The Liberal Assault on the NFL

[Deleted]

Sept 30, 2017 23:38:46 GMT -5 Opti said:

Sept 30, 2017 23:23:35 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Just out if curiosity, I have to ask: What useful thing that Obama did does Trump want to damage? I've tried to find things that fit  that description and can't find any.

And you forgot "stop the damage to America"... so "not Obama, and not damage America, and not career politician" (dangerous and criminal are on the fence for me... so I gave in and allowed "criminal" when I reiterated my question with a comparison to Donald a few posts ago... you can have one or the other, but not both).

I'm not conservative and have no desire to go back to when Trump was born or slightly after, so I see him as causing damage to America. Some Bernie supporters voted for him Because He Would Damage America, so not all Trump voters even think he's leading them to the promised land.

I didn't forget your point. I just don't agree with it.

I don't know that Trump can or will fix the damage that Obama did to America. I do, however, know that Hillary pledged to continue the increasing damage started by Obama. That was the issue I was pointing at. Trump was promising (whether it was a lie or not is immaterial, all politicians lie) to end it.

You can disagree if you like. People's disagreement with/about it doesn't stop it from being reality. Obama's policies were damaging America. The problem with most Obama followers is that they were focused on the short term. It's like putting oatmeal or raw eggs in your leaking radiator. Yes, SHORT TERM the leak will stop leaking and things will appear better... but you'd better replace that radiator soon... or a leaky radiator will be the least of your problems.

[Virgil Showlion]

Sept 30, 2017 22:02:08 GMT -5 Opti said:

Sept 30, 2017 20:52:12 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I've heard this explanation proffered many times, but it makes no sense at all. The investigation is going to dig up what it digs up and conclude what it's going to conclude regardless of what the man tweets.

It makes sense because as he and his peeps are being investigated he knows what is being found out and what the investigators might think. He them knows things that will eventually be revealed to the public if Mueller continues on.

OK. And...?

Sept 30, 2017 22:14:55 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Sept 30, 2017 20:52:12 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I've heard this explanation proffered many times, but it makes no sense at all. The investigation is going to dig up what it digs up and conclude what it's going to conclude regardless of what the man tweets.

You build up your civilian allies so they will fight for you if you get in trouble.

Getting civilian allies on his side is a good strategy regardless of the ongoing investigations. You're simply assuming causality.

Sept 30, 2017 22:24:58 GMT -5 justme said:

Found on Facebook...

Tu quoque, at best.

At most, you can accuse any NFL critics who approved of the specific actions you've listed (as opposed to approving of Pres. Trump generally) of hypocrisy. But even this assumes critics want the same things from a president that they want from football players, which isn't a sound assumption.

[weltschmerz]

Sept 30, 2017 17:18:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Sept 30, 2017 13:28:30 GMT -5 tallguy said:

I would consider that an indictment of my colleagues and family members.  

Firstly, since Pres. Trump never featured in the discussions, their opinions solely concerned whether taking the knee during the anthem was an appropriate form of protest. This thread has mixed this together with the issue of punishment for the players, the appropriateness of the White House response, the legality of protest as free speech, etc., muddying the waters.

Secondly, their conclusion is based on a simple values judgment that I share: there's an appropriate time, place, and format for political protest, and this isn't one of them. Even if they consider the protest sincere, the message good, and the players within their rights.

You're acting like the athletes pulled their pants down and mooned the crowd during the anthem.
Taking a knee is quiet, peaceful, inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one.

[tallguy]

Sept 30, 2017 20:48:35 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Sept 30, 2017 17:34:40 GMT -5 tallguy said:

At any rate, taking a knee during the anthem is a mild form of protest, affecting nobody to any real degree.

As I see it, this the single most important difference between their view and yours.

They don't consider it a mild form of protest.

I'm about halfway between you and them. I don't consider it mild, but it also doesn't cause my blood to boil.

You probably should have quoted the next line too.

One's response to it depends entirely on their own feelings. 

There is no way that anyone anywhere is materially harmed by someone taking a knee for the anthem.  If someone chooses to be upset by it, it is because they choose to be upset by it, but there is still no real harm inflicted on anyone.  Any harm that exists was coming FROM the observers TOWARD the players, or in one notable case the anthem singer who received death threats.  I would suggest that it is false patriotism, small-minded thinking, and a stunning lack of both perspective and empathy to allow oneself to be seriously offended to that extent. 

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 2:16:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Sept 30, 2017 17:18:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Firstly, since Pres. Trump never featured in the discussions, their opinions solely concerned whether taking the knee during the anthem was an appropriate form of protest. This thread has mixed this together with the issue of punishment for the players, the appropriateness of the White House response, the legality of protest as free speech, etc., muddying the waters.

Secondly, their conclusion is based on a simple values judgment that I share: there's an appropriate time, place, and format for political protest, and this isn't one of them. Even if they consider the protest sincere, the message good, and the players within their rights.

You're acting like the athletes pulled their pants down and mooned the crowd during the anthem.
Taking a knee is quiet, peaceful, inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one.

"quiet, peaceful", I'll grant you, taking a knee is those.

"inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one" isn't even remotely true. It's very offensive to anyone that believes in respecting the flag. And while the "hurt" isn't physical, damaging the heart (or "soul", if you prefer) is still a painful injury.

Not that I'm suggesting anyone do this, but... someone could "quiet[ly], peaceful[ly]" take a on the flag and then use another flag to wipe their butt... doesn't mean that them doing it should just be ignored, just because they did it in a "quiet, peaceful" manner. Disrespect to the flag is disrespect to the flag... whether it's loud and uproarious or "quiet, peaceful".

[Deleted]

But killing people because of the color of their skin, locking them up, threatening their very existence... what kind of pain is that to 'disrespecting a flag'...

Eye fucking roll.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 4:21:36 GMT -5 oped said:

But killing people because of the color of their skin, locking them up, threatening their very existence... what kind of pain is that to 'disrespecting a flag'...

Eye fucking roll.

That's no comparison. I agree. No argument from me.

Now here's the part that'll really get you steamed: Under which flag were more people of color enslaved, killed, raped, beaten, and otherwise harmed or made dead just because of the color of their skin?

This flag?


Or this flag?




If you picked the first one, you are mistaken.

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 4:30:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Oct 1, 2017 4:21:36 GMT -5 oped said:

But killing people because of the color of their skin, locking them up, threatening their very existence... what kind of pain is that to 'disrespecting a flag'...

Eye fucking roll.

That's no comparison. I agree. No argument from me.

Now here's the part that'll really get you steamed: Under which flag were more people of color enslaved, killed, raped, beaten, and otherwise harmed or made dead just because of the color of their skin?

This flag?


Or this flag?




If you picked the first one, you are mistaken.

I think you need to define what under flag X means for starters. Is the latter only government actions? The current 50 star US flag has been in use since 1960. There were some horrible things that happened government wise during school desegregation in the 60s, but I do not remember deaths.

The 50-star flag was ordered by the then president Eisenhower on August 21, 1959, and was adopted in July 1960. It is the longest-used version of the U.S. flag and has been in use for over 57 years.[4]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_States

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 1:31:19 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 30, 2017 23:38:46 GMT -5 Opti said:

I'm not conservative and have no desire to go back to when Trump was born or slightly after, so I see him as causing damage to America. Some Bernie supporters voted for him Because He Would Damage America, so not all Trump voters even think he's leading them to the promised land.

I didn't forget your point. I just don't agree with it.

I don't know that Trump can or will fix the damage that Obama did to America. I do, however, know that Hillary pledged to continue the increasing damage started by Obama. That was the issue I was pointing at. Trump was promising (whether it was a lie or not is immaterial, all politicians lie) to end it.

You can disagree if you like. People's disagreement with/about it doesn't stop it from being reality. Obama's policies were damaging America. The problem with most Obama followers is that they were focused on the short term. It's like putting oatmeal or raw eggs in your leaking radiator. Yes, SHORT TERM the leak will stop leaking and things will appear better... but you'd better replace that radiator soon... or a leaky radiator will be the least of your problems.

Don't take up analogy writing as a future job ... please. Most people know or knew that ACA had to and would evolve. Much like Medicare has. Only haters who are so worried about their own taxes when fellow needier citizens are involved decided ACA would never change so x, y, and z would happen. Medicare has changed greatly over its life. What it covers changes and the industry is changed by it. Subacute facilities exist in part to cut medical costs and they were signed into law I think by Clinton. Prior to their existence people would have to remain in costly hospitals longer or discharge before being recovered.

Obama and I are focused on the long game. You are focused on the short term and your own magical things will never change for the better thinking. Many conservatives are happy to spend their money on more taxes to get us into wars that now are lasting decades. But help fellow citizens, heck no! We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens. Its no wonder such people sew in veterans and especially their own family into our flag which is why they get so emotional at perceived disrespect to the flag. Camera men kneel during the anthem all the time, so its not kneeling that has them emotional. Spectators sit during the anthem, talk, buy food, etc. but the crowd rarely bullies them into standing either. So is it really because they want all football players to stand or is it really about non white players taking a knee during the anthem?

[Shooby]

Oct 1, 2017 6:17:50 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 1:31:19 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I don't know that Trump can or will fix the damage that Obama did to America. I do, however, know that Hillary pledged to continue the increasing damage started by Obama. That was the issue I was pointing at. Trump was promising (whether it was a lie or not is immaterial, all politicians lie) to end it.

You can disagree if you like. People's disagreement with/about it doesn't stop it from being reality. Obama's policies were damaging America. The problem with most Obama followers is that they were focused on the short term. It's like putting oatmeal or raw eggs in your leaking radiator. Yes, SHORT TERM the leak will stop leaking and things will appear better... but you'd better replace that radiator soon... or a leaky radiator will be the least of your problems.

Don't take up analogy writing as a future job ... please. Most people know or knew that ACA had to and would evolve. Much like Medicare has. Only haters who are so worried about their own taxes when fellow needier citizens are involved decided ACA would never change so x, y, and z would happen. Medicare has changed greatly over its life. What it covers changes and the industry is changed by it. Subacute facilities exist in part to cut medical costs and they were signed into law I think by Clinton. Prior to their existence people would have to remain in costly hospitals longer or discharge before being recovered.

Obama and I are focused on the long game. You are focused on the short term and your own magical things will never change for the better thinking. Many conservatives are happy to spend their money on more taxes to get us into wars that now are lasting decades. But help fellow citizens, heck no! We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens. Its no wonder such people sew in veterans and especially their own family into our flag which is why they get so emotional at perceived disrespect to the flag. Camera men kneel during the anthem all the time, so its not kneeling that has them emotional. Spectators sit during the anthem, talk, buy food, etc. but the crowd rarely bullies them into standing either. So is it really because they want all football players to stand or is it really about non white players taking a knee during the anthem?

Gee, all in one post you are able to accuse Richard of being a stupid, hating, war mongering racist.  Wow.

[Tennesseer]

Oct 1, 2017 2:15:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Sept 30, 2017 22:02:08 GMT -5 Opti said:

It makes sense because as he and his peeps are being investigated he knows what is being found out and what the investigators might think. He them knows things that will eventually be revealed to the public if Mueller continues on.

OK. And...?

Sept 30, 2017 22:14:55 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

You build up your civilian allies so they will fight for you if you get in trouble.

Getting civilian allies on his side is a good strategy regardless of the ongoing investigations. You're simply assuming causality.

Sept 30, 2017 22:24:58 GMT -5 justme said:

Found on Facebook...

Tu quoque, at best.

At most, you can accuse any NFL critics who approved of the specific actions you've listed (as opposed to approving of Pres. Trump generally) of hypocrisy. But even this assumes critics want the same things from a president that they want from football players, which isn't a sound assumption.

Not when they are heavily armed and take to the streets.

[Tennesseer]

Oct 1, 2017 8:29:37 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Oct 1, 2017 6:17:50 GMT -5 Opti said:

Don't take up analogy writing as a future job ... please. Most people know or knew that ACA had to and would evolve. Much like Medicare has. Only haters who are so worried about their own taxes when fellow needier citizens are involved decided ACA would never change so x, y, and z would happen. Medicare has changed greatly over its life. What it covers changes and the industry is changed by it. Subacute facilities exist in part to cut medical costs and they were signed into law I think by Clinton. Prior to their existence people would have to remain in costly hospitals longer or discharge before being recovered.

Obama and I are focused on the long game. You are focused on the short term and your own magical things will never change for the better thinking. Many conservatives are happy to spend their money on more taxes to get us into wars that now are lasting decades. But help fellow citizens, heck no! We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens. Its no wonder such people sew in veterans and especially their own family into our flag which is why they get so emotional at perceived disrespect to the flag. Camera men kneel during the anthem all the time, so its not kneeling that has them emotional. Spectators sit during the anthem, talk, buy food, etc. but the crowd rarely bullies them into standing either. So is it really because they want all football players to stand or is it really about non white players taking a knee during the anthem?

Gee, all in one post you are able to accuse Richard of being a stupid, hating, war mongering racist.  Wow.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt." 

[zibazinski]

Oct 1, 2017 5:41:55 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 4:30:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

That's no comparison. I agree. No argument from me.

Now here's the part that'll really get you steamed: Under which flag were more people of color enslaved, killed, raped, beaten, and otherwise harmed or made dead just because of the color of their skin?

This flag?


Or this flag?




If you picked the first one, you are mistaken.

I think you need to define what under flag X means for starters. Is the latter only government actions? The current 50 star US flag has been in use since 1960. There were some horrible things that happened government wise during school desegregation in the 60s, but I do not remember deaths.

The 50-star flag was ordered by the then president Eisenhower on August 21, 1959, and was adopted in July 1960. It is the longest-used version of the U.S. flag and has been in use for over 57 years.[4]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_States

We had a lynching in Gainesville in 1968.

[dondub]

  Old Glory has a many year history as the only flag flying over a nation that had slavery, lynchings, killings, rapes, torture, destruction of families, destruction of language and culture, segregation in schools, restaurants, discrimination in housing (Trump Inc.) and employment. It flies in every police station where an officer has shot to death an unarmed Black citizen. It is flown in every courtroom where

justice was denied, where an overwhelming % of Black citizens are sentenced to incarceration. 

 Yet kneeling during the anthem, in protest of these gross injustices stretching back centuries, is considered disrespectful and worthy of a firing even though it is citizens exercising their Constitutional right to dissent. I respectfully disagree.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Oct 1, 2017 2:34:05 GMT -5 tallguy said:

I would suggest that it is false patriotism, small-minded thinking, and a stunning lack of both perspective and empathy to allow oneself to be seriously offended to that extent. 

I agree. I didn't think too much about the actual kneeling when it began. Just kind of a blip, and "oh? Huh."

The reaction to it is mind numbingly dumb. I now see the wisdom of this form of statement.

Your fellow Americans are telling you that the racial inequality in the justice system will no longer be left unremarked upon.

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 1, 2017 2:16:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Sept 30, 2017 17:18:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Firstly, since Pres. Trump never featured in the discussions, their opinions solely concerned whether taking the knee during the anthem was an appropriate form of protest. This thread has mixed this together with the issue of punishment for the players, the appropriateness of the White House response, the legality of protest as free speech, etc., muddying the waters.

Secondly, their conclusion is based on a simple values judgment that I share: there's an appropriate time, place, and format for political protest, and this isn't one of them. Even if they consider the protest sincere, the message good, and the players within their rights.

You're acting like the athletes pulled their pants down and mooned the crowd during the anthem.
Taking a knee is quiet, peaceful, inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one.

Richard's post hits on the key points:

1. It obviously is offensive to a majority of Americans (somewhere near 50%). Polls reveal as much.
   
   
2. Offensive gestures rarely "hurt" anyone beyond causing offense.
   
   
3. While Americans can choose not to be offended, they lack a compelling reason to do so.
   

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 1, 2017 8:35:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Oct 1, 2017 2:15:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

OK. And...?

Getting civilian allies on his side is a good strategy regardless of the ongoing investigations. You're simply assuming causality.

Tu quoque, at best.

At most, you can accuse any NFL critics who approved of the specific actions you've listed (as opposed to approving of Pres. Trump generally) of hypocrisy. But even this assumes critics want the same things from a president that they want from football players, which isn't a sound assumption.

Not when they are heavily armed and take to the streets.

"Good" in the sense that allies are desirable for Pres. Trump--regardless of the ongoing investigations.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

Today the Baltimore Ravens, and I believe other teams, locked arms and took a knee during a message of liberty and justice for all. Then stood up for the anthem and some had their hand over their heart. 

[Tennesseer]

Oct 1, 2017 16:14:54 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Oct 1, 2017 8:35:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Not when they are heavily armed and take to the streets.

"Good" in the sense that allies are desirable for Pres. Trump--regardless of the ongoing investigations.

If you have not read it, give the Tribalism thread a read.

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 8:29:37 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Oct 1, 2017 6:17:50 GMT -5 Opti said:

Don't take up analogy writing as a future job ... please. Most people know or knew that ACA had to and would evolve. Much like Medicare has. Only haters who are so worried about their own taxes when fellow needier citizens are involved decided ACA would never change so x, y, and z would happen. Medicare has changed greatly over its life. What it covers changes and the industry is changed by it. Subacute facilities exist in part to cut medical costs and they were signed into law I think by Clinton. Prior to their existence people would have to remain in costly hospitals longer or discharge before being recovered.

Obama and I are focused on the long game. You are focused on the short term and your own magical things will never change for the better thinking. Many conservatives are happy to spend their money on more taxes to get us into wars that now are lasting decades. But help fellow citizens, heck no! We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens. Its no wonder such people sew in veterans and especially their own family into our flag which is why they get so emotional at perceived disrespect to the flag. Camera men kneel during the anthem all the time, so its not kneeling that has them emotional. Spectators sit during the anthem, talk, buy food, etc. but the crowd rarely bullies them into standing either. So is it really because they want all football players to stand or is it really about non white players taking a knee during the anthem?

Gee, all in one post you are able to accuse Richard of being a stupid, hating, war mongering racist.  Wow.

Wow, project and lie much? And all in one sentence too.

I accused Richard of nothing except being focused on ACA as passed and not what it could evolve to. If you saw other things in what I wrote that is on you and isn't literal. I discussed what I believe many conservatives focus on. Whether it applies to you or Richard IDK. And my last sentence is a question not a statement.

If a white player took a silent knee and protested how the VA hospitals were treating veterans would you feel the same outrage? If not, why not? Protesting that the full Muslim ban is not in effect? ISIS? Abortion?

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 4:18:30 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Oct 1, 2017 2:16:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

You're acting like the athletes pulled their pants down and mooned the crowd during the anthem.
Taking a knee is quiet, peaceful, inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one.

"quiet, peaceful", I'll grant you, taking a knee is those.

"inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one" isn't even remotely true. It's very offensive to anyone that believes in respecting the flag. And while the "hurt" isn't physical, damaging the heart (or "soul", if you prefer) is still a painful injury.

Not that I'm suggesting anyone do this, but... someone could "quiet[ly], peaceful[ly]" take a on the flag and then use another flag to wipe their butt... doesn't mean that them doing it should just be ignored, just because they did it in a "quiet, peaceful" manner. Disrespect to the flag is disrespect to the flag... whether it's loud and uproarious or "quiet, peaceful".

The ironic thing things that I think are disrespectful to the flag, people who are flag waving patriots often do not. And the flag code agrees with me. Post 911 flags were out everywhere. They were out in the rain, the wind, on cars, on homes, and even on their little sticks in the ground in garden areas. They got faded, tattered and generally nasty. And even when people complained about the very faded flags, I don't remember anyone invoking the disrespect to veterans idea.

How do you feel about folks taking unintentional dumps or making tracks in their American or Confederate flag underwear? Peeing in their American flag or Confederate flag swimwear while in the lake, ocean or pool? Are you as deeply offended?

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 1, 2017 16:40:00 GMT -5 Opti said:

If a white player took a silent knee and protested how the VA hospitals were treating veterans would you feel the same outrage? If not, why not? Protesting that the full Muslim ban is not in effect? ISIS? Abortion?

I'm convinced the overwhelming majority of protest critics would remain critics if the protest concerned any of the above.

They'd be more diplomatic about it. We'd see a lot more silence, a lot more "It's not such a big deal.", "They're doing it for a good cause.", etc.  But the base judgment that kneeling during the national anthem at a sports game is offensive and inappropriate would persist.

[Virgil Showlion]

Oct 1, 2017 17:08:16 GMT -5 Opti said:

How do you feel about folks taking unintentional dumps or making tracks in their American or Confederate flag underwear? Peeing in their American flag or Confederate flag swimwear while in the lake, ocean or pool? Are you as deeply offended?

I'm guessing he would be if they did so on national television in order to make a political statement.

Of course if it was unintentional it would be more embarrassing than offensive.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 5:41:55 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 4:30:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

That's no comparison. I agree. No argument from me.

Now here's the part that'll really get you steamed: Under which flag were more people of color enslaved, killed, raped, beaten, and otherwise harmed or made dead just because of the color of their skin?

This flag?


Or this flag?




If you picked the first one, you are mistaken.

I think you need to define what under flag X means for starters. Is the latter only government actions? The current 50 star US flag has been in use since 1960. There were some horrible things that happened government wise during school desegregation in the 60s, but I do not remember deaths.

The 50-star flag was ordered by the then president Eisenhower on August 21, 1959, and was adopted in July 1960. It is the longest-used version of the U.S. flag and has been in use for over 57 years.[4]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_States

That shouldn't need to be defined. The intent is pretty clear based on the question and this is nothing but an attempt to deflect said question.

But, I'll ask the question again without the images:

Under which flag were more people of color enslaved, killed, raped, beaten, and otherwise harmed or made dead just because of the color of their skin?

A: The Confederate flag
B: The American flag

If you picked the first one, you are mistaken.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 16:16:31 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

Today the Baltimore Ravens, and I believe other teams, locked arms and took a knee during a message of liberty and justice for all. Then stood up for the anthem and some had their hand over their heart. 

That's a protest I could support.

As has been said before:  There's a right way and a wrong way to do anything. Get your protest message out first, then stand in respect for the flag.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 16:40:00 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 8:29:37 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Gee, all in one post you are able to accuse Richard of being a stupid, hating, war mongering racist.  Wow.

Wow, project and lie much? And all in one sentence too.

I accused Richard of nothing except being focused on ACA as passed and not what it could evolve to⁽¹⁾. If you saw other things in what I wrote that is on you and isn't literal. I discussed what I believe many conservatives focus on. Whether it applies to you or Richard IDK. And my last sentence is a question not a statement.

If a white player took a silent knee and protested how the VA hospitals were treating veterans would you feel the same outrage? If not, why not? Protesting that the full Muslim ban is not in effect? ISIS? Abortion?

I didn't comment on the post originally because Shooby summed it up quite well... but... I'll detail where all those points she made come from.

• You called me "stupid" by falsely accusing me of bolded #1 (what it could evolve to is exploded debt and a collapsed healthcare system
• You accused me of "hating" with this: "We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens." You can't have war without hating.
• You accused me of being "War mongering" in that same line.
• I give a pass on the "racist" accusation though... not sure I see that one either.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 17:08:16 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 4:18:30 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

"quiet, peaceful", I'll grant you, taking a knee is those.

"inoffensive, and hurts absolutely no one" isn't even remotely true. It's very offensive to anyone that believes in respecting the flag. And while the "hurt" isn't physical, damaging the heart (or "soul", if you prefer) is still a painful injury.

Not that I'm suggesting anyone do this, but... someone could "quiet[ly], peaceful[ly]" take a on the flag and then use another flag to wipe their butt... doesn't mean that them doing it should just be ignored, just because they did it in a "quiet, peaceful" manner. Disrespect to the flag is disrespect to the flag... whether it's loud and uproarious or "quiet, peaceful".

The ironic thing things that I think are disrespectful to the flag, people who are flag waving patriots often do not. And the flag code agrees with me. Post 911 flags were out everywhere. They were out in the rain, the wind, on cars, on homes, and even on their little sticks in the ground in garden areas. They got faded, tattered and generally nasty. And even when people complained about the very faded flags, I don't remember anyone invoking the disrespect to veterans idea.

How do you feel about folks taking unintentional dumps or making tracks in their American or Confederate flag underwear? Peeing in their American flag or Confederate flag swimwear while in the lake, ocean or pool? Are you as deeply offended?

Yes. I actually do find those things offensive.

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 19:26:45 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Oct 1, 2017 16:40:00 GMT -5 Opti said:

Wow, project and lie much? And all in one sentence too.

I accused Richard of nothing except being focused on ACA as passed and not what it could evolve to⁽¹⁾. If you saw other things in what I wrote that is on you and isn't literal. I discussed what I believe many conservatives focus on. Whether it applies to you or Richard IDK. And my last sentence is a question not a statement.

If a white player took a silent knee and protested how the VA hospitals were treating veterans would you feel the same outrage? If not, why not? Protesting that the full Muslim ban is not in effect? ISIS? Abortion?

I didn't comment on the post originally because Shooby summed it up quite well... but... I'll detail where all those points she made come from.

• You called me "stupid" by falsely accusing me of bolded #1 (what it could evolve to is exploded debt and a collapsed healthcare system
• You accused me of "hating" with this: "We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens." You can't have war without hating.
• You accused me of being "War mongering" in that same line.
• I give a pass on the "racist" accusation though... not sure I see that one either.

I have a massive problem with your interpretation. If I wanted to call you stupid, a hater, or a war monger, I would just do it. I wouldn't hide it general statements. That's not how I roll.

But apparently that might be how you and Shooby roll because you see that in what I wrote, and I don't. I didn't have any need or desire to call your belief stupid, merely short-sighted at best. Sure its possible it could go horribly wrong, but it is more likely to stagger to rightness because so many other countries have already succeeded at something similar. If you want to call yourself stupid though, I won't stop you.

 

Lastly I was talking about many conservatives because frankly I don't always remember what any one believes in any given moment.

[Deleted]

Oct 1, 2017 23:12:34 GMT -5 Opti said:

Oct 1, 2017 19:26:45 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I didn't comment on the post originally because Shooby summed it up quite well... but... I'll detail where all those points she made come from.

• You called me "stupid" by falsely accusing me of bolded #1 (what it could evolve to is exploded debt and a collapsed healthcare system
• You accused me of "hating" with this: "We need more imaginary security by starting wars that kill off more of our young vital citizens." You can't have war without hating.
• You accused me of being "War mongering" in that same line.
• I give a pass on the "racist" accusation though... not sure I see that one either.

I have a massive problem with your interpretation. If I wanted to call you stupid, a hater, or a war monger, I would just do it. I wouldn't hide it general statements. That's not how I roll.

But apparently that might be how you and Shooby roll because you see that in what I wrote, and I don't. I didn't have any need or desire to call your belief stupid, merely short-sighted at best. Sure its possible it could go horribly wrong, but it is more likely to stagger to rightness because so many other countries have already succeeded at something similar. If you want to call yourself stupid though, I won't stop you.

 

Lastly I was talking about many conservatives because frankly I don't always remember what any one believes in any given moment.

Stupid or short-sighted... either one is derogatory though. And both are irrelevant anyway, because I'm NOT stuck on the short-term (contrary to your assertion). There's nothing short-term or short-sighted about seeing and recognizing the incredibly devastating long-term effects. which is what I've seen since it's inception (once it was voted on, and passed, "so [we] can see what's in it").

Many other countries have succeeded by implementing universal healthcare without feeding billions of dollars into the coffers of private insurance companies... something that Obamacare definitely isn't even close to being "similar" to.

[Opti]

Oct 1, 2017 23:47:40 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Oct 1, 2017 23:12:34 GMT -5 Opti said:

I have a massive problem with your interpretation. If I wanted to call you stupid, a hater, or a war monger, I would just do it. I wouldn't hide it general statements. That's not how I roll.

But apparently that might be how you and Shooby roll because you see that in what I wrote, and I don't. I didn't have any need or desire to call your belief stupid, merely short-sighted at best. Sure its possible it could go horribly wrong, but it is more likely to stagger to rightness because so many other countries have already succeeded at something similar. If you want to call yourself stupid though, I won't stop you.

 

Lastly I was talking about many conservatives because frankly I don't always remember what any one believes in any given moment.

Stupid or short-sighted... either one is derogatory though. And both are irrelevant anyway, because I'm NOT stuck on the short-term (contrary to your assertion). There's nothing short-term or short-sighted about seeing and recognizing the incredibly devastating long-term effects. which is what I've seen since it's inception (once it was voted on, and passed, "so [we] can see what's in it").

Many other countries have succeeded by implementing universal healthcare without feeding billions of dollars into the coffers of private insurance companies... something that Obamacare definitely isn't even close to being "similar" to.

Short-sighted is my opinion and I agree its not a positive one but certainly more generous and accepting than stupid. You can choose to come to the good side ( we have cookies) and realize law and life is evolution. While you've seen long-term effects that you feel are devasting, the truth is the majority of the act didn't even go into effect until January of 2014. My experience is different than yours, as is NJ compared to how your state is handling it.

You are stuck on your vision of what will happen based on your sample of what you know. I prefer to assume and believe course corrects that will fix it. Because frankly we are throwing enough money at wars we don't need to be  in that might be able to fully pay for this in conjunction with evolving how healthcare is done in this country. And start realizing that some base healthcare for all is actually good for almost anyone's health in the US and will prevent massive losses to the economy just by cutting down the number of sick days of lowly paid employees.