What do you hold in high respect?

[pondwater]

Up until Sept 23, 2007 it was not a first amendment issue.  It was a employee/employer issue.  Once the leader of government demanded the NFL change its policy it became a first amendment issue. 

That doesn't even make any sense. The NFL is under no obligation to change it's policy for anyone. It's still an employee/employer issue. Seems to me that they did it in response to the fans.

[Spider-Dan]

Multiple NFL owners have stated that the new policy is a direct result of political attacks from the head of the executive branch of our government.

Where are the free speech conservatives against government tyranny when you need them?

[Sunstroke]

Where are the free speech conservatives against government tyranny when you need them?

They're cheering him on...

[BuccaneerBrad]

Multiple NFL owners have stated that the new policy is a direct result of political attacks from the head of the executive branch of our government.

Where are the free speech conservatives against government tyranny when you need them?

I don't believe that for a second (reasons for the new policy).   The owners can say what they want, as can President Trump, but I believe the new policy is because attendance and NFL Sunday Ticket subscriptions dropped like a stone.

[CF DolFan]

They're cheering him on...

Kind of like the same people who have wanted to get tougher and fight illegal immigration are now against a a wall, ICE and are even supporting illegals to have the right to vote. People are hypocritical assholes whenever it suits their agenda. 

I don't believe that for a second (reasons for the new policy).   The owners can say what they want, as can President Trump, but I believe the new policy is because attendance and NFL Sunday Ticket subscriptions dropped like a stone.

Bingo. I heard someone saying the other day that profits were up. Well ... they were because of tv rights but that will go down because viewership is steadily dropping and the owners see that.

[Dolphster]

People are hypocritical assholes whenever it suits their agenda. 

Comment of the year right there. 

[pondwater]

Are we to believe that Trump can actually do something to make the NFL change their rules. Or that he actually has an opinion that he voiced. I wasn't aware that being POTUS you had to forfeit your opinions.

[Sunstroke]

Are we to believe that Trump can actually do something to make the NFL change their rules. Or that he actually has an opinion that he voiced. I wasn't aware that being POTUS you had to forfeit your opinions.

I wasn't aware that being POTUS meant being an asshole to everyone who doesn't tell you daily how awesome you are...

[Cathal]

I wasn't aware that being POTUS meant being an asshole to everyone who doesn't tell you daily how awesome you are...

That's cause we didn't have a snowflake in chief before.

[Spider-Dan]

The owners can say what they want, as can President Trump, but I believe the new policy is because attendance and NFL Sunday Ticket subscriptions dropped like a stone.

Here are the NFL attendance numbers from 2008-2017:



If one were to claim that NFL attendance "dropped like a stone" in 2017, one would also have to conclude that followed attendance surging wildly when the protests originally started in 2016.

I believe what you probably meant to reference was television viewership, which is down significantly... but nearly all television programming has been suffering huge losses, due in no small part to the proliferation of cord cutting and online streaming.  However, relative to the rest of TV programming, the NFL is still going gangbusters: 81 of the top 100 most-viewed shows in 2017 were sports telecasts, and the NFL had 40 of the top 50 sports audiences in 2017 (compared to 33 of the top 50 in 2016).

[CF DolFan]

I wasn't aware that being POTUS meant being an asshole to everyone who doesn't tell you daily how awesome you are...

In all fairness ... he was like that way before he became president.

[Spider-Dan]

I wasn't aware that being POTUS you had to forfeit your opinions.

Just to be clear, here: are you saying you think it's OK for the President to go after private citizens for protesting and insist that their employers fire them, because he's only "expressing his opinion"?

It's tiresome to keep using this example because it's clear that Obama was held to the highest standard while Trump is held to none, but if Obama had publicly and repeatedly insisted that Tea Party protesters be fired from their jobs, the right would have called for open violent rebellion.

[CF DolFan]

Just to be clear, here: are you saying you think it's OK for the President to go after private citizens for protesting and insist that their employers fire them, because he's only "expressing his opinion"?

It's tiresome to keep using this example because it's clear that Obama was held to the highest standard while Trump is held to none, but if Obama had publicly and repeatedly insisted that Tea Party protesters be fired from their jobs, the right would have called for open violent rebellion.

Hahahaha ... that's got to be one of the dumbest things you have ever said and that's dsaying something. Obama wasn't held to any standard. Any time he was criticized and I stress anytime ... the complainer was labeled a racist. Identity politics took off under the Obama administration as to silence anyone who was against anything he stood for.

Obama basically started the war on police with his comments. His public criticism of police at Cambridge when he even admitted he didn't know the details of the case, his "If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon" speech, or all the times he was conveniently absent to condemn the violence. He finally realized he needed to say some things to"condemn police violence"  while covering it with the ever "but" of injustices against minorities. "But" always means what I just said is BS.

[Sunstroke]

Hahahaha ... that's got to be one of the dumbest things you have ever said and that's dsaying something. Obama wasn't held to any standard. Any time he was criticized and I stress anytime ... the complainer was labeled a racist. Identity politics took off under the Obama administration as to silence anyone who was against anything he stood for.

Obama basically started the war on police with his comments. His public criticism of police at Cambridge when he even admitted he didn't know the details of the case, his "If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon" speech, or all the times he was conveniently absent to condemn the violence. He finally realized he needed to say some things to"condemn police violence"  while covering it with the ever "but" of injustices against minorities. "But" always means what I just said is BS.

That has to be the most ridiculous two paragraphs I've read in a while. Whether it is transference, or just being delusional, I am now genuinely concerned for your mental well-being.

[Spider-Dan]

Oh, so we have found an instance where a President merely "offering his opinion" is bad!  Good to know.

So if Obama would have called those officers "sons of bitches" and advocated for them to be fired, you would have stood behind Obama's right to offer an opinion just as you are standing behind Trump now, right?

Pretty funny how "small-government conservatives" were up in arms about a President condemning alleged abuse by government employees, yet are cheering a President attacking private citizen protesters and insisting they be fired.  When it comes to Trump fealty, no ideological bridge is too far.  Gotta own those libs!