Trump and NFL boycott

[Ziggurat]

So what are people supposed to think, if not that you believe what Trump does doesn't matter?

How about something other than the false dichotomy of incipient dictatorship or nothing mattering?

I think Obama was a terrible president, and did some serious damage to the country. I do not think he was Hitler, or even Woodrow Wilson for that matter. See how it works? You don't have to like Trump, you don't have to be indifferent to him, to not think we're on the brink of fascism. And incompetence can have negative consequences other than turning our country into a dictatorship.

 

[PhantomWolf]

There is simply no difference between the president exercising his first amendment rights and you exercising yours.

This is not actually true. When a John Q Citizen speaks they are speaking only for themselves,when a Head of State speaks, especially when they do so over what we are told is an offical channel of communications, then that Head of State is not speaking for themselves, but rather they are speaking for the entire Country that they are the Head of State of.

This is what you, and Trump, and Pence, and a lot of their supporters don't seem to get, because Trump is President, when he speaks he's not speaking as Donald J. Trump US Citizen, but rather President Donald J. Trump, Leader and Representative for all the people in the USA. When he tweets, he does so in the voice of the USA, it's not him speaking, but his office, and via that, the Country itself.

So no, you are not at all right that "there is simply no difference between the president exercising his first amendment rights and you exercising yours." There is a major difference, because no one here or on an NFL field is speaking for an entire country every time they open their mouth, or angrily bash their keyboards, and this is the HUGE difference in why Presidents are supposed to act and speak Presidentially, because everything they do reflects on the country they are representing, 24/7 during their term.

And BTW, in calling for Tax change, Trump might have crossed the line from moronic actions to illegal ones.

 

[Ziggurat]

If the NFL adapts a mandatory standing rule,be prepared for a massive protest the first Sunday after it is imposed.
The Players union will be up in arms about it.

Um... they already have a mandatory standing rule. Have had it for a long time. They just haven't been enforcing it lately.

 

[Beerina]

And BTW, in calling for Tax change, Trump might have crossed the line from moronic actions to illegal ones.

It's an interesting question. Whereas deliberately adding new taxes to hurt speech, say, on a newspaper, is not allowed (as opposed to a general purpose law, though even that might be unconstitutional on a newspaper if it dragged them down too much), merely repealing a tax break is a different matter. It may still be disallowed by the Supreme Court (if it happened, which it won't) but that remains to be seen.


I am not a fan of government targeting uppity citizens as that is an unconstitutional abuse of power (everyone is supposed to be equal under the law, and that includes choice of who to investigate for an apparent crime.) I was opposed to it when Obama investigated S & P in response to when they lowered the rating of US bonds, and I am opposed to Trump's BS here.


Go ahead and open your yapper to your heart's content, Trump, and use that bully pulpit. But sic the government on people? That's wrong.

 

[theprestige]

And BTW, in calling for Tax change, Trump might have crossed the line from moronic actions to illegal ones.

It's illegal for the president to urge legislative action? Seems like the cheerleader for "Obamacare" would have a lot to answer for.

 

[PhantomWolf]

It's illegal for the president to urge legislative action? Seems like the cheerleader for "Obamacare" would have a lot to answer for.

When urging it to curb free speech, yes that is starting to cross the line.

 

[LSSBB]

Um... they already have a mandatory standing rule. Have had it for a long time. They just haven't been enforcing it lately.

"mandatory", or "should"?

 

[WilliamSeger]

You are not being coherent or rational. If the amount doesn't matter at all, if it makes no difference if it was $1 million or $0.01, then the entire complaint is specious.

Baloney. Again you misrepresent: I didn't say "the the amount doesn't matter at all" or that "it makes no difference." I said "the specific complaint was not 'about' how much it cost." It was about spending any tax money at all to send Pense to fart at the protestors, just to stir up a failing president's deplorable base. Complaining about the amount would be a different complaint -- I'm not limited to one! You don't get to merely assert that it "makes no difference" to the issue of Pense spending taxpayer money for a reprehensible political purpose. That's as bad or worse than your original rationalization that it didn't matter because the money would be just spent on something else.

 

[newyorkguy]

Um... they already have a mandatory standing rule. Have had it for a long time. They just haven't been enforcing it lately.

Apparently they don't.

The NFL’s rules that players “should stand at attention” for the national anthem could be changed to make it clearly mandatory for them to do so, a league spokesman said Tuesday. Link

 

[Beerina]

I thought their union contract said they didn't have to stand. That would be more for, say, Jehovah's Witnesses or something. And wouldn't that mean sit quietly on the bench, not kneel in obvious defiance?

 

[LSSBB]

I thought their union contract said they didn't have to stand. That would be more for, say, Jehovah's Witnesses or something. And wouldn't that mean sit quietly on the bench, not kneel in obvious defiance?

Where in the NFL rules is "kneel" defined as obvious defiance?

 

[LSSBB]

But in Trump's world that's worth spending all his energy on demanding they be punished for it. On the other hand American's carrying swastika's, chanting anti-Semitic slogans and causing public disorder is barely worth 5 minutes of his time, which give's Neo-Naz's something in common with disaster victims in Puerto Rico...

I see this point raised again, and I again see it totally ignored by Trump's defenders.

 

[dudalb]

I see this point raised again, and I again see it totally ignored by Trump's defenders.

Dear Leader can do no wrong............

 

[a_unique_person]

How about something other than the false dichotomy of incipient dictatorship or nothing mattering?

I think Obama was a terrible president, and did some serious damage to the country. I do not think he was Hitler, or even Woodrow Wilson for that matter. See how it works? You don't have to like Trump, you don't have to be indifferent to him, to not think we're on the brink of fascism. And incompetence can have negative consequences other than turning our country into a dictatorship.

Who was worse? Trump or Obama?

 

[Foolmewunz]

President Trump is now asking, via Twitter, why NFL receives tax breaks.


edited to add...



IMO taking a knee isn't "disrespecting our Anthem, Flag and Country" in any case.

Does the NFL get any federal tax breaks? I think all their sweetheart deals are down at the city level, aren't they?

 

[phiwum]

Apparently they don't.

Kinda depends, again, on how "should" is meant. But no doubt that "required" would remove ambiguity.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Foolmewunz]

"next to of course god america i
love you land of the pilgrims' and so forth oh
say can you see by the dawn's early my
country 'tis of centuries come and go
and are no more. what of it we should worry
in every language even deafanddumb
thy sons acclaim your glorious name by gorry
by jingo by gee by gosh by gum
why talk of beauty what could be more beaut-
iful than these heroic happy dead
who rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter
they did not stop to think they died instead
then shall the voice of liberty be mute?"

He spoke. And drank rapidly a glass of water

Apparently this crap is as old as the hills.

 

[theprestige]

When urging it to curb free speech, yes that is starting to cross the line.

The tax code is used to encourage and discourage expression all the time.

The government offers artistic grants all the time. Is it a constitutional violation every time the government withdraws a grant, or refuses to subsidize some expression it is not interested in?

Is it okay for the government to enact artistic subsidies as long as no government official actually discusses it? Because that seems... Unworkable.

 

[Ziggurat]

Does the NFL get any federal tax breaks? I think all their sweetheart deals are down at the city level, aren't they?

I'm pretty sure that's correct. The NFL gets some special anti-trust exemptions at the federal level, but that's not part of the tax code.

 

[LSSBB]

The tax code is used to encourage and discourage expression all the time.

The government offers artistic grants all the time. Is it a constitutional violation every time the government withdraws a grant, or refuses to subsidize some expression it is not interested in?

Is it okay for the government to enact artistic subsidies as long as no government official actually discusses it? Because that seems... Unworkable.

Disingenuous. Does the government proscribe what the artist can create?