I didn't say that the government was trying to take anyones free speech away. However some people here would like to take away free speech when they don't agree with it.
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Your employer is allowed to take away your free speech while you're on the job, otherwise your employer has the right to fire you if they don't like it.
In this case, the NFL chooses not to exercise that right... but they have to contend with dropping ratings.
Since the NFL succeeds only when fans watch the games, they will eventually have to either stick it out, or make a decision.
Again, freedom of speech doesn't exist while you're at work... and I can assure you, when the players are in the stadium, dressed in uniform... they are at work, "on the clock."
By any reasonable measure, this is not freedom of speech.
forget it, everytime theliberals got someone fired, because of something they did or said either on the job (sports caster or any other media) or a google suit going through a taco bell drive through it was ok to blast and get them fired, but when it is for one of their pet causes, you are trying to take their first amendment rights away... 3dog, Bdub and dratts are cut from the same one way street sign..
Editted: ownage of page 11
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 11-15-2017).]
I didn't say that the government was trying to take anyones free speech away. However some people here would like to take away free speech when they don't agree with it. forget it, everytime theliberals got someone fired, because of something they did or said either on the job (sports caster or any other media) or a google suit going through a taco bell drive through it was ok to blast and get them fired, but when it is for one of their pet causes, you are trying to take their first amendment rights away... 3dog, Bdub and dratts are cut from the same one way street sign..
Editted: ownage of page 11
As are you, 'the one way street sign'. I lean left but I'm open to conservative ideas too. I don't get you. You're a terrific nice guy on general fiero chat and technical discussion. Why do you get so negative on TOT? I think you're probably a nice guy but you seem to go out of your way to lay names on me like "libtard, commie, socialist, I've never called you a name and I won't. I would rather get along than fight.
[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 11-16-2017).]
So by this same logic, its the white nationalists who tore the country apart by choosing to have protests, right?
I said nothing to the sort? Nothing. You are making things up.
White nationalism I am ok with. Extreme right wing behavior, much like extreme left wing history, uspets me greatly. I hold no candle for either, and have never alluded to such. You are making up accusations again and I want no part of that lunacy.
quote
Also, when did I say anything about limiting speech?
quote
Originally posted by Threedog: You can not pick and choose what is "respectful" based on your political beliefs.
Here, and yes I can. I can choose what is respectful. I am capable of judgement. You cannot take that away from me. Ever. I will always have this and many more rights that you will not be able to strip from my grasp. I have earned these privileges through diligence. This is not understood by you, but legally I am muy bueno son.
Try and enjoy your day...
[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 11-16-2017).]
As are you, 'the one way street sign'. I lean left but I'm open to conservative ideas too. I don't get you. You're a terrific nice guy on general fiero chat and technical discussion. Why do you get so negative on TOT? I think you're probably a nice guy but you seem to go out of your way to lay names on me like "libtard, commie, socialist, I've never called you a name and I won't. I would rather get along than fight.
WHY, because I care,, about the country that allows me to have so much, that If I was to go to where my family came from I'd never even have the chance to have/do/se.. THAT is why.. It is called passion..
Originally posted by rinselberg: GQ (magazine) names Colin Kaepernick "Citizen of the Year." Kaepernick's face, in photographic portraiture, will grace the cover of GQ's December issue.
GQ Magazine... Dilly Dilly!
"Citizen of the Year", , ?
Bruce Jenner was graced with "Woman of the Year". Fathom that.
forget it, everytime theliberals got someone fired, because of something they did or said either on the job (sports caster or any other media) or a google suit going through a taco bell drive through it was ok to blast and get them fired, but when it is for one of their pet causes, you are trying to take their first amendment rights away... 3dog, Bdub and dratts are cut from the same one way street sign..
Not a single one of them addressed my post either... which means they already knew that, or they didn't and are too embarrassed to comment on it.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Not a single one of them addressed my post either... which means they already knew that, or they didn't and are too embarrassed to comment on it.
I don't make a habit out of replying to E.Furgal, but yeah, the reason I didn't reply to your post about that was because I don't see this as a first amendment issue.
I'll post this again, in case you missed it the first time:
quote
Originally posted by theBDub:
I have also stated multiple times in this thread that I don't care what the owners do with Kaepernick. If nobody wants him, that's just fine. I don't care if sponsors pull their advertisements. I don't care if viewers quit watching. I'm all for freedom and exercising those rights....
quote
Originally posted by theBDub:
These players can be fired, and I'm all for the freedom of the owners to do that, too. I'm all about freedom.
quote
Originally posted by theBDub:
And I respect the right of their bosses to fire them. If their bosses support them, then that's that. We've seen a few owners that stand by their players. Apparently they believe their employees are doing just fine.
quote
Originally posted by theBDub:
I've said the whole time that the NFL has every right to fire their employees over kneeling. So far, the coaches haven't done anything. The owners haven't. But I've still said they have the right.
I also believe they have the right to fire this person for not being with the team, for going out and standing. Why? Because I believe employment is not a right. It's an agreement between employer and employee.
I am consistent with this belief.
quote
Originally posted by theBDub:
I have been consistent. My belief on this is fair. It is fine for players to kneel as a form of protest. It is fine for owners to fire players for that same thing. Somehow, this pretty benign belief in freedom has resulted in a huge uproar on this thread.
"They answered as follows: 32% said they stopped watching or attending NFL games “in support of Donald Trump”; 22% said “in solidarity with players kneeling”; 13% said “no interest in the teams playing”; 12% said “in support of Colin Kaepernick”; and 11% said “news about traumatic brain injuries among players.” Another 8% said “games are boring.” 46% chose “some other reason.”
Tony, "I said nothing to the sort? Nothing. You are making things up."
Yes, THIS is exactly what the lefty liberals do. They make up whatever they want for their agenda. Even if its false and theyre forced to admit it, they already do their damage...so for them its ok. Heaven forbid anyone say anything bad about goddess Hillary who is given a free pass even if its a proven fact.
I dont know about the 35% number...it depends on who you listen to. Fox news yesterday said they were down 18%. Also depends on how you figure it. Does that mean ticket sales, tv viewers, both, merchandise ? The one indisputable fact is that fans are down...just how many is the only question.