Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would be nice if Trump actually addressed the issue of police killing people of all races. Instead of worrying about fake-patriotism. How about actually addressing the issue that all of this is about?
Because it would alienate his base. Conversely, Targeting "patriotism" (as if "patriotism" is defined by whether one stands for the national anthem...) gets his base riled up.
If I was the NFL I'd quit having them play the anthem before games until the president passes a test on American government and the constitution. He clearly is overstepping his moral and legal authority to get involved here.
Trump has no business calling for that and meddling in private industry matters. He is walking a dangerous path with these public statements (with First Amendment saying "hello" as he walks by). It's one thing to "state an opinion" - it's another thing to bully or make overt threats against the players or the league.
And it's funny for me to write any of this because I adamantly dislike the NFL and don't watch it. Still - Trump needs to stay the hell out of this. He's creating a potentially serious mess for himself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trlhiker
I never would have thought I would see the day when a President threatens private business's for exercising their right to free speech. So shameful.
wait, werent you guys t one time CALLING for the end of tax breaks to the NFL? and now when they may happen you are COMPLAINING about it? deal much in hypocrisy do you?
wait, werent you guys t one time CALLING for the end of tax breaks to the NFL? and now when they may happen you are COMPLAINING about it? deal much in hypocrisy do you?
I don't know who you think I am, but I've never called for that.
I don't care if they have subsidies or not. They probably shouldn't have them - it is a bit of a farce. But that is not the issue being discussed here now, is it? We all know what sparked these public announcements by Trump, and it isn't taxes (but hey, you're welcome to go "play dumb" on that!).
No, the issue is Trump's dangerous dance with the first amendment.
If I was the NFL I'd quit having them play the anthem before games until the president passes a test on American government and the constitution. He clearly is overstepping his moral and legal authority to get involved here.
I'd love to see this.
Even more basic: I'd love to see Trump pass the tests that new citizens take when applying for their citizenship. You have to know a lot about American history and the way our government functions. I worry that Trump would not do well...which is a bit concerning.
They are a 501c6 league that gets tax breaks for a bunch of millionaires.
We are not talking US Steel here...
Who gave them tax breaks to begin with? I've never agreed with those tax breaks. But ya'll had no problem with the players that fight and kill dogs, abuse women, and do drugs with getting tax breaks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer
I agree. President Trump should call for ending sports teams' subsidies whether their players kneel during the Anthem or not. That is the proper way to stop "meddling in private industry matters".
Don't you agree?
I agree tax breaks should have been ended YEARS ago. IF Trump tries to do that for players exercising their constitutional rights though- then I think ole Trumpadump will have a problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman
If I was the NFL I'd quit having them play the anthem before games until the president passes a test on American government and the constitution. He clearly is overstepping his moral and legal authority to get involved here.
How absurd. The subsidy was applied individually to just the NFL. That error must be corrected individually, on the same NFL. What does "speech" have to do with it?
If the intent is "punitive" is what I said, in other words if it is a case of "You will say or not say X or we will revoke your tax exempt status" that is certainly an attempt to use government power to control speech.
It would be logically equivalent to saying "If you say/do not say Y we will give you special tax exemptions"
Either way equivalent to using government funds to bribe people to say what the government wants them to say. Wether or not the funds are distributed to pay for it or revoked after the fact is irrelevant.
I don't know who you think I am, but I've never called for that.
I don't care if they have subsidies or not. They probably shouldn't have them - it is a bit of a farce. But that is not the issue being discussed here now, is it? We all know what sparked these public announcements by Trump, and it isn't taxes (but hey, you're welcome to go "play dumb" on that!).
No, the issue is Trump's dangerous dance with the first amendment.
once again i will remind you, and others, that the right to free speech is not a freedom from responsibility, or a freedom from consequences. but you still dont get that do you? trump is not attacking free speech, so much as he is attacking the lack of respect being shown by the players and the NFL as a whole.
but once again you are also of the rights for me but not for thee mindset. meaning you think the players can say or do what ever they want and those that oppose them have to shut up and accept that. well i say you are teh one trying to limit peoples free speech rights, not trump.
and trump calling for the end of subsidies doesnt mean that will necessarily happen now will it?
once again i will remind you, and others, that the right to free speech is not a freedom from responsibility, or a freedom from consequences. but you still dont get that do you? trump is not attacking free speech, so much as he is attacking the lack of respect being shown by the players and the NFL as a whole.
but once again you are also of the rights for me but not for thee mindset. meaning you think the players can say or do what ever they want and those that oppose them have to shut up and accept that. well i say you are teh one trying to limit peoples free speech rights, not trump.
and trump calling for the end of subsidies doesnt mean that will necessarily happen now will it?
Freedom of speech has never meant freedom from all (read: non-Government) consequences of said speech. I never said that it didn't mean that?
Who are you talking to here? This point seems very irrelevant.
But the First Amendment does very specifically discuss government's role in all of this, and Trump is walking a very fine line here that could get him a heap of trouble depending on how things go on this matter.
I'm not trying to dictate anyone's speech. You are welcome to think whatever you want. Trump, for that matter, is welcome to think whatever he wants. The players are also welcome to think (and act) in whatever way they want. You need to read the words that I have written - I have never said differently anywhere.
But the government is not allowed to take actions because of anyone's speech. This is stipulated in the First Amendment. Things could get ugly here if Trump is stupid enough to force any of these threats through.
Last edited by HockeyMac18; 10-13-2017 at 01:43 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
