

I think you're off in outer space with this opinion, but you can definitely rant in the Politics board about it.

As I've said- when politicians get involved in everything, everything is politics. It is not my opinion, or my decision, but my observation. It wasn't me that brought up how men need to be reprogrammed to not be men- that was the solution proposed by (totally un-PC joke ahead ---->) some broad who clearly needs to be slapped on ESPN (you can't say you weren't warned).

Now that you have Rice beating his wife, and Peterson beating his child-- just wait, we're going to be into a full-fledged white liberal elite assault on the "culture of violence" in sports, and how it causes war, and perpetuates poverty, and that's when the liberal shakedown of the NFL will begin in earnest. You see, we need "funding", so we can reprogram men. The obvious racial overtones of the whole mess will be ignored because rich, white, liberal elites can say anything they want.

You may not understand my argument- it is definitely a message "for those who have ears to hear", but it's spot on. Maybe you'll see it one day, maybe you won't. If you don't like it- please, instead of the long fancy shame me into shutting up approach- and the "no its not" argument-- try making a counter intellectual point.

Fundamentally, if you understand that liberalism is an ideology at war with nature- you can decode the whole thing. Once you grasp this, you understand why you so often find moral confusion in liberalism- in liberalism, it's not right and wrong, it's always those perceived to be weak vs. those perceived to be strong-- and the entire function of liberalism is to make sure the odds are even-- even if it means aiding and abetting evil.

This is why liberals were confounded by what Hitler did when he was appeased. It's why the foreign policy of Ronald Reagan baffled them so and why some in his administration kept telling him to "tone it down", and they even tried to strike the 'provocative' statement of the obvious-- that the Soviet Union was an "evil empire" from his speech. It explains the appeasement of radical islam, and the entire "blame America first" crowd on the left. And yes, it explains their contempt for "jocks" in general at all levels, and their disgust with some aspects of professional sports- especially the money, and "celebrating in the end zone"-- basically anything that shoves winning in the face of the losers.

Look, words like "conspicuous consumption", and "McMansion" are words that come from the intellectual underpinnings of the left. They are words of contempt for winners. For those who are prosperous. They hate SUVs, they used to hate cell phones until Cardinal Jobs blessed the devices and made them "cool".

Liberals believe that through some cosmic accident the wrong people are in charge. The wrong people are rich, and the wrong people win. They don't like the structure of the universe itself. They fail to realize that there's an unequal distribution of human liberty underpinned by an absolute moral code and connected to personal responsibility. Instead, they see an unequal distribution of wealth, regard it as unfair, and see the role of government-- the only institution that should have guns-- as taking from those that have "too much" and giving it to those that have "too little".

So, sports naturally bothers them. Let's face it- some people are born into this world who possess natural traits that make them superior athletes, and they generate more interest than teachers, firefighters, police, and even soldiers-- so they get paid millions of dollars to play games while others grind it out, and risk their lives. Don't think this doesn't drive liberals up the wall-- especially when they'd like to get their hands on that money to pay for climate researchers, and to force gender studies and training for oral sex on first graders. And why do they do those things I just mentioned (the aren't made up)? They do them to upset affluent suburban WASPS who they see as people who deserve to be humilated, whose children ought to be divorced from their values and trained to believe in moral relativism and appreciate the challenges of transgendered gay muslims in white, racist, homophobic America. Because you know- the whole of society should be conformed to the outlook and worldview of 19 fucking weirdos. And if you disagree-- you're a bully, and need to be sent to some re-education camp.

So, yeah- this is one big complicated clusterfuck for an NFL commissioner trying to appease the wacko coalition on the left- the race baiters, poverty pimps, and feminists all have a stake in the outcome-- so do you rush out and suspend the guy for a year, or release him and have Al Sharpton chanting "No justice, no peace" outside your stadiums on Sunday, or do you go easy on the black guy and have NOW all up in your shit?

And you'll note- none of this is really directly related to the issue-- but it's all stuff that has to be considered in the brave new world we now occupy.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2014 13:30:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 16, 2014 11:21:30 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

thank you for starting this thread over here where it belongs.

I think you're off in outer space with this opinion, but you can definitely rant in the Politics board about it.

As I've said- when politicians get involved in everything, everything is politics.

maybe i am not paying attention here, but what politicians got involved?

[chiver78]

Sept 16, 2014 13:37:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 16, 2014 13:30:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

As I've said- when politicians get involved in everything, everything is politics.

maybe i am not paying attention here, but what politicians got involved?

and I guess I need to ask Paul - am I a liberal or not? you've called me one before, but in the past couple days' worth of rants, you claim I'm not.

hint: you don't know. you really don't. and you don't know as much as you think you do.

[Wisconsin Beth]

Sept 16, 2014 13:37:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 16, 2014 13:30:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

As I've said- when politicians get involved in everything, everything is politics.

maybe i am not paying attention here, but what politicians got involved?

Maybe he's counting the Gov. of Minn. saying that the Vikings should suspend AP? 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

My observation in the other thread is that we were witnessing liberalism at war with liberalism in this.

1. First, you've got a black NFL player and a white commissioner- the guy is looking at Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown and probably went the two week suspension, and let's withhold the video because you know-- a black guy can't ever really be a threat to someone, right? Punish the guy too hard, you're a racist. So there's that.

2. Rice is just a gentle giant-- and after all, his girlfriend assaulted him first- spitting on him, and hitting him. And what if she's a white African-American? Can we get the NY Times opinion on this?

2. I guess violence-against-women is apparently the trump card of all trump cards. You can strong arm rob a convenience store and be a gentle giant that poses no threat to anyone, you can break a police officer's face with your fists; you can straddle a man and beat his head into the concrete sidewalk, but if you knock a woman unconscious-- that is a bridge too far.

3. Releasing video of violent black men behaving violently is racist. Remember the video of the "gentle giant" robbing the store? Even though there were numerous requests for any and all video- when it was revealed the gentle giant was just another budding street rat, then releasing that video was racist. So, the NFL had the video- but they denied it, and wouldn't release it because it's racist to do that-- well, unless it shows an NFL player knocking a woman unconscious.

4. Does money play a role? Trayvon and Brown didn't have a possible $4 million coming this year. Maybe you can be a gentle giant if you're poor? If you have a million or two and you nearly kill someone with your bare hands- perhaps then it's not acceptable.

5. Anyone else here think that the media has seized upon the NFL as the greatest threat facing America today because if they weren't focused on the Washington Redskins and Ray Rice-- they'd have to cover Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, the rise of ISIS, the record debt and deficits, ObamaCare's collapse, and the total joke that is man-made-climate change?

I come down on #5 -- knowing about it, it's appalling, and I think a big part of the reason players make millions of dollars is that fans come to see them play. If a player is a turn off- as wife-beaters typically are- then that costs the employer something and it is the business-- literally the business-- of that employer to deal with the negative image of their company as a result of bad moral character on the part of Rice. The prosecutors certainly went easy on him because of who he was-- no doubt in my mind the NFL used their influence. The random black man that knocks a woman unconscious is not going to get counselling and probation. That's two felonies- assault and battery-- maybe even aggravated battery. Athletes can be considered weapons so you might even through in "with a deadly weapon". Anyway- no doubt something should be done. But the real reason we're all discussing this is that it is a convenient distraction, and an opportunity for the lamestream press to attack the NFL because they disobeyed the dear leader on changing the name of the Redskins, and you must obey the leader.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 16, 2014 13:46:01 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Sept 16, 2014 13:37:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

maybe i am not paying attention here, but what politicians got involved?

and I guess I need to ask Paul - am I a liberal or not? you've called me one before, but in the past couple days' worth of rants, you claim I'm not.

hint: you don't know. you really don't. and you don't know as much as you think you do.

Politicians may have been the wrong word-- though, I'm sure by now some idiot running for office somewhere has chimed it-- political activists may have been more accurate.  When you have the leadership of NOW chiming in- it's a political issue.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 16, 2014 13:46:01 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

Sept 16, 2014 13:37:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

maybe i am not paying attention here, but what politicians got involved?

and I guess I need to ask Paul - am I a liberal or not? you've called me one before, but in the past couple days' worth of rants, you claim I'm not.

hint: you don't know. you really don't. and you don't know as much as you think you do.

I just go by the numbers.  When you meet someone, there's a 4 in 10 shot they already self-identify as a conservative-- the nation's largest ideological group.  There's about 2 in 10 shot they self-identify as liberal.  I've been politically active for a fairly long time- since about 1989.  In that time, I've seen a lot of people become conservatives or libertarians that were previously liberal, I can honestly tell you I don't know, and in fact have never even heard about someone who "used to be conservative".  

Sports have so many parallels to real life, and liberalism, as I've said, is an ideology at war with nature-- at war with real life.  Therefore, I feel that the odds are pretty good that someone who really likes sports, but self-identifies as liberal may just be a member of that larger group who are conservative, but they don't know it yet.  It's easy to identify as liberal- you don't have to really think about anything or do anything to be a liberal.  That's why our liberal party- the Democrats- depend on the "low information voter", recent immigrants, straight party line victim-group voting blocks.  

But as soon as the more intelligent, curious liberals I know start to delve into the issues in a meaningful way- their liberalism almost never survives the crucible of serious thought.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2014 14:05:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 16, 2014 13:46:01 GMT -5 chiver78 said:

and I guess I need to ask Paul - am I a liberal or not? you've called me one before, but in the past couple days' worth of rants, you claim I'm not.

hint: you don't know. you really don't. and you don't know as much as you think you do.

I just go by the numbers.  When you meet someone, there's a 4 in 10 shot they already self-identify as a conservative-- the nation's largest ideological group.  There's about 2 in 10 shot they self-identify as liberal.

oh.  you meant political in the trivial sense, not in the specific sense.  got it.

yes, i am sure that the actors involved in any transaction have political feelings of one sort or another.

i thought you were making a specific claim.  my error.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2014 13:55:36 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

My observation in the other thread is that we were witnessing liberalism at war with liberalism in this.

1. First, you've got a black NFL player and a white commissioner- the guy is looking at Trayvon Martin, and Michael Brown and probably went the two week suspension, and let's withhold the video because you know-- a black guy can't ever really be a threat to someone, right? Punish the guy too hard, you're a racist. So there's that.

i'll just address this first claim, and assume that the other examples are equally good/bad.

in the TM case, we had an unarmed teen gunned down by an armed non-professional security hack.  the teen had every right to be where he was, and there is no evidence who threw the first punch, only how it ended up.

in the second case, we have two unarmed individuals, one of whom knocked the other out cold.  the person knocked out was outmatched, and everyone is a witness to it via video tape, so there is no disputing what happened.

in both of these cases, this liberal is siding with the person who was the victim of excessive force.  race played no role in it whatsoever.  it is up to the defense to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that excessive force was necessary/justified, from my point of view.  i realize that is not how the law works in certain states, but that is the perspective from which i judge these cases, and i think it is absolutely coherent.  i am no more at war with myself over these two cases than you are.

[happyhoix]

5. Anyone else here think that the media has seized upon the NFL as the greatest threat facing America today

OK there is where you went off course. The media has NOT said that the NFL is the greatest threat facing America today.

The NFL will do some symbolic shit, they'll appoint someone to some touchy feely post which has ZERO meaning but sounds nice. This isn't the first shit storm they weathered - there was the guy that probably hired a buddy to kill his pregnant GF, the guy who ran the dog fighting ring, the guy who killed his buddy because he made fun of him - each time, the NFL flapped their hands, made some empty statements, appointed someone to a touchy feeling positions, donated money to this or that foundation, etc etc, and in the end, it all blew over and we still play football. 

There is no liberal conspiracy to end football, and even if there was, they wouldn't be able to.

If I were you, I would spend my time worrying that the player's union may start requiring changes in the regulations and helmets due to all the medical evidence that repeated head impacts cause long term damage - but that won't come from squishy liberals, it will come from the players themselves.  

[happyhoix]

3. Releasing video of violent black men behaving violently is racist. Remember the video of the "gentle giant" robbing the store? Even though there were numerous requests for any and all video- when it was revealed the gentle giant was just another budding street rat, then releasing that video was racist. So, the NFL had the video- but they denied it, and wouldn't release it because it's racist to do that-- well, unless it shows an NFL player knocking a woman unconscious.

I can't even begin to follow your line of reasoning here. Your philosophical contortions to blame liberals for everything in life that pisses you off gives me a headache.

The NFL didn't release the video because they were busy trying to cover their asses. They don't want to lose a valuable player, but if the video got out they would be obligated to fire him - because clearly that was assault.  They don't want the negative publicity of an NFL player slugging a woman, because that makes the whole sport look bad. There are tons of very good reasons they tried to sit on this video, none of them at all related to racism. 

I can't follow what your argument is. Are you saying NFL players ought to be allowed to punch out their GF's because to demand they refrain from spousal abuse will make all the players limp wristed and delicate, which will ruin the game of football?

 

[happyhoix]

But as soon as the more intelligent, curious liberals I know start to delve into the issues in a meaningful way- their liberalism almost never survives the crucible of serious thought.

  So only stupid people are liberals, all the smart ones are conservatives.

[Wisconsin Beth]

Anheuser-Busch, the beer maker that spends a fortune on NFL advertising and sponsorship, has released a strongly worded statement in response to the controversies that have unfolded over the last week regarding Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Greg Hardy and Ray McDonald.

“We are disappointed and increasingly concerned by the recent incidents that have overshadowed this NFL season. We are not yet satisfied with the league’s handling of behaviors that so clearly go against our own company culture and moral code. We have shared our concerns and expectations with the league,” the statement said.

  from profootballtalk.com 

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/16/anheuser-busch-disappointed-concerned-dissatisfied-with-nfl/

[dondub]

 Yep, the NFL as we know it is now emasculated and near death. What's next... flag football instead of knocking women unconscious and bruising a 4 years privates? Dang liberals should just let it be.

[mmhmm]

I'm still trying to figure out why liberals, or anybody else for that matter, would be hell-bent on bringing down the NFL. Who the heck cares that much about the NFL?  Really?  Who?  I guess those whose paychecks are signed by them care. 

[mmhmm]

Sept 16, 2014 14:57:38 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

Anheuser-Busch, the beer maker that spends a fortune on NFL advertising and sponsorship, has released a strongly worded statement in response to the controversies that have unfolded over the last week regarding Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Greg Hardy and Ray McDonald.

“We are disappointed and increasingly concerned by the recent incidents that have overshadowed this NFL season. We are not yet satisfied with the league’s handling of behaviors that so clearly go against our own company culture and moral code. We have shared our concerns and expectations with the league,” the statement said.

  from profootballtalk.com 

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/16/anheuser-busch-disappointed-concerned-dissatisfied-with-nfl/

Anheuser Busch has a stake in what's going on, I suppose. They pay for advertising. Just like the advertisers here on ProBoards are very tight about keeping content PG13, apparently Anheuser Busch doesn't want to be associated with organizations that seem to be blase about employees who deck their fiancees on elevators, while being filmed, then drag the unconscious victim around like a sack of rocks. That's their right.

[Wisconsin Beth]

Sept 16, 2014 15:02:22 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Sept 16, 2014 14:57:38 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

  from profootballtalk.com 

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/09/16/anheuser-busch-disappointed-concerned-dissatisfied-with-nfl/

Anheuser Busch has a stake in what's going on, I suppose. They pay for advertising. Just like the advertisers here on ProBoards are very tight about keeping content PG13, apparently Anheuser Busch doesn't want to be associated with organizations that seem to be blase about employees who deck their fiancees on elevators, while being filmed, then drag the unconscious victim around like a sack of rocks. That's their right.

Yep.  And using a switch on a 4 year old after stuffing leaves in his mouth apparently doesn't sit well for them either.  Go A-B

[happyhoix]

Sept 16, 2014 14:58:26 GMT -5 dondub said:

 Yep, the NFL as we know it is now emasculated and near death. What's next... flag football instead of knocking women unconscious and bruising a 4 years privates? Dang liberals should just let it be.

Naw, we need games without winners or losers, so no one feels bad when they lose

Someone gave my son a Thomas the Tank Engine game when he was about 4. There was no point to the game, you just moved a train around the track and put things on it and off it. No one won or lost. When I read the directions on the game, it said it was supposed to 'promote co-operation.'

We played it once and very quickly my son announced "this is stupid" so we put it up and played his favorite game, the one with the ghost that chases all the players, killing the slow ones until all the players have either been killed or have reached a 'safe zone' in the castle dungeon.

Whoever thought little boys would want to play a game with no winners or losers really hasn't met very many little boys. I don't think Paul has to worry about emasculated males too much.  

[greeniis10]

I don't get the whole "liberal" thing as related to this topic, but the NFL is FAR from over.  It's way past time for a serious house cleaning and rule change, however.

But, the problem IMHO is that these athletes are treated as gods and given special treatment and praised from the moment in middle school (or sometimes earlier) when they show a glimpse of talent.  They are hand-held through high school and sometimes college and "minor" issues are swept under the rug because no one wants them to lose their big chance!  The problem is now the NFL is full of enabled kids who never grew up and were never taught ethics and morals because honing their athletic talent was much more important.

***This does NOT apply to all NFL players nor all athletes.  It's just my personal rant due to the NFL being "blamed" for the behavior of these guys.  Maybe they should have been taught better behavior and disciplined when they were younger? 

[steff]

Sept 16, 2014 11:34:25 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

So I have to stop watching sports if I'm a liberal?

Who wants to tell the NFL and MLB?  They are going to love this!

I'm a Liberal who likes Nascar & even *gasp* goes to races.    The drunk sitting next to me at the next race might be highly offended to find out that a damn dirty Liberal is next to him.  He's probably a Kyle Busch fan too. 

[steff]

Therefore, I feel that the odds are pretty good that someone who really likes sports, but self-identifies as liberal may just be a member of that larger group who are conservative, but they don't know it yet. It's easy to identify as liberal- you don't have to really think about anything or do anything to be a liberal.

Ok clearly this is leftover from yesterday & you telling me that I'm not really a Liberal.  My response was deleted (and I'm okay with that) so today I'll be a little more polite.


Dine heartily a phallic shaped symbol.   Because seriously, the things that I hate most about Republican politics aren't going to change.  The more religion is brought into conservative politics, the further away from their shit I want to get.  the more they declare thru actions that they believe men are just smarter & know better for women, the more stabby & angry I become.   I'm 46 yrs old, I have voted in local, state & federal elections every single time since I turned 18.  Only once have I ever flipped a Republican button in the booth & it was because I didn't have a choice but between 2 Republicans in a Georgia gov'n election.  I voted AGAINST the Tea Party Republican and still felt dirty having voted for the other Republican. 

I grew up in a Red state, but in the largest Liberal city in the state.  I grew up with Anne Richards, a strong female Democrat as the gov'n.  We had the first (not out) gay mayor in Houston with Kathy Whitmire.  Houston had one of the largest gay populations in the country & a thriving gay community.  I was raised by a divorced mom, doing it on her own.   working 2 and 3 jobs to support her 3 kids.  With NO child support.  when the Oil crash hit Houston & my mom lost her main job with an oil company, we were on food stamps for 6 months. I have a gay brother & I am pro-gay marriage/equal rights & treatment.  I am RABIDLY pro-choice.  that will NEVER change.  I have my reasons for it & I can guarantee you, it will never change. 

I could go on and on for all the reasons you are talking out your ass when it comes to me not being a real Liberal.  But it won't do any good with you.   You personify the "a man knows better than a woman" Republican that makes my skin crawl.  

Enjoy your fine dining.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2014 14:52:00 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

3. Releasing video of violent black men behaving violently is racist. Remember the video of the "gentle giant" robbing the store? Even though there were numerous requests for any and all video- when it was revealed the gentle giant was just another budding street rat, then releasing that video was racist. So, the NFL had the video- but they denied it, and wouldn't release it because it's racist to do that-- well, unless it shows an NFL player knocking a woman unconscious.

I can't even begin to follow your line of reasoning here. Your philosophical contortions to blame liberals for everything in life that pisses you off gives me a headache.

The NFL didn't release the video because they were busy trying to cover their asses. They don't want to lose a valuable player, but if the video got out they would be obligated to fire him - because clearly that was assault.  They don't want the negative publicity of an NFL player slugging a woman, because that makes the whole sport look bad. There are tons of very good reasons they tried to sit on this video, none of them at all related to racism. 

I can't follow what your argument is. Are you saying NFL players ought to be allowed to punch out their GF's because to demand they refrain from spousal abuse will make all the players limp wristed and delicate, which will ruin the game of football?

 

no, because liberals hate wife beaters, and presumably, conservatives don't.

[swamp]

Sept 16, 2014 15:06:53 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

Sept 16, 2014 15:02:22 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Anheuser Busch has a stake in what's going on, I suppose. They pay for advertising. Just like the advertisers here on ProBoards are very tight about keeping content PG13, apparently Anheuser Busch doesn't want to be associated with organizations that seem to be blase about employees who deck their fiancees on elevators, while being filmed, then drag the unconscious victim around like a sack of rocks. That's their right.

Yep.  And using a switch on a 4 year old after stuffing leaves in his mouth apparently doesn't sit well for them either.  Go A-B

What a bunch of freakin liberal pansies. 

[Deleted]

Steff gets my POTD! 

[Tennesseer]

It's magic mushroom season in Cocoa Beach Florida, as of late.