First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply NFL Protests During National Anthem
7737 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

Mishio1 wrote:


DevinKuska wrote:

crap...I just remembered N. Korea likes Dennis Rodman... NBA are communists!!!!!


Was that just a shitpost, or are you trying to make a point?


To be honest I am not familiar with the term shitpost.. it was an attempt(perhaps a poor one) at satire.

EDIT: hmm after looking at urban dictionary it would appear it was a shitpost....as humor doesn't really add value.
3154 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

DevinKuska wrote:

To be honest I am not familiar with the term shitpost.. it was an attempt(perhaps a poor one) at satire.


If it contributes to the conversation, it's probably not a shitpost.

Most humor and such would be considered shitposting, but people frequently try to use humor to convey a point or argument. I thought you might be trying to make a critique about my comparing sports policies with North Korea's policies, but wasn't sure.
7737 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

Mishio1 wrote:

I thought you might be trying to make a critique about my comparing sports policies with North Korea's policies, but wasn't sure.


No i wasnt critiquing you I mentioned the NBA required you to stand, you had made the comparison and then I remembered Mr. Rodmans visit was well recieved in N. Korea so I exaggerated by implying that meant all the NBA were somehow communists... lol the fact that I have to explain the joke means I didn't execute it well... How do I delete my old posts?

runec 
40996 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

DevinKuska wrote:
Again the conversations with the Gold Star widow are not public so its possible she took the comment the wrong way. Without hearing the conversation and its context "he knew what he signed up for" doesn't strike me as uplifting or offensive. As far as Presidents trump owning up to possibly poor choice of words... cant argue that. Then again I don't think there is a proper way to talk to a grieving family. regarding President Trump accepting responsibility.... no argument there either since politicians are all liars and thieves.


The rep who was a friend of the family first brought up what Trump said on the call. Then the mother of the soldier confirmed that that account was accurate. Then the widow herself confirmed the account was accurate and how it made her feel. That the conversation is not "public" is irrelevant. The White House responded first by attacking the rep, then had Kelly slander the rep while basically confirming Trump said what she said he did, then the mother confirmed the account which blew up the entire "Evil Dems are making it up" narrative Trump was going with. Now the widow has confirmed it as well. Even Sanders hasn't been able to slither around this one.

Trump vowed when this all started that he had proof of what he said. He has not produced it. Much as he never produces any of the "proof" he ever claims he has to back up his bullshit. Instead he has effectively accused a Gold Star family of lying.




DevinKuska wrote:
As far as kneeling goes... The SF in question said he would prefer he at least kneel rather than sit, as Kneeling for lost soldiers is common as a show of reverence for the dead comrades(whereas sitting is has zero excuse for anyone). Saying kneel rather then sit is a far cry from saying its ok to kneel. Though I am not aware of any military branch observing kneeling as a tradition, rather standing at attention or saluting is far more likely be be considered the status quo, and is observed and military funerals. I dont speak for all military obviously but the many I associate with find the NFLs choice of when to boycott disrespectful. The stance they are trying to take is commendable(though misguided IMO) however the blow back is from the timing they choose to boycott. The NFL and the players have recognized this and thus come to agreements to find alternative ways to let the players make their political demonstrations. This tells me the boycotting players are either boycotting half heartedly or understand the significance of how their actions are viewed by the public. Viewer ratings and ticket sales show a good portion of the public that pays their salaries dont agree with when they choose to protest, not what they choose to protest.


It appears to be a tradition in the Army specifically. Saluting and standing to attention are for formal affairs.

The NFL is not boycotting anything. It's players are kneeling in protest of a specific issue. Trump is the one that started all this current fervour because culture wars like this play to his base. And his base is all he ultimately cares about. Or more specifically the adulation from his base.

As for sales and viewer ratings the articles I've seen touting that as a "See?!" were all pointing at completely unrelated market forces. The quality of the games themselves for example has been crap this season. Moving teams into markets that want nothing to do with them is another big problem. The NFL's embattled image with both PR disasters and ongoing issues with concussions is yet another.




DevinKuska wrote:
To be honest I am not familiar with the term shitpost.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shitposting

The More You Know(tm).


7737 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

runec wrote:


The rep who was a friend of the family first brought up what Trump said on the call. Then the mother of the soldier confirmed that that account was accurate. Then the widow herself confirmed the account was accurate and how it made her feel. That the conversation is not "public" is irrelevant. The White House responded first by attacking the rep, then had Kelly slander the rep while basically confirming Trump said what she said he did, then the mother confirmed the account which blew up the entire "Evil Dems are making it up" narrative Trump was going with. Now the widow has confirmed it as well. Even Sanders hasn't been able to slither around this one.

Trump vowed when this all started that he had proof of what he said. He has not produced it. Much as he never produces any of the "proof" he ever claims he has to back up his bullshit. Instead he has effectively accused a Gold Star family of lying.




So would I be correct in saying you believe the phrase "He knew what he signed up for" is inherently disrespectful regardless of what the rest of that conversation was about?
199 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
108 / O
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

DevinKuska wrote:


runec wrote:


The rep who was a friend of the family first brought up what Trump said on the call. Then the mother of the soldier confirmed that that account was accurate. Then the widow herself confirmed the account was accurate and how it made her feel. That the conversation is not "public" is irrelevant. The White House responded first by attacking the rep, then had Kelly slander the rep while basically confirming Trump said what she said he did, then the mother confirmed the account which blew up the entire "Evil Dems are making it up" narrative Trump was going with. Now the widow has confirmed it as well. Even Sanders hasn't been able to slither around this one.

Trump vowed when this all started that he had proof of what he said. He has not produced it. Much as he never produces any of the "proof" he ever claims he has to back up his bullshit. Instead he has effectively accused a Gold Star family of lying.




So would I be correct in saying you believe the phrase "He knew what he signed up for" is inherently disrespectful regardless of what the rest of that conversation was about?


Sorry for jumping in. But context definitely matters whether or not its disrespectful in itself (I have been trying to think of an example when it doesn't have negative connotations but havent yet), the sentence doesn't happen in a vacuum. To say it to a widow especially a mourning one is disrespectful
7737 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

zefur wrote:

Sorry for jumping in. But context definitely matters whether or not its disrespectful in itself (I have been trying to think of an example when it doesn't have negative connotations but havent yet), the sentence doesn't happen in a vacuum. To say it to a widow especially a mourning one is disrespectful


Thats the point I am trying to make.. that context matters. If say the conversation was something like 'I am very sorry for your loss, he knew what he signed up for, but joined SF and served bravely" Is much different then "I am sorry your husband is dead, he knew what he signed up for. goodbye"
199 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
108 / O
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

DevinKuska wrote:


zefur wrote:

Sorry for jumping in. But context definitely matters whether or not its disrespectful in itself (I have been trying to think of an example when it doesn't have negative connotations but havent yet), the sentence doesn't happen in a vacuum. To say it to a widow especially a mourning one is disrespectful


Thats the point I am trying to make.. that context matters. If say the conversation was something like 'I am very sorry for your loss, he knew what he signed up for, but joined SF and served bravely" Is much different then "I am sorry your husband is dead, he knew what he signed up for. goodbye"


Yes that way there could be minimal disrespect "if" it was said like that, but from going on his past public appearances, speeches (both scripted and off the cuff) its highly doubtful that that is how it was said. Then there are the accounts from the people who heard it the rep, widow and anyone else who spoke publicly about it.
7737 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17

zefur wrote:

Yes that way there could be minimal disrespect "if" it was said like that, but from going on his past public appearances, speeches (both scripted and off the cuff) its highly doubtful that that is how it was said. Then there are the accounts from the people who heard it the rep, widow and anyone else who spoke publicly about it.


I understand what you are saying. My issue is other then taking the word of a rep from the other side of the "aisle" or the mother who is grieving as well and may have been a bit oversensitive the context of the conversation isnt available. I will agree President Trump doesn't exactly have tact, however I just find it difficult to believe that out of the (I believe 4) SF members families who received probably almost identical speeches. That it was somehow disrespectful. But I could be wrong. Time will tell if/when we get the full conversation.

Though personally speaking... I find it odd that so many people were listening into a phone call. Unless it happened to be at a family gathering and it was put on speakerphone to address the entire family. Other then that scenario I find all these witnesses to the call something akin to a planned trap. I hope I am wrong that nobody would use the death of their own family for politcal/social gains.

Ahh but we have strayed a bit from the original topic. My apologies.
Zorvus 
1038 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / M
Offline
Posted 10/23/17 , edited 10/24/17
As a Vet I support them, I could really care less about the flag waving crowd they are idiots any way. The biggest example to prove that is that they elected a hairless ape to be president.
15743 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / El Mirage, AZ
Offline
Posted 10/24/17 , edited 10/24/17
Kap was kneeling because he wanted the 49ers to trade him since he was still a year away from being able to opt out of his contract. He just never expected that this would be the result of his action.

runec 
40996 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/24/17 , edited 10/24/17

DevinKuska wrote:
So would I be correct in saying you believe the phrase "He knew what he signed up for" is inherently disrespectful regardless of what the rest of that conversation was about?


It's a pretty tone deaf thing to say to a grieving widow and she elaborated on what the conversation was about. By all accounts Kelly was trying to coach Trump on making these calls and the way Kelly put it was more eloquent. What Trump said was basically a Trumpian version of the story Kelly told him of losing his own son.

What Kelly was told was:

"He was doing exactly what he wanted to do when he was killed,” Mr. Kelly recalled. “He knew what he was getting into by joining that 1 percent. He knew what the possibilities were because we were at war."

But crucially that was officer to officer. Not President to grieving widow.

Conversely, Trump distilled that down to "He knew what he was signing up for, but I guess it still hurts". Because Trump does not understand human interaction and does not form coherent thoughts overly well. The way Trump said it made it sound like it was the soldier's fault he was dead and that the grief was an afterthought.




First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.