Artie Burns is not happy with new NFL National Anthem policy

[Mojouw]

Let me talk about that part first, as it ties in to the bigger point you are making about civility and respect in general as it relates to the current political climate.

I firmly believe that the protesters would have found a far, far more receptive audience if they had not picked what is quite likely THE worst possible time, place, and manner to get their point across. Not specifically because it's the flag, or because of people's feelings about patriotism and whatever - but simply because the meaning was already taken by something else and was very firmly established. Double bonus that the specific meaning for many people (honoring war veterans) is largely unrelated to what the protests are about, AND is often a very powerful and personal one.

I literally cannot think of any better way to take the focus off of your own message and get people talking instead about whether or not YOU are a jerk. Which is exactly what happened.

There are some people who say, "Well, the whole point is that you NEED to draw attention to the cause, so choosing a target like that and making people 'uncomfortable' was a brilliant move!" On a practical basis, I would disagree very strongly with that. Alienating people is certainly one way of getting their attention, but generally does the opposite of converting them to your cause. Especially since this is an issue that most people, by and large, were already aware of; you were not going to find any new recruits to your cause that way.

The one thing it probably DOES do is strengthen people's existing opinions on the subject. Either you already agree with their point and you get more galvanized in favor of it, or you already disagree with their point and now you start resenting them for their actions, not just disagreeing with their message.

For example, last time I took my kids to the circus, these assholes were outside with posters of animals being beaten and tortured, and they were shouting at everyone who was walking in the door. My reaction was not "Now that you have my attention, I'll consider your point," it was "I came here to enjoy myself, not get a lecture on morality, so FUCK YOU and your cause." And this was for a protest that, while more in-your-face than kneeling for a song is, was actually somewhat relevant to the event. Certainly a lot more connected to the circus than general racial anger is connected to a football game. The overall principle is the same, though - you are not going to win any converts that way, just amplify existing opinions and get people angrier at each other.

And in a broader sense, this is just a microcosm of the entire political climate. On almost every significant topic, everyone has their minds made up and their heels dug in, and the only "discussion" that takes place is primarily through an endless stream of soundbites and memes trying to paint the other side as people who are crazy or evil with no real reason for being that way. And the more that goes on, the more it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; people's political opinions and social discourse really ARE reduced to the mental equivalent of potato chips. A real problem with the country and the Kaepernick story is a great example of it.

edit: I just wanted to say that overall, I do think your point is right on the money, and a lot of people on both sides of the political spectrum share the blame for the monkey-shit-fight that is the current state of public affairs.

Yeah, I should be clear that individuals and groups from the left, right, and center are all guilty here. No one escapes the current political morass we are in looking good.

You and I fundamentally differ on the symbol was already taken thing, but that’s okay - at least for me. Symbols typically hold multiple meanings and rarely represent the same thing to everyone who views them.

It is just frustrating that we can’t, as a society, recognize that and incorporate some complexity and nuance into our thinking.

All that being said, I’m often guilty of what I accuse others of. If I seem to have called anyone out or not adequately listened, I apologize. Recent events and public debates have me on an uncalled for hair trigger lately.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hawaiiansteeler]

Ted Nugent is a dirtbag who made a career off people who have bad taste in music anyway. Who gives a f what he thinks lmao.

[Fire Goodell]

Little too much before my time. I know I probably have an unpopular opinion but I also think the Beatles suck. Zeppelin is the only classic band I can stomach. As for what I listen to, give me some Metallica (old Metallica), Pantera, or Slayer

My dad and I always got into arguments over rock, he says those bands I'm hating on are the reason why the metal bands exist today. But whatever, if I like it I listen to it. If not, I don't. Though I'd say our arguments probably fueled even more of my hating on 'old people music' even more

[hawaiiansteeler]

Little too much before my time. I know I probably have an unpopular opinion but I also think the Beatles suck. Zeppelin is the only classic band I can stomach. As for what I listen to, give me some Metallica (old Metallica), Pantera, or Slayer

My dad and I always got into arguments over rock, he says those bands I'm hating on are the reason why the metal bands exist today. But whatever, if I like it I listen to it. If not, I don't. Though I'd say our arguments probably fueled even more of my hating on 'old people music' even more

come on man, you gotta give the Rolling Stones some props. they have spanned almost 6 decades, it's absolutely amazing to me how Keith Richards is still alive...

[st33lersguy]

Let me talk about that part first, as it ties in to the bigger point you are making about civility and respect in general as it relates to the current political climate.

I firmly believe that the protesters would have found a far, far more receptive audience if they had not picked what is quite likely THE worst possible time, place, and manner to get their point across. Not specifically because it's the flag, or because of people's feelings about patriotism and whatever - but simply because the meaning was already taken by something else and was very firmly established. Double bonus that the specific meaning for many people (honoring war veterans) is largely unrelated to what the protests are about, AND is often a very powerful and personal one.

I literally cannot think of any better way to take the focus off of your own message and get people talking instead about whether or not YOU are a jerk. Which is exactly what happened.

There are some people who say, "Well, the whole point is that you NEED to draw attention to the cause, so choosing a target like that and making people 'uncomfortable' was a brilliant move!" On a practical basis, I would disagree very strongly with that. Alienating people is certainly one way of getting their attention, but generally does the opposite of converting them to your cause. Especially since this is an issue that most people, by and large, were already aware of; you were not going to find any new recruits to your cause that way.

The one thing it probably DOES do is strengthen people's existing opinions on the subject. Either you already agree with their point and you get more galvanized in favor of it, or you already disagree with their point and now you start resenting them for their actions, not just disagreeing with their message.

For example, last time I took my kids to the circus, these assholes were outside with posters of animals being beaten and tortured, and they were shouting at everyone who was walking in the door. My reaction was not "Now that you have my attention, I'll consider your point," it was "I came here to enjoy myself, not get a lecture on morality, so FUCK YOU and your cause." And this was for a protest that, while more in-your-face than kneeling for a song is, was actually somewhat relevant to the event. Certainly a lot more connected to the circus than general racial anger is connected to a football game. The overall principle is the same, though - you are not going to win any converts that way, just amplify existing opinions and get people angrier at each other.

And in a broader sense, this is just a microcosm of the entire political climate. On almost every significant topic, everyone has their minds made up and their heels dug in, and the only "discussion" that takes place is primarily through an endless stream of soundbites and memes trying to paint the other side as people who are crazy or evil with no real reason for being that way. And the more that goes on, the more it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; people's political opinions and social discourse really ARE reduced to the mental equivalent of potato chips. A real problem with the country and the Kaepernick story is a great example of it.

edit: I just wanted to say that overall, I do think your point is right on the money, and a lot of people on both sides of the political spectrum share the blame for the monkey-shit-fight that is the current state of public affairs.

Totally agree 100%. There is no better way to alienate people and draw focus away from your message than to kneel during the national anthem, which is widely viewed as a sign of disrespect.

I read somewhere where Torrey Smith was speaking out about how it was misinterpreted as being disrespectful. That may be something the players like to tell themselves to make themselves feel better, but it just comes off as tone deaf to the majority of Americans who hold the national anthem as sacred and view kneeling as a sign of disrespect.

[Dwinsgames]

come on man, you gotta give the Rolling Stones some props. they have spanned almost 6 decades, it's absolutely amazing to me how Keith Richards is still alive...

to the bold ....

if you had no idea who Kieth Richards is and was asked a multiple choice question of what his name is 99% would probably say B) Rob Zombie

[st33lersguy]

(This next post is from a purely observational and neutral perspective, I'm not to suggest anything personally)

Another problem with the messaging of using kneeling for the national anthem to raise awareness is it reinforces conservatives opinions in their eyes that liberals/democrats hate America. Conservatives had already been criticizing Obama/Democrats/Liberals for being anti-American/anti-military citing his cuts to the Military, his mishandling of Benghazi invasion, his American apology tour, and his perceived weakness of foreign policy with critics citing examples such as the Iran Nuclear Deal and the 2009 Russian reset. Having social justice activists choose the national anthem as the platform for their protests really only reinforces a conservative's views in their eyes that liberals are anti-American and they don't end up listening. Colin Kaepernick the poster boy, didn't help matters with imaging when he praised Fidel Castro in a press conference.

A more effective method for this is doing what NFL players were doing is reaching out and having honest conversation with law enforcement to try and come together rather than discourse from guys like Malcolm Jenkins, Brandon Marshal (LB) (and pictured Torrey Smith mentioned earlier). That is probably more effective and better for political discourse



https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-police-chief/

[GBMelBlount]

come on man, you gotta give the Rolling Stones some props. they have spanned almost 6 decades, it's absolutely amazing to me how Keith Richards is still alive...

Agreed!

[tom444]

NFL players, give it up. I applaud your effort. I back your mission. Find another way.


The beginning of a new era:

[ThorndikeFFA]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/580962550...#sp=show-clips

[teegre]

it's absolutely amazing to me how Keith Richards is still alive...

Keith Richards is part vampire, part Dorian Gray.

[steelreserve]

Totally agree 100%. There is no better way to alienate people and draw focus away from your message than to kneel during the national anthem, which is widely viewed as a sign of disrespect.

I read somewhere where Torrey Smith was speaking out about how it was misinterpreted as being disrespectful. That may be something the players like to tell themselves to make themselves feel better, but it just comes off as tone deaf to the majority of Americans who hold the national anthem as sacred and view kneeling as a sign of disrespect.

Yeah I mean, you can say the protests are not "about" the flag or veterans or hating your country all you want but ... tone deaf is a great way of describing that.

Like, if I was angry about something (say, high taxes) and chose to make my protest by getting in people's face at the Martin Luther King Day parade - that would be a really stupid way to try to get my point across. I could have a really important message that was 100% indisputable, and people wouldn't even care, I'd just be the dumb asshole who caused a scene on Martin Luther King Day.

If I then said "But the protest wasn't ABOUT Martin Luther King Day," how many people do you think would care? About zero. No, not everybody holds that day as sacred as everyone else either - but the fact is that a lot of people do, and I would have to be a real moron not to realize my protest was just going to piss off a ton of people needlessly.

If Martin Luther King Day is too sensitive a subject, then take everything I just said and replace that with going around shouting "HAIL SATAN!" on Christmas Eve as your protest, and it's the same point. Some people won't be bothered by your choice of format and venue, but you will piss a lot of others off.

You want my honest opinion, I think Kaepernick himself was just too stupid to consider any of this. But once the kneeling protest became the default symbol of "us against them" (and the president further cemented it by opening his big mouth), then it ceased to even really be about the issue so much as the act of defiance and what was an appropriate venue for it.

Reminds me of some History Channel show about jail (back before it was all reality shows), where they interviewed a guy who killed another prisoner over a pack of cigarettes. And the guy said, "You say it's about a pack of cigarettes. But if someone asks you for a cigarette and you tell him no, and then he spits in your face and says 'what are you gonna do about it, you dumb motherfucker?' and 10 of his friends and 10 of your friends join in - well, then it's not about a pack of cigarettes anymore, is it?"

That pretty well summarizes the state of the NFL protests, not to mention politics in general in 2018.

[Mojouw]

Who gets to decide what appropriate protest symbols/targets are? The majority or the minority? By definition a protest and its associated symbols are going to piss of the majority of people. That's the fundamental goal. Bottom line of the majority gets to designate how the minority protests in a given issue then protest is by definition stopped. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Many people thought tea was an atrocious way to protest. How'd that work?

[Mojouw]

Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.

Henry David Thoreau - On Civil Disobedience

[steelreserve]

Who gets to decide what appropriate protest symbols/targets are? The majority or the minority? By definition a protest and its associated symbols are going to piss of the majority of people. That's the fundamental goal. Bottom line of the majority gets to designate how the minority protests in a given issue then protest is by definition stopped. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Many people thought tea was an atrocious way to protest. How'd that work?

Not really. There are plenty of ways you can protest without just being a dick. The two are not the same, and if you are smart, the goal is not the same either.

At least if your goal is to actually achieve change rather than just make people angry. There's a also a reason why it's called MLK Day and not Black Panthers Day.

[tom444]

Who gets to decide what appropriate protest symbols/targets are? The majority or the minority? By definition a protest and its associated symbols are going to piss of the majority of people. That's the fundamental goal. Bottom line of the majority gets to designate how the minority protests in a given issue then protest is by definition stopped. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Many people thought tea was an atrocious way to protest. How'd that work?

It's not a matter of appropriate, or inappropriate, or who designates the how of it, and who doesn't. It's a matter of what's effective, and what isn't. After all, being effective is the point.

[hawaiiansteeler]

Donald Trump re-embraces anthem issue

Posted by Mike Florio on July 20, 2018

Giants co-owner Steve Tisch wishes that Donald Trump would leave the NFL alone. That wish won’t be coming true.

“The NFL National Anthem Debate is alive and well again — can’t believe it!” Trump said on Twitter. “Isn’t it in contract that players must stand at attention, hand on heart? The $40,000,000 Commissioner must now make a stand. First time kneeling, out for game. Second time kneeling, out for season/no pay!”

Of course, there’s nothing in any contract requiring any players to stand for the national anthem. The NFL had recognized the right of players to protest during the anthem, and the NFL has suspended the application of a new policy that would have required any player not in the locker room to stand for the anthem.

The NFL and NFL Players Association currently are trying to resolve the situation. It’s highly unlikely that the final outcome will reflect the wishes of the President. Which means that it’s highly unlikely that he’ll leave the issue alone.

Especially when it provides a welcome distraction to a week’s worth of not-so-flattering stories.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-anthem-issue/

[Steeldude]

Why not protest during the week or after the game?

[Craic]

Hmmm...Ted Nugent first got a student deferment to avoid being drafted into Vietnam then he got reclassified as 4F (unfit for service) while he was out of school and a full-time touring musician. He even claimed he purposely got the 4F designation by being drugged out (meth) and neglecting his personal hygiene during medical reviews. Nugent has since claimed that story was made up to make him look better for a "High Times" magazine interview.

Bottom line, Nugent twice got out of being drafted. Made some "rock and roll cred" on being a drugged out draft dodger when that was cool and now that it is better for his career to wrap himself in the flag and support the military he does that. Plus the "High Times" story conflicts with his straight-edge image during much of his career from the 1970's forward. Wonder if brazen marketing of the "Nugent" brand might have something to do with all of this?

Putting all that aside, Nugent had ample opportunity for the service and sacrifice he seems to hold so dear and ensured that he would not be asked to serve. Why does he get to take some sort of moral patriotic high-ground now?

Nugent has pretty much never touched drugs. His high, and probably almost his undoing, was sex. As his former? wife says, it was "Bag 'em, tag 'em, then give them cab fair." So, yes, I do believe him when it comes to a magazine making stuff up.

As for the other, well, it's a development of an ethos over several decades. What started his journey was getting arrested for shooting a arrow from a bow in one of his concerts as part of the stage act. That opened his eyes to issues of weapons, 2A, civil rights, and other issues tied into it. And from there his journey began. On top of all of that, the whole draft dodgers lose their credibility pretty much died with the election of Bill Clinton. If he could dodge military service and still be the commander and chief, someone else can dodge and later on recognize the importance of honoring other's service.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not protest during the week or after the game?

That really makes no sense. You do realize the entire purpose is to draw attention to the issue, right? So, you do it exactly when the crowd is the largest. Agree or disagree, the theory is sound: if you want the biggest audience, then make a statement when you have the biggest audience.

[stillers4me]

The NFL caved and it has nothing to do with Artie Burns. Again...the story changed. Please make new posts and let the old ones die in cyberspace. If you are pulling up months old threads to post new story angles..............that's your clue that you should be probably be making a new thread. Please.

[AtlantaDan]

The NFL caved and it has nothing to do with Artie Burns. Again...the story changed. Please make new posts and let the old ones die in cyberspace. If you are pulling up months old threads to post new story angles..............that's your clue that you should be probably be making a new thread. Please.

I am not going to re-enter the fray on the anthem but would respectfully note every story changes whenever new facts occur.

I for one have limited clues on what the guidelines are for starting a new thread but personally have no interest in sorting through a dozen threads on the same topic.

Accordingly, I am going to post a thread requesting the mods to provide guidance on what the suggested guidelines are for starting a new thread rather than adding a post to an existing thread in order to avoid inadvertently being out of compliance with board policies now that posting will be picking up with the start of training camp.

[steelreserve]

It's not a matter of appropriate, or inappropriate, or who designates the how of it, and who doesn't. It's a matter of what's effective, and what isn't. After all, being effective is the point.

That really makes no sense. You do realize the entire purpose is to draw attention to the issue, right? So, you do it exactly when the crowd is the largest. Agree or disagree, the theory is sound: if you want the biggest audience, then make a statement when you have the biggest audience.

A pretty flawed way of looking at it. The purpose of protesting is to gain support for your cause. Attracting attention without attracting any support is not effective. Attracting a large audience but generating more opposition than support for your cause is, by definition, the opposite of effective.

Taken to an extreme example - terrorism is great at attracting a large audience. After all, murder is perhaps the best tool of all for drawing attention to yourself. Does it help the people behind it get any closer to their goals, and convince others to see things from their point of view? No, it's actually one of the least effective methods of doing that, because it alienates everyone who is not a lunatic.

Since some rocket scientist will inevitably say "OH SO YOUR COMPARING KNEELING BEFORE A FOOTBALL GAME TO MASS MURGER OMG YOUR SO RACIST" that's obviously not the point. It's that merely drawing the attention of a large audience does not, by itself, mean that you have been "effective."

Put another way, if you are attracting a lot of attention to yourself, but not convincing any new people to support you, then you are just making noise.

[st33lersguy]

That really makes no sense. You do realize the entire purpose is to draw attention to the issue, right? So, you do it exactly when the crowd is the largest. Agree or disagree, the theory is sound: if you want the biggest audience, then make a statement when you have the biggest audience.

If you want to draw attention to yourself doing the act, then yes kneel for the anthem, if you want to draw attention to your cause, then kneeling for the anthem will not be very effective. Kneeling for the anthem will only make millions of Americans who hold the national anthem in high regard resent the person kneeling/doing their protest, they really won't care why. And since players have spoken negatively about how the message they are trying to convey isn't being heard and that intention has been misconstrued, it hasn't been effective.

[Born2Steel]

Actually, Ted Nugent was never a drug user.

"Since the 1970s Nugent has promoted anti-drug and anti-alcohol stances. In an interview for VH1's Behind The Music, Nugent said this was due to his father's having reprimanded him when he came home smelling of alcohol after a night of drinking.^{[citation needed]}
He has been cited as a key influence on the straight edge movement, a punk rock-associated lifestyle that developed in the early 1980s and discourages drug and alcohol use. Henry Rollins, vocalist for Black Flag, reports that he and friend Ian MacKaye (vocalist for Minor Threat and writer of the song "Straight Edge" that gave the movement its name) were inspired by Nugent during their high school years in the 1970s when he was the only major rock star to publicly eschew drug use: "[We] would read about the Nuge and the thing that really rubbed off on us was the fact that he didn't drink or smoke or do drugs ... [Nugent's performance] was the craziest thing we'd ever seen onstage and here's this guy saying, 'I don't get high.' We thought that was so impressive."^[59]
Nugent is a national spokesman for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program,^[60] In 2015, however, Nugent declared his support for the legalization of marijuana for medical use.^[61] In 2018 he admitted that he drinks "a little wine".^[62]"

[Mojouw]

Actually, Ted Nugent was never a drug user.

"Since the 1970s Nugent has promoted anti-drug and anti-alcohol stances. In an interview for VH1's Behind The Music, Nugent said this was due to his father's having reprimanded him when he came home smelling of alcohol after a night of drinking.^{[citation needed]}
He has been cited as a key influence on the straight edge movement, a punk rock-associated lifestyle that developed in the early 1980s and discourages drug and alcohol use. Henry Rollins, vocalist for Black Flag, reports that he and friend Ian MacKaye (vocalist for Minor Threat and writer of the song "Straight Edge" that gave the movement its name) were inspired by Nugent during their high school years in the 1970s when he was the only major rock star to publicly eschew drug use: "[We] would read about the Nuge and the thing that really rubbed off on us was the fact that he didn't drink or smoke or do drugs ... [Nugent's performance] was the craziest thing we'd ever seen onstage and here's this guy saying, 'I don't get high.' We thought that was so impressive."^[59]
Nugent is a national spokesman for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program,^[60] In 2015, however, Nugent declared his support for the legalization of marijuana for medical use.^[61] In 2018 he admitted that he drinks "a little wine".^[62]"

FWIW, I was not making the claim that Nugent was a drug user. I am citing a story that both High Times AND Nugent have both claimed as true and then fought about. Nugent self-reported to an interviewer that he briefly used drugs (meth) and neglected his personal hygiene in order to ensure he was designated as unfit to serve once his student deferment ran out. Years later, he then claimed that was an urban legend and it never happened.

[Born2Steel]

Little too much before my time. I know I probably have an unpopular opinion but I also think the Beatles suck. Zeppelin is the only classic band I can stomach. As for what I listen to, give me some Metallica (old Metallica), Pantera, or Slayer

My dad and I always got into arguments over rock, he says those bands I'm hating on are the reason why the metal bands exist today. But whatever, if I like it I listen to it. If not, I don't. Though I'd say our arguments probably fueled even more of my hating on 'old people music' even more

I can understand you not being 'in tune' with your parent's music but there are things you can love about all styles and genres if you are a true music lover. Ted Nugent whom you seem to really hate(dirtbag and bad taste in music referenced), was a disciple of Chuck Berry. The Beatles influenced everyone from the Foo Fighters to Lady GaGa, from the Beach Boys to Kiss, the Bee Gees to Billy Joel, the list goes on and on. Lemmy cited the Beatles as his favorite band of all, the most influential music on his career including Motorhead. People that simply just throw away history just because it doesn't interest them are simple minded fools.

[Born2Steel]

FWIW, I was not making the claim that Nugent was a drug user. I am citing a story that both High Times AND Nugent have both claimed as true and then fought about. Nugent self-reported to an interviewer that he briefly used drugs (meth) and neglected his personal hygiene in order to ensure he was designated as unfit to serve once his student deferment ran out. Years later, he then claimed that was an urban legend and it never happened.

I guess you have to decide which version you believe is true and which is the lie then. I do know that since I started following him musically in the late 70s, he has always maintained an anti-drug message and lifestyle.

[Dwinsgames]

I guess you have to decide which version you believe is true and which is the lie then. I do know that since I started following him musically in the late 70s, he has always maintained an anti-drug message and lifestyle.

this ... and recall an interview on the Mike Douglas show of him saying if I used drugs I would fall off the F#%#ing rope ( he would swing out on stage with )

[Mojouw]

I guess you have to decide which version you believe is true and which is the lie then. I do know that since I started following him musically in the late 70s, he has always maintained an anti-drug message and lifestyle.

For me, the drug use or non use is a red herring. The take away is the Nugent penned a message that was an attempt to paint anyone who kneels as dishonoring all service members and their sacrifice and somehow unworthy of having their voices heard because they are lacking a Nugent sanctioned perspective.

He had multiple chances to engage in the honor, duty, sacrifice, God and country service he claims to hold so dear. But he choose the life of a touring rock star.

I find his attempt to now sieze some moral high ground and discredit individuals he has never met or spoken to duplicitous, mean spirited, an obvious attempt to keep his "brand" in the news, and more than a little bit dishonest.

Returning to the drug story, he let it ride for some time. He tore the lie until it didn't work for him anymore. Branding.

[Dwinsgames]

For me, the drug use or non use is a red herring. The take away is the Nugent penned a message that was an attempt to paint anyone who kneels as dishonoring all service members and their sacrifice and somehow unworthy of having their voices heard because they are lacking a Nugent sanctioned perspective.

He had multiple chances to engage in the honor, duty, sacrifice, God and country service he claims to hold so dear. But he choose the life of a touring rock star.

I find his attempt to now sieze some moral high ground and discredit individuals he has never met or spoken to duplicitous, mean spirited, an obvious attempt to keep his "brand" in the news, and more than a little bit dishonest.

Returning to the drug story, he let it ride for some time. He tore the lie until it didn't work for him anymore. Branding.

not to be judgmental or anything but are you not in some way doing that very thing here to a man you never met sat down with or spoken to ?

seems eerily pot calling the kettle black here to me but I digress because it is going to seem like I am picking on you when I truly am not