NFL owners have banded together against Trump’s divisive comments, but will they put their money where their mouth is?
By Jessicah Pierre
[Distributed via Otherwords.org]
When Colin Kaepernick began to protest during the national anthem at NFL games last year, he made his intent very clear. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick told NFL Media.
“To me, this is bigger than football,” he explained, “and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”
Kaepernick made the brave decision to do this mostly alone — and of course faced the backlash and took the heat on his own. That was until President Trump decided to attack black sports players who raised awareness about racial injustice.
At a campaign rally in Alabama, Trump called out NFL players that chose to take a knee or sit during the anthem. “Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, say, ‘Get that son of a b*tch off the field right now’?” Trump asked.
The following Sunday, a far greater number of NFL players stood up for those who protest inequity during the national anthem — and were joined, surprisingly, by many of the team owners Trump called out to.
While this was a good show of solidarity, it led some to wonder whether the NFL actually cares about black lives, or whether team owners were just looking to distance themselves from Trump’s problematic and divisive comments.
African-American males are only 6 percent of the United States population, but comprise nearly 70 percent of NFL players. It’s no wonder that issues around race are making their way into the NFL spotlight.
Black issues have never been a concern for NFL officials when it came to causes worthy of their monetary support. Instead, many NFL officials have donated millions to causes that were openly hostile to the Black Lives Matter movement — such as the Trump campaign.
CNN Money reports that “at least $7.75 million of the $106 million raised for Trump’s inaugural committee came from NFL owners and the league.” Several owners, many of whom supported Trump — and seven of whom had donated at least $1 million to him — released statements denouncing Trump’s comments.
Yet none have used their economic power to actually address the problem that brought the protest on in the first place.
Now would be a fine time to take the next step. While there are a number of ways the league can contribute to this movement, there’s one obvious way: supporting the Colin Kaepernick Foundation.
After Kaepernick began to raise awareness on the field, he put his money where his mouth is and created a foundation aimed at fighting oppression of all kinds globally, through education and social activism. Through this foundation, he made a pledge to “donate one million dollars plus all the proceeds of my jersey sales from the 2016 season to organizations working in oppressed communities.”
Imagine what could really transpire if NFL officials decided to make this same commitment.
We need to hold the NFL accountable, just as we do for other powerful American organizations. Taking a knee, banding arms, and releasing statements of support is easy compared to what the league can actually do to help fight racial injustice.
It’s time for the NFL to stand up for black lives and the rights of all Americans.
Jessicah Pierre is the inequality media specialist at the Institute for Policy Studies
On point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L369n7ZYR_U
Very moving. How could people see that and still believe taking a knee is insulting our military and flag? Oh wait, there’s a whole lot of willfully ignorant and brainwashed people out there. And to steal a quote, for many of them a light rinse probably sufficed.
Well, it requires the ability to imagine another person’s life and what that might really be like. These black NFL players may have achieved success but they know or can imagine the lives of their less fortunate brothers. And they want to stand up. Isn’t that what we are supposed to do, stand up for the less fortunate? I think there are some “good” (white) people out there who have forgotten about that.
Dear racists,
If you hop in a cop car and go looking for bad guys guess what happens?
FFS. The complete lack of common sense from the party that claims ownership of common sense is astounding.
“If you hop in a cop car and go looking for bad guys guess what happens?”
That was not what happened, Tom, and you know that wasn’t what I said. Surely you can find enough to complain about without actually making things up.
That’s exactly what you said.
Fake conservatives like you and Kavanagh and Thuckhead always change the subject or try to claim some other meaning to their own words when they realize they’re losing and argument.
For example, just reread this thread. Fake conservatives running for the woods.
Boring.
“That’s exactly what you said.”
No it wasn’t exactly what I said. It was your special spin on what I said. However, I will grant you that, upon reading it again, it describes what happened, but in a very flippant manner.
When I went for the ride alongs, I did not think of it in terms of “hunting for bad guys”. I thought of it as riding along with the Police to observe what they do and how they do it. But, as you said, it really does boil down to looking for bad guys because that is what the Police do.
So I apologize for saying you didn’t quote me correctly (even though you didn’t quote me exactly) because at it’s essence your comment did describe what I was doing. Sorry about that, Tom.
Senator: I’ll be happy to answer your question. A baker or a photographer is no more complicit in a wedding than a gun seller who sells a bump stock to a mass murderer. Now, if you want to change that paradigm….
If you’re smart, Mr. Kavanagh, you’ll tap out on this one.
I could feel that smackdown all the way out here in the foothills.
” A baker or a photographer is no more complicit in a wedding than a gun seller who sells a bump stock to a mass murderer.”
On the contrary, the baker and photographer are actively involved with the wedding. They know exactly when and how their products are going to be used. They are very complicit in the wedding.
On the other hand a gun seller who sells someone a “bump stock” has no idea when or how or even if it is going to be used.
What utter nonsense. The baker & photographer are merely providing a service to the wedding, they’re not a part of it. Or did you have those service providers double as bridesmaids at your nupitals?
Bottom line is the baker & photographer are business people operating in the public sphere.
As far as the gun seller goes, what does the seller think the bump stock is going to be used for? Decoration? People usually don’t convert semi-automatic weapons to “automatic” weapons without a specific purpose in mind.
“People usually don’t convert semi-automatic weapons to “automatic” weapons without a specific purpose in mind.”
Now you are displaying ignorance, Wileybud. The purpose the vast majority of shooters have who buy the “bump stock” have only entertainment in mind. Shooting a fully automatic weapon is a lot of fun. It might not be fun to you, but it is to large numbers of people out in the real world. After all, if the purpose of buying a “bump stock” is to cause mayhem and problems (as you clearly imply), how do you explain the thousands of them that have been sold and nothing happened?
Apparently the meaning of the phrase “specific purpose” eludes you. Whatever that specific purpose may be. And how would you know “nothing happened”?. Guessing you have sweet baby Jesus whispering in your ear?
This response to Wileybud is out of sequence because there were no “reply” options available.
“And how would you know “nothing happened”?”
Because if something happened, the anti-gun press would have had a field day “exposing” the evil that is gun owners with “bump stocks”. If something had happened prior to Las Vegas, everyone would have known what a “bump stock” was. As it is, the emergence of “bump stocks” onto the national scene occurred because of Las Vegas which is the first time they were used in an illegal manner. “Bump stocks” have been around for a long time and there has been no misuse prior to Las Vegas, nor since Las Vegas.
“Guessing you have sweet baby Jesus whispering in your ear?”
Is it really necessary to mock someone’s religion in order to insult me?
No Steve, it’s not necessary to mock your religion just to insult you. Namely because any basis of insulting you is just so easy. As far as your religion goes, apparently you’re nothing more than a “southern white” type of Christian – one who thinks nothing of using their religion to justify their bigotry. Like, for example, the KKK.
“As far as your religion goes, apparently you’re nothing more than a “southern white” type of Christian…”
I didn’t say “my religion”, I simply asked if it was really necessary to mock someone’s religion in order to insult me? I have never addressed what religion I am.
OK Steve, first you say “Is it really necessary to mock someone’s religion in order to insult me?” and then pretend my reply is about all Christians when it was specifically directed at you.
And you wonder why people here properly call you out as a troll.
Whatever, dude.
“And you wonder why people here properly call you out as a troll.”
I don’t “wonder” why I am called a troll here on these pages. I disagree with what many people post here. Disagreeing with them is all it takes.
What I do wonder about is why people here think I consider it offensive to be called a “troll” when I have always made it clear that I couldn’t care less about the name. Or name calling, in general. A person cannot post contrary opinions without being called name…it goes with the territory.
Another non-answer and evasion. So typical of those who can only throw stones but not engage in meaningful discussion.
That was for Tom.
Engaging in a bit of self criticism there Senator? Quite a few times I’ve posed questions specifically to you, questions that you never bothered to answer. So your criticism of FSNT is pretty thin gruel.
There is none so blind as those who refuse to see Senator.
“There are none…” If you are going good to insult me, use proper grammar.
Typos are allowed though.
Tom was quoting an old Native American saying.
It is an exact quote from Jesus. Read Matthew 9:26-27.
Source: Google
“None can take either a singular or plural verb. A common misconception is that none is always singular because it is short for no one. However, it is just as likely to mean not any, implying a plural. When none is followed by a mass noun (a noun that cannot be counted or made plural) it takes a singular verb.”
Clearly on this blog you can indefinitely argue about anything. I had fun but it is time to move on to the next post.
To your adieu on this comment thread: “When reality reared it’s truthful head, the senator bravely turned his tail and fled.” (With major apologies to Monty Python).
In response to your first comment I said:
“All they are asked to do is stand. No looking and no saluting or hand on heart. It is as close to neutral as you can get. Employers have the right to stop employees from making statements that harm their business. Taking a knee is clearly a political statement as much as wearing a “Make America Great Again” pin.” END OF POST
My later post said:
“Were the owners of the team the government and it was requiring the players to salute the flag or recite the pledge, then it would probably be compelled speech as per West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943.)
However, in this case it is a private employer dealing with employees with contracts. The issue is not so clear, as per the American Bar Association. Go to: https://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/aba-legal-fact-check-can-you-be-forced-to-participate-in-the-national-anthem/
I would add that my guess is that players could be penalized for kneeling because it is in violation of the contract that they signed because it is detrimental to the game and that an owner who ordered a salute would lose because it seems like truly compelled speech to me but that an owner would prevail, if he or she were just requiring a neutral action like standing mute. END OF POST
I said that it would be compelling speech, were the government to require to salute or pledge. But that is not the case. I again said that my opinion (guess) is that just having them stand is acceptable because it is as close to neutral as possible and a neutral act is not compelling anything. I thought that was clear but I do not mind clarifying.
I then asked you all, “..since all of you are so anti-compelled speech, are you now OK with bakers and photographers refusing jobs that compel them to contribute to activities that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs? And how about those Little Sisters of the Poor?,” which you forgot to comment about.” Please do so.
So, Senator, please deign to provide us the list of immoral and unpatriotic sins that we must shun any customer, patron, client or patient from our services, product or care. And what level of proof must be applied? Mere suspicion? Probable cause? Clear and convincing? Beyond a reasonable doubt? I recommend that you read and understand John 8:7.
Read the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which was supported by Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton. It’s a good start.
And since I answer your questions, how about answering mine or can’t you?
Actually, Senator you have studiously avoided my questions.
As Colonel Flagg said, “You will be loyal to your country or the country you love will hound you to death into loyality.” Can’t beat that.
Trump laughs and jokes during solemn “Retreat” ceremony honoring flag while on military base
By Oliver Willis |
OCTOBER 11, 2017
…
Donald Trump sat and laughed with Fox News host Sean Hannity as the “Retreat” bugle call was played. Tradition dictates that members of the military and civilian leadership stand at attention to respect the U.S. flag during the solemn ceremony.
Trump’s act of disrespect occurred during an interview that happened in a hangar at the Air National Guard base in Pennsylvania.
Trump referred to the bugle call as a “nice sound,” and asked Hannity if they were playing it “in honor of his ratings.”
As the official Army website notes, playing “Retreat” is “one of the oldest traditions in the U.S. Army, which dates back to the Revolutionary War.” Playing the song is used “to signal the end of the duty day and pay respect to the nation’s flag.”
Trump disrespected the flag the same evening he returned to the subject of black NFL players protesting police brutality by kneeling during the anthem. He told Hannity, “You cannot disrespect our country, our flag, our anthem, you cannot do that.”
https://shareblue.com/trump-laughs-and-jokes-during-solemn-retreat-ceremony-honoring-flag-while-on-military-base/
I will look past the arrogant and condescending part of your post (“And you clearly do not understand the concept of ‘compelled speech,’ do you Senator!?”) and address the compelled speech part. Were the owners of the team the government and it was requiring the players to salute the flag or recite the pledge, then it would probably be compelled speech as per West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943.)
However, in this case it is a private employer dealing with employees with contracts. The issue is not so clear, as per the American Bar Association. Go to: https://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/aba-legal-fact-check-can-you-be-forced-to-participate-in-the-national-anthem/
I would add that my guess is that players could be penalized for kneeling because it is in violation of the contract that they signed because it is detrimental to the game and that an owner who ordered a salute would lose because it seems like truly compelled speech to me but that an owner would prevail, if he or she were just requiring a neutral action like standing mute.
You might want to do a little research before mouthing off in an arrogant and condescending way. Makes you look bad.