Do you stand for the National Anthem?

[CultiVader]

I believe you yourself said it’s not really that bad anymore in America. We saw some improvements after the 50s era, but I think it’s obvious we’re slipping again. But what I don’t understand is why?

I only brought dump into this because it’s usually the “thanks Obama” people that are die hard trump lovers. So naturally I figured you were anti Obama/pro trump, and I had to compare Obama’s speeches to trumps.

 

[rascal14]

President speeches have to be dumbed down for all of us morons to understand.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I believe you yourself said it’s not really that bad anymore in America. We saw some improvements after the 50s era, but I think it’s obvious we’re slipping again. But what I don’t understand is why?

I only brought dump into this because it’s usually the “thanks Obama” people that are die hard trump lovers. So naturally I figured you were anti Obama/pro trump, and I had to compare Obama’s speeches to trumps.

I disliked Bush and Obama, and think Trump puts his foot in his mouth more often than not.

 

[ax1]

You guys do know that politicians will often tailor their language to their target audience. If they’re speaking to the general public, which often includes some not-very-educated people, you don’t want to go over their heads with terribly complex vocabulary and sentence structure. This goes for Obama and Trump.

Its the unfortunate truth.

 

[ax1]

I believe you yourself said it’s not really that bad anymore in America. We saw some improvements after the 50s era, but I think it’s obvious we’re slipping again. But what I don’t understand is why?

I only brought dump into this because it’s usually the “thanks Obama” people that are die hard trump lovers. So naturally I figured you were anti Obama/pro trump, and I had to compare Obama’s speeches to trumps.

Politicians and some of those who own them gain from public division. It distracts people from real issues keeping the same puppet circle in power.

When I hated Bush people thought I worshipped Clinton. When I hated Obama people thought I worshipped Bush. When I hated Hitlery people both thought I was voting for Dump and worshipped Obama.

Its called a duopoly cycle. Both sides being the Republicrats and Demicans create a monopoly by creating whats called a duopoly. They create the illusion of competition and most of the same people finance both sides of the same coin and also monopolize the media as well as the education system and they tell people who to vote for and regurgitate specific chosen political ideology over and over again. People are deceived into a false left right paradigm and add in the so called "middle" and "extremes" as if its all competitive forms of thought when really there are many more ways of political thought and foreign/domestic policy. Then when people like me lash out at Hitlery they think Im a Dump supporter when I dont support that genocidal maniac....which if I say that they think Im a Obama supporter which is a joke because Obama is a genocidal terrorist too and so on. There really isnt much difference between Obama and Dump in regards to the real policy that is signed into place. End/rant that was too long, lol.

 

[Aleksandar37]

Gaypernick could have done much more for his cause (whether we agree on this "cause" is another issue) on his own time, and maybe even asked the NFL headquarters or his team to possibly help back him and start a movement that could have been far more effective and not divide and alienate him from both the public and business core. I think he made a mistake that set his agenda back, and his BLM girlfriend isnt helping much either imo. He is young, he is not a "trained" politician, it is what it is of course and hopefully he can better his strategy in the long run if it is a concern for him, unfortunately he may have potentially hurt is long run money train (great NFL salary) which is needed in marketing and leveraging a cause.

He could have marched somewhere else or held a rally somewhere, but we wouldn't be talking about it to the degree that we are now. Kaepernick is a protester like any other protester, but he had the opportunity to do it on a much bigger stage than most. He's seen others protest on their own time and saw that it wasn't getting results.

 

[ax1]

He could have marched somewhere else or held a rally somewhere, but we wouldn't be talking about it to the degree that we are now. Kaepernick is a protester like any other protester, but he had the opportunity to do it on a much bigger stage than most. He's seen others protest on their own time and saw that it wasn't getting results.

What results was he really looking for? Do you think he really got results? Has he really changed anything other than possibly some of the division and lower ratings (to what extent I dunno, but Ill note I watch less NFL because the game had turned into sissy ball, Gaypernicks doesnt effect me personally at all) he may have caused? What is really is long term plan to solve the issues he is claiming? Im just asking because I follow some football and I didnt get or seen anything positive out of this at all any more so than the people who havent been heard on a smaller platform.

 

[justhere4comm]

President speeches have to be dumbed down for all of us morons to understand.

The President's speeches have to be dumbed down for the President to understand... and his Reich Idioten.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

The President's speeches have to be dumbed down for the President to understand...

Some people think that Trump intentionally speaks/spells/etc. incorrectly as to try to make less-educated "common people" feel like he's one of them, when in reality he's just as out of touch with reality as an other rich politician. In fact, that strategy is perhaps why he won the election; lower and middle class Americans felt that a billionaire was more in touch and representative of the common person than a rich politician married to another politician (Hillary) was (but we know they're all completely out of touch with reality). So mock him if you will, but it worked I suppose. Is he dumb like a fox?

 

[justhere4comm]

No. He's really an idiot.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

No. He's really an idiot.

He's an idiot who's made more money than all of us together ever will though. Yes, he had a "small loan" of $1 million or something like that, but there are plenty of people in this world who had way more than $1 mil and blew it all or at least didn't become billionaires. And before you mention his bankruptcies as "proof" that he's a bad businessman, know that he seems to have done them as a strategy. It may be a deceptive strategy that took advantage of some people, but that would make him an unethical or sleezy businessman, not a bad one or an idiot.

Also, just so it's clear, I'm not a "Trump fan boy" or a conservative, I'm just trying to be objective here.

Trump has no filter and says really stupid things all the time, but I don't claim that he's unintelligent per se.

 

[DemntedCowboy]

He's an idiot who's made more money than all of us together ever will though. Yes, he had a "small loan" of $1 million or something like that, but there are plenty of people in this world who had way more than $1 mil and blew it all or at least didn't become billionaires. And before you mention his bankruptcies as "proof" that he's a bad businessman, know that he seems to have done them as a strategy. It may be a deceptive strategy that took advantage of some people, but that would make him an unethical or sleezy businessman, not a bad one or an idiot.

Also, just so it's clear, I'm not a "Trump fan boy" or a conservative, I'm just trying to be objective here.

Trump has no filter and says really stupid things all the time, but I don't claim that he's unintelligent per se.

Alot of rich people file bankruptcy on purpose. I had a friends dad in highschool that filed bankruptcies just to get out of paying for things. Thats how the rich get richer. Lol

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Alot of rich people file bankruptcy on purpose. I had a friends dad in highschool that filed bankruptcies just to get out of paying for things. Thats how the rich get richer. Lol

Exactly. You can argue it is unethical and screws some other people over, but it doesn’t make him a bad or unsuccessful businessman.

 

[Bagofturdwind]

Love the non-rich people that think Trump is “their guy” bc he’s a “good businessman”. Also love when people who typically work for someone in their every day lives sides with upper management and suppressing the little guy like they do with Kaep and the NFL. In no other facet of life do they side with the big guns and think they should continue to oppress the little man, but put a black man with an unconventional strategy at the face of a cause and “helllll nah, I ain’t gonna listen to your message... wha bout my country and dem troops yah?”

 

[ax1]

He's an idiot who's made more money than all of us together ever will though. Yes, he had a "small loan" of $1 million or something like that, but there are plenty of people in this world who had way more than $1 mil and blew it all or at least didn't become billionaires. And before you mention his bankruptcies as "proof" that he's a bad businessman, know that he seems to have done them as a strategy. It may be a deceptive strategy that took advantage of some people, but that would make him an unethical or sleezy businessman, not a bad one or an idiot.

Also, just so it's clear, I'm not a "Trump fan boy" or a conservative, I'm just trying to be objective here.

Trump has no filter and says really stupid things all the time, but I don't claim that he's unintelligent per se.

Ill add majority people who win the lottery go broke and even in debt. Dump is a great combination of business intelligence with a incredibly strong ambitious drive to succeed. That being said people are going to think I support him too which I dont but I call it as I see it. These traits of his I wish I had 1/8th of, Id be well set.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Love the non-rich people that think Trump is “their guy” bc he’s a “good businessman”. Also love when people who typically work for someone in their every day lives sides with upper management and suppressing the little guy like they do with Kaep and the NFL. In no other facet of life do they side with the big guns and think they should continue to oppress the little man, but put a black man with an unconventional strategy at the face of a cause and “helllll nah, I ain’t gonna listen to your message... wha bout my country and dem troops yah?”

Are you suggesting I'm forming opinions on the application of the First Amendment because Kaep is black? Get out of here man. I'm not siding with the "big guys" because I hate a black man, I'm siding with them because it's consistent with what the Constitution says. A private employer has the right to limit political speech at work, unless state laws prohibit it. I would say this if it's Kaep protesting police brutality at work against his employer's wishes or if a white Christian player decided to protest abortions somehow while at work.

Are some people against Kaep because he's black? Yes. Am I? No. I'm just trying to be consistent and objective with the legality of the issue.

If I worked at CVS and told everyone who bought condoms that premarital sex is a sin, and I continued after my boss told me to stop, I should be fired. If I'm a waiter and I take a knee to protest something, anything, before taking customers' orders, and my boss tells me to stop and I don't, I should be fired. Period. Even if my cause is "noble."

 

[ax1]

Love the non-rich people that think Trump is “their guy” bc he’s a “good businessman”. Also love when people who typically work for someone in their every day lives sides with upper management and suppressing the little guy like they do with Kaep and the NFL. In no other facet of life do they side with the big guns and think they should continue to oppress the little man, but put a black man with an unconventional strategy at the face of a cause and “helllll nah, I ain’t gonna listen to your message... wha bout my country and dem troops yah?”

Maybe some of these people who work for someone understand that when a customer pays for a product and is served a protest that it may negatively effect the business financially and cost some of these people depending on these jobs their jobs if the budgeting obligations are not met causing layoffs. Some people do want the big guns to do well, grow and succeed especially when they have absolutely nothing to do with the issues presented and protested as it does help the "little guy" to a great extend in most cases all across society.

 

[Bagofturdwind]

I’m not going to get into a long online discussion about this matter, but I’ll just say this, I’ve learned throughout my life to listen to people. To truly listen to people’s hurt, ESPECIALLY when they’re of a minority group. Does a black man doing this mean more than a white man? Yes, yes it does. I’m not saying you’re racist if you disagree. But you’re certainly not listening. He doesn’t work at CVS, and he’s not a waiter. He’s a public figure and that’s his biggest platform to make a difference - a perfectly legal and peaceful way to make that difference. The fact that people tried to make it about anything other than the police brutality of his people means they weren’t listening. There’s an underlying theme with a lot of people in this country. And it’s that they don’t listen. They don’t care to listen. It’s me, me, me. Call me a liberal hippy if it means I’m going to listen to and actually care about messages from people who don’t have the historical advantages as I do being a white male in this country. Imagine fighting against the mistreatment of your people, and then being told you’re wrong predominately by the race that’s doing the mistreatment, and then that race further mistreats you. Orrr maybe, we could just listen and not b*tch about every single thing that makes us uncomfortable and challenges the status quo. Wouldn’t that be something? My sermon is over.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I’m not going to get into a long online discussion about this matter, but I’ll just say this, I’ve learned throughout my life to listen to people. To truly listen to people’s hurt, ESPECIALLY when they’re of a minority group. Does a black man doing this mean more than a white man? Yes, yes it does. I’m not saying you’re racist if you disagree. But you’re certainly not listening. He doesn’t work at CVS, and he’s not a waiter. He’s a public figure and that’s his biggest platform to make a difference - a perfectly legal and peaceful way to make that difference. The fact that people tried to make it about anything other than the police brutality of his people means they weren’t listening. There’s an underlying theme with a lot of people in this country. And it’s that they don’t listen. They don’t care to listen. It’s me, me, me. Call me a liberal hippy if it means I’m going to listen to and actually care about messages from people who don’t have the historical advantages as I do being a white male in this country. Imagine fighting against the mistreatment of your people, and then being told you’re wrong predominately by the race that’s doing the mistreatment, and then that race further mistreats you. Orrr maybe, we could just listen and not b*tch about every single thing that makes us uncomfortable and challenges the status quo. Wouldn’t that be something? My sermon is over.

Dude, the First Amendment does not protect himfrom the consequences of political speech at work if it's against his employer's wishes. It protects him from the government penalizing him for it, but not his employer. So it was legal for him to protest at work, of course, but it is also likely (on a federal level, as state laws may differ) for his private employers (the 49ers) to penalize him (or not re-sign him) for it.

I'm talking from a PURELY LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, and making no comments about the validity or necessity of his protest, so your "sermon" is irrelevant to what I'm saying.

I also never said I didn't listen to his points and concerns, only that I think the employer has the LEGAL right to tell him not to protest at work. That doesn't mean that it's not a good or useful protest, only that his employers likely have the LEGAL right to tell him to stop.

You say that people don't listen, but YOU'RE not listening to me, as your "sermon" was largely irrelevant to what I've been saying. I never said I didn't listen to his protest, or that it's not a valid cause, only that he doesn't have the legal right to do it if his employer tells him not to (on a federal level, as state laws may vary).

 

[Aleksandar37]

What results was he really looking for? Do you think he really got results? Has he really changed anything other than possibly some of the division and lower ratings (to what extent I dunno, but Ill note I watch less NFL because the game had turned into sissy ball, Gaypernicks doesnt effect me personally at all) he may have caused? What is really is long term plan to solve the issues he is claiming? Im just asking because I follow some football and I didnt get or seen anything positive out of this at all any more so than the people who havent been heard on a smaller platform.

To draw attention to a cause and bring change. If this doesn't work, then him or somebody else will have to try something bigger. You escalate until you get the results that you are looking for. This isn't about one or two cops being racist; this is about a disproportionate amount of black people being shot by cops without any consequences to the cops. Yes, there is blakc on black killing, but that does not mean that white cops are doing it as well. Cops should be held to a higher standard than average citizens and there shouldn't be coverups of bad cops. Mistakes will always happen and good people will accidentally get shot, but what is currently happening is more than just accidentally. It's easier though for people and the government to attack him, or to attack Black Lives Matters, or to say this is anti-cop, or anti-flag, or anti-troop, or whatever rather than dealing with the issue.

 

[ax1]

Imagine fighting against the mistreatment of your people, and then being told you’re wrong predominately by the race that’s doing the mistreatment, and then that race further mistreats you.

Statistically blacks are most mistreated by blacks, not cops. So imagine the minority being oppressed by the same minority but blaming the majority or good law enforcement as a whole, how does that make sense? Also why is there such a big "non-snitch" culture, the country would be in a much safer situation people would more openly comply with good community policing. I also notice a lack of 2nd Amendment advocacy rather the opposite which doesnt work as I notice the most violent communities are where black people are most oppressed to legally defend themselves in places such as Chicago.

Most black people are voting for big government police state Demicans and Republicrats oppressing the country of all races as a whole which isnt a "black blame" but people in general, constantly grouping people into races is just so lame to me. Anyways many of the people protesting this cop on black crime are propping up the same system that supports the big police state they claim to be brutalizing black people.

 

[Aleksandar37]

Statistically blacks are most mistreated by blacks, not cops. So imagine the minority being oppressed by the same minority but blaming the majority or good law enforcement as a whole, how does that make sense? Also why is there such a big "non-snitch" culture, the country would be in a much safer situation people would more openly comply with good community policing. I also notice a lack of 2nd Amendment advocacy rather the opposite which doesnt work as I notice the most violent communities are where people cant legally even defend themselves such as Chicago.

Most black people are voting for big government police state Demicans and Republicrats oppressing the country of all races as a whole which isnt a "black blame" but people in general, constantly grouping people into races is just so lame to me.

Just because somebody is protesting one thing, doesn't mean they're saying the other isn't important. Saying black lives matters doesn't mean others don't ven though it has been twisted by the media and people in general. I like apples doesn't mean I hate oranges. And the non-snitch culture in the black community comes from generations of friends and family being openly killed, hauled off to jail for something they didn't do, or sometimes just disappearing to never be seen again. You learn to not trust the police and deal with things on your own because calling the police can be dangerous. Again, grew up south side of Chicago and I was fortunate that I was white and could call the cops without worrying that they'd take me in or just shoot me and say they thought I was the one they got called about.

Most police officers are good people. Some go into it because they're *******s and like the power. There needs to be attempts on both sides to talk and gain trust again, but that is going to take a long ass time and won't start until both sides show that they are serious about change.

 

[Aleksandar37]

Most black people are voting for big government police state Demicans and Republicrats oppressing the country of all races as a whole which isnt a "black blame" but people in general, constantly grouping people into races is just so lame to me. Anyways many of the people protesting this cop on black crime are propping up the same system that supports the big police state they claim to be brutalizing black people.

Yep, but most people vote against their own interests or simply don't vote at all.

 

[irone93]

I’m sorry, this is not optional. People should be getting their ass kicked

 

[ax1]

Most police officers are good people. Some go into it because they're *******s and like the power. There needs to be attempts on both sides to talk and gain trust again, but that is going to take a long ass time and won't start until both sides show that they are serious about change.

There are egos on both sides thats for sure....thanks for your posts, helps me make more sense out of the other point of view.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

or simply don't vote at all.

Like Kaep (sorry, I had to lol).

 

[Aleksandar37]

I’m sorry, this is not optional. People should be getting their ass kicked

Feel free to try

 

[Aleksandar37]

Like Kaep (sorry, I had to lol).

He's explained why. It's not just a lazy thing.

 

[justhere4comm]

I’m sorry, this is not optional. People should be getting their ass kicked

Burp. What? lol.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

He's explained why. It's not just a lazy thing.

No, it’s just an incorrect logic thing. He claims that he won’t participate in the system that is oppressive, but to suggest that electing candidates that are determined to address and remedy the issue of corruption and oppression won’t help the situation is silly. He could have voted for a third party if he thinks two two are the same BS.

Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, said he supports BLM and wants to end the war on drugs. He says we have to many unnecessary laws and that makes to many prisoners. He’s opposed to stop and frisk. Etc.

Not voting sets a terrible example for people. Imagine if everyone who looked up to him, say young minorities, followed his example and didn’t vote? It wouldn’t convince the system to change itself, it’d mean even more republicans being elected who may even make matters worse, right?

 

[justhere4comm]

Veterans for Kaepernick
https://twitter.com/hashtag/veteransforkaepernick?lang=en

Maybe you would prefer Egypt where 75 have been sentenced to death for protesting...
https://twitter.com/i/moments/1038413715761246208

In the USA we honor our Vets by protesting because they have sacrificed for our right to.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Veterans for Kaepernick
https://twitter.com/hashtag/veteransforkaepernick?lang=en

I definitely do admit that it's really open to interpretation; some people may find it offensive, and some may not. But as we all know in 2018, there will ALWAYS be someone who finds literally anything offensive, so being offended really doesn't mean much today. That said, my issue isn't him being "disrespectful," it's just that I think an employer has a right to tell employees they can't say/do certain political things at work, even if the things are just and raise legitimate points. I'd say the same for any protest at work, white or black, and if I agree or disagree with the message. I try to be consistent.

Granted, many people don't share my reasoning, and think it's disrespectful or just don't like him, whatever, but I at least try to come from an objective legal perspective.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Veterans for Kaepernick
https://twitter.com/hashtag/veteransforkaepernick?lang=en

Maybe you would prefer Egypt where 75 have been sentenced to death for protesting...
https://twitter.com/i/moments/1038413715761246208

In the USA we honor our Vets by protesting because they have sacrificed for our right to.

I've repeated ad nauseam, there is not, and has never been, a blanket federal right to freedom of political speech at work in regards to penalties or impositions by private employers, only from the government.

 

[Aleksandar37]

No, it’s just an incorrect logic thing. He claims that he won’t participate in the system that is oppressive, but to suggest that electing candidates that are determined to address and remedy the issue of corruption and oppression won’t help the situation is silly. He could have voted for a third party if he thinks two two are the same BS.

Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, said he supports BLM and wants to end the war on drugs. He says we have to many unnecessary laws and that makes to many prisoners. He’s opposed to stop and frisk. Etc.

Not voting sets a terrible example for people. Imagine if everyone who looked up to him, say young minorities, followed his example and didn’t vote? It wouldn’t convince the system to change itself, it’d mean even more republicans being elected who may even make matters worse, right?

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it illogical. Republicans are not the only problem and Democrats and Libertarians are not the only answer. He's talking about a broken system and you're saying to just vote in different people into the system. Oh look, another old white guy who says he has our best interest at heart and will help us. If you can't understand the cynicism associated with that crap over and over again, for generations, then you're not paying attention. ****, I'm a white male and even I feel like voting is useless most of the time.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it illogical. Republicans are not the only problem and Democrats and Libertarians are not the only answer. He's talking about a broken system and you're saying to just vote in different people into the system. Oh look, another old white guy who says he has our best interest at heart and will help us. If you can't understand the cynicism associated with that crap over and over again, for generations, then you're not paying attention. ****, I'm a white male and even I feel like voting is useless most of the time.

Please, tell me how not voting would help anything? Even if voting in better candidates, and do you really think Gary would be worse for minorities than Trump, isn't THE solution, it could at the least lead to some small "bandage" improvements in a larger problem. What would happen if all people who probably look up to and listen to Kaep (likely young minorities) the most took his lead and didn't vote? It'd just reduce the already small say that these minorities have in government, no? I don't see how this point is debatable. Look at someone like Ron Paul. Yes, he's an old white politician, but he's repeatedly gone out against both parties and attempted to fight oppression and injustice and protect individual liberties. If you want to be technical, if you base your judgement on a person, even a politician, on them being white, you're making a mistake. There are plenty of black politicians who support policies that would further hurt minorities, and some white ones who support policies that would help them.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to be cynical, only that, as I explained above, even if voting isn't THE solution, it can help a bit, and not voting will only make things worse by reducing the already small say in government that young minorities have.


But yeah, I'm clearly "not paying attention." This entire time I've been saying that I understand Kaep's message, and he has good points, and something needs to be done about it. I'm just saying that not voting is not the solution, and will only make matters worse.

Please read this from MLK:

It is my belief that one of the most significant steps that members of a minority community may take is that short walk to the voting booth. It is the responsibility of every good citizen to register and vote. I strongly urge you to vote in the coming election. Vote for the party and candidate of your choice, but by all means vote.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Also, remember that 99% of the time both Republicans and Democrats want to expand the power of government, they just want to expand it to allow and prohibit different things, failing to realize that when they give a new power to their party, the opposing party will have that same power when they are voted in in the future. On the other hand, most libertarians, by definition, want to completely reform and constrain the government, and their primary focus is protecting individual liberty and rights, which would inherently mean holding corrupt and oppressive police and other officials accountable and pushing for policies that would make it more difficult for them to abuse their power. Again, they're not all perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than this two-sides-of-the-same-coin thing we've all convinced ourselves we're stuck in.

 

[Aleksandar37]

Please, tell me how not voting would help anything? Even if voting in better candidates, and do you really think Gary would be worse for minorities than Trump, isn't THE solution, it could at the least lead to some small "bandage" improvements in a larger problem. What would happen if all people who probably look up to and listen to Kaep (likely young minorities) the most took his lead and didn't vote? It'd just reduce the already small say that these minorities have in government, no? I don't see how this point is debatable. Look at someone like Ron Paul. Yes, he's an old white politician, but he's repeatedly gone out against both parties and attempted to fight oppression and injustice and protect individual liberties. If you want to be technical, if you base your judgement on a person, even a politician, on them being white, you're making a mistake. There are plenty of black politicians who support policies that would further hurt minorities, and some white ones who support policies that would help them.

I'm not saying he doesn't have a right to be cynical, only that, as I explained above, even if voting isn't THE solution, it can help a bit, and not voting will only make things worse by reducing the already small say in government that young minorities have.


But yeah, I'm clearly "not paying attention." This entire time I've been saying that I understand Kaep's message, and he has good points, and something needs to be done about it. I'm just saying that not voting is not the solution, and will only make matters worse.

Please read this from MLK:

And they have tried voting since MLK said that. Not voting won't improve things. I didn't say that, so not sure why you want me to explain that to you. I'm trying to show you his point of view on why he and many see voting as useless, so he might as well just not vote as a protest. Voting is participating in the system that he says is broken, so voting would be supporting that system. I'm not saying I agree with him; simply trying to further explain his point of view.

If you're offended by the second part of my setence saying "you're not paying attention", but do understand why that cynicism is there, then you're ignoring the first part of that sentence. Second part doesn't apply to you if the first doesn't.

 

[ax1]

Also, remember that 99% of the time both Republicans and Democrats want to expand the power of government, they just want to expand it to allow and prohibit different things, failing to realize that when they give a new power to their party, the opposing party will have that same power when they are voted in in the future. On the other hand, most libertarians, by definition, want to completely reform and constrain the government, and their primary focus is protecting individual liberty and rights, which would inherently mean holding corrupt and oppressive police and other officials accountable and pushing for policies that would make it more difficult for them to abuse their power. Again, they're not all perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than this two-sides-of-the-same-coin thing we've all convinced ourselves we're stuck in.

Maybe the system of Demicans and Republicrats have done a great job keeping its competition (such as Libertarians) from the ears of Colon Gaypernick (along with 10s of millions of other people) and also on his end he has done a poor job doing his political homework and discovering other options? I really wonder how much time he really spends studying politics and what sources he absorbs?

 

[muscleupcrohn]

And they have tried voting since MLK said that. Not voting won't improve thing. I didn't say that, so not sure why you want me to explain that to you. I'm trying to show you his point of view on why he and many see voting as useless, so he might as well just not vote as a protest. Voting is participating in the system that he says is broken, so voting would be supporting that system. I'm not saying I agree with him; simply trying to further explain his point of view.

If you're offended by the second part of my setence saying "you're not paying attention", but do understand why that cynicism is there, then you're ignoring the first part of that sentence. Second part doesn't apply to you if the first doesn't.

Ok. I understand his cynicism, but I wholeheartedly believe that not voting will at best not help, and at worst make matters much worse than they currently are for minorities. People have been voting like sheep for years/decades/etc. Just voting right down party lines regardless of the individual politician's history, stances, views, etc. is worse than not voting at all IMO, I can agree to that haha.

I was looking over the Amendments that'll be on the ballot in Florida this year, and read that the average proposed legislation from 2017 had a reading level of 20 years of education, which is graduate-level (as in graduate degree, not graduating high school). That's intentionally trying to mislead people IMO. I agree that if people can't understand what they're voting on, how can they expect to be able to improve their situation through voting? But then some candidates like Ron/Rand Paul want to simplify these massive and convoluted laws, and require politicians to actually read the proposed laws, so they'll get my vote, as they're unquestionably better than the current lot we have.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Maybe the system of Demicans and Republicrats have done a great job keeping its competition (such as Libertarians) from the ears of Colon Gaypernick (along with 10s of millions of other people) and also on his end he has done a poor job doing his political homework and discovering other options? I really wonder how much time he really spends studying politics and what sources he absorbs?

The electoral college system in theory makes it VERY difficult for a third party to win the Presidential election, even though no third party candidate has really ever made this a practical issue. A third party may win no state, but may be 1 vote behind the winner in every single state and get destroyed in the electoral college. Think the last election except orders of magnitude more; in theory they can have not just the most popular votes, but the vast majority of the popular vote and still lose in a landslide in the general election.

 

[Country]

Damn right I do and if ur sitting near me ur gonna end up standing its bs

 

[justhere4comm]

Damn right I do and if ur sitting near me ur gonna end up standing its bs

You're missing out on the whole Freedom of Speech thing... it's really cool. Try letting someone else do it without infringing on it. It's what made America great.

 

[Aleksandar37]

Damn right I do and if ur sitting near me ur gonna end up standing its bs

**** that. If you're too ****ing lazy to spell complete words, then you're not going to do **** for people sitting.

 

[ax1]

Damn right I do and if ur sitting near me ur gonna end up standing its bs

Sounds like you would fit in well in North Korea.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

You're missing out on the whole Freedom of Speech thing... it's really cool. Try letting someone else do it without infringing on it. It's what made America great.

This. Even if a private employee doesn’t necessarily have the legal right to political speech at work against his employer’s wishes, a private citizen/fan unquestionably does have the right to not stand, and harassing someone for peacefully exercising their right is kind of sh**ing on what America actually stands for.

 

[UCSMiami]

I heard it live for the first occasion in many years at the park earlier this year. A JrHS football game was in beginning. Yeah I stopped and did the hand over heart. So did many others like myself who were within earshot but not in the stadium. Reflexive reaction from childhood.

I see it as a sign of respect to our flag which represents our country, our values, our way of life.

I would stand overseas in respect of other countries if they played their anthem at events. Like doing the one minute of silence in the UK on November 11th.

We did all of these things in our early youth as part of the training to be a good citizen. Stays with a person all their life. Respect for something larger than oneself.

Similarly, thanks to parents, PSAs, teachers I do not litter. Never have, never will. Training from early on in good habits. Similar with smoking, etc. Jesuits have a saying "Give me a child for the first seven years of his life and release him into the world he will come back to his training". Same reason in good ole P.S.XX I attended as kid in NYC taught us to be Americans. Same system used back to the 1800s with the influx of immigrants. You became as American as anyone here generations before.

That has all changed now of course to the detriment of our country.

 

[Jiigzz]

The US has failed black minoritys all throughout its history, yet you get mad because one man draws attention to it by kneeling during the anthem, and yet show zero compassion for his cause and his reasons.

You care more about the flag and the anthem than you do about the people of your own nation. That's shameful and you should be embarrassed OP.

When your nation fails you, repeatedly, why would you stand for it?

Ax1 - you made a point that statistically a black male is more likely to get shot by another black male than by a cop. You'd sure hope so. Police are there to protect others, not kill them.

 

[TheMovement]

The US has failed black minoritys all throughout its history, yet you get mad because one man draws attention to it by kneeling during the anthem, and yet show zero compassion for his cause and his reasons.

You care more about the flag and the anthem than you do about the people of your own nation. That's shameful and you should be embarrassed OP.

When your nation fails you, repeatedly, why would you stand for it?

Ax1 - you made a point that statistically a black male is more likely to get shot by another black male than by a cop. You'd sure hope so. Police are there to protect others, not kill them.

The amount of respect I have for you has blown past what words can say. Thankyou! Theres alot of people who will never get it simply because its easier to ignore the truth than to face reality.

Carry on folks, Im unsubbing from this as I think it be the best.

 

[Aleksandar37]

The US has failed black minoritys all throughout its history, yet you get mad because one man draws attention to it by kneeling during the anthem, and yet show zero compassion for his cause and his reasons.

You care more about the flag and the anthem than you do about the people of your own nation. That's shameful and you should be embarrassed OP.

When your nation fails you, repeatedly, why would you stand for it?

Ax1 - you made a point that statistically a black male is more likely to get shot by another black male than by a cop. You'd sure hope so. Police are there to protect others, not kill them.

Many complaining don't care about the flag or anthem or ever ever think about it. It's a cop-out so they don't have to actually address an issue. It's the same thing as people using women and children as the excuse for why they're mad about Target bathrooms and illegal immigrants, but than do **** all when an old white dude rapes a woman or somebody shoots up a school.

 

[Yomo]

Many complaining don't care about the flag or anthem or ever ever think about it. It's a cop-out so they don't have to actually address an issue. It's the same thing as people using women and children as the excuse for why they're mad about Target bathrooms and illegal immigrants, but than do **** all when an old white dude rapes a woman or somebody shoots up a school.

imagine not even looking American to these same fraud ass "hand-over-your-heart or you should get shot and killed", group of fanatics...so many social media bad@.$$ White Power M.F.ers...I remember when these same kinda people wanted to protest MLB because they chose to have Marc Anthony sing God Bless America during the ASG...and obviously his hue of skin color makes it impossible for him to be American...