Kaepernick and the National Anthem

[What a Tuel]

 

The media just does what it's told. We don't have a free media, at least not in the mainstream. We have a corporate and controlled media that delivers the messages that best serves its corporate interests, not the interests of the American people.

 

What corporate interest lies in making it look like black people are being stalked and murdered by police?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

What corporate interest lies in making it look like black people are being stalked and murdered by police?

 

If you do some research, the answer might surprise you.

 

What's the old saying? When there's blood in the streets, buy property.

[boyst]

Now you are also defining political correctness according to your viewpoint. Yes, the left (or SJW as you put it) is traditionally on the side of political correctness, however, that doesn't mean it's only to be associated with left leaning causes. Political Correctness means exactly what its name implies and doesn't confirm to any single ideology.

 

 

From the dictionary - agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people.

 

If many people in the country are offended by his behavior (e.g. not standing for the national anthem) he's by definition being politically incorrect.

political correctness used to be putting aside your differences and saying plain things "people being killed is bad." "Drugs, meth, coke are bad." "Tyler Perry is bad."

 

But now it is spun. People being killed is good if they had a gun pointed at you. People being killed is bad because they had a gun pointed at you when they are black. Drugs are bad when you !@#$ your life up. Drugs are bad when you !@#$ your life up because your parents were addicted to rooster. Tyler Perry is just bad because Tyler perry is bad.

 

Political correctness is now only a matter from which angle you take. Its a bulkshit argument to say anything he has done is politically correct. Because what he has done is 100% freedom of speech and therefore is nothingrlelse except his right.

 

If you do some research, the answer might surprise you.

 

What's the old saying? When there's blood in the streets, buy property.

unless its in a black neighborhood. Amiright?

 

If you do some research, the answer might surprise you.

 

What's the old saying? When there's blood in the streets, buy property.

unless its in a black neighborhood. Amiright?

[Magox]

 

If you do some research, the answer might surprise you.

 

What's the old saying? When there's blood in the streets, buy property.

 

 

You do realize that the corporate interests of the media are called ratings? And ratings usually means what people want to see. Therefore the corporate media interests intersect with what the public wants.

 

 

The problem isn't what you are alluding to, which is that corporations or in this case corporate media is some sort of iniquitous cloaked entity that is out there to mind !@#$ the public. Is it the public's fault that has driven the media to cover things the way they do or is it a case of the media conditioning the public to view what they want to show?

 

Considering that at the end of the day, each consumer has the decision to watch a wide variety of programming, at worst it's a little of both. Most journalists are liberals, so most news that is covered comes more from a liberal perspective. FOX was one of the few tv options for conservatives to get their news, and they were able to monopolize that market, whereas the other channels competed with one another.

 

The problem is that you have opportunistic members of both the conservative and liberal media who see that there is a market for a certain form of "news", and then they look to push those views to the extreme which conditions viewers to adopt those views.

 

It's a vicious virtuous circle, think of a feedback loop. Just keeps going round and round reinforcing those views. It's horrible.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Magox

[Azalin]

Now you are also defining political correctness according to your viewpoint. Yes, the left (or SJW as you put it) is traditionally on the side of political correctness, however, that doesn't mean it's only to be associated with left leaning causes. Political Correctness means exactly what its name implies and doesn't confirm to any single ideology.

 

 

From the dictionary - agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people.

 

If many people in the country are offended by his behavior (e.g. not standing for the national anthem) he's by definition being politically incorrect.

 

I'm not going to get into a debate over word definitions. All I'm saying that B-Man was right when he said your comparison was silly.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

You do realize that the corporate interests of the media are called ratings? And ratings usually means what people want to see. Therefore the corporate media interests intersect with what the public wants.

 

 

Ratings are certainly one part of their interest. For the people working on the telecasts themselves -- the anchors, producers, crew -- this is undoubtedly the primary driver.

 

 

The problem isn't what you are alluding to, which is that corporations or in this case corporate media is some sort of iniquitous cloaked entity that is out there to mind !@#$ the public.

 

Just remember what CIA director William Casey famously said when talking with Reagan about this way back in 1981:

 

"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

 

Casey said this in relation to his astonishment that over 80% of the intelligence that the analysis side of CIA produced was based on open public sources like newspapers and magazines. Reagan asked Casey what he saw as his goal as CIA director in light of this information to which Casey replied with this now infamous quote.

 

 

Is it the public's fault that has driven the media to cover things the way they do or is it a case of the media conditioning the public to view what they want to show?

 

Considering that at the end of the day, each consumer has the decision to watch a wide variety of programming, at worst it's a little of both. Most journalists are liberals, so most news that is covered comes more from a liberal perspective. FOX was one of the few tv options for conservatives to get their news, and they were able to monopolize that market, whereas the other channels competed with one another.

 

The problem is that you have opportunistic members of both the conservative and liberal media who see that there is a market for a certain form of "news", and then they look to push those views to the extreme which conditions viewers to adopt those views.

 

It's a vicious virtuous circle, think of a feedback loop. Just keeps going round and round reinforcing those views. It's horrible.

 

This all plays a part, but it's only part of the story.

[GG]

Seems like he's trying create a dialogue, and actually engaging in said dialogue.

 

http://deadspin.com/why-colin-kaepernick-switched-up-his-protest-1786092913Is it ironic that many of the same folks who are supporting Trump due to his setting aside of political correctness are so quick to yell and point fingers when that lack of political correctness no longer aligns with their idea of what's right?

Not quite. He doesn't want to create a dialogue. He wants to preach, because deep down he knows he's speaking from an emotional perspective and not a fact based one. It's probably why all the great SJWs from the main board have abandoned this topic once it came over to the dark side. I do applaud you for coming here for a discussion, if you want to make it a discussion.

 

As for the generalizations of trump supporters, you, just like Kaep should do a fact check first. Many of the people highly critical of Kaep's actions also despise trump.

 

But, you know it's hard to let go of a stereotype, right?

[Prickly Pete]

Not quite. He doesn't want to create a dialogue. He wants to preach, because deep down he knows he's speaking from an emotional perspective and not a fact based one. It's probably why all the great SJWs from the main board have abandoned this topic once it came over to the dark side. I do applaud you for coming here for a discussion, if you want to make it a discussion.

 

As for the generalizations of trump supporters, you, just like Kaep should do a fact check first. Many of the people highly critical of Kaep's actions also despise trump.

 

But, you know it's hard to let go of a stereotype, right?

 

Right on.

Edited September 2, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[bbb]

 

I don't know about everyone else, but I am more offended by the continued proliferation of inaccurate accusations that police are murdering black people for paid leave with no statistical facts to back it up other than anecdotal cases that never support the theory that cops are out to kill people let alone specifically black people.

 

I blame the media who is selling their soul for the ratings, and BLM because it is founded on a lie.

 

This is EXACTLY it!

 

[Prickly Pete]

 

I don't know about everyone else, but I am more offended by the continued proliferation of inaccurate accusations that police are murdering black people for paid leave with no statistical facts to back it up other than anecdotal cases that never support the theory that cops are out to kill people let alone specifically black people.

 

I blame the media who is selling their soul for the ratings, and BLM because it is founded on a lie.

 

So is this guy....

 

 

https://twitter.com/CloydRivers/status/771540194835046401

 

I have truck loads of respect for this guy. I'm actually afraid for him. He brings up one of the big pieces of the problem. The reluctance of blacks to testify against black criminals.

 

This guy has way more leadership potential than Kaepernick, but will hardly get any attention. How about a high profile black athlete gives some "real talk" about this side of the story? If there is an aspect that could help improve the situation for law abiding blacks, that the police have some control over, it is there. Providing witness protection, and gaining some trust with potential witnesses could effect some changes.

Edited September 3, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[bbb]

 

So is this guy....

 

 

https://twitter.com/CloydRivers/status/771540194835046401

 

I have truck loads of respect for this guy. I'm actually afraid for him. He brings up one of the big pieces of the problem. The reluctance of blacks to testify against black criminals.

 

This guy has way more leadership potential than Kaepernick, but will hardly get any attention. How about a high profile black athlete gives some "real talk" about this side of the story? If there is an aspect that could help improve the situation for law abiding blacks, that the police have some control over, it is there. Providing witness protection, and gaining some trust with potential witnesses could effect some changes.

 

That is outstanding!

 

And, in local news, an 8 year old is still critical. But, will that get anybody to cooperate. No. A similar youngster was gunned down to start the summer and still no arrests. But, it's the cops fault:

 

Donnell “Donny” Bibbes, the 8-year-old boy shot in the head as he sat in a car with his mother and older brothers on South Division Street, remained in critical condition at Women and Children’s Hospital on Wednesday night, according to Michael J. DeGeorge, spokesman for the Buffalo Police Department.

Police continue to ask for anyone with information about the incident to call or text the Buffalo Police Confidential TIPCALL Line at 847-2255.

[Captain Caveman]

Not quite. He doesn't want to create a dialogue. He wants to preach, because deep down he knows he's speaking from an emotional perspective and not a fact based one. It's probably why all the great SJWs from the main board have abandoned this topic once it came over to the dark side. I do applaud you for coming here for a discussion, if you want to make it a discussion.

 

 

 

As for dialogue, you're not actually responding to what I posted, just restating what others have said many times. IMO that's not really dialogue, it's talking so you can hear yourself talk. The article I posted references him sitting down with an Army ranger to talk about better ways of protest. He understands that a lot of people are assuming he is being disrespectful of the military, and he is open to talking to people who have been in the military to try and understand their perspective.

 

As for the findings that black people are no more likely (or even less likely) to be the subject of deadly force by police, I acknowledge it's out there, and I'm not saying it's wrong. But it's a small part of the overall message, although people getting shot by Police tends to spur the most outrage. And by the way, far too many people of all races are getting shot by Police, and I'm glad that people in this country are pissed off when it happens.

 

There are too many police and too many police departments who do not treat people right (in lots of cases there is a racial component, and I think IMO class / economic status also plays a big part.) This erodes trust in local communities, and makes it harder to police those communities and there is a real vicious cycle. That needs to be addressed at the state and local level, and until it is, we are going to keep seeing this ****.

 

 

As for the generalizations of trump supporters, you, just like Kaep should do a fact check first. Many of the people highly critical of Kaep's actions also despise trump.

But, you know it's hard to let go of a stereotype, right?

 

 

The language I used was that many supporters of Trump who have specifically mentioned how political correctness is a big problem in this country don't seem to like it when someone is politically incorrect in way that offends them. I didn't say that all (or even most) people who have a problem with Kaep's protest support Trump, I said the folks that do support Trump for being anti-PC seem to not like when someone is not PC and also disagreeing with them.

 

I'm not going to get into a debate over word definitions. All I'm saying that B-Man was right when he said your comparison was silly.

Cool, you guys can go give each other handies while you pat each other on the back for calling out PC bull ****.

political correctness used to be putting aside your differences and saying plain things "people being killed is bad." "Drugs, meth, coke are bad." "Tyler Perry is bad."

 

But now it is spun. People being killed is good if they had a gun pointed at you. People being killed is bad because they had a gun pointed at you when they are black. Drugs are bad when you !@#$ your life up. Drugs are bad when you !@#$ your life up because your parents were addicted to rooster. Tyler Perry is just bad because Tyler perry is bad.

 

Political correctness is now only a matter from which angle you take. Its a bulkshit argument to say anything he has done is politically correct. Because what he has done is 100% freedom of speech and therefore is nothingrlelse except his right.

 

I'm saying that protesting during the national anthem is textbook definition political incorrectness. I was saying that many Trump supporters who have said over and over that political correctness is a huge problem in our society (which I think is bull ****, if being annoyed by PC is your biggest problem then you either are a moron or America is already great) also seem to have a big problem with someone being politically incorrect when it makes them uncomfortable. Not sure if that was understood.

[Prickly Pete]

 

 

That is outstanding!

 

And, in local news, an 8 year old is still critical. But, will that get anybody to cooperate. No. A similar youngster was gunned down to start the summer and still no arrests. But, it's the cops fault:

 

Donnell “Donny” Bibbes, the 8-year-old boy shot in the head as he sat in a car with his mother and older brothers on South Division Street, remained in critical condition at Women and Children’s Hospital on Wednesday night, according to Michael J. DeGeorge, spokesman for the Buffalo Police Department.

Police continue to ask for anyone with information about the incident to call or text the Buffalo Police Confidential TIPCALL Line at 847-2255.

 

 

The anguish and pain in that guy's voice is crushing to me. I have seen a few videos like these, and know there are many decent people, trapped in terrible circumstances. And "Black Leadership" lets them down when they sidestep black's own responsibility in the equation. He has nowhere to turn.

 

Tragic.

 

I have yet to hear about any high profile blacks taking any kind of action relating to helping or encouraging black witnesses or crimewatch programs. Maybe I have just missed it. It wouldn't get the same coverage that silly ass, "look at me" protests against the Man like Kaepernick's, get.

Edited September 3, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[DC Tom]

 

So is this guy....

 

 

https://twitter.com/CloydRivers/status/771540194835046401

 

I have truck loads of respect for this guy. I'm actually afraid for him. He brings up one of the big pieces of the problem. The reluctance of blacks to testify against black criminals.

 

This guy has way more leadership potential than Kaepernick, but will hardly get any attention. How about a high profile black athlete gives some "real talk" about this side of the story? If there is an aspect that could help improve the situation for law abiding blacks, that the police have some control over, it is there. Providing witness protection, and gaining some trust with potential witnesses could effect some changes.

 

Actually, in a community that's been told for generations that police are tools of oppression, he has absolutely no leadership potential.

[Prickly Pete]

 

Actually, in a community that's been told for generations that police are tools of oppression, he has absolutely no leadership potential.

 

You guys are sticklers. How about "this guy has way stronger leadership qualities"....?

Edited September 3, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[DC Tom]

 

You guys are sticklers. How about "this guy has way stronger leadership qualities"....?

 

Not in the black community, he doesn't.

 

That you think he shows leadership qualities is just your white privilege showing. Stop being racist.

[Prickly Pete]

 

Not in the black community, he doesn't.

 

That you think he shows leadership qualities is just your white privilege showing. Stop being racist.

 

No doubt there is a way to spin it.

 

Maybe something like..."You aren't black, so you can never understand the qualities needed to lead in the black community!"

 

Good thing they have the likes of Jesse Jackson, Lew Alcindor, and Kaepernick.

[DC Tom]

 

No doubt there is a way to spin it.

 

Maybe something like..."You aren't black, so you can never understand the qualities needed to lead in the black community!"

 

Good thing they have the likes of Jesse Jackson, Lew Alcindor, and Kaepernick.

 

No spin. Your white Euro-centric definitions of "leadership" deemphasize black feelings and the black narrative, and thus are a tool of minority oppression.

 

Anyone want to tell our newest PPP poster what theory this comes from?

[Prickly Pete]

 

No spin. Your white Euro-centric definitions of "leadership" deemphasize black feelings and the black narrative, and thus are a tool of minority oppression.

 

Anyone want to tell our newest PPP poster what theory this comes from?

 

I've read this kind of sophistry from Black Leadership, but can't recall a label for it.

[DC Tom]

 

I've read this kind of sophistry from Black Leadership, but can't recall a label for it.

 

Critical Race Theory.

 

But don't call it sophistry...because "sophistry" is a construct of Western European philosophy, thus is oppressive and invalid under Critical Race Theory...