Trumps NFL tweet
-
The stipulation that illegal orders shall not be followed is huge in the UCMJ
Thanks for admitting that I'm right, as usual - but you just wanted to call someone an asshole, as usual.
Here's a clue: Following the President's orders is conditional on those orders both being legal and meeting the conditions of the UCMJ.
Which is exactly what I stated the first time.
Try reading before you reply next time, ignorant asshole.
Clue #2: When you type your inevitable clusterfuck of a reply, your assertions of "what I really meant even though I explicitly didn't say it" will be wrong. Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my problem.
Thanks for admitting that I'm right, as usual - but you just wanted to call someone an asshole, as usual.
Following the President's orders is conditional on those orders both being legal and following the conditions of the UCMJ.
Which is exactly what I stated.
Try reading before you reply next time, ignorant asshole.
conditional is subjective, you idiot.
" subject to one or more conditions or requirements being met; made or granted on certain terms: "
There is no subjectivity . It's concrete - you know the UCMJ, and abide by it. That's it. There are no "certain terms" made or granted.
There are no "conditions" where you follow an illegal order, there are no conditions where an illegal order is allowed
to be issued. None. Were you in the military? You are wrong. There is NO condition where you don't have to follow a legal order.
There is no condition where you are allowed to obey an illegal order. Not conditional.
-
That's three repeats around the same topic!
You are all now sentenced to watch the Key and Peele excessive celebration sketch.
Please resume your normally scheduled flame wars on the politics board where I'll never see it.
-
Thank you for conceding. Have a nice day. and this thread should have been put on the politics board.
-
Well....what do you feel about what I posted earlier: why bother at all to even have the anthem played at sporting events (since, like I said...it is not played at any other entertainment venues).
As I see it....if people are going to get their panties in a bunch over it...either way.....then just eliminate it. Simply a superfluous gesture.
-
I've said all along this is a terrible and divisive way to protest. It seems to me if you are protesting something you would want to win people over to your side and all this does is to make a large number of people angry and that is counter productive to their cause. It is made even worse by a Browns team that is 0-3 and should be more focused on winning football games. I thought they had figured it out with the team coming on the field with the police, military and first responders and respectfully standing for the national anthem with their arms locked together. They got a lot of POSITIVE response for that.
I've said all along this is a terrible and divisive way to protest. It seems to me if you are protesting something you would want to win people over to your side and all this does is to make a large number of people angry and that is counter productive to their cause. It is made even worse by a Browns team that is 0-3 and should be more focused on winning football games. I thought they had figured it out with the team coming on the field with the police, military and first responders and respectfully standing for the national anthem with their arms locked together. They got a lot of POSITIVE response for that.
Well, now, isn't that a bit Pollyanna? I think the whole point of a "protest" is to disturb the thought of others over the issue that you are protesting. I don't think Rosa Parks was looking to sing Kumbaya with the bus company or the city of Montgomery when she refused to go to the back of the bus. Same with the guys that sat down at the Woolworth counter. Protesting the Vietnam War was certainly not aimed at making LBJ, Nixon etc. happy campers. The opposite is the same. People that protest against abortion are not really trying to win abortionists to their side, are they. I mean, when the KKK and the Nazis came to protest the removal of Confederate statues.....were they trying to sing Kumbaya as well? A protest is DESIGNED to make people angry.....the people who support what you have to say to get angry on your behalf...and the people you oppose to get angry at what you do in order to show their positions.
Are there ways to accomplish things that might be better? Yes, certainly. (e.g. remember...the whole thing started as a way to protest the killing of young unarmed black men by police. There are no doubt better ways to reduce those events.....training, community outreach, education). The protest is often, however, the thing that brings "the issue" into the forefront so that those other methods of resolving some of these issues may be looked into and come to fruition. Without the protests, would the Civil Rights Act, or the Voting Rights act have ever been passed?
Its like an analogy: If the Cuyahoga River had never caught fire, would this country have ever gotten serious over clean air and clean water?
So...sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Fair to say?
-
I've said all along this is a terrible and divisive way to protest. It seems to me if you are protesting something you would want to win people over to your side and all this does is to make a large number of people angry and that is counter productive to their cause. It is made even worse by a Browns team that is 0-3 and should be more focused on winning football games. I thought they had figured it out with the team coming on the field with the police, military and first responders and respectfully standing for the national anthem with their arms locked together. They got a lot of POSITIVE response for that.
Well, now, isn't that a bit Pollyanna? I think the whole point of a "protest" is to disturb the thought of others over the issue that you are protesting. I don't think Rosa Parks was looking to sing Kumbaya with the bus company or the city of Montgomery when she refused to go to the back of the bus. Same with the guys that sat down at the Woolworth counter. Protesting the Vietnam War was certainly not aimed at making LBJ, Nixon etc. happy campers. The opposite is the same. People that protest against abortion are not really trying to win abortionists to their side, are they. I mean, when the KKK and the Nazis came to protest the removal of Confederate statues.....were they trying to sing Kumbaya as well? A protest is DESIGNED to make people angry.....the people who support what you have to say to get angry on your behalf...and the people you oppose to get angry at what you do in order to show their positions.
Are there ways to accomplish things that might be better? Yes, certainly. (e.g. remember...the whole thing started as a way to protest the killing of young unarmed black men by police. There are no doubt better ways to reduce those events.....training, community outreach, education). The protest is often, however, the thing that brings "the issue" into the forefront so that those other methods of resolving some of these issues may be looked into and come to fruition. Without the protests, would the Civil Rights Act, or the Voting Rights act have ever been passed?
Its like an analogy: If the Cuyahoga River had never caught fire, would this country have ever gotten serious over clean air and clean water?
So...sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Fair to say?
Well, now, isn't that a bit Pollyanna? I think the whole point of a "protest" is to disturb the thought of others over the issue that you are protesting. I don't think Rosa Parks was looking to sing Kumbaya with the bus company or the city of Montgomery when she refused to go to the back of the bus. Same with the guys that sat down at the Woolworth counter. Protesting the Vietnam War was certainly not aimed at making LBJ, Nixon etc. happy campers. The opposite is the same. People that protest against abortion are not really trying to win abortionists to their side, are they. I mean, when the KKK and the Nazis came to protest the removal of Confederate statues.....were they trying to sing Kumbaya as well? A protest is DESIGNED to make people angry.....the people who support what you have to say to get angry on your behalf...and the people you oppose to get angry at what you do in order to show their positions.
Are there ways to accomplish things that might be better? Yes, certainly. (e.g. remember...the whole thing started as a way to protest the killing of young unarmed black men by police. There are no doubt better ways to reduce those events.....training, community outreach, education). The protest is often, however, the thing that brings "the issue" into the forefront so that those other methods of resolving some of these issues may be looked into and come to fruition. Without the protests, would the Civil Rights Act, or the Voting Rights act have ever been passed?
Its like an analogy: If the Cuyahoga River had never caught fire, would this country have ever gotten serious over clean air and clean water?
So...sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Fair to say?
It is not Pollyanish to say the type of protest these players are taking is divisive and counter productive. Below are some comments I read from other posters and probably relate to a great many others who feel the same:
"How many other jobs are you allowed to publicly make political protests without repercussions? The NFL is a sports league. The players are being paid to perform on the field. They need to take the political protests OFF THE JOB like the rest of Americans have to do. If the NFL doesn’t enforce the common sense rules the rest of us have to abide by, then they deserve to go bankrupt and the sooner, the better."
"There is no “right” to protest in the workplace on the employers time. When you protest at work and damage the business by doing so you should be FIRED.
The employer is putting up with it in this case, but the “customers” are NOT. The boycott is growing larger every day, and revenue is plummeting."
-
Well, now, isn't that a bit Pollyanna? I think the whole point of a "protest" is to disturb the thought of others over the issue that you are protesting. I don't think Rosa Parks was looking to sing Kumbaya with the bus company or the city of Montgomery when she refused to go to the back of the bus. Same with the guys that sat down at the Woolworth counter. Protesting the Vietnam War was certainly not aimed at making LBJ, Nixon etc. happy campers. The opposite is the same. People that protest against abortion are not really trying to win abortionists to their side, are they. I mean, when the KKK and the Nazis came to protest the removal of Confederate statues.....were they trying to sing Kumbaya as well? A protest is DESIGNED to make people angry.....the people who support what you have to say to get angry on your behalf...and the people you oppose to get angry at what you do in order to show their positions.
Are there ways to accomplish things that might be better? Yes, certainly. (e.g. remember...the whole thing started as a way to protest the killing of young unarmed black men by police. There are no doubt better ways to reduce those events.....training, community outreach, education). The protest is often, however, the thing that brings "the issue" into the forefront so that those other methods of resolving some of these issues may be looked into and come to fruition. Without the protests, would the Civil Rights Act, or the Voting Rights act have ever been passed?
Its like an analogy: If the Cuyahoga River had never caught fire, would this country have ever gotten serious over clean air and clean water?
So...sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Fair to say?
It is not Pollyanish to say the type of protest these players are taking is divisive and counter productive. Below are some comments I read from other posters and probably relate to a great many others who feel the same:
"How many other jobs are you allowed to publicly make political protests without repercussions? The NFL is a sports league. The players are being paid to perform on the field. They need to take the political protests OFF THE JOB like the rest of Americans have to do. If the NFL doesn’t enforce the common sense rules the rest of us have to abide by, then they deserve to go bankrupt and the sooner, the better."
"There is no “right” to protest in the workplace on the employers time. When you protest at work and damage the business by doing so you should be FIRED.
The employer is putting up with it in this case, but the “customers” are NOT. The boycott is growing larger every day, and revenue is plummeting."
It is not Pollyanish to say the type of protest these players are taking is divisive and counter productive. Below are some comments I read from other posters and probably relate to a great many others who feel the same:
It IS Pollyanish to think that a Protest is not designed to be Divisive. It IS designed to be thought provoking. It IS designed to be disturbing to you. If this protest being engaged in here by the NFL players was not that....then you wouldn't be here talking about it. As to whether not it is counter productive...THAT remains to be seen. Rosa Parks protest was not counter productive. The Woolworth sit ins were not counter productive. Protests against Vietnam had a lot to do with the ending of the war. The results of those protests were a long time in the making..but they were productive.
IF in fact communities come together....get better training for police....and the result is many fewer bad incidents as has happened...then maybe it will have been a very productive protest. It has people talking. Of course, like with those other protests....the "productivity" of the protest may be a long time in the making.
"How many other jobs are you allowed to publicly make political protests without repercussions? The NFL is a sports league. The players are being paid to perform on the field. They need to take the political protests OFF THE JOB like the rest of Americans have to do. If the NFL doesn’t enforce the common sense rules the rest of us have to abide by, then they deserve to go bankrupt and the sooner, the better."
How many other jobs start their workday with the National Anthem? No job I have ever held has ever done that...including government jobs. (On the other hand...one job I had...in government....city councilman...did start our sessions with the Pledge of Allegiance). Like I said before...the solution to your problem of not wanting the National Anthem to be "marred" with protests....is to simply not play the National Anthem. Like those jobs, as I said, no other entertainment venue/event that I ever attend plays the national anthem....only sports.
"There is no “right” to protest in the workplace on the employers time. When you protest at work and damage the business by doing so you should be FIRED.
The employer is putting up with it in this case, but the “customers” are NOT. The boycott is growing larger every day, and revenue is plummeting."
Well, now you are certainly going into the area of Pollyana. The NFLs revenue has grown from 9 Billion a year to now around 13 billion. They ain't going bankrupt...there revenue is rising. The customers mostly ARE putting up with it. Are there a few "boycotters". Perhaps No one forces them to go to the games, watch the games. No one is forcing you to be here talking about the games. WE want our football. This is not going to change that. Personally, I don't give a shit if they protest, or don't protest or whatever. I am not really taking a side in this. I don't see them on TV...and if I do, it don't matter to me. Besides....what are you going to do, switch to watching soccer? GGGGuh.
-
should at least be able to pretend that they care about us
They're not your trained monkeys, dude..
Time for you to at least be able to pretend you care about them as people, because in this entire thread all I see is the projection of expectations onto them..
The only time ""freedom of speech" is actually a thing is when it concerns an issue you disagree with. You don't get to define who is and who isn't a person, you don't get to define what is and what isn't an issue important enough to protest about..
How many fights have you started with neighbors in seats who were eating nachos instead of standing with their hand and elbow at an appropriate angle?
They're not your trained monkeys, dude..
Time for you to at least be able to pretend you care about them as people, because in this entire thread all I see is the projection of expectations onto them..
The only time ""freedom of speech" is actually a thing is when it concerns an issue you disagree with. You don't get to define who is and who isn't a person, you don't get to define what is and what isn't an issue important enough to protest about..
How many fights have you started with neighbors in seats who were eating nachos instead of standing with their hand and elbow at an appropriate angle?
At first I was tempted to insult you but I wont. I pay my money I watch the games I look at the commercials. I'm a customer they are entertainers when you come right down to it. So it's up to me whether or not I want to watch the games or buy the products. I'm an Entertainer. Now if there was something in this world that deeply offended me and I thought was a great Injustice I might decide to protest by beginning each show with a paper American flag ripping it to shreds and stopping on the pieces. That's My First Amendment right isn't it? I would explain to the Press that I wanted to draw attention to whatever perceived slight was eating away at me.
Not only would people have less enjoyment of my show but do you think I'm actually making things better by insulting people who might possibly agree with me if I sat down and explained? I doubt it. I think you doubt it too but you are just too invested and being contrary on this board.
And as far as being trained monkeys every performer has a role they are expected to play.
WSS
-
They're not your trained monkeys, dude..
Time for you to at least be able to pretend you care about them as people, because in this entire thread all I see is the projection of expectations onto them..
The only time ""freedom of speech" is actually a thing is when it concerns an issue you disagree with. You don't get to define who is and who isn't a person, you don't get to define what is and what isn't an issue important enough to protest about..
How many fights have you started with neighbors in seats who were eating nachos instead of standing with their hand and elbow at an appropriate angle?
At first I was tempted to insult you but I wont. I pay my money I watch the games I look at the commercials. I'm a customer they are entertainers when you come right down to it. So it's up to me whether or not I want to watch the games or buy the products. I'm an Entertainer. Now if there was something in this world that deeply offended me and I thought was a great Injustice I might decide to protest by beginning each show with a paper American flag ripping it to shreds and stopping on the pieces. That's My First Amendment right isn't it? I would explain to the Press that I wanted to draw attention to whatever perceived slight was eating away at me.
Not only would people have less enjoyment of my show but do you think I'm actually making things better by insulting people who might possibly agree with me if I sat down and explained? I doubt it. I think you doubt it too but you are just too invested and being contrary on this board.
And as far as being trained monkeys every performer has a role they are expected to play.
WSS
At first I was tempted to insult you but I wont. I pay my money I watch the games I look at the commercials. I'm a customer they are entertainers when you come right down to it. So it's up to me whether or not I want to watch the games or buy the products. I'm an Entertainer. Now if there was something in this world that deeply offended me and I thought was a great Injustice I might decide to protest by beginning each show with a paper American flag ripping it to shreds and stopping on the pieces. That's My First Amendment right isn't it? I would explain to the Press that I wanted to draw attention to whatever perceived slight was eating away at me.
Not only would people have less enjoyment of my show but do you think I'm actually making things better by insulting people who might possibly agree with me if I sat down and explained? I doubt it. I think you doubt it too but you are just too invested and being contrary on this board.
WSS
Well, many people have their way of protesting, if they are that passionate about something. Some may do what you say or similar. Remember Sinead O'Connor tearing up a photo of the Pope...it didn't engender her to a lot of people....but it was her way to show her passion over an issue. She was, apparently, willing to burn a lot of bridges with that act...possibly...probably at the expense of a lot of her fan base.
But you (and I) are more like what you said...preferable to sitting down, discussing things, trying to work them out..whatever that may be. But though, sometimes I do understand what I said above (a phrase that I like and should get a copyright on...
:
Sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
-
@westside-steve said:
Plus from the standpoint of NFL revenue, and I'm just guessing here, the people who buy Budweiser and Bud Light and drive Ford or Chevy pickup trucks would prefer not to watch their team disrespect the flag or the national anthem.
WSS
Do you give them that much credit for being so thoughtful?
-
And, if you don't think Protests don't sometimes work.....look at this:
3. Lysistrata
Though Aristophane’s comedy was fictional, it held real-life lessons for future generations: In the 5th-century-BC play, the protagonist organizes Greek women to agree not to have sex with their husbands and lovers until they can forge peace and end the Peloponnesian War. Silly as the concept may sound, sex strikes have been used as peacekeeping measures in modern societies from Colombia to the Philippines. Perhaps most notably, women in Liberia included a sex strike in their Women of Liberia Mass Action for Peace that successfully ended the 13-year Second Liberian Civil War—and got a female president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, elected. Sirleaf and organizer Leymah Gbowee won the Nobel Peace Prize for their work.
Other successful protest movements (including the above)
-
At first I was tempted to insult you but I wont. I pay my money I watch the games I look at the commercials. I'm a customer they are entertainers when you come right down to it. So it's up to me whether or not I want to watch the games or buy the products. I'm an Entertainer. Now if there was something in this world that deeply offended me and I thought was a great Injustice I might decide to protest by beginning each show with a paper American flag ripping it to shreds and stopping on the pieces. That's My First Amendment right isn't it? I would explain to the Press that I wanted to draw attention to whatever perceived slight was eating away at me.
Not only would people have less enjoyment of my show but do you think I'm actually making things better by insulting people who might possibly agree with me if I sat down and explained? I doubt it. I think you doubt it too but you are just too invested and being contrary on this board.
WSS
Well, many people have their way of protesting, if they are that passionate about something. Some may do what you say or similar. Remember Sinead O'Connor tearing up a photo of the Pope...it didn't engender her to a lot of people....but it was her way to show her passion over an issue. She was, apparently, willing to burn a lot of bridges with that act...possibly...probably at the expense of a lot of her fan base.
But you (and I) are more like what you said...preferable to sitting down, discussing things, trying to work them out..whatever that may be. But though, sometimes I do understand what I said above (a phrase that I like and should get a copyright on...
:
Sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Well, many people have their way of protesting, if they are that passionate about something. Some may do what you say or similar. Remember Sinead O'Connor tearing up a photo of the Pope...it didn't engender her to a lot of people....but it was her way to show her passion over an issue. She was, apparently, willing to burn a lot of bridges with that act...possibly...probably at the expense of a lot of her fan base.
But you (and I) are more like what you said...preferable to sitting down, discussing things, trying to work them out..whatever that may be. But though, sometimes I do understand what I said above (a phrase that I like and should get a copyright on...
:
Sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Back in the day, I won a debate in college. It was about the anti-war movement on campuses. Had most of the class against me
on the "it was counter-productive" side. But I won hugely. The anti-war movement alienated the middle class. At kent, there was
Jerry Rubin proclaiming you had to "kill your parents" garbage, jane "traitor" fonda etc etc.
What it did, was to alienate the middle class across America.
BTW, what is the point of protesting to make the fans in attendence, and fans across the country be upset? it isn't the fans
who are NOT the problem they are protesting about. It's stupid. So, what do you think happens when a hollywood extra gets
Passionate about something, and protests during the middle of an expensive shoot?
-
From Yahoo Answers
The full idiom is: kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Below is an explanation of what it means: Destroy a source of riches through stupidity or greed, as in If he never gives his loyal customers a break on some items in his store, he'll kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. This expression, already a proverb in the late 1400s, alludes to Aesop's fable about a farmer whose... Full answer
-
-
furthermore, even though he's a steeler....
he's a former Army Ranger, and he respects our country. and his jersey's sales went way up.
-
Well, many people have their way of protesting, if they are that passionate about something. Some may do what you say or similar. Remember Sinead O'Connor tearing up a photo of the Pope...it didn't engender her to a lot of people....but it was her way to show her passion over an issue. She was, apparently, willing to burn a lot of bridges with that act...possibly...probably at the expense of a lot of her fan base.
But you (and I) are more like what you said...preferable to sitting down, discussing things, trying to work them out..whatever that may be. But though, sometimes I do understand what I said above (a phrase that I like and should get a copyright on...
:
Sometimes you gotta burn a river to get things done.
Back in the day, I won a debate in college. It was about the anti-war movement on campuses. Had most of the class against me
on the "it was counter-productive" side. But I won hugely. The anti-war movement alienated the middle class. At kent, there was
Jerry Rubin proclaiming you had to "kill your parents" garbage, jane "traitor" fonda etc etc.
What it did, was to alienate the middle class across America.
BTW, what is the point of protesting to make the fans in attendence, and fans across the country be upset? it isn't the fans
who are NOT the problem they are protesting about. It's stupid. So, what do you think happens when a hollywood extra gets
Passionate about something, and protests during the middle of an expensive shoot?
-
From Yahoo Answers
The full idiom is: kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Below is an explanation of what it means: Destroy a source of riches through stupidity or greed, as in If he never gives his loyal customers a break on some items in his store, he'll kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. This expression, already a proverb in the late 1400s, alludes to Aesop's fable about a farmer whose... Full answer
Back in the day, I won a debate in college. It was about the anti-war movement on campuses. Had most of the class against me
on the "it was counter-productive" side. But I won hugely. The anti-war movement alienated the middle class. At kent, there was
Jerry Rubin proclaiming you had to "kill your parents" garbage, jane "traitor" fonda etc etc.
What it did, was to alienate the middle class across America.
I am not sure which side of the debate you are saying you were arguing for. Did protests against that war alienate the middle class? I suspect so...nevertheless....most of America including most of the Middle Class came around to the way of thinking of the protesters and opposition to the war. Did Rosa Parks action..or the Woolworth sit ins "alienate" the white middle class of the South? Absolutely....as was, perhaps, its intent. See the link I placed above. Mahatma Ghandi led what was known as the "Salt Protest". Who did it alienate? The British who ruled in India...what did it accomplish: eventually the Independence of the nation of India. So...you see....alienating people who oppose you..or even those sitting on the sidelines....often works positively.
BTW, what is the point of protesting to make the fans in attendence, and fans across the country be upset? it isn't the fans
who are NOT the problem they are protesting about. It's stupid. So, what do you think happens when a hollywood extra gets
Passionate about something, and protests during the middle of an expensive shoot?
-
What is the point of making fans in attendance upset? (though in fact it may only be a small percentage of them) Answer here in an analogy: Remember when the NFL and everyone was doing this business:
- It is called AWARENESS. The protests....just like the ice bucket challenge is ALL about bringing certain awareness to an issue. So...now aren't you fully aware of the issues that are the subject of the protest? You should be....except I do believe that in a lot of this the issues that are the subject of the protests are getting lost in the cacaphony.
-
-
http://nypost.com/2017/09/25/pushed-to-my-limit-stadium-worker-quits-after-bills-protest-anthem/
harmless awareness activity <> destructive, damaging offensive behavior
-
-
yep. you nfl protesters are stupidly killing your golden goose out of spite of having a gripe.
just stupid. I'll be doing a lot of dvr'ing and watching later, which I always hated to do...
now, I just won't care about it. There was poverty before, and these rich idiots didn't care.
and kaepernickleforbrains didn't do his garbage until after the election aug, 2016.
-
Why do they have to protest during the national anthem? - The anthem and flag represent the efforts of their fellow countrymen...and the many that cannot be here because they gave their life to protect everyone of us.
Why not AFTER THE ANTHEM? They could all run out to the middle of the field and do whatever the hell they want. Kneel, stand on their heads, chant in unison, etc. I mean, they're NOT getting us on their side. They're just pissing us off.
If it's just for the television cameras, then the networks should just cut to commercials until the anthem is over.
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
should at least be able to pretend that they care about us
They're not your trained monkeys, dude..
Time for you to at least be able to pretend you care about them as people, because in this entire thread all I see is the projection of expectations onto them..
The only time ""freedom of speech" is actually a thing is when it concerns an issue you disagree with. You don't get to define who is and who isn't a person, you don't get to define what is and what isn't an issue important enough to protest about..
How many fights have you started with neighbors in seats who were eating nachos instead of standing with their hand and elbow at an appropriate angle?
They're not your trained monkeys, dude..
Time for you to at least be able to pretend you care about them as people, because in this entire thread all I see is the projection of expectations onto them..
The only time ""freedom of speech" is actually a thing is when it concerns an issue you disagree with. You don't get to define who is and who isn't a person, you don't get to define what is and what isn't an issue important enough to protest about..
How many fights have you started with neighbors in seats who were eating nachos instead of standing with their hand and elbow at an appropriate angle?
I neither pretend to care about them as people nor actually care about them as people. Always been my stance. They're football players. Gladiators. Paid mercenaries. Good on them if they can do something once they get out of the league, but that's not really for me, as a fan, to be concerned with.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login