Scioscia on protesting during the anthem

[TSD]

4 hours ago, jordan111280 said:

What needs to happen is that these athletes need to combine with the cops/community and work hard to educate people.  Athletes and cops have got to come together for things to change.  Kneeling during the anthem only incites anger and is a distasteful way to make their objective known. 

No, what needs to change is the fact that nearly 75% of black men don't stick around to raise their kids, so gangs have easy pickings.  It's not the athletes and cops' jobs to fix the African American community.  Asians were discriminated against and even randomly imprisoned as recently as WW2, yet you don't see these problems in their culture, in fact they're more law abiding and successful on average than even whites.

Anyone who supports a movement that chants "what do we need?  Dead cops! When do we need it? NOW!" needs their head examined. 

[John Taylor]

I consider myself someone who leans on the "left" side of the political spectrum, and support anyone's right to express their freedom of speech, but with that being said, I find kneeling or not being present during the National Anthem incredibly disrespectful, and I wish they would have found other ways to protest personally.

 

I remember going to SafeCo field to see the Angels play the Mariners this season, and I was walking around the stadium looking for my seat, passing all the hustle and bustle of Edgar Martinez jersey retirement night, and I remember the second the National Anthem started, everything went still and quiet, all hats were off, hands over hearts, even in "liberal" Seattle. Gives me chills just thinking about it.

 

I don't care about how or why the National Anthem started being played before sporting events, what I do care about is the fact that I feel it shows a certain respect for our Country, and those who have given their lives for it. This is my personal belief on the issue, and is not meant to win any kind of argument with someone who might disagree with me, as I would gladly give my life to protect their right to disagree with my opinions.

[daygloman]

9 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I think Sosh just gained a few extra points with me.

Ditto.

[maximus p]

9 hours ago, Scotty@AW said:

Whether they mean it or not, it's disrespectful to everyone who wore a uniform and fought for them.

I'm not saying protesting or making a statement is wrong. I'm saying that doing this during the national anthem is wrong place-wrong time. 

The bolded sums it for me.

[2112]

I'm impressed with this thread - it's nice reading on a subject like this without all the emotion bleeding in.

My thoughts:

I thought that Kapernick had every right to kneel during the anthem.  I didn't see it as offensive.  What I did see as offensive is the media coverage of every 49ers game last year.  The "baggage" everyone is discussing here, I think a lot of it comes from that coverage.

 

 

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, TSD said:

No, what needs to change is the fact that nearly 75% of black men don't stick around to raise their kids, so gangs have easy pickings.  It's not the athletes and cops' jobs to fix the African American community.  Asians were discriminated against and even randomly imprisoned as recently as WW2, yet you don't see these problems in their culture, in fact they're more law abiding and successful on average than even whites.

Anyone who supports a movement that chants "what do we need?  Dead cops! When do we need it? NOW!" needs their head examined. 

In reference to Asians, absolutely agree. No one can for a second say asians arent discriminated against. There are few we didnt bomb last century, so coming to this country with little money in your pocket wasnt exactly open arms.

But for the most part, theyve thrived. 

It starts in the home. 

Even deqling with asian gangsters, as a cop, is vastly different than the black guy with piru tatted on his face, the whiteboy with peni on his neck, and the cholo with 3 letters tatted on the back of his head...even if all are shooters.

For whatever reason theres a myth that asians have it easy, because they have money. Well, usually their parents had shit when they got here. 

[Mark68]

3 hours ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

That is the exact reason that some teams privately used for not bringing in Tim Tebow, including his hometown Jacksonville Jaguars, who desperately needed a quarterback.

Of course, it didn't help when Bill Belichick cut him. People around the league believed that if anyone had a chance of turning him around, it was Bill.

No. The reason that nobody wanted to bring in Tim Tebow is that he was a horrible quarterback. Take it from a Bronco fan. The guy was worthless. Kaepernick is MUCH better than Tebow ever was.

[stormngt]

12 hours ago, totdprods said:

Agreed - what Sosh says is perfect. We are a melting pot nation of individual beliefs, values, religions, ethnicity, all with freedom of expression, speech, and religion.

Standing for the anthem with your hand over your heart doesn't make you a racist or insensitive to the plight of lesser. 
Kneeling and raising a fist and taking a stand for those less fortunate to show solidarity and raise awareness to their cause doesn't make you a disrespectful showoff.

I still can't believe this whole thing has become so inflammatory. Freedom of expression and speech is basically what this country was founded on, and it blows my mind that anyone would bat an eye at either action taken, regardless if you're kneeling, standing, jumping, hiding, eating, etc. As long as you aren't hurting someone, do what you want and no one else should have any reason to complain. Why in the world can't we get back to respecting that and compromising? Just being decent human beings who can understand each other even in disagreement and find a way to communicate a resolution that works?

Okay, coming off the soapbox.

I am a firm defender of freedom of speech.  However what you do on the job reflects the employer.  The employer has every right set policies restricting the behavior and speech of employees while on job.  

I am curious:  for those defending tge pkayers free speech:  woukd you support an athlete coming out in uniform with a tatoo of the confederate flag on his arm?

 

 

[stormngt]

10 hours ago, krAbs said:

So, not to get into the politics of this, but lets do a thought experiment: Lets assume that they are correct about what they are protesting about (basically, there are enough racist police that blacks see a different, more brutal side of law enforcement, and are often killed because of it, and therefore are justified in being terrified of the police even if they are totally innocent). What would be the CORRECT way to protest this? I'm assuming violent action is out, as is anything that disturbs traffic or the normal functioning of society. Protests at the anthem are out. Protests on the side of the road where no one is being disturbed are likely useless (I walk past some dudes holding up a sign about some labor dispute in a building every day, and I literally do not care at all about whatever issue they are talking about). So...IDK, what IS the right way to protest? Or is the wrong place/wrong time argument kinda code for having a problem with the idea of protesting in general?

How about an ad during the football game.  They are rich enough to afford it 

[stormngt]

10 hours ago, ettin said:

 

The whole reason they are doing this is directly tied to the 3rd stanza of the National Anthem that no one ever hears because is is always the 1st stanza that is sung:

" And where is that band who so vauntingly swore,
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion
A home and a Country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave."

Key, who wrote the Star-Spangled Banner, had, just weeks before the Fort McHenry battle where he wrote the song, been defeated in battle by a group of black soldiers that had joined the British because the English had guaranteed their freedom. The third stanza above basically revels in those black soldiers (band who so vauntingly swore) deaths and that their blood  "wash'd out their foul footstep's pollution". This perhaps wouldn't be so bad except that Key himself believed in slavery. The only thing he wanted to do for slaves was show them some Christian kindness.

So in the end asking a black man or woman to respectfully sit through and listen to a song that was written by a man who believed in slavery and even wrote a section of the song that reveled in the death of black soldiers (even though they were fighting for the other side) is asking too much. This song has seeped into our traditions over the decades and has become so accepted that no one really questioned it.

In the realm of science we are always asking ourselves new questions and re-examining phenomena that we thought we knew but turns out we didn't really know as well as we thought. This is no different and taking the time to read and understand how this is offensive to black people should help everyone realize that that perhaps we never really progressed very far after the Revolutionary and Civil War's ended. The Confederate flag still flies. Monuments to the Confederate Southern leaders and ideologies still dot the landscape around the country. And bits and pieces of a very hateful time still exist in our texts and song lyrics. White supremacists walk openly on the streets of Charlottesville in 2017!!!! 

These athletes are U.S. citizens and have the right to express their 1st Amendment rights. Only until Kapernick took a knee did I realize there was actually four stanza's to the Star-Spangled Banner. I didn't realize only the 1st stanza is read during the National Anthem. When you go and look at it and understand the song's writer and the context in which it was written along with the history of the time it becomes more clear how a black person could, would, and should take offense to it. It also becomes clear that perhaps this (the song) is just one more vestige that should be removed from our vernacular. So many people are pushing back hard against this simply because of the long-steeped tradition of the song.

This country is based on liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. It is of the people, by the people, and for the people. All of them, including the one's that this country left behind and still continue to leave behind. We have fought significant wars to ensure that every U.S. citizen can freely express those Constitutional rights, including the 1st Amendment. They absolutely have a right to protest the song, that right was and continues to be earned.

Respectfully, - Robert

Sorry ettin but that is fake news.  I saw the same thing iver a year ago and looked up fir accuracy.

[stormngt]

10 hours ago, Mark68 said:

In my opinion, Kaerpernick being blackballed is akin to the blackballing of suspected Communists during the McCarthy era. You can't honestly say that every starting and backup QB in the NFL is better than a guy who took his team to a Super Bowl just a few years ago.

I am sorry but tgat is a terrible comparison.  MCarthism is akin to a witch hunt.  People being oersecuted without evidence.

There is no doubt what Klappernick did!

And the owners have every right not to hire someone that woukd cause negative in controversy the benefit to the franchise.   Yes ge is being black ball because his behaviour is bot worth the positives ge brings to the team.  That is far different tgthan an people losing their livelihood on mere accusation.

[tdawg87]

Jesus christ it's impossible to read your posts. Get a God damn spell check for fuck's sake.

[stormngt]

8 hours ago, GrittyVeterans said:

Owners have the right to sign whoever they want

If you don't want the negative publicity and baggage a player comes with, you do not have to sign him, and you are not a racist because of that.

Kaepernick should have known this is a business and consequences like his money are at stake.

He has the right to protest but the owners have the right to not give him a job. 

The only players that can protest without having to worry about losing their jobs are the true superstars in the league, which Kaepernick is not. Kaepernick is a mediocre player who every team can survive without. Put that on top of the baggage he comes with and I don't really blame teams for not wanting him

We have a winner.  Owners will not sign controversial players who are not impact players. 

[stormngt]

4 minutes ago, hangin n wangin said:

Klappernick? Who dat?

Whatever how he spells his effin name...i have seen four different spellings in this post.  

[OregonLAA]

23 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Jesus christ it's impossible to read your posts. Get a God damn spell check for fuck's sake.

So I'm reading through this thread kind of frustrated by particular opinions then I get to this post. So then I go above and re-read the poorly constructed post and I laughed harder than I've ever laughed reading this board. I'm dying. Tdawg, you kill me

[ettin]

6 hours ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Ok, ill bite.

I avoid these topics on here as much as possible. Ive mentioned on here having MLB connections. If i ever said who and to what extent, no one would believe me (except chuck). One thing i have in common with these guys is that both what i do and what they do is routinely second guessed by the public...which by and large habe no idea what actually happens behind the scenes, nor do they habe any actual background in what we do. As such, as much as i like reading the smart things guys like @dochalo, @ettin etc say, i dont discuss that with them. Why? Its simple. As well addressed and intelligent as their posts are, they (no offense to doc, ettin and the rest, who i think are brilliant at analyzing baseball), they still are merely observers, with no background other than an amateurs opinion. Its why i wouldnt tell doc anything about medicine, or a woman how to handle her pregnancy.

First of all thank you for the kind words, I appreciate it. Second here is an excerpt from the upcoming Annual Primer regarding the Series of articles as a whole:

"First we must caveat this whole discussion with the understanding that there are so many permutations and paths Billy can take that it is impossible to predict with any exact accuracy what the outcome will be for the Angels 40-man roster heading into 2018.

As fans we simply lack sufficient information about who may or may not be available in trade, professional scouting reports on any particular player, and which free agents are actually willing to sign with the Halos for a price that the team feels comfortable with from a payroll perspective. This does not mean that the following article is not a useful exercise, just that getting the particulars right is a difficult endeavor."

I think my opinion has improved over time. I look back 2-3 years ago and sort of laugh at some of my trade deadline stuff. I think this year's Primer will be the best yet as I feel my analysis has improved and evolved. All that being said I'll probably get most, if not all, of it wrong in terms of exact moves/transactions. In fact I have kept the series broader in scope this year because I have delved too much into specifics in the past. In the end though Ten is correct as I just do not have access to complete data and in some cases critical information.

He is also right that I wouldn't dare to tell him what his daily job as a police officer entails, nor would I preach to Doc about surgery, or tell tdawg how to masturbate to Mike Trout (is there a wrong way, I doubt it!).

I will say this though if you are speaking to an expert in their field, give them some credit and your attention, you may really learn something fascinating and increase your own knowledge. Some people spend their entire lives in one field and to casually dismiss them on an Internet forum, Twitter, or Facebook is not only insulting it is contributing to the "dumbing" down of American society. It is the catalyst to embrace anarchy and lawlessness. It puts speculation before facts (of which I find myself doing at times).

[Tank]

8 hours ago, jordan111280 said:

Totally agree.  It's gone on over a year now, and it's time to figure out step 2, which in my opinion goes to what I originally said...athletes and cops and let's include politicians (gulp), into the mix of coming together to educate people on different cultures, the struggles people face, etc.  There has to be a peaceful step 2, and the angrier people get on both sides, that won't happen. 

Thank you for posting this. I've been trying to figure out what to post, because the gesture of protesting does nothing to solve the issue driving the protest. So where do things go from here so that there is some kind of action plan developed and implemented?

i think the biggest hindrance right now is the idiotic comments of the POTUS. The focus has now shifted on protesting his comments.

[Tank]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

I am a firm defender of freedom of speech.  However what you do on the job reflects the employer.  The employer has every right set policies restricting the behavior and speech of employees while on job.  

I think this point has been greatly overlooked in this discussion.

[Jeff Fletcher]

Every country has a flag. Not every country has freedom. 

I am more interested in the latter than the former.

No one should put their life on the line for a flag. It's a piece of cloth. What's important is freedom. 

[Glen]

27 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Every country has a flag. Not every country has freedom. 

I am more interested in the latter than the former.

No one should put their life on the line for a flag. It's a piece of cloth. What's important is freedom. 

Damn, man. You nailed it.

[Slegnaac]

13 hours ago, fan_since79 said:

...

Why does every Sunday have to be full of political statements and controversy?

 

Because that is when they air 'Face the Nation', 'Meet the Press' and '60 Minutes'.

[eligrba]

18 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

There are two thought processes.

One is showing true respect for the flag and those sacrificing their lives and health to preserve it.

Another is that those who are choosing to make a statement during the anthem are upholding another big symbol of the flag, the freedom to express differing opinions as long as you don't advocate harming others.

It is possible to do both. Protesting athletes demonstrating true courage happened at the 1968 Olympics and is not happening in 2017.  Today, athletes are simply exercising their first amendment rights without retribution. Big difference.

[HALOS23]

5 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Every country has a flag. Not every country has freedom. 

I am more interested in the latter than the former.

No one should put their life on the line for a flag. It's a piece of cloth. What's important is freedom. 

That flag represents freedom. 

[OregonLAA]

A year ago Trump was shitting all over that Muslim family whose son died fighting for this country. Mr. Patriotic. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 hours ago, HALOS23 said:

That flag represents freedom. 

A symbol is never more important than the thing it symbolizes. 

Would a secret service agent jump in front of the bullet if someone shot a picture of the president?

That's what I think when someone says "people died for that flag."