Henderson Goes Nuclear on Kid Rock/Ilitch

[Wesley Mouch]

Well put, but I would argue that many who, like myself, refuse to do the full monty of submission--standing, hat off, hand over heart, and full-throated singing--are not doing so with intent to irritate.

Although I believe CK is a bit of a grandstander, I don't think he intends to irritate either.

I have a hard time being a part of a North Korean-style rally, especially at sports events where many are dressed all in the same swag. I stand and sing along, hat on, hands at my side.

I see conformity with non-conformance.

Some guy at the Big House in AA once called me out for not removing my hat. I turned and told him, I had served my country and sworn and oath of allegiance to the constitution and would honor my country in the manner I chose. He got all apologetic.

Good manners abound

Those who choose to kneel or otherwise protest are honoring America too and, with all the conformist nutso's out there, doing so bravely. They're demonstrating to the world that we are a free country where one has the right to protest, or make asses of themselves....land of the free, home of the brave.

How can an unwillingness to share and communicate your appreciation for your country be called honoring?

You of course have the right to participate as you wish, as does everyone in our free country. If this were a targeted protest, where you wore some kind of ribbon or hat as you sat to make your point, it still is a selfish action [[IMO) that takes an opportunity for celebration and makes it about your protest. The moment is about celebration. To not celebrate is allowed, but it is not honoring our Country. Honoring would be the action of solidarity. Not joining expresses discontent. You may not see it as disrespect. OK. But others do.

So you have a choice. Stop the protest for one minute and share with your fellow citizens the joy of living in a great country.

Here's the irony. It is the sharing of our common love for country that has enabled us to significantly overcome racism [[and much else). Common civic pride is a public good that is diminished by selfish action.

Freedom allows each of us the ability to decide whether to participate in that pride.

[Bham1982]

How can an unwillingness to share and communicate your appreciation for your country be called honoring?

What is "honoring" the country? Is it practicing the ideals upon which the country was founded, or is is blindly saluting a flag and song?

I would argue Kapernick is doing the former, and is displaying real patriotism. Someone isn't automatically a "patriot" because they stand to the Anthem at a sports event [[something which began in the jingoistic Cold War-era).

[Bigdd]

What is "honoring" the country? Is it practicing the ideals upon which the country was founded, or is is blindly saluting a flag and song?

Taking advantage of a freedom that this country provides is not "honoring" it any more than going on welfare is honoring the welfare system. It's using.

He is using the freedoms others have provided him,... to then insult the country and people that provided it.

It's his right. But there's nothing noble in it.

[Bham1982]

Taking advantage of a freedom that this country provides is not "honoring" it any more than going on welfare is honoring the welfare system. It's using.

Putting aside the absurd analogy, what is "honoring" the country, then?

Apparently it isn't exercising Constitutional rights, it isn't standing up for injustice and it isn't offering critical analysis for structural change [[basically the definition of constructive patriotism).

Give us an example. How can someone effectively "honor" the country?

He is using the freedoms others have provided him to then insult the country and people that provided it.

When did he "insult the country"? Be specific, please. Did he collude with a foreign enemy, like the President?

[Bigdd]

Putting aside the absurd analogy, what is "honoring" the country, then?

I don't need to give you examples to state that kneeling for the anthem isn't.

Apparently it isn't exercising Constitutional rights, it isn't standing up for injustice and it isn't offering critical analysis for structural change [[basically the definition of constructive patriotism).

Correct.

When did he "insult the country"? Be specific, please. Did he collude with a foreign enemy, like the President?

Hillary lost the election.

[Wesley Mouch]

What is "honoring" the country? Is it practicing the ideals upon which the country was founded, or is is blindly saluting a flag and song?

I would argue Kapernick is doing the former, and is displaying real patriotism. Someone isn't automatically a "patriot" because they stand to the Anthem at a sports event [[something which began in the jingoistic Cold War-era).

Certainly, dissent can be patriotic. One's country is not always right. Criticism is important.

One can criticize strongly, yet be willing to acknowledge the massive amount of good that is working to eradicate the bad in the US. We are far from perfect, but CK is fortunate to live in the US.

[Oddz313]

Certainly, dissent can be patriotic. One's country is not always right. Criticism is important.

One can criticize strongly, yet be willing to acknowledge the massive amount of good that is working to eradicate the bad in the US. We are far from perfect, but CK is fortunate to live in the US.

If he could play soccer he would be fortunate to live in Australia, U.K., Germany, Spain, etc. Most places are not Iran

[Wesley Mouch]

If he could play soccer he would be fortunate to live in Australia, U.K., Germany, Spain, etc. Most places are not Iran

The US is absolutely not alone as a 'fortunate' place to live.

Iran is absolutely not alone as an 'unfortunate' place to live. Try dissent in NK, Russia, most of the Middle East, much of Africa, Venezuela, or China.

[canuck]

And I love singing O Can-uh-duh too. Also with my hat on.

Try on the Mountie hat, the tuque, or the beavertail. Whichever one you choose, you'll look like a 1,23 million Canadian bucks, or if you prefer, a million dollars.

[Honky Tonk]

Try on the Mountie hat, the tuque, or the beavertail. Whichever one you choose, you'll look like a 1,23 million Canadian bucks, or if you prefer, a million dollars.

If he does the mountie hat, he'll need the hip-hugger pants to complete the outfit.

[canuck]

If he does the mountie hat, he'll need the hip-hugger pants to complete the outfit.

Yes. Atop a pony for maximum effect.

[Bham1982]

Because you're the little whiner that seems to have the problem.

Just to be clear, you believe that "little whiners" need to leave the U.S., correct?

And you, simultaneously deify the whiner-in-chief, who built his entire campaign on lying about Obama/Clinton and whining about everything in America today, claiming America was a "disaster" and experiencing "carnage".

Once again, the Trump cult strikes with rampant hypocrisy and nonsensical contradictions.

[canuck]

Little Winers and Diners can stay in the United States, they're good for business. It's the little weiners I'd worry about. You won't build a strong Nation unless you slip them some Viagra.

[Wesley Mouch]

Very whitty everyone.

Nothing left to say about the worship of Kaepernick and Kid Rock? Probably not. Its all been done before.

[clubboss]

Health care is supposedly on the verge of collapsing.
America has one foot on a banana peel, and one foot in the door with war in Asia - no problem there, America has never faced fanaticism in Asia. Another war that will be over by Christmas.
Tax reform is also small matter that congress should quickly resolve.
All the irons in the fire [[which are blue hot) and dotard, once again goes after NFL players.

[313WX]

Now I'm seeing a bunch of people comparing Kaepernick to Moses or Ali.

For fuck's sake. These people clearly have no grasp of history. The guy at best contributed to a conversation that's been ongoing to decades. He's not leading any type of movement.

Furthermore, now I see everyone's acting like sheeple and suddenly following Kaepernick. But the fact of the matter is they're only doing it because of their sheer hatred for Trump, not because they're helping black people or defending Kaepernick. And the crazy part is, despite his intention, Trump may have just given Kaepernick a lifeline.

Just ridiculousness all around.

[Wesley Mouch]

Now I'm seeing a bunch of people comparing Kaepernick to Moses or Ali.

For fuck's sake. These people clearly have no grasp of history. The guy at best contributed to a conversation that's been ongoing to decades. He's not leading any type of movement.

Furthermore, now I see everyone's acting like sheeple and suddenly following Kaepernick. But the fact of the matter is they're only doing it because of their sheer hatred for Trump, not because they're helping black people or defending Kaepernick. And the crazy part is, despite his intention, Trump may have just given Kaepernick a lifeline.

Just ridiculousness all around.

313WX, you are spot on here. Trump hatred has inspired a lot of irrational thinking. The real conversation needed starts when we stop demonizing others and being open to other viewpoints [[both sides). No conversation moves forward much from the current f*** you [[both sides).

CK realizes he gets support by claiming racism today. Trump realizes he gets support by calling out apparent disrespect. Both are acting selfishly [[both sides).

[Bham1982]

313WX, you are spot on here. Trump hatred has inspired a lot of irrational thinking.

Replace "hatred" with "cult worshippers" and you have a reasonable point.

Yeah there are two sides. One side respects the Constitution, civil rights, and blacks not getting murdered. The other side loves enemies of America, white supremacists, and killer cops. Pick a side.

[Johnnny5]

IMO the NFL should have nipped this in the bud the first time Kaepernick took a knee. When a player is on the field he's on the job, and his actions represent the team. The NFL was already struggling with CTE and dwindling attendance, and if this continues to spread it's going to absolutely decimate attendance, viewership and advertising dollars. Honestly, I'm totally fine with that.

[Bham1982]

IThe NFL was already struggling with CTE and dwindling attendance, and if this continues to spread it's going to absolutely decimate attendance, viewership and advertising dollars. Honestly, I'm totally fine with that.

Given that the vast majority of Americans, and almost the entire globe, can't stand Trump, I'd say the NFL will be just fine standing up to his idiocy.

It's only the most profitable league on the planet. Pretty sure it will be OK standing up for civil rights and against the most hated man on earth.

[Johnnny5]

Given that the vast majority of Americans, and almost the entire globe, can't stand Trump, I'd say the NFL will be just fine standing up to his idiocy.

It's only the most profitable league on the planet. Pretty sure it will be OK standing up for civil rights and against the most hated man on earth.

Sorry, but even if the "Vast majority of Americans" do hate Trump, there is still a sizable portion that support him. I would venture to say that among NFL fans support for Trump is probably far higher than among the U.S population overall. There's also an even larger number of people that are turned off by these protests, regardless of their opinion of President Trump.

You don't grow or maintain a fan base by offending a huge portion of your fans, and that's exactly what these on the field protests are doing. The NFL is now up against a revolution in the way people watch sports [[The cord cutting from cable), the effects of CTE on current and former players and now a rapidly spreading player protest that many fans find distasteful. If you don't think this is going to hurt the NFL, you're simply not paying attention.

[Bham1982]

Sorry, but even if the "Vast majority of Americans" do hate Trump, there is still a sizable portion that support him.

OK, and? Putting aside the ethics of standing up for civil rights vs standing up for traitors like Trump, does it make economic sense for the NFL to side with the global majority, or does it make sense to side with an extremist opinion? Obviously the former.

The NFL gains far more fans in opposition to Trump than in support of Trump.

[Johnnny5]

OK, and? Putting aside the ethics of standing up for civil rights vs standing up for traitors like Trump, does it make economic sense for the NFL to side with the global majority, or does it make sense to side with an extremist opinion? Obviously the former.

The NFL gains far more fans in opposition to Trump than in support of Trump.

I disagree totally, but we're all entitled to our own opinions when on our own time. Generally gaining new customers[[Fans) is many times more difficult than keeping your current ones. This is even more important when your entire business model revolves around the fan loyalty to "their teams".

[Wesley Mouch]

Replace "hatred" with "cult worshippers" and you have a reasonable point.

Yeah there are two sides. One side respects the Constitution, civil rights, and blacks not getting murdered. The other side loves enemies of America, white supremacists, and killer cops. Pick a side.

Pick a side?

No. I will not play Trump's game.

Why? Because I do believe in the Constitution, civil rights, and blacks not getting murdered. But more because I see that Trump is using Kaepernick.

How? By drawing battle lines. Here are the sides as I see them.

Yours... Elites from Birmingham who have forgotten just how difficult it is to build a society, and are ashamed of America. And believe that they have the solution to all the problems.

Ours... Normal people who love their country, warts and all. And who have mostly left their racist parents behind and are ready to move forward -- but are tired of being labelled racist for the acts of a handful of white supremacists.

Did you listen to Trump's UN speech? Not the 'Rocket Boy' soundbite, nor the media's selected clips of crowd reaction. It was a great speech, unless you're already made up your mind. I was quite happy to hear him call out N. Korea and tell them they'll get their ass handed to them if they threaten us. Happy to hear him call Iran an oppressive regime that murders its own citizens. Happy to hear him condemn Venezuela for moving from socialist to dictatorship. Happy to hear him call upon the UN to stop appointing these countries to the human rights council.

You really should take 45 minutes and listen to every word. And try to take off the blinders handed you by the media.

So Henderson goes nuclear on KR/Ilitch. He's picked his side.

Trump is happy to win the next election without you and Henderson. Rather than just appealing to outcasts who elected him, he's broadening his appeal by making it clear that he supports the US. And not those who are guilty to be Americans and are defining us by our rare black-killing cop.

[aj3647]

The Supreme Court eloquently summed this all up in a decision made more than 70 years ago in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, where they ruled that it was unconstitutional for schools to force students to stand for the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. But they went further in their majority opinion to address the larger issue of Free Speech.

Bolded and underlines the relevant parts:

The case is made difficult not because the principles of its decision are obscure but because the flag involved is our own. Nevertheless, we apply the limitations of the Constitution with no fear that freedom to be intellectually and spiritually diverse or even contrary will disintegrate the social organization. To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great. But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.

Compelling people to engage in forced displays of patriotism is not freedom, it is the opposite of freedom. It's North Korea, where you display blind loyalty to the state and blind deference to its symbols...or else.

Decades ago, Jehovah's Witnesses were similarly singled out for ostracization and demonization because they similarly refused to stand for the flag or pledge allegiance to it. My, how far we [[haven't) come since then.