WWTBAM Bored

Brit Canuck wrote:

Sorry, I know this joke's old, but someone had to do the meme thing.

That joke is an insult to Terence Stamp and General Zod.

NFLPA wrote:This decision by the White House has led to the cancellation of several player-led community service events for young people in the Washington, DC area.

Huh? The players were planning on doing community service, but because the guy they didn't want to meet with in the first place won't meet with them they are backing out of the community service they "committed" to do?

And Trump is the bad guy here....because.....?

Eagles screw their fans just to make a poor political "statement".

Philadelphia Eagles pulled a “political stunt” and abandoned their fans when they tried to reschedule their visit to meet President Donald Trump to celebrate the team’s Super Bowl victory.

According to the White House, the Eagles notified them on May 31 that 81 people, including players, coaches, management and personnel would attend the White House event.

“On Friday, the Secret Service cleared them for participation. These individuals, along with more than 1,000 Eagles fans, were scheduled to attend the event,” according to the White House.

However, last Friday, the White House says the Eagles reached out to reschedule the event after citing that many players would not be in attendance. The White House says Trump would be overseas on the dates the Eagles proposed.

And Trump is the bad guy here....because.....?

Somebody give a reason besides "because he's Trump".

edit: I realize Trump did not take the high road here, as usual, but as I see it, the Eagles started it.

BackInTex wrote:And Trump is the bad guy here....because.....?

Somebody give a reason besides "because he's Trump".

edit: I realize Trump did not take the high road here, as usual, but as I see it, the Eagles started it.

Trump vilified the Eagles repeatedly. First he claimed Eagles players refused to attend because they disagreed with him about standing for the national anthem. (When Fox News reported on the story, they showed a photo of Zach Ertz kneeling in prayer; their VP apologized later.) Actually, all the Eagles stand during the anthem. Then he tweeted that hiding in the locker room is as bad as kneeling. The Eagles never did that either. Finally, the White House claimed the team pulled a political stunt when many players decided to skip the event.

An event with some players, plus coaches, front office, and 1,000 fans, would have been great. Millions more would have watched on TV. I don't know Trump's motive, but he insulted the team and its fans. The Eagles love their country and city, and prove it every day.

jarnon wrote:

BackInTex wrote:And Trump is the bad guy here....because.....?

Somebody give a reason besides "because he's Trump".

edit: I realize Trump did not take the high road here, as usual, but as I see it, the Eagles started it.

Trump vilified the Eagles repeatedly. First he claimed Eagles players refused to attend because they disagreed with him about standing for the national anthem. (When Fox News reported on the story, they showed a photo of Zach Ertz kneeling in prayer; their VP apologized later.) Actually, all the Eagles stand during the anthem. Then he tweeted that hiding in the locker room is as bad as kneeling. The Eagles never did that either. Finally, the White House claimed the team pulled a political stunt when many players decided to skip the event.

An event with some players, plus coaches, front office, and 1,000 fans, would have been great. Millions more would have watched on TV. I don't know Trump's motive, but he insulted the team and its fans. The Eagles love their country and city, and prove it every day.

You are completely ignoring the fact that the Eagles tried to reschedule to a day Trump would not be in country.

Also, not agreeing with Trump's position is not mutually exclusive to continuing to stand and honor the flag. One can do both.

I admitted that Trump did himself no favor by responding as he did, but his actions are a response, not a first shot.

BackInTex wrote:You are completely ignoring the fact that the Eagles tried to reschedule to a day Trump would not be in country.

Also, not agreeing with Trump's position is not mutually exclusive to continuing to stand and honor the flag. One can do both.

I admitted that Trump did himself no favor by responding as he did, but his actions are a response, not a first shot.

From what Eagles players and staff have said, they had various reasons not to attend. None of them gave the anthem controversy as a reason. Most still wouldn't have gone on any rescheduled date. But a few players were looking forward to the event, as were coaches and fans, and I think Trump should have welcomed them.

We agree that he could have been more gracious.

Well we know that the NBA champions won't be going to the White House.

jarnon wrote: We agree that he should have been more gracious.

Corrected that for both of us.

Civil Servants Masquerade As Eagles' Fans As Trump's Counter-Programming Snub Turns Into Fiasco

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-h ... d=55665328

BackInTex wrote: I admitted that Trump did himself no favor by responding as he did, but his actions are a response, not a first shot.

One would think that the President of the United States would be above playing tit-for-tat schoolyard games, but, in this case, obviously not.

BackInTex wrote:

jarnon wrote: We agree that he should have been more gracious.

Corrected that for both of us.

Actually, good point. Incapability reigns a lot.

The NFLPA strikes back:

Bob78164 wrote:The original proposal was to impose a 15-yard penalty for failure to stand. I think NFLPA is going to have a pretty good argument that this should have been the subject of collective bargaining. --Bob

Told you so. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The original proposal was to impose a 15-yard penalty for failure to stand. I think NFLPA is going to have a pretty good argument that this should have been the subject of collective bargaining. --Bob

Told you so. --Bob

Just one of the many times that our great uniter of a President finds a non-issue and turns it into an issue for the sole purpose of driving this country apart yet again.

Didn't read the entire thread but just weighing in that I fully support the league in putting some guidelines (and potential penalties) for any player who is so misguided as to disrespect our country with these kneel-downs. There are many, many, ways for them to get their points across during the rest of the week and I don't have any problem with them doing so then.

lilclyde54 wrote:Didn't read the entire thread but just weighing in that I fully support the league in putting some guidelines (and potential penalties) for any player who is so misguided as to disrespect our country with these kneel-downs. There are many, many, ways for them to get their points across during the rest of the week and I don't have any problem with them doing so then.

I really can't agree that peaceful protest disrespects the country. In my view, it honors the country. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:peaceful protest

I pray for the day when this oxymoron is eliminated from the popular vernacular. A protest has to incite and outrage to call attention to the issue being protested against... and doing something to intentionally anger the masses is NOT peaceful. Lack of physical violence does NOT translate into peaceful. Passive aggressive is still aggressive. The right to protest may be necessary to spark change in society, but it's time to stop the bullshit belief that the act can be a peaceful one. A true peaceful protest would be ignored entirely and be ineffective...

lb13

littlebeast13 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:peaceful protest

I pray for the day when this oxymoron is eliminated from the popular vernacular. A protest has to incite and outrage to call attention to the issue being protested against... and doing something to intentionally anger the masses is NOT peaceful. Lack of physical violence does NOT translate into peaceful. Passive aggressive is still aggressive. The right to protest may be necessary to spark change in society, but it's time to stop the bullshit belief that the act can be a peaceful one. A true peaceful protest would be ignored entirely and be ineffective...

Like Bob's ongoing peaceful protest against Trump here.

littlebeast13 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:peaceful protest

I pray for the day when this oxymoron is eliminated from the popular vernacular. A protest has to incite and outrage to call attention to the issue being protested against... and doing something to intentionally anger the masses is NOT peaceful. Lack of physical violence does NOT translate into peaceful. Passive aggressive is still aggressive. The right to protest may be necessary to spark change in society, but it's time to stop the bullshit belief that the act can be a peaceful one. A true peaceful protest would be ignored entirely and be ineffective...

lb13

I don't agree that it's necessary to anger people to get their attention, although that's certainly one way to do it. Typically the goal of these protests is less to change people's minds, and more to simply get people off the sidelines. That means you don't care whether you're pissing off people who won't agree with you anyway, but your goal usually isn't to piss off your intended target audience. The goal is to get people who hadn't been thinking about your issue to think about it, and even to do something about it.

I do think it's appropriate to use the word "peaceful" in its meaning of non-violent, as opposed to its meaning of quiet. Particularly since in our world violent protests also are not uncommon. --Bob

littlebeast13 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:peaceful protest

I pray for the day when this oxymoron is eliminated from the popular vernacular. A protest has to incite and outrage to call attention to the issue being protested against... and doing something to intentionally anger the masses is NOT peaceful. Lack of physical violence does NOT translate into peaceful. Passive aggressive is still aggressive. The right to protest may be necessary to spark change in society, but it's time to stop the bullshit belief that the act can be a peaceful one. A true peaceful protest would be ignored entirely and be ineffective...

lb13

I could not have said that better myself.

Roger Goodell now acknowledges: "We, the National Football League, admit we were wrong for not listening to NFL players earlier and encourage all to speak out and peacefully protest."

"Unless a prominent player is missing, not many fans are going to notice who's absent."

Maybe not right away, but I'll bet there will be people in the press box with binoculars checking out who's missing, or else who comes out of the locker room after the anthem. One way or another, someone will pick up on it and report it.

littlebeast13 wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:01 am

Bob78164 wrote:peaceful protest

I pray for the day when this oxymoron is eliminated from the popular vernacular. A protest has to incite and outrage to call attention to the issue being protested against... and doing something to intentionally anger the masses is NOT peaceful. Lack of physical violence does NOT translate into peaceful. Passive aggressive is still aggressive. The right to protest may be necessary to spark change in society, but it's time to stop the bullshit belief that the act can be a peaceful one. A true peaceful protest would be ignored entirely and be ineffective...

lb13

The one I fervently hope will go away is "friendly fire." It cannot be friendly -- it killed Pat Tillman. And others, but since this thread seems to concern the NFL, I thought of Pat.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: ↑

Thu May 24, 2018 9:14 pm

Bob78164 wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:
So why are you commenting on this?

Because it's an example of a bully winning and I want my voice to be heard in protest. --Bob

How is he bullying anyone by expressing his opinion, which is his right under the first amendment of the constitution? He didn't threaten to sue anyone in the NFL because he didn't like what they were saying or doing. Now that would be bullying.

Trump is suing Bolton. Is that bullying?