Governor Landry suggests pulling scholarships for athletes who skip National Anthem.

[uncle bernard]

 

[WrestlingRasta]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

 

You can believe what you want. You can believe how ever many coaches you want, however many athletes you want, whatever you want. But you and I both know that THAT coach did this in purpose. Very much on purpose so they could give me just enough rage to come on here and scream over and over about it.  
 

BECAUSE IM A PATRIOT!!

[jross]

The politicians and media is good at misinforming and making issues out of nothing.  It's easy to assume that a team misses the anthem due to player protests, given how frequently the narrative has been presented.  LSU says that is not what they did.  Okay fine.  There is still discussion to be had.

There is a difference between not knowing any better, following orders, and showing intentional disrespect. Some deserve a pass, but the other deserves to be called out.  Could the remarks about shouting down, rage, and anger actually stem from individuals projecting their own insecurities and defensiveness onto others?

Without direct callouts, I assume the remarks include me as a target.  I don't feel rage.  I feel disgust and dissapointment... similar but more intensely to how I feel when someone doesn't wash their hands after using the bathroom.

These comments remind me of my daughter.  When I call her out for neglecting her Covid dog, her response is anger.  This is a defensive reaction to protect herself from discomfort and guilt.

[uncle bernard]

1 hour ago, jross said:

The politicians and media is good at misinforming and making issues out of nothing.  It's easy to assume that a team misses the anthem due to player protests, given how frequently the narrative has been presented.  LSU says that is not what they did.  Okay fine. 

fixed your post for you

[jross]

21 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

fixed your post for you

I'd want it stopped there too if I made up things like "shouted down."

Edited April 7 by jross

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 4/5/2024 at 6:24 PM, jross said:

Its dissapointing that you have strong opinions on pronoun usage that causes no physical harm to anyone! 

See how that works?

Will you explain the irony to me?  Why does it bother you that I think people who exercise their right to skirt the anthem protocol are jerks?  

Oh this is gonna be great. Tell me what my opinion is on pronoun usage? 

Who have I attacked for using the wrong pronouns? No one. Do you have examples where this is untrue? 

Have I been attacked for not using gender specific pronouns while talking about a person? Yes I have. 

Do the examples you refer to correlate at all? No they don't. But if you disagree I would love to see your explanation.  

 

Sorry. To answer your questions. I don't see the irony or the parallel, please explain? 

Hypocrisy bothers me. You are in favor of freedom but, seemingly, only the kind of freedom that you are comfortable with. That's all. 

Not abiding by a 'protocol' does nothing to you. Its not personal. No one is pointing at you while they kneel or fail to remove their hat. You are taking offense, personally, to an act(if it is even purposeful, which is a different conversation altogether) being done to the whole. And again, you are not addressing the person responsible. But hoping to get solace from a group of likeminded people. A group that may contain one or more members who feeling sooooo aggrieved and snowflake-ish as to take out their vicitmhood by committing acts of violence.  My guess is, that since you cannot 'fix' this situation that someone else will do it for you. There is a word for that. 

Edited April 8 by ThreePointTakedown

[ThreePointTakedown]

20 hours ago, jross said:

The politicians and media is good at misinforming and making issues out of nothing.  It's easy to assume that a team misses the anthem due to player protests, given how frequently the narrative has been presented.  LSU says that is not what they did.  Okay fine.  There is still discussion to be had.

There is a difference between not knowing any better, following orders, and showing intentional disrespect. Some deserve a pass, but the other deserves to be called out.  Could the remarks about shouting down, rage, and anger actually stem from individuals projecting their own insecurities and defensiveness onto others?

Without direct callouts, I assume the remarks include me as a target.  I don't feel rage.  I feel disgust and dissapointment... similar but more intensely to how I feel when someone doesn't wash their hands after using the bathroom.

These comments remind me of my daughter.  When I call her out for neglecting her Covid dog, her response is anger.  This is a defensive reaction to protect herself from discomfort and guilt.

Who deserves a pass? What is the criteria? 

And, we teach the next generation the coping techniques they will use to handle stress. 

[Le duke]

On 4/5/2024 at 8:21 AM, jross said:

He is asking the same questions that 99% of the sports audience asks themself.  This includes me.  These are natural questions.  I have no problem with asking questions. 

If you get the education and still show disrespect, then you have shown your ass.  Don't we all have family or friends negatively impacted by Military experiences or deaths?  Show your respect.

Find another way to express you dissapointment in the country without pissing on those who gave you the right.

 

I'm going to sarcastically quote rabid no step on snek crowd:

My right to free speech (liberty, guns) is God-given, and not given to me by any person who has served in the military and died in the service of the country.

Also, claiming that someone is pissing on those who died in the service of their country is a bit dramatic.

[jross]

22 minutes ago, Le duke said:

Also, claiming that someone is pissing on those who died in the service of their country is a bit dramatic.

100% agree.  I decided it was needed to convey the significance.

[jross]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Oh this is gonna be great. Tell me what my opinion is on pronoun usage? 

You know what?  I owe you an apology.  Thinking about it, I don't recall you making a deal of pronoun usage.  You seem to defend progressive views and victimhood, and I associate that with the pronoun is violence crowd.  That's on me.  I apologize.

[jross]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

You are in favor of freedom but, seemingly, only the kind of freedom that you are comfortable with. That's all. 

100%.  

"Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" affects us both.

Let's say I feel it is my right to bring my family to a public parade without seeing nudity.  Let's say another person feels it is their right and chooses to be nude in public.  Everyone should be free to act as they wish as long as their actions do not cause harm to others.  Here we have two sides that feel harmed in a public space.  Okay so that is where societal norms and laws come in. 

Having a law around the anthem would be stupid... Protesting the anthem is dissapointing to a large portion of public.

[jross]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Not abiding by a 'protocol' does nothing to you. Its not personal. No one is pointing at you while they kneel or fail to remove their hat. You are taking offense, personally, to an act(if it is even purposeful, which is a different conversation altogether) being done to the whole. And again, you are not addressing the person responsible. But hoping to get solace from a group of likeminded people. A group that may contain one or more members who feeling sooooo aggrieved and snowflake-ish as to take out their vicitmhood by committing acts of violence.  My guess is, that since you cannot 'fix' this situation that someone else will do it for you. There is a word for that. 

Do you even try to comprehend what and why something is communicated?  Bud, you missed the mark here.

Who said it is about me?

I take offense on behalf of those who sacraficed for the whole.  It isn't personal.

I don't need solace or agreement.

Who is committing acts of violence and what is that violence?  

How do you think I am trying to 'fix', who is going to fix, and how will they fix?

My point is to inform why the anthem matters and to let it be known that those who disrespect it are jerks.

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, jross said:

100%.  

"Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" affects us both.

Let's say I feel it is my right to bring my family to a public parade without seeing nudity.  Let's say another person feels it is their right and chooses to be nude in public.  Everyone should be free to act as they wish as long as their actions do not cause harm to others.  Here we have two sides that feel harmed in a public space.  Okay so that is where societal norms and laws come in. 

Having a law around the anthem would be stupid... Protesting the anthem is dissapointing to a large portion of public.

Why should anyone alter their behavior in public because it makes you uncomfortable? 

I think the 'large portion of the public' is smaller than you'd think. I think they are vocal but ultimately a shrinking minority. 

 

[jross]

1 minute ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Why should anyone alter their behavior in public because it makes you uncomfortable? 

I think the 'large portion of the public' is smaller than you'd think. I think they are vocal but ultimately a shrinking minority. 

In Public - because of the law where it exists and otherwise due to that community's expectation.

The next time you go to a public event where the anthem is played, please assess how many people are standing and facing the flag.  Compare that to how many are screwing off.  Tell me again its a shrinking minority?

No, the jerkish minority is increasing but remains an outlier to the respectful majority.

[ThreePointTakedown]

5 minutes ago, jross said:

In Public - because of the law where it exists and otherwise due to that community's expectation.

The next time you go to a public event where the anthem is played, please assess how many people are standing and facing the flag.  Compare that to how many are screwing off.  Tell me again its a shrinking minority?

No, the jerkish minority is increasing but remains an outlier to the respectful majority.

The question was not about the law, it was about your comfortability level with regards to others' behavior. Please answer the question asked? 

Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. That they stand tells you nothing of their opinion of what is acceptable during the playing of a national anthem. I have stood for every anthem that has been played at a sporting event I competed in or coached in, with exceptions of logistical mix ups or schedule confusion, yet have had zero concern with anyone not doing what I was doing during the anthem. Sorry if that's disappointing but just as other's actions have no effect on you. Your disappointment or disgust sways me not one bit to your way of thinking. Feeling disgust in another human for an action that has no effect on your life, on the other hand, is something that could lead to negative consequences to society. 

 

[Bigbrog]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

The question was not about the law, it was about your comfortability level with regards to others' behavior. Please answer the question asked? 

Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. That they stand tells you nothing of their opinion of what is acceptable during the playing of a national anthem. I have stood for every anthem that has been played at a sporting event I competed in or coached in, with exceptions of logistical mix ups or schedule confusion, yet have had zero concern with anyone not doing what I was doing during the anthem. Sorry if that's disappointing but just as other's actions have no effect on you. Your disappointment or disgust sways me not one bit to your way of thinking. Feeling disgust in another human for an action that has no effect on your life, on the other hand, is something that could lead to negative consequences to society. 

 

Literally you are just typing to type...you literally said nothing in 98% of what you wrote.  Jross has answered every one of your questions in great detail...what else are you looking for??  It doesn't "bother" you when people don't stand or pay tribute during the national anthem but you do, fine.  Jross has explained how he feels, done, fine.  What is it that you have to keep babbling about?  Is it until you can find some mythical boogeyman in what he has said??  Give it up dude and learn how to communicate without typing 98% mumbling nonsense.

[ThreePointTakedown]

13 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Literally you are just typing to type...you literally said nothing in 98% of what you wrote.  Jross has answered every one of your questions in great detail...what else are you looking for??  It doesn't "bother" you when people don't stand or pay tribute during the national anthem but you do, fine.  Jross has explained how he feels, done, fine.  What is it that you have to keep babbling about?  Is it until you can find some mythical boogeyman in what he has said??  Give it up dude and learn how to communicate without typing 98% mumbling nonsense.

As you respond to a post that clearly breaks down how the question was NOT answered. 

Reading my original question, did it mention anything about legality of actions? No. Just actions that might make J uncomfortable. That J may have meant 'illegal' did not come through in the post that inspired the question. That J  changed the verbiage of the statement midstream is something they should address.  May it have been a mistake or typo or could it have been J answered a question that they felt may paint the opinion in a better light? Who can say other than the author? But they should if for no other reason then to help quell any confusion. Maintain credibility. 

 

[jross]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Feeling disgust in another human for an action that has no effect on your life, on the other hand, is something that could lead to negative consequences to society. 

What would happen if the public lost all respect for the military?  It would result in less volunteers, unity, identity, morale, and pysch.  The protectors stop protecting.  The Michigan guy removes your freedom.

Calling someone out does have negative consequences to the weak-minded.  Boo hoo.

I'm not talking about calling people out to be mean.  No, it is to influence the positive change.

Wash your hands after using the bathroom.  Stop wiping your boogers on the wall and peeing on the floor.  Pick up the trash on the ground.  Walk your dog.  Meet your deadline.  Quit talking and start doing.  Show respect.  (OMG the negative consequences... sheesh).

[jross]

31 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

As you respond to a post that clearly breaks down how the question was NOT answered. 

Reading my original question, did it mention anything about legality of actions? No. Just actions that might make J uncomfortable. That J may have meant 'illegal' did not come through in the post that inspired the question. That J  changed the verbiage of the statement midstream is something they should address.  May it have been a mistake or typo or could it have been J answered a question that they felt may paint the opinion in a better light? Who can say other than the author? But they should if for no other reason then to help quell any confusion. Maintain credibility. 

 

What are you talking about.  I agreed with you.

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, jross said:

What would happen if the public lost all respect for the military?  It would result in less volunteers, unity, identity, morale, and pysch.  The protectors stop protecting.  The Michigan guy removes your freedom.

Calling someone out does have negative consequences to the weak-minded.  Boo hoo.

I'm not talking about calling people out to be mean.  No, it is to influence the positive change.

Wash your hands after using the bathroom.  Stop wiping your boogers on the wall and peeing on the floor.  Pick up the trash on the ground.  Walk your dog.  Meet your deadline.  Quit talking and start doing.  Show respect.  (OMG the negative consequences... sheesh).

What happens, perhaps we try to find peaceful solutions to our problems. At the barrel of a gun is a not a great way to orchestrate a lasting peace. Just about everyone has figured that out by now. Resentment and disdain is what is left when you are forced into peace rather then convinced. 

Do rational actors engage, honestly, in peaceful negotiations? No. That's why I brought up the 'disgust' remark. People that grow to find others as disgusting and less than human are less likely to want to peacefully reside on a planet, let alone the same country/state/county/city as one they feel is subhuman. You probably didn't intend that to come off when using that word but it can be spun that way especially by those already predisposed to seeing it. 

I feel rhetoric like that should not be taken lightly. We can disagree but referring to someone in a way that takes away their humanity is dangerous and a phenomenon we have seen before. The consequences of allowing it continue and grow is never good. Do I suggest quelling it by force? No. But we need to stop people that engage in this behavior, early. Identify and acknowledge that their ideas may bear fruit but the rhetoric to get there is unacceptable. 

 

[jross]

24 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

People that grow to find others as disgusting and less than human are less likely to want to peacefully reside on a planet, let alone the same country/state/county/city as one they feel is subhuman. You probably didn't intend that to come off when using that word but it can be spun that way especially by those already predisposed to seeing it. 

Distinction.

I do not find 'others' as disgusting, rather I find 'some behaviors' disgusting.

Edited April 8 by jross

[jross]

The US military provides Peace through Power.  I don't have to like it to appreciate it.

[ThreePointTakedown]

5 minutes ago, jross said:

The US military provides Peace through Power.  I don't have to like it to appreciate it.

Or think about how unsustainable it is. 

[JimmyBT]

Babble Boy Jr is in full force today.  

[jross]

11 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

That they stand tells you nothing of their opinion of what is acceptable during the playing of a national anthem.

Actions will always speak louder than words.