Exactly.

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

airforcebear said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

Ask yourself why people are offended at players protesting police brutality. Also, of course they are going to protest during the most visible time pregame. The point of a protest is to draw attention to a cause. If you don't like the cause, we can have a discussion around that, but let's get away from the "they hate America and are anarchists" narrative. It's not productive. We also need to wean ourselves as a country off of this "worshipping at the altar of America" mindset we've developed in the past few decades.

---

---

---

---

---

Think you totally missed the point. Totally.

No one seems to be offended by the message of the protest but rather by how it is delivered. Like the What, Dislike the How.

Example: if you said "I am against rape" everyone would agree. If you messaged "I am against rape" by castrating every male, everyone would likely disagree. How not What.

When you say "ask yourself why people are offended at players protesting police brutality" you are creating a false narrative to shoot down. And then try to use that false narrative to further your argument.

Step One: stop making false narratives to set up your argument.
Step Two: listen to the specificity of the complaints. When people complain about riots, violent protests, and/or national anthem kneeling they are NOT disagreeing with Be Against Police Brutality or Be For Equal Rights or Be Against Racism.
Step Three: stop equating respect for the values upon which the USA was founded with worshipping. I respect many things and most people. I show them that respect. I don't worship them. Again, you are creating a false narrative to shoot down.

It is hard to take serious complaints which are built upon fake premises. It doesn't say "let's find healthy agreement" but rather "trying to create unnecessary conflict where no substantive disagreements exist".

99.999% of people agree on the basics: equality, anti-racism, etc. You may think the kneeling tactic is good because it draws attention [your words] but it does not create an atmosphere where real substantive conversations can occur.

Side Note: the continued intermingling of concepts of race and culture also is counterproductive. Race is genetic. Clothes, music, etc. is cultural. Not the same thing.

---

Why do you "dislike the how," in your words?

There's a lot to dig into here, and I appreciate your candid, civil response. I can't respond to it in the detail I'd like to, because I'm frankly pretty busy today.

The other question I'll ask is when you think these substantive conversations on race, police brutality, systemic poverty, etc. would occur in the absence of protests? There is literally no incentive (outside of a moral imperative) to change the status quo as it exists in this country. Therefore, I have zero issue with anyone with a platform expressing their First Amendment right to peacefully protest at whatever moment they choose to do so, if it sheds light on an issue that would otherwise go untouched by society writ large. Some people will argue a point convincingly and eloquently, and some will show their ass (see: Jackson, Desean and Stephen), but let's judge the merit of the argument, not the manner in which they bring it to the table.

Thank you Adriacus Peratuun! If I honestly want to have a conversation, I don't start by being disrespectful and offensive. The message I hear is "You believe this is offensive? So what". It is the 'when', not the 'what'.

BUatbirth said:

---

Thank you Adriacus Peratuun! If I honestly want to have a conversation, I don't start by being disrespectful and offensive. The message I hear is "You believe this is offensive? So what". It is the 'when', not the 'what'.

---

What if people have been trying to have the conversation for 50+ years and no one will listen? If you're in their shoes, you might start looking for other ways to bring it up other than the respectful petition that hasn't worked hundreds of times in the past.

Mitch Henessey said:

---

BUatbirth said:

---

Thank you Adriacus Peratuun! If I honestly want to have a conversation, I don't start by being disrespectful and offensive. The message I hear is "You believe this is offensive? So what". It is the 'when', not the 'what'.

---

What if people have been trying to have the conversation for 50+ years and no one will listen? If you're in their shoes, you might start looking for other ways to bring it up other than the respectful petition that hasn't worked hundreds of times in the past.

---

Valid point. The message, the 'what', can get lost in the 'How' to bring awareness. Take this thread as a example...the conversation is not about the message. It's about 'how' attention Is being drawn. The media focuses the 'how' because that is where the friction is. There really isn't friction on ones right to protest. I too fought to defend that right. I'll point to MLB as a positive way to draw attention to the message...kneeling, holding the black rope, a moment of silence. Then all stood for the National Anthem. I look for ways we all can come together during these times. Can't we come together to honor OUR first responders, OUR men and women in uniform serving around the world, and the sacrifices of OUR heroes who have given their last full measure defending all the good that that flag represents by standing as one as Americans?

blueeyedbear said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

Adriacus Peratuun said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

airforcebear said:

---

Mitch Henessey said:

---

I see the American flag worship is not only confined to the football board.

---

Care to clarify that?

---

It was in reference to the posters who are making the equivalence that a peaceful protest during the national anthem is disrespectful to America, despite it repeatedly being said by those protesting that they are not protesting America or intending any disrespect to the armed forces or those who have served in them.

---

It doesn't matter what they state their intended purpose to be. If folks have an entire pregame to "protest", "express
themselves", etc. and they do not do so during the 99% of that timeframe where it would not offend people but instead purposefully choose to do it during the 1% of the timeframe where they know it will offend people, that clearly indicates that the purpose (even if stated otherwise) is to offend people as a mechanism of generating attention.

The timing isn't coincidental. It is purposeful. If folks make a choice they should at least own it. Instead they keep arguing that if anyone dislikes the "how" of the argument they must be racist and hate the "what" of the argument. If the intent is to pursuade folks, purposefully offending them seems like an odd pathway to achieve it.

---

Ask yourself why people are offended at players protesting police brutality.

Also, of course they are going to protest during the most visible time pregame. The point of a protest is to draw attention to a cause. If you don't like the cause, we can have a discussion around that, but let's get away from the "they hate America and are anarchists" narrative. It's not productive. We also need to wean ourselves as a country off of this "worshipping at the altar of America" mindset we've developed in the past few decades.

---

Mitch let me remind you of something Colin Powell told the Archbishop of Canterbury when he made a comment about "American Imperialism". " Sir we have sent our sons and daughters to fight for freedom and justice all over the world and all we have ever asked for is a little piece of land to bury them in"
These multi millionaire hypocrites want to disrespect the flag and what it stands for. How is it possible that if this country is so systemically racist that this is still the country that people are willing to risk their lives to get into instead out of ?

---

Again, you are making a false equivalency that the intent is to "disrespect the flag and what it stands for." The reason Kaepernick originally started kneeling for the anthem is because he had previously been sitting on the bench, out of view of the cameras. Recall that the NFL began requiring players to come out of the locker rooms for a contrived show of patriotism around 20 years ago (they previously stayed in the locker room until after the anthem, as college players still do), for some bizarre reason that probably had little to do with the billions the armed forces are paying the NFL to advertise and recruit for them with their jingoistic pregame show (note the sarcasm).

Someone noticed, and a former Green Beret (former Seahawk and UT Longhorn Nate Boyer) reached out to Kaepernick and let him know that his sitting out the anthem could be viewed as disrespectful to those serving in the armed forces. Boyer and Kaepernick together worked for a resolution that would allow Kaepernick to express his displeasure with police brutality in a way that would still be considered honoring to the flag. Hence, the kneeling. Kaepernick was subsequently blackballed from the league, lost his livelihood, and was called a "son of a b****" BY THE SITTING PRESIDENT (still boggles the mind). And, just like that, a movement was birthed.

All of this to say, your perceived offense at the nature of the protest is misguided. If you want to be upset that African Americans are protesting a pretty clear and obvious injustice at the hands of those whose role is to uphold justice, that's your prerogative, but don't conflate it with disrespecting the flag or America.

To your last point, America was, and still is a great country that affords many people much more opportunity than they would ever be able to achieve in their homelands. No one is suggesting otherwise. We are not, however, without our faults, and this particular issue is long overdue in being addressed, in my opinion.

And just like that... Sabrina goes off for 33 pts tonight

Ionescu's stat line tonight vs the Wings:
33 points on 11-20 shooting, 6-10 from 3pt, 5-5 ft, 7 reb, 7ast, 5 to, 1 pf

Her team lost the game, the stat that matters.

fredbear said:

---

Her team lost the game, the stat that matters.

---

Her team that includes 7 rookies aren't going to win many this season.

Brian Ethridge said:

---

HoustonBear15 said:

---

fredbear said:

---

Her team lost the game, the stat that matters.

---

Her team that includes 7 rookies aren't going to win many this season.

---

She'll get her shots then. Good learning experience for them all.

---

That's until Joyner Holmes enters the game

Mitch Henessey said:

---

BUatbirth said:

---

Thank you Adriacus Peratuun! If I honestly want to have a conversation, I don't start by being disrespectful and offensive. The message I hear is "You believe this is offensive? So what". It is the 'when', not the 'what'.

---

What if people have been trying to have the conversation for 50+ years and no one will listen? If you're in their shoes, you might start looking for other ways to bring it up other than the respectful petition that hasn't worked hundreds of times in the past.

---

I think people have lost sight of what the intent of the protest is supposed to be. It has always been to bring to the attention of the public an issue that has been ignored. Well, the issue of social justice and police brutality justified or not has been in the headlines of most of the major media outlets. These protests are not a case about a minority viewpoint looking for a voice, but rather a lot of people jumping on a popular bandwagon for a lot of different reasons. You can not watch a TV show without this subject being discussed. You can not watch sporting events without this issue being at the forefront of the announcers. The major news networks are are all on board with this issue. One major political party supports this whole hardly.

Let's not beat around the bush. It is a chosen focal point used by a number of different groups pushing their own separate social and political agendas. Social Justice is only an afterthought but convenient for their purposes. They have picked this as a focal point because very few people would be against social justice. and people are just afraid to call it what it is--- emotional manipulation. They want to bring down the system thus creating a vacuum that they hope they can fill with their own draconian oppressive governmental agendas.

Houston bear 15

I appreciate the tone with which you converse. So I'll shut up for now and let the SI legend unfold as I wish her well. I do think ESPN is ridiculous about her, but I've been wrong before and will be again. Time will provide the answer. Been fun.

For what it's worth, Ionescu isn't even my pick to win Rookie of the year. I'm going with Chennedy Carter or Ty Harris for that.

Wouldn't look at the box score for repeatable results. Dallas is one of the worst organizations in all of sports.

Does she still have to push off to get a shot off?

WacoKelly83 said:

---

This thread got me thinking. Who is the player that ESPN is going to over-hype this year? Ryne Howard comes to mind but I'm not sure she has much star marketability. Paige Bueckers is only a freshman but will be the next big thing...or so I'm told. I vote for Didi but it ain't gonna happen because of her offensive play.

Sorry to highJack and please delete if mods feel the need

---

Howard is the POY in my opinion.

HoustonBear15 said:

---

Ionescu's stat line tonight vs the Wings:
33 points on 11-20 shooting, 6-10 from 3pt, 5-5 ft, 7 reb, 7ast, 5 to, 1 pf

---

WOW!

Looks pretty bad. Guessing out for a few weeks

UPDATE
August 22, 2020

Nice to hear some positive news.