RACIST NFL TO PUNISH PROTESTING PLAYERS

The picture above, of slaves in Virginia during the Civil War, is how the NFL views those players who sit or kneel in silent protest during the National Anthem. With the league’s pronouncement on Thursday, May 23, 2018  any players who are on the field during the playing of that jingoistic warmongering tune must stand silently instead of kneeling or sitting. If they do not want to be on the field that is okay. But any protests will result in the NFL fining or otherwise discipling teams with the team owners/management having the discretion to fine or punish their players in some way who do not abide by the mandate.

Approximately 70% of NFL players are black. The protests have pointedly been a clear objection to the injustice, racial profiling, and physical or legal abuse or even killing of black people by law enforcement who by any objective standards posed no threat to the cops.

The NFL’s declaration is blatantly racist. The players who have sat or knelt in silent protest and have been publicized the past two seasons are overwhelmingly black. This policy targets black players protesting injustices for blacks. The NFL wishes they would never have done so because it serves fans in a bipartisan manner. That is, both racists and non-racists love football. However, the folks making the most noise against these silent protests are the same racists who infest all other aspects of our lives which carry far more importance in the greater scheme of things than a mere game.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has proven himself to be an obsequious toady. The NFL owners who approved this measure are just like all the other greedy billionaires who speak of patriotism but possess not a whit of E Pluribus Unum idealism.

Of course the most vocal of the critics of the players who have knelt for the anthem has been Racist Drumpf.

(Editor’s note: In any references to a certain individual fraudulently occupying a certain high office, he will be named as Racist Drumpf. The racist part is, in this case, not an adjective but a substitute for his given first name since his racism is part and parcel of his entire being. The Drumpf part stems from the fact that was the family name when his grandfather arrived from Europe. John Oliver’s HBO show, “Last Week Tonight” created a browser extension that, in any internet stories using his name, it appears as Drumpf instead of in its current spelling form. It also changes any appearances of “Make Donald Drumpf Again” to “Make Donald Drumpf Again”. Therefore the stories I read and often cite have that spelling and I use it whenever I write the name.)

Racist Drumpf has suggested such protesting players be fired or, since the NFL announced this policy, he proffered that maybe they shouldn’t be in this country. His claim, naturally, is that they disrespect our flag and our military when they kneel.

Yet, for people who actually disrespected our flag by firing on it at Fort Sumter, and disregarded our military even more by killing hundreds of thousands of them, and who truly fit committed treason as defined in the United States Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort

and who in some cases themselves owned slaves and were surely fighting to preserve slavery, and who may have maintained discrimination against blacks for generations through Jim Crow laws and other methods, he believes that statues and other public symbols of praise for them should not be eliminated.

Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments,” Drumpf said in a series of tweets. “You can’t change history, but you can learn from it.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/17/politics/trump-tweet-confederate-statues/index.html

The irony here, of course, is that he has not learned from history in the least.

So the protests waged are clearly about race, as stated unequivocally by Colin Kaepernick

I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.

http://theundefeated.com/features/colin-kaepernick-protests-anthem-over-treatment-of-minorities/

So the utter rejection of the protests by the NFL ignores the plainly stated rationale behind them and, in effect, is telling the players,

we don’t give a sht about your black issues, we’re trying to add to our fortunes

If that is not racism I have no idea what is.

 

JUST CALL IT TREASON AND BE DONE WITH IT

 

In the wake of the recent murders of nine black worshipers in a church in Charleston, South Carolina by a young professed racist, there has arisen a clarion call for removal of the Confederate flag flying on the grounds of the state capital in Columbia.

I deliberately used this image of the Confederate flag because even if you grant that it is flown as a symbol of the South’s heritage from the Confederate army, that heritage is something not to be honored, but to be deplored. Whether the ensign was an offical rperesentation of the Confederate States of America or not…it was the battle flag of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia…what it stands for is anything but admirable.

Southerners, and there was a man interviewed on NBC News at a cemetery for Confederate soldiers, will state that it honors the brave soldiers who died. I will not dispute the bravery or deny recognition to the horrible tragedy of the men lost to a senseless war. But the man on the news seemed to be pissed off that the Ku Klux Klan had appropriated the banner, thus associating it with hate. He averred that these men died “defending their state”.

Nonsense. They died participating in a war that was the most blatant and broad act of treason ever perpetrated against the United States of America.

The United States Constitution, Article 3 Section 3 reads in part

 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,

If ever a clear case of treason could be made one need look only to the events of April 12, 1865 when the first shots were fired at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor and subsequent events and battles until Sunday, April 9, 1865 when General Robert E. Lee surrendered his armies at Appomattox.

Those men took up arms against their nation and levied war on it for four years. It was not “The War of Northern Aggression” as some attempt to assert. It was not a war for states’ rights as is commonly pleaded. It was plainly a war against their own nation, treason be damned.

The Constitution provided many ways for any grieveances or concerns the people conducting this treasonous act could have addressed those issues, but they chose treason.

The American Civil War was indescribably destructive and demeaning no matter which side one fought on.And the South, the Confedarcy, clearly was defeated and the treason staunched.

As punitive and oppressive as the Reconstruction Acts and other steps taken to reincorporate the secessionist states into the nation as a whole…and they were harsh indeed…the victors did not summarily execute the traitors as they had every right to do under existing precedents.

But merely losing the war wasn’t enough for the rebels. They had to embark upon a path of self-destruction for the next one and one-half centuries though it most frequently assumed the form of treating the black Americans in their midst as less than human. Jim Crow laws, the Ku Klux Klan, denial of voting rights, and various other tools of the racist trade were implemented, overt and subtle, to carry out this War of Southern Aggression on A Race Deemed Inferior.

All too often, just as they had rallied under the Confederate flag in battles led by Robert E. Lee, they also rallied under that same flag in battles led by hate and discrimination and rapacious desire.

What may arguably have once been a banner of morale easily morphed into a banner of immoral behavior.But that banner would have no meaning whatsoever were it not birthed in treason.

(As an aside, what we think of as the Confederate flag was never formlly adopted by the Confederacy, though one design that was adopted had that stars and bars design in the upper left corner with the field of the flag being white. Its designer, William T. Thompson, described this as a “white man’s flag”, with the white field representing the superiority of the white race.)

Oddly the Confederate flag now on the capital grounds in Columbia, previously over the Capitol itself, did not appear there until 1962, coincidentally in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement. It’s argued in some quarters that this was done in direct defiance of the federal governemnt’s efforts to enforce existing law and court rulings that favored blacks and opposed discrimination. Treason Light, if you will.

It is clear that this flag is a symbol of racist hate. Those who fly or display it may be ignorant of its true meaning but the old saying is that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”. Neither is ignorance of racist meaning…most particularly when that racist meaning has been brought to your attention for years.

This symbol was born in treason and spawned the illegitimate offspring of racism and hate. After several generations its appallingly repugnant prodigious progeny must be eliminated.

TEAR DOWN THAT FLAG!

 

 

CAN BROTHERS BE BROTHERS?

That would seem to be the attitude of the members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity (SAE) at the University of Oklahoma who recently became infamous for a little song they performed in a video that went viral.

There will never be a nigger at SAE,” the students sang to the tune of “If You’re Happy and You Know It” while dressed in formal attire and riding a bus. “You can hang him from a tree, but he’ll never sign with me. There will never be a nigger at SAE.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/10/several-sigma-alpha-epsilon-chapters-accused-racism-recent-years?utm_source=slate&utm_medium=referral&utm_term=partner

This article from Inside Higher Ed purports to tell the tale of that fraternity as historically racist. Thus the individual incident at Oklahoma should not be viewed as an outlier or as a very rare exceptional occurrence within that Greek organization’s culture.

It recounts other incidents (citing various sources) that can be traced to SAE chapters at the University of Cincinnati, Texas A&M, the University of Memphis, Oglethorpe University, Syracuse University, and Washington University in St. Louis.

These incidents included black face stunts, racial slurs targeting black athletes or other students, and parties perpetuating racial stereotypes such as welfare and absent fathers.

This article drew my attention for more than the obvious reasons and a much more personal one. The grandson of my best friend is a freshman here at WVU, a very nice and bright young man, and circumstances recently put us together for a period of several hours during which we discussed, among other topics, his rushing fraternities this semester.

He indicated that SAE was among the front runners of his possible choices. Since this was before the racial issues surfaced my advice to him was that he should choose the fraternity, if any, which seemed most compatible to his own standards. I added that he should run like hell from that fraternity should its members put him in any danger of physical harm during his pledge period (or whatever term may now be used).

After all, WVU is the school where a Kappa Sigma pledge was forced to—in effect—drink himself to death in the chapter house last fall during a Pledge-Active weekend. Criminal charges have been brought in that case, which has received national publicity.

His grandfather and I were pledge brothers together in 1966 and we never were faced with any such potential abuse or harm.

But now I wonder if, indeed, he did choose SAE and might have to deal with this pattern of racism depicted in the article.

After all, WVU does lie below the Mason-Dixon Line and during the 1960’s was a member of the Southern Conference. When I was in school we had one fraternity, Kappa Alpha Order which held an annual “Old South Weekend“, during which the brothers dressed as Confederate soldiers and their dates as Southern Belles.

Ah, yes, the pre-Civil War South with its slaves and faux aristocracy were so romantic.

At that time no fraternities on our campus were integrated racially. But there came a time when my fraternity, Lambda Chi Alpha, almost became the first to lead the way towards having black members.

Almost. Close but no cigar.

In 1968 one of our brothers had a friend who he knew from classes or his dorm…I can’t recall the exact connection…who was a young black man.Save for his skin color he was indistinguishable from our members and had the qualities we looked for in prospective members.

As background our chapter, though part of one of the strongest fraternities nationally, was very small. I doubt we ever had more than 35 active members at one time in our brief history (established 1949) and so we were among the youngest and smallest at WVU. There were several houses with membership exceeding 100. The system favored  the larger houses. In addition, our house’s location was on a street away from campus where four of the behemoth chapters surrounded us.

College students, regardless of IQ or grades or scholarships have a tendency to do stupid, immature things, especially fueled by alcohol. Thus our house, both the physical building and the collection of us brothers occasionally came under assault from our rivals. Broken windows were common and a stone with our Greek letters in our front yard…which we painted with our colors…was burned so often that one time we lit  it up ourselves after our latest decoration just to deprive the surrounding assholes from getting the satisfaction of doing it.

Against this backdrop after “Bruce” the potential black recruit had made his initial visit, we had our usual post-rush session to determine which candidates we wished to ask to return and probably extend a bid for membership to.

When Bruce’s name arose, what ensued was not fiery rhetoric for or against, but instead a truly mature discussion of the positives and negatives of having Bruce as a member.

On the positive were his intelligence and personality and campus involvement and social acumen and on the negative was absolutely nothing within the criteria we usually applied to such dealings.

That he was black was unassailable. Out of the roughly 25 active members participating there were a few who, honestly, wanted no part of a black member, no matter his qualifications. But they were a very distinct and very small minority faction.

The rest of us, to a man, agreed that he had all the qualities we normally looked for.But there was a definite divide as to whether, given our position within the WVU Greek hierarchy, we could take a chance on offering membership.

I believe this was an honest concern but I, among others, thought that we could ,overcome this potential problem (drawing even more enmity from the “good” brothers of other frats) and urged that we get him back and present a bid.

We needed a majority to proceed that way but the vote, though close, was negative.

Though my chapter has long since folded, I note that many Lambda Chi chapters across the country have minority members and several of the fraternities at WVU have at least outwardly ended any discrimination on the basis of race.

Whether the SAE as a whole has a history of racism, or whether that has been confined to a few errant chapters, or where the WVU chapter stands in such matters is not really relevant to my tale. I’m just trying to present an honest take about how one pretty small group of young men dealt with a difficult issue during the still turbulent but somewhat post Civil Rights Era sixties.

Our own regional diversity within our chapter showed our makeup was of a fair number of brothers from the Pittsburgh region, another segment from the Charleston area and more rural sections of West Virginia, and a smattering from Maryland, New York, Ohio, and Missouri, and Florida.

Although we did not pioneer, I am proud that the brothers who spoke that evening did so without using slurs and spoke their hearts, but not in a hateful way. That some were disappointingly wrong in their views I freely admit and make no excuses for them. If the majority had been for Bruce, I’d like to think he would have been accepted by all.

But who knows?

I do know the hateful singing of SAE at Oklahoma was wrong as wrong can be.

I can adapt their lyrics as follows

“There will never be an UMOC at SAE.”

THE NEW RACISM—A THEATRICAL TRIUMPH

We have entered the Theater of The Absurd.

“Welcome, Sir, would you prefer seating on the right or left?”

What’s the difference?

On the left you can view our play through a prism that brings clarity to the absurdity.”

And on the right?

“There, Sir, you are provided blinders so that you view the play solely through the cacophony emanating from the stage and cannot see the truth.”

Well, what’s the play about?

“Sir, it is a dialogue about racism.”

Is it for or against?

“Oh, everyone is completely against racism, Sir.”

Then where is the conflict?

“Respectfully, Sir, some of the players, called Republicans here, are  utterly opposed to racism and are thankful that it was totally abolished in the United States solely by the will of God…….and the Republican Party…and has not existed since.”

That’s pretty silly, Mr. Usher, I think the families of Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin and Eric Golden might disagree with that. And so would the long time voters now denied that right due to these draconian voter ID laws.

“Oh, but Sir, those players deny there is any racial motivation in those acts.”

But what about the protests about those deaths and laws and all the statistical evidence that puts numbers to how disproportionately blacks and other minorities are affected by these measure?

“Sir, the other group of players, known as liberals,  makes that same argument…and more.”

How does the first group of players respond to those arguments?

“Oh, Sir, they call out the second group of players for their blatant racism.”

How can that be? I assume the second group includes blacks who have been discriminated against.

“Oh, it does, Sir, but when they complain about that the first group calls them racists.”

Now I am confused.

“You see, Sir, they are racist because they complain about white police killing young black men, when it is a well known fact that young black men kill a lot more young black men.”

I guess that is bad but what about the voters?

“In that case, Sir, it is the fault of those who cannot get the proper ID because they chose to be born black or poor or both and simply have no ambition to become a Koch brother.”

Why on earth would anyone wish to be a Koch brother?

“So you can buy your own country, Sir.”

I suppose there are advantages to that. But since Republicans ended slavery why do these Republicans act in what many could interpret to be a racist manner?

Don’t forget, Sir, that the parties switched identities sometime in the 1960’s. The Democrats then who opposed the Civil Rights Act are now Republicans. The Republicans of Lincoln and even Teddy Roosevelt were more like the Democrats/liberals of today.”

Oh, now I get it, sort of like the old Cleveland Browns of Jim Brown now being the Baltimore Ravens with a completely new Browns team that has adopted the records of the old Browns. Just as the Ravens officially do not have claim to the old Browns records, the GOP of today should have no claim to the records of the much more liberal old Republicans who accomplished them.

“That is what our second group of players maintains, Sir”

Do these Republicans in the play make any other assertions?

Yes, Sir, they state very clearly that the American Civil War had absolutely nothing to do with slavery.”

Why that is utterly absurd!

“Precisely, Sir”

Excuse me, I’m going to ask for my money back. If I watch this play I am sure to be sick.

 

ORANGE MAY BE THE NEW BLACK, BUT CARSON WILL NOT

I just read a story that there is a group headed by John Philip Sousa IV raising money in an effort to back a run for President By Dr, Ben Carson in 2016.  http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/ben-carson-is-raking-in-more-money-than-hillary-clinton-or-rand-paul-for-2016-20140418

Carson, of course, is the retired physician—brilliant in that role—who has demonstrated either total ignorance of history in relation to current political issues or else is a demagogue cynically making unfounded accusations about the Obama administration, especially the Affordable Care Act, to further some illogical agenda.

Not that I think he has a rat’s ass chance in hell to get nominated for many reasons, but if he or his supporters honestly believe he is a viable candidate for the Republican Party’s ticket they are woefully naive and not as smart as any of them think they are.

Carson may have received praise for his statements by many conservatives and FOX NEWS as well as having been the subject of internet memes trotted out to demonstrate how racially blind they are but to expect Republicans to actually desire to have another black man in the White House shows how detached from reality his bloc is.

He’s fine for the right as a symbol of supposed non-bias as a spokesman but there is no way in hell they want to have the most powerful person in the world not share their whiteness.

Hope you have a good retirement package, Ben. And I hope you realize that your calls will no longer be returned once another white person is CINC.

KRAUTHAMMER IRKS ME

               Here is a link to today’s  Charles Krauthammer column as it appeared in the Post-Gazette.

               http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10240/1083203-109.stm

                In it he accuses liberals of looking for bigotry everywhere there is opposition to it’s leftist agenda. Methinks Herr Krauthammer is viewing this issue through coal-colored glasses. True it is easy to find instances where the conservative movement has been called racist or homophobic or otherwise bigoted, and either that claim did not bear out or circumstances showed there was no black and white controversy, merely one with multiple layers of grey.

             Primary among these for me is the Henry Louis Gates, Jr. incident in Cambridge, where he had to break into his own house, the police were called and when he was confronted as a possible burglar, he was sorely  offended.  That was undertstandable, but so was the officer’s explanation that he was responding to a 911 call, and merely needed to check  the situation. Gates immediately saw this as a racial affront and began a rant. The cop, apparently not racist but likely sensitive to a loud but not violent outburst from a potential miscreant, and having the proof he needed that Gates was indeed the homeowner, did not withdraw as good sense dictated but instead proceeded to arrest Gates for, I believe, disorderly conduct.

           As the officer was white and Gates black many jumped to the conclusion that the affair indicated white racism. President Obama chimed in on the “stupid” behavior of the cop. The two pertinent parties and the Pres finally all had a civil discourse over a cold beer on the White House Lawn.

                It turns out neither the cop nor Gates demonstrated patience when that virtue was undeniably necessary. And Obama jumped the gun is his assessment of the incident.

                 I realize this has nothing to do with a liberal political agenda per se, but it is illustrative that liberals can do the knee-jerk as well as anyone.

                But on more sweeping national questions such as illegal immigration, gay marriage and the Ground Zero mosque, Krauthammer appears to judge them as the will of the majority should be heard and allegations of bigotry, even if made only against segments of the right wing positions on these topics, are stifling the will of the people.

                 Well, in light of the rhetoric espoused by these right wingers, especially the trained rats at FoxNews and drones and clones of the ilk of the half governor of Alaska, how could one not conclude bigotry was afoot?

                Is Krauthammer not cognizant of the fact our Constitution and a number of its amendments were designed precisely to prevent the tyranny of the majority. Would he not deem it bigotry if a synagogue or Mormon temple were opposed simply due to the religious beliefs of the people behind it? Does he fail to see the bigotry in focusing attention on the immigration status of one ethnic group and lies are spread to persuade folks these immigrants are nothing but prenicious leeches, preying upon vulnerable Americans? Does he not see the bigotry and plain unfairness in opposition to gay marriage which was addressed so eloquently by the judge who threw out the California law?

              Oh, yeah, the coal-colored glasses. Questions answered.

               While many people may not have bigotry at the heart of their opinions on these issues, they certainly are prone to extreme narrow-mindedness which, in effect, is the same. Think of those whites who cared not a whit about the Civil Rights movement, but did not practice bigotry themselves. What was the effect of their apathy? Should I mention all those “good” Germans ignoring the Holocaust around them?

           Neither  being an ostrich or being ignorant automatically excuses one from charges of bigotry when it comes to simple matters of right versus wrong.

GLENN BECK THE HERETIC

              I sincerely hope that my computer keyboard continues operating after I have forced it to type the words Glenn Beck…………..brprh;h844joijf’     SEE? It’s already rebelling. Keyboard, I apologize. This is a one-time mission.

             Today is the day of the Glenn Beck organized rally in D.C. to “restore America’s honor”. What a crock! If any honor needs to be restored it is because it has been severely tarnished by people like Beck who believe and act like it is America’s place in the world, not to simply be a leader, but to dominate. Our ideas, ideals, culture and religion (although not our soccer teams) are superior to that of any other nation on earth. We are almighty and can do no wrong. All those little wars with many thousands of our troops killed? Well, hell, we offed millions of them gooks, ragheads and other inferior species. And we did it to make the world safe for democracy and good old Christianity, at least the Christianity that preaches abortion is bad, gotta protect the unborn, but has no problems eliminating the already born and breathing through unnecessary wars, the death penalty, (Hey, that innocent guy didn’t file his appeal on time!) and by spreading greed and pollution and filth that makes the lives of our own citizens rather dicey but is downright lethal to the parasites inhabiting the three other corners of the earth. As Superman fought for truth, justice and the American Way…….wait a minute, that’s a triumverate….what’s the third part of Beck’s battle after democracy and Christianity……oh yeah…..as Superman fought for truth, justice and the American way so Glenn Beck fights for democracy, Christianity and gold coins!!!

             Look, even a fallen Christian like me sees the heresy in  Beck’s procalamation that this is a Christian endeavor. He who spews hate on a daily basis is no more a Christian than Osama bin Laden. I was raised Presbyterian and was taught that the church was an outlet for loving and forgiveness and understanding. I still value these qualities, but Beck’s sputterings are one of the reasons I disdain organized religion and the idea of God or a god itself. Whether you consider Jesus the Messiah and son of God or look at him as an ordinary man with extraordinary teachings, the utter filth emanating from Beck has as much to do with those teachings as it does a recipe for chocolate cheesecake. Heretics used to be burned at the stake. I do not advocate that approach, but if there are lit matches near Beck, I ain’t gonna blow ’em out.

CREEPY COMMENTS

      

.

              Many of you, no doubt, are regular readers of blogs, on line news stories, opinion pieces or other writing that usually allow for the entry of comments. It has been my experience that few of the people who exercise this choice do so from the standpoint of wishing to engage in an honest debate on the topic at hand.

                The truth is that most of the comments made are irrelevant, fail to acknowledge that opposing opinions may have some validity, promote a particular agenda no matter the subject, and use personal attacks on people who had nothing to do with the original story. Or if they were involved, issues are raised that are impertinent and frequently outrageously defamatory. Or they are so personal as to question the motives of the commentator. Or they focus on some trait of a person which has no relevance, particularly those made of a racial nature. 

          There are comments so bigoted, so outrageous, so disgusting, that one wonders what world these folks reside in. Anonymity permits comments like this to be made without fear of retribution. Most sites allowing comments do ask for at least a name and email address, but there is no way to check on these.

               There are a number of lawsuits pending in which a party has attempted to uncover the true identity of posters who may have crossed the legal line from offering an opinion to outright libel. This is especially so where the person attacked is some sort of public figure or current or aspiring politician. Those cases will presumably bring some order to this chaos without compromising First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech.

           My concern is with the comments that fall far short of crossing that line, but are ugly and contribute nothing to the understanding of or discussion about often complex public concerns. But then, even on non-vital issues the ugliness emanates from and permeates these comment pages.

          One example I encountered today was a story about how former NFL coach Tony Dungy had criticized New York Jets coach Rex Ryan for using foul language including a number of F-bombs in an HBO program following the Jets in their current training camp.

         Understand that Dungy was a successful coach, his Indianapolis Colts having won a Super Bowl under him. He also had produced some good teams in Tampa which Jon Gruden led to a Super Bowl win the year after he replaced Dungy, who many still gave credit to for his part in building that team. Dungy was also a long-time NFL assistant coach with several stops after beginning his coaching career in Pittsburgh, soon after his playing days.

             Now Dungy is outside the mold that produces most football coaches. He does not believe in berating his players, screaming at them, and especially does not cuss them out. This system worked for him. Few other coaches attempt to emulate him. Remember this is the league where one of Vince Lombardi’s players in Green Bay once said, “Coach treats us all the same, like dogs”.

              Tony Dungy is also a religious man which is another basis for his non-swearing ways. He is known for counselling troubled players such as Michael Vick, convicted for his part in a dog- fighting ring.

              Thus it is not surprising that he would be offended over Rex Ryan’s vulgarity. Frankly, my personal opinion is that he can criticize, but he has unrealistic expectations. The show, after all, is on HBO. Nedd I say more?

             Along with this story were a number of comments either backing Dungy or calling him out of line. And the writer had gotten an unfavorable reaction to Dungy’s remarks from Buddy Ryan, father of Rex, a former coach himself  known for a gruff personality. So one person made the comment that at least Buddy Ryan has a son, alive and working.( Dungy’s son committed suicide a few years ago.)

          If a negative IQ has ever been recorded it was probably this commentator who scored it. Pure garbage. Not the only out-of-line comment on that site, just the most egregious.

       I will let you read for yourself two other  group of comments which I believe buttress my argument. The first is a letter in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette objecting to an editorial cartoon citing the problems facing many of our servicemen due to combat in Iraq. The original letter writer thought the cartoon offensive to servicemen.  Little discussion ensues actually taking a position on the offending nature of the cartoon. The wisest is the very last comment. Note the similarity of the poster’s name to that of the author of this blog. Pure coincidence.

         The second is a story about how, due to the slumping U.S. economy, many companies are now relocating their customer call centers back in this country. Again, the comments range form the few on point to the ones which just make you go HUH? If you see more than a smidgen of reasoned debate, let me know.

                  As they say at the poker table, read’em and weep.

 

Letters published by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette are offered here for broader comment and discussion.

Source: All categories and sections

Offensive cartoon

User Rating: / 9
PoorBest 

Friday, August 13, 2010 05:00 AM

I am writing to express how offended and dismayed I am by your editorial cartoon on Aug. 10. As the war in Iraq winds down, the best you have to offer is a cartoon that ridicules the men and women who served in that war. We have a family member that served for 15 months as a member of the 101st Airborne in Iraq and fortunately returned unharmed. I can only imagine his reaction as he opened your paper to see that you believe his sacrifice, and that of his fellow soldiers, was in vain.To focus the cartoon on the unfortunate soldiers who suffered mental disabilities is a disservice to them and all those who serve. Your attitude toward our soldiers is somewhat reminiscent of the Vietnam era when the media elite sought to blame the soldiers for waging the war.

You also imply that all those returning from war are somehow defective individuals that we need to fear. It was wrong when they did that to our Vietnam vets and it’s wrong now. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We should all be proud of our returning soldiers and the sacrifice they have shown for their country. Unfortunately some have returned with physical and mental issues and we should all be just as proud and supportive of them. I think the Post-Gazette and Rob Rogers should be ashamed of themselves for publishing such a defamatory cartoon. If you meant it as a compliment it was back-handed at best. You owe all of those who serve this country an apology.

TOM HENDERSON
Upper St. Clair

Comments (21)

…
written by Deke, August 13, 2010 – 07:08 AM

Mr. Henderson that was a great cartoon. It never displayed any disrespect.

…
written by jayare, August 13, 2010 – 08:00 AM

**s a cartoon let me say it again its a cartoon.Tom H.quit buying the post and buy the trib.

…
written by myreply, August 13, 2010 – 08:02 AM

While I don’t agree with Rob Rogers all of the time, there was no disrespect in this cartoon.

The maladys shown in this cel, were those expressed by numerous reports of the trauma, both physical and mental, that these returning, and active soldiers endure.

…
written by CraigWallace, August 13, 2010 – 08:50 AM

Mr. Henderson, first of all, thank you to your family member serving. Second, the PG is a far left newspaper. As such, they have very little respect for the military.

…
written by myreply, August 13, 2010 – 10:25 AM

That was a low blow Craig.

…
written by fhornplayer83, August 13, 2010 – 10:49 AM

You might want to read Rob Rogers’ blog post for that cartoon:

“Just because we are pulling out of Iraq doesn’t mean our soldiers are out of harm’s way. Reports are showing a rise in the suicide rate among soldiers fighting in Iraq. Combine that with post-traumatic stress, violent behavior, depression, drug and alcohol abuse and we have a national epidemic on our hands. These heroes need serious help. They need treatment and counseling. Let’s make sure they get it.”

…
written by boldart, August 13, 2010 – 10:50 AM

CraigWallace

Your statement insinuating that the left is anti-military is a conservative myth.

Currently there are more Congressional democrats who served in the military than there are republicans.

Tom Corbett the current republican candidate for governor took a deferment to avoid active military service during the Vietnam war.

Conservatives talk tough about war, but few are eager to serve.

…
written by myreply, August 13, 2010 – 10:57 AM

Craig:

You say “Conservatives talk tough about war, but few are eager to serve”.

Your president obama did not serve either. He was too busy preparing for playing president. Many presidents did not serve.

I have often said that I believe that one of the requirements for being president is serving first in the armed forces.

If you are going to have the power to send men and women into combat – by God, you had better know what that feels like.

…
written by CraigWallace, August 13, 2010 – 11:55 AM

Myreply, no I didn’t say that. Boldart did.

…
written by GBRetired, August 13, 2010 – 12:08 PM

Boldart,

Let’s take a look at the current admin. and their extensive military background:

Barack Hussein Obama—nuff said

Joe Biden—5 student deferrments, finally given medical deferrment for asthma (did not hinder his college football career)

NOW, THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF:

Lawrence Summers—NO military service

Timothy Geithner—NO military service

Eric Holder—NO military service

Rahm Emanuel–served with Israeli defense forces as a civilian volunteer to maintain equipment.

David Axelrod—NO military service

Pete Rouse—NO military service

Greg Craig—NO military service

Chris Lu—no military service

Robert Gibbs—NO military service

Dan Pfeiffer—NO military service

NOW THE WHITE HOUSE CABINET:

Gary Locke—NO military service

Tim Kaine—NO military service

Aneesh Chopra—NO military service

Leon Panetta—served 1964-1966 Army Second Lieutenant

I could keep going, but the message seems quite evident. This bunch is about as qualified to handle a military conflict as Nancy Pelosi is to judge a beauty contest!!

…
written by CraigWallace, August 13, 2010 – 12:48 PM

Wasn’t it Dems that brought up a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries? Lincoln must have been insane when he said “to care for him who
shall have borne the battle.”

…
written by GBRetired, August 13, 2010 – 01:01 PM

The proposal for insurance companies of servicemen to pay was an actual Obama budget proposal. The attached Washington Post article describes how after meeting with a group of veterans–the annointed one finally figured that this may not be a wise move—-NO S**T!

…
written by fhornplayer83, August 13, 2010 – 01:09 PM

How pathetic. Some people just have no ability to be objective. If you want to know what’s wrong with our country these days, there is quite a lot of evidence right here.

If you seriously think that being a liberal/conservative means not caring about the welfare of our service members, then you need to get your head out of your fourth point of contact.

…
written by myreply, August 13, 2010 – 01:15 PM

Sorry CraigWallace.

…
written by GBRetired, August 13, 2010 – 01:20 PM

Boldart,

Once again–you play fast and loose with the truth. Tom Corbett attended Lebanon Valley College from 1966 to 1970–which would have qualified him for a 2-S student deferment. He taught school for the year 1971 and enrolled in the PA Army National Guard from 1971 to 1984.
Just where did he get that supposed deferment?? Surely you are not claiming the 2-S are you??

…
written by Centinel, August 13, 2010 – 06:55 PM

I think Bob can be a pretty petty hack, but this cartoon didn’t bother me.

…
written by misinfo, August 13, 2010 – 08:32 PM

If this isn’t the epitome of the Fox News formula, I don’t know what is. This artilce comes right from the the Sean Hannity – Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, playbook. Spot on!

First – Distort or bend the the topic so that it becomes something that’s it’s not.
Second – Gin up a story in your head, based on your preconceived notion or fantasies,usually in the form of a straw an argument
Third- Debunk the ginned up straw man argument that now has absolutley nothing to do with the original message
Last – Make sure you let the person know that they owe an apology to everyone, based on your straw man.

1. So a cartoon that points out the negative effects of war = Ridiculing our troops. WRONG! – One of Hannity’s biggest talking points to keep people from actually thinking.

2. Insinuate that that the sacrifices of our men and women was in vain. Wrong.
Another Fox News talking point to keep people from thinking.

3. Cartoon is a disservice to all that serve, Wrong! Fox and Friends again

4 Media Elite. Wow- Where have I heard that talking point mentioned before. Perfect Straw Man again used to keep people from actually thinking.

5. Owing all who serve this country an apology. – Similar to Palin telling Letterman that he owes all young girls an apology for something he said about her 18 year old daughter. WRONG WRONG WRONG.

We all have respect and admiration for our troops. In my opinion, they should all be given free educations when they return. If our country has enough money to send them to die, they can sure provide them with an education. And yes, I have no problem having my taxes raised for this to happen.

Unfortunatley, articles like this do nothing but make people dumber.

…
written by myreply, August 14, 2010 – 04:04 PM

misinfo:

You are “mis”taken in your post. The writer truly “mis”understood this cartoon. It would have helped had she the explanation, I’m sure.

For you to even involve Fox in explaining away her “mis”statements – well, you are just “mis”judging her.

…
written by misinfo, August 14, 2010 – 07:57 PM

Myreply,

unfortunately you are mistaken. I’m willing to bet my yearly salary, which isn’t much, that the author of this post is on a steady diet of fox news. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, I’m saying it’s directly out of their playbook. I hear these arguments all the time from people that I know have only one channel at home-Fox News. Maybe i’m wrong, but in this case, it’s highly unlikely.

…
written by bigmack, August 15, 2010 – 10:35 AM

I don’t know how the letter writer, Tom Henderson, will feel being “mis”represented as a she or her.

…
written by UMOC, August 16, 2010 – 09:27 PM

GBRetired, listing Obama administration members who did NOT serve in the military is pointless. Save for a few, all are too young to have faced the draft. The vast majority of such men has never come close to a military recruitment center, not just those in government. What is more telling is that in the administration of George W. Bush which instigated this destructive and needless war were a great number of men who were old enough to serve while there was still a draft, yet managed to avoid any military duties. Of course they were not poor. Dick Cheney is the epitome of this, having received 5 deferments from the draft. Unapologetic, he has been quoted as saying “I had other priorities” So don’t cite Obama’s people for not serving, at least not without noting the same situation under Bush.
But perhaps GBRetired is correct that military endeavors should be left to those with military experience. Look what a mess Obama inherited from the incompetent non-veterans led by Bush.
But then, FDR never served and he somehow led the U.S. through the most catastrophic war the world has ever known.
And, GBR, are you trying to say a 2-s student deferment was not a deferment? If that is what Tom Corbett received while in college, he is simply one of several million men who did, including me. But it is, was and always shall be a deferment. No matter the justification or legality, that deferment kept him from being drafted, just like it did me.
And all you commentators, and I have been dragged in myself, you ignore the actual controversy as to whether the cartoon was offensive, to promote your own agenda that has nothing to do with that issue.

Call-center jobs returning to US

The depressed economy has reduced operating costs so much that Indian outsourcing isn’t as attractive.

Posted by Kim Peterson on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 3:35 PM

The global economy is changing quickly, causing this unexpected turn: Call-center jobs are coming back to America from India.

Customer-support employees are becoming just as cheap to hire here as in India, the head of a large outsourcing company in India tells the Financial Times.

Blame the high unemployment level in the U.S., which has driven down wages. People are willing to accept less money and are more open to working in low-skilled jobs in customer support.

That’s not the case in India, where wages are up 10% this year, the FT reports. Senior outsourcing managers are now asking for more money than the global average.

The chief executive of one company, Genpact, told the FT he expects to triple the number of U.S. employees over the next two years (it employs 1,500 here now).

Americans “are open to be working at home and working at lower salaries than they were used to,” he told the newspaper. “We can hire some seasoned executives with experience in the U.S. for less money.”

A similar story is playing out at Indian outsourcing giant Wipro, which has begun recruiting workers in other countries and expects to be at 50% non-Indian employment in two years, the FT reports.

Sort by:Newest firstOldest first

1 – 15 of 191

I would say , all Americans should buy American made product
Avoid answer to all the calls  with any accent

 

It’s about damn time!!!!  I’m changing my internet because of Qwest using people in the Philipines.  Bring ALL OUTSOURCED JOBS BACK TO THE U.S.

 

Americans always complain that the people in India do not talk clearly but I do not agree with that. Because it is vice versa, Indian people also have difficulty understanding the accent of americans. As not all Americans can clearly speak, it is the same way not all Indian’s can speak clearly. So, what I wanted to say is people need to show some patience when they are dealing with people from other countries. I know how much tolerance Indian people are showing at work here in america. All the time Americans use Indians to work under them though the Indians have very good talents americans won’t let them get promoted, they will put obstacles.  

 

I would pay more taxes to have more american jobs.  I am a lucky person my husband and I both have steady jobs so haven’t faced the problems that most have.  I think it is a shame that we out source so much stuff.  And if the problem is what one person commented that Indian people are more knowledgeable lets train the people out of work and get real Americans a living wage.  I am plain tired of talking to people I can’t understand and have to have them repeat it over and over.  Let’s give the economy a real boost and the American people as well.  

 

First, we all need to pressure Walmart…so-called America’s store…to stop buying things made overseas.  Also Target and K-Mart.  Shop at green sites online , if possible..have toys and things for your house and clothes..and are made here.  The only thing the big guys like Walmart will understand are floods of e-mails telling them you are boycotting them and why!

I am an American and have worked as a Customer Service Representative for 7 years.  I do not make a living wage and dealing with customers is not easy!  The last thing these jobs should be called is easy or low tech  I am required to have knowledge of more than 10 different contracts!  I am required to always be polite (no calling my customers idiots, even when they are!). I am required to be understandable and welcoming.  I am required to be at my desk on the phone on time to start my shift, to take my breaks and to end my shift!  No overtime, unless authorized!  So these are not jobs that will add immeasurably to the economy!  They are fill ins for people who have a roommate or partner or spouse that is also working!  Most of these jobs do not have benefits as the workers are all part-time!  The people who are handling CS in China or India, or other overseas countries don’t earn enough to buy food and shelter!  But it is the same here.  We are not paid commensurate with our responsbilities!  I began working when gas was $1.35 a gallon, gas is now $3.65 a gallon, but my salary didn’t increase 200%!  the COE’S salaries did though!

 

They can’t even speak english ask dell and other companies how many complaints they get about their call centers in other countries.

It is time to put a maximum wage on the upper management of 10 times the lowest paid employee regardless of where that employee is at.

 

Those call centers are terrible I stopped buying Samsung products because I could not understand the call center people.

 

You actually believe that? Better take a look in the mirror along with 75% of Americans that have stuffed their closets with clothes they don’t wear, cars they can’t afford and DVD players they don’t use. This country went on a spending spree that caused the credit card companies to be richer than Richie Rich. Don’t blame this on the Gov’t. Look in the mirror and see how you helped in the matter. Learn from your mistakes and SAVE, SAVE, SAVE.

 

I stopped taking the local newspaper here in fl.I found out the call center was in india an guess what,its the new york times that dictates where the call centers go to ,like I read here its the big corp.america doing it.I am so happy to hear its going to stop,I have a dell laptop so I will still have to talk to india….the comp. has been down for a week an I am dreading placing the call as I get so stressed talking to them……

 

Well said minnhistoryman.
Our government SCREWED us over since 1913 (inception of the federal reserve) and now we applaud because we are gaining lower wage jobs (that we should have never lost) that can’t put food on the table and pay rent without food stamps? It is impossible to live on $7.50/hr and pay your own bills w/o government assistance.
So the government and federal reserve destroyed our economy, and we all suffered and now we are supposed to be happy about lower wages? I am sure obama will claim he was the cause for this and claim it was his brilliant policies that made us gain jobs. **** every president since woodrow wilson, except Kennedy. (who oddly was assassinated… coincidence? NOT)
End the fed and vote out the bums…

 

Amen! Sorry, but I usually hang up if I can’t understand the person on the other end of the phone. If I’m calling them, I’ll call, and call, and call, until I get someone I understand.

 

I am so so so so happy. I will actually be able to understand the person on the other end of the line. Hooray!!!!!!!!!!

 

ty!  ty! ty !  I am hard of hearing and i have spent too many minutes and time trying to resolve issues!

 

hey are reading a book and have no real knowledge of what is wrong.  I was told to hand delete but knew I could dump the more than one thousand entries. I was 3 hours or more because they knew nothing.  I just trashed the machine and bought another brand.

SHAME ON THEM

              There has been a lot of news lately concerning immigration. Much of that news is the reporting of the exhortations of a number of politicians to stem the tide of immigrants and to ensure those filthy bastards don’t cast a shadow on American soil. If they do, they will be quickly rousted and any advantage they sought by moving here will be denied.

               One of the more egregious proposals to accomplish this “ideal” is to repeal or rewrite the 14th Amendment to our revered Constitution so that babies born to immigrants are not automatically entitled to American citizenship merely because of that birth.

               There has arisen a common belief that a large percentage of these filthy folks, if not a majority, cross the border to drop a kid, hoping its citizenship will eventually enure to the benefit of the mother, if not both parents. In fact the term “anchor babies” has been coined as a description of denigration for this supposed trend.

               Like so many of the alleged facts about illegal immigrants, this one lacks substance and proof. I could cite so many examples it would make your head spin. (All cliches and trite phrases are free of charge).  But, to complement my previous post, Hail Hail The Constitution, I will confine my remarks to this situation.

            Here is a link to a refutation to the basic claim:

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/06/lindsey-graham/illegal-immigrants-anchor-babies-birthright/

        Here is the complete text of the 14th Amendment. Take time to read it and consider it.

Amendment 14 – Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

             The main provision drawing ire is paragraph number One. The naysayers emphasize the phrase awarding citizenship to all those born in this country. Some context is in order.

           This amendment was ratified in 1868, three years after the end of the Civil War and in the wake of the total abolition of slavery.  The citizenship language essentially meant that these  now ex-slaves were afforded the same rights as all citizens. And they attained their citizenship not through any formal process……after all, the Dred Scott case, among other things, denied them the privilege of citizenship………..but by virtue of being born here, regardless of slave status.

           And the possibility that these rights would not be recognized in those so recently recalcitrant and secessive southern states, necessitated the specific  provision that individual states could not abridge these rights.

                Now anyone even remotely familiar with this nation’s history knows that states violated these rights in so many ways that it required an awakened sense of decency and justice, the sacrifice of numerous lives to racial violence, an extraordinary social movement and an enormous cost to our collective conscience, that culminated in the passing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Congress had finally fulfilled its role as outined in Paragraph 5 of the Amendment.

          Even before that momentous event, the provision was occasionally invoked and enforced as intended. Not often enough, but it wasn’t completely ignored either.

        Fast forward to the twenty-first century. Few Americans have not benefitted from the protections offered by this Amendment. It has been or could be applied to racial and gender issues, religion, and so many other aspects of our lives. It served as at least a partial rationale for the recent decision nullifying California’s anti-gay marriage law.

           To repeal or change this amendment would be a travesty and an offense to the sacrifices, physical and otherwise, made by those good Americans that enhanced the freedom of us all. Shame on those demagogues and tyrants who would destroy these protections.

           I love my U.S. Constitution.

            DON’T FUCK WITH IT!!!!

MY TWO CENTS ON THE SHERROD SCREWUP

         The recent attempt by Andrew Breitbart to muddy the waters of our still unresolved and often tendentious racial divide is appalling.

          Breitbart himself should be admonished severly for releasing a tape of Sherrod’s speech about her own struggle with personal racist attitudes when he knew it was only a partial rendering of her thoughts. He was aware her speech, taken in context with all the pertinent facts known, would have been about as controversial as playing Musical Chairs at a children’s birthday party.

         Naturally FoxNoNews took up the cause of the rampant, insidious, institutionalized outrageous racism of African-Americans towards the whites whose ancestors owned their ancestors. That there is racism on both sides of the aforementioned divide is a given. To suggest, however, that the history of this republic is replete with equal acts of prejudice by blacks and whites is simply unfathomable.

           Since however, FoxNoNews overlooks no opportunity to excoriate the current POTUS with the big ears, dark skin and questionable birth certficate, any guilt by association will be exploited.

           Now the mainstream media, or as the former half-governor of Alaska terms it, the “lamestream media” quickly jumped on the bandwagon carrying the lemmings over the cliff. They dutifully reported Sherrod’s act of discrimination and called for her head. It is expected that FoxNoNews will ignore the facts to arrive at their own “politically correct”  conclusions and trumpet these canards to the masses.

        But we usually anticipate higher standards from the mainstream, not necessarily matching the authenticity of the Bible but somewhere higher than mere innuendo produced by less true  journalistic research than what goes into the latest issue of Mad Magazine.

       Now in the Third Act of this farce, entering from Stage trying to be in the middle, comes the Obama Administration. Whether on direct orders from someone close to POTUS demonstrating that no racism will be tolerated by its employees, or as a result of a retinue of minions in The Department of Agriculture having a collective IQ substantially below that of the average sperm donation, Ms Sherrod was asked to resign her position.

        Someone in the lamestream finally did some homework, discovered the total fraud behind the instigation of this controversy, and caused right-thinking people everywhere to reevaluate, reassess, and recant their comments and decry their own actions. I said right-thinking people, so Breitbart is still smirking over the little pot-boiler he created. What a DUDE!!!

       In the aftermath Ms Sherrod has apparently decided that, in the interest of peace, love and understanding (thank you Elvis Costello) and to adhere to the oldest and finest of American traditions, she will SUE THE BASTARDS.

       In this whole scenario it appears the nation has experienced an epidemic of illegitimate births because the bastards in this case are found EVERYWHERE. In light of the shameful behavior of so many in the non-pursuit of the truth, the possibility of myriad parties defendant exists. Thus perhaps any subsequent trial can be docketed for the Louisiana Superdome which is experienced in treating the stench of overflowing shit arising following a devastating storm occurring outside its walls.

       What an opportunity for a freshly minted member of the Bar. He or she can simply adapt the research and memos developed in their Moot Court exercise in re; libel and N.Y. times v Sullivan to the case at hand and secure their first million dollar verdict in time to pay the first installment on their educational loans.

      Good luck to Ms Sherrod and bad luck to all the miscreants receiving a summons from process servers.