General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
Page: 9 of 29
mail
person
allen
9/27/2017 1:40 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
And the beautiful irony in this particular case is that it's being done in the name of Patriotism, with a capital P. We're so goddamned Patriotic that we don't even care about the first amendment anymore, and the biggest enemy we can conjure up is the opposition party.
I'm not an expert in the Constitution.
Fortunately,I have a friend who is.

He's a Constitutional Lawyer,who is qualified to argue cases before the Supreme Court.

I asked him about the whole National Anthem/kneeling issue.

According to him:

The language in the First Amendment is clear.
"Congress shall make no law . . . ".

That has nothing to do with this.

This is strictly a private employer/employee matter.

He used the same example I believe someone else may have posted ,that a restaurant owner can prohibit a server from saying to customers that eating meat is murder.

The only way the First Amendment could possibly come into play is if the employer wanted to prohibit an employee from exercising their free speech rights,outside of work,in "street clothes".
The Constitution only apply to government employment. Privat companies can fire you if they think that you represented them in a negative light especially in at will states and where there is no union. However, no government official can punish or coerce others to punish people who using their first amendment right, so it is very unusual that a sitting president would try to push for protesters that broke no law to get fired, especially a hard right republican. Lawyers will bring complaints against Trump because of it, but so far he has not coerced anyone. I don't think anybody brought up legality because most logical peopl know that he was throwing red meat to his racist base. We have a few supporters here that would support anything that he does and they are 3 out of the 100 Trump supporters with college degrees. They are valiant in their efforts to support this nonsense. They will use made up friends and made up supreme court opinions to support their narrative, but the Supreme Court actually upheld flag burning, so we should probably get rid of lens sees what the protesters are doing as something that is illegal. I am one of the three supporters, we are united. We already spoke amongst one another and said that we would say we supported Dr. King's protest that advocated for equality and some facets of socialism. We all have at least one black person that we say hi to or exchange pleasantries with at games, sometimes I cross my fingers so it really doesn't count.
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 1:47 PM
Hey! Someone stole my weed!
mail
The Optimist
9/27/2017 1:54 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Huh? Who said anything about racism? Or globalism? In sum: what are you talking about? What is globalism, and where are you seeing this massive push?
[/QUOTE]
Tribalism and Globalism are two sides of the same coin. My main point is that racism (which IS a problem) is being thrust into the Tribalism vs Globalism debate and you've now got two sides at each others throats because they're debating two different issues.

[QUOTE]That's the second time in this thread that you've insisted you're not racist completely out of the blue. It's super weird.

I don't see myself insisting that in either case; In both cases, I was attempting to make the point that divisive comments by the media towards people in Middle America are often made with racism being used as an end all be all "your a racist so your opinion is irrelevant." Racism is/was/has been a problem but the media has exacerbated the situation.

...

I can't think of many better explanation for Donald Trump's success in the Rust Belt as "backlash against Globalism." Across the board, the statistics are clear that globalism is a success. For all the negative news you hear, compare poverty levels, death rates from war, disease, global per capita gdp. It's all massively up like no time in history. But it's not the "everyone wins" scenario that was painted for so long... There are economic "losers" in globalism and they've made in pretty clear that the welfare state isn't an acceptable replacement for a way to make a living for yourself.

It's amazing to me so many people fail to see this, because it isn't an issue specific to the United States. The Rust Belt flipping from voting Blue for Barack Obama to voting for Donald Trump is an extreme example but the underlying story of globalism is very similar situation to the Brexit. In Spain, you've got Catalonia voting on a referendum to break off from the rest of the country. There are plenty of examples on smaller scales.
mail
person
allen
9/27/2017 2:02 PM
Would anybody want people to advocate for their son if this happened to them? At Ohio, I have seen fraternity members debate police and get up in policemen's faces and the police descalted the situation with out beating them up. While they manhandled the nurse in Utah who disobeyed their order which was wrong, they went a little further here. I say the teen had it coming, he has a tan and it is rumored that he took a picture with gangsters two years ago. What do you think? See the protester's have it wrong. https://filmingcops.com/watch-pittsburgh-cop-caught-camer... /
mail
DelBobcat
9/27/2017 2:11 PM
RP, you know I like you even though you and I often (usually) disagree. But I have to point out that all of your arguments seem to be nothing more than vague appeals to authority.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

I believe that you have friends who are law enforcement officers (after all, you do live in Jersey) and I do believe that you have a friend who practices Constitutional Law. But I'm not sure why that matters in this conversation. Almost all of us here know at least one law enforcement officer and at least one lawyer (and many of us, I'd imagine, know a few of the constitutional variety). But just because they express an opinion doesn't make it valid. I could find law enforcement officers (and indeed I know some--dammit see I did it too!) that disagree. Also, I think your point about the first amendment was made earlier in the thread when it was pointed out that no player is breaking an NFL policy and the owners actually support them.

I'll leave you with the greatest appeal to authority. One I know you can relate to. The ever-wise Mr. Bruce Springsteen:

41 shots, and we'll take that ride
Across this bloody river to the other side
41 shots, they cut through the night
You're kneeling over his body in the vestibule
Praying for his life

Is it a gun?
Is it a knife?
Is it a wallet?
This is your life
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
Ain't no secret my friend
You can get killed just for living in your American skin

41 shots, Lena gets her son ready for school
She says, "On these streets, Charles
You've got to understand the rules
If an officer stops you, promise me you'll always be polite
And that you'll never ever run away
Promise Mama you'll keep your hands in sight"

Is it a gun?
is it a knife?
Is it a wallet?
This is your life
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
No secret my friend
You can get killed just for living in your American skin
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 2:13:29 PM by DelBobcat
mail
person
rpbobcat
9/27/2017 4:00 PM
DelBobcat wrote:expand_more
RP, you know I like you even though you and I often (usually) disagree. But I have to point out that all of your arguments seem to be nothing more than vague appeals to authority.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

I believe that you have friends who are law enforcement officers (after all, you do live in Jersey) and I do believe that you have a friend who practices Constitutional Law. But I'm not sure why that matters in this conversation. Almost all of us here know at least one law enforcement officer and at least one lawyer (and many of us, I'd imagine, know a few of the constitutional variety). But just because they express an opinion doesn't make it valid. I could find law enforcement officers (and indeed I know some--dammit see I did it too!) that disagree. Also, I think your point about the first amendment was made earlier in the thread when it was pointed out that no player is breaking an NFL policy and the owners actually support them.

I'll leave you with the greatest appeal to authority. One I know you can relate to. The ever-wise Mr. Bruce Springsteen:

41 shots, and we'll take that ride
Across this bloody river to the other side
41 shots, they cut through the night
You're kneeling over his body in the vestibule
Praying for his life

Is it a gun?
Is it a knife?
Is it a wallet?
This is your life
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
Ain't no secret my friend
You can get killed just for living in your American skin

41 shots, Lena gets her son ready for school
She says, "On these streets, Charles
You've got to understand the rules
If an officer stops you, promise me you'll always be polite
And that you'll never ever run away
Promise Mama you'll keep your hands in sight"

Is it a gun?
is it a knife?
Is it a wallet?
This is your life
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
It ain't no secret (it ain't no secret)
No secret my friend
You can get killed just for living in your American skin
1.Actually, I work with people in law enforcement almost every day,including when I have to provide expert testimony in Drug Free School Zone cases.

2.Someone else raised the issue of the First Amendment.
I was just pointing out that it doesn't apply to the kneeling issue.

3.As far 41 shots,when Amadu Diallo was shot there were all kinds of questions as to how the police could have fired so many shots.

One of the N.Y. papers put a reporter in a police simulator.
They put him in a "shoot/don't shoot" situation.
He shot.
Then they asked him how many shots he fired.
He said 1 or 2.
Turned out,in a matter of seconds,he emptied an entire clip.I believe 14 rounds.
He said that,if he reacted that way in a simulator,he could understand that once you make the decision to fire,between the adrenaline and the type of weapon,he can see how you can fire multiple shots without knowing.

Obviously, that has nothing to do with whether or not the shooting was justified.

I believe the officers were tried,but not convicted.
Out of curiosity I'm going to "google" it when I get a chance.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 4:02:24 PM by rpbobcat
mail
person
bobcatsquared
9/27/2017 4:25 PM
41 shots, Lena gets her son ready for school
She says, "On these streets, Charles
You've got to understand the rules
If an officer stops you, promise me you'll always be polite
And that you'll never ever run away
Promise Mama you'll keep your hands in sight"

Sadly, this is a conversation African-American parents feel is of uppermost importance to have with their son(s), regardless of their profession, economic status or where they live in America. Potentially, a life-or-death defining discussion.

I feel somewhat guilty as a white male with a son that it isn't as necessary to have this talk with my son.
mail
person
allen
9/27/2017 4:39 PM
Diallo, I remember him. NYC tax payers had to pay millions and African immigrants had to bury their son because he reached for his I'd after being suspected of breaking into his own apartment. I also remember Abner Louima and others were beat and killed, Louima was raped. Trump didn't take out an ad like he did with the Central Park Five. I like RP have a lot of law enforcement friends and respect them, thank God that my friends have never done anything that cowardly and sick because I would have to disagree with them.
mail
person
cc-cat
9/27/2017 5:19 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
One of the N.Y. papers put a reporter in a police simulator.
They put him in a "shoot/don't shoot" situation.
He shot.
Then they asked him how many shots he fired.
He said 1 or 2.
Turned out,in a matter of seconds,he emptied an entire clip.I believe 14 rounds.
He said that,if he reacted that way in a simulator,he could understand that once you make the decision to fire,between the adrenaline and the type of weapon,he can see how you can fire multiple shots without knowing.

Obviously, that has nothing to do with whether or not the shooting was justified.

I believe the officers were tried,but not convicted.
Out of curiosity I'm going to "google" it when I get a chance.
Yup - unfortunately we have some police no better prepared, trained, or mentally or emotionally equipped to be a police officer than some scribe involved in a media hype piece.

Yes the officers were acquitted - as was Michael Brelo in Cleveland - but then he and his buds only put 137 shots into a car while he stood on the hood and fired over, and over, and over. How could that possible be unjustified. They were hyped up on adrenaline - makes me understand why they opened fire on Tamir Rice in 2 seconds upon arrival to a playground.

But in the meantime - dammit - "stand the F up while we have the flag and sing the national anthem. Don't you have any respect for this country? After all we pledge to the flag" - you know "with liberty and justice for all."

We don't live up to it, but is is catchy don't you think. We should put it on a bumper sticker - or maybe a red hat.

"This is our flag. Our country we are talking about here. Our heritage. They just don't respect it. If you can't stand up for the national anthem why don't you you just leave."
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 5:46:39 PM by cc-cat
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 5:45 PM
cc-cat wrote:expand_more
But in the meantime - dammit - stand the F up while we have the flag and sing the national anthem. Don't you have any respect for this country? After all we pledge to the flag - you know "with liberty and justice for all." We don't live up to it, but is is catchy don't you think. We should put it on a bumper sticker - or maybe a red hat.

Nope. Go ahead and kneel. Let me know how it works out for your party.
mail
person
cc-cat
9/27/2017 5:49 PM
/\/\/\/\\//\

Winner, winner, chicken dinner - There you have it - party, party, party. Who can win an election.

You...us - party has replaced color as the great divider.

It's about living up to our constitution - a pledge we make as a country to our people. Too bad we don't live up to it and too bad the Constitution and it's soul is no longer the great uniter or even a concern for some.

"Justice for all" God what a great concept. Too bad it is just a slogan to so many people.

And I understand your concern that you don't get people to a table and start a conversation by insulting the person. You also don't start by turning a blind eye to injustices. Our people. Our citizens are more important than our symbols and totems. And by the way, the table is round.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 6:40:33 PM by cc-cat
mail
person
Alan Swank
9/27/2017 6:02 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
But in the meantime - dammit - stand the F up while we have the flag and sing the national anthem. Don't you have any respect for this country? After all we pledge to the flag - you know "with liberty and justice for all." We don't live up to it, but is is catchy don't you think. We should put it on a bumper sticker - or maybe a red hat.

Nope. Go ahead and kneel. Let me know how it works out for your party.
Robert this makes the assumption that all who kneel or support those who do are Democrats. As long as we continue to paint everything along party lines which scream "I'm right and you're wrong" this country will never move forward with justice for all.

Respectful question - what if we didn't play the anthem before the game and just let the players come out an play like they do in little league baseball?
mail
person
cc-cat
9/27/2017 6:07 PM
Another question for all. What happens this Saturday or next, or over the winter when an Ohio athlete takes a knee. It will happen folks.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
9/27/2017 6:15 PM
Allen, Bobcat squared and CC, I couldn't agree more with the things you have said on this thread. Robert, You just leave me shaking my head.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 6:31:39 PM by BillyTheCat
mail
person
Alan Swank
9/27/2017 6:21 PM
cc-cat wrote:expand_more
Another question for all. What happens this Saturday or next, or over the winter when an Ohio athlete takes a knee. It will happen folks.
And I hope it does because one would think that on a college campus we would have a much better chance of having an intelligent and productive conversation and perhaps some action than we do in the general population.
mail
person
bobcatsquared
9/27/2017 6:22 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Respectful question - what if we didn't play the anthem before the game and just let the players come out an play like they do in little league baseball?
North Newark Little League plays the anthem every night prior to the first pitch.
mail
person
allen
9/27/2017 6:23 PM
I think what gets lost is that Kaepernick sought out a way to protest the flag without dishonoring soldiers and vets. It's too bad that he went to a green beret instead of cc cat and rp, he went to a real patriot. Someone who doesn't just posture, but engages our enemies in close combat, so that we are free to kneel or stand. We don't have to jail the elderly or people in wheel chairs for not standing, we are not North Korea or Russia, wait we do have a Russian twist, forgive me I forgot about that. Kaepernick also donated money made donations to veterans just like a bunch of other patriotic Americans that kneeled. I am sure that cc and to do much more than them though, the truth is we are annoyed because our leaders pull our strings. We wear the mask that grin and lies, lol. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/h... /
mail
person
bobcatsquared
9/27/2017 6:25 PM
DelBobcat, great share with Springsteen's "American Skin (41 Shots)."

My I suggest Bob Dylan's "Hurricane", about the racial injustices in our country's judicial system. And, unfortunately, still as relevant today as it was when he released it more than 40 years ago.
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 7:21 PM
cc-cat wrote:expand_more
/\/\/\/\\//\

Winner, winner, chicken dinner - There you have it - party, party, party. Who can win an election.

You...us - party has replaced color as the great divider.

It's about living up to our constitution - a pledge we make as a country to our people. Too bad we don't live up to it and too bad the Constitution and it's soul is no longer the great uniter or even a concern for some.

"Justice for all" God what a great concept. Too bad it is just a slogan to so many people.

And I understand your concern that you don't get people to a table and start a conversation by insulting the person. You also don't start by turning a blind eye to injustices. Our people. Our citizens are more important than our symbols and totems. And by the way, the table is round.
Right. Justice for all is simply not understood by we moronic conservatives. Isn't that what you mean when you toss around snark like that? That people like me are dunderheaded racist fools with barely enough IQ to manage our own aspiration.

You're right. It's just a slogan to me. Or, maybe you'll claim that I'm one of the scant percentage of conservatives who--maybe--understands nuance, but the vast majority are dammed fools, clinging to their guns and religion.

Spare me your lectures. The problem with this and so many issues, is neither side will concede any ground. Here, you want me to start? Police brutality is a real thing. Police officers, at times, behave well beyond the pale. People have died and been seriously injured as a result. In communities where this takes place, people should ask for and demand better police training and behavior.

I get it. But don't try to brow beat me into submission by shitting on my country's traditions. You're a he-man crusader, right? Next time you show up for your kid's football game, and the anthem is played, leave your hat on, fold your arms and take a knee. Do it in as central an area as possible. It's for the cause, right? If you piss off a few conservative old people, to hell with 'em.

I attempted to enter this discussion and keep it civil. I get tired of being labeled with BS and continually accused of being thick headed.

Maybe try to reason without the snark and come to the understanding that if you're going to win a debate, you're going to have to attempt to find common ground.
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 7:22 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Allen, Bobcat squared and CC, I couldn't agree more with the things you have said on this thread. Robert, You just leave me shaking my head.
Great dialogue, BTC. You're a champ. You might want to consult with DelBobcat. Pretty sure this is logical fallacy you're making, but I can't remember. He'll know for sure.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 7:24:06 PM by Robert Fox
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
9/27/2017 7:31 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
/\/\/\/\\//\

Winner, winner, chicken dinner - There you have it - party, party, party. Who can win an election.

You...us - party has replaced color as the great divider.

It's about living up to our constitution - a pledge we make as a country to our people. Too bad we don't live up to it and too bad the Constitution and it's soul is no longer the great uniter or even a concern for some.

"Justice for all" God what a great concept. Too bad it is just a slogan to so many people.

And I understand your concern that you don't get people to a table and start a conversation by insulting the person. You also don't start by turning a blind eye to injustices. Our people. Our citizens are more important than our symbols and totems. And by the way, the table is round.
Right. Justice for all is simply not understood by we moronic conservatives. Isn't that what you mean when you toss around snark like that? That people like me are dunderheaded racist fools with barely enough IQ to manage our own aspiration.

You're right. It's just a slogan to me. Or, maybe you'll claim that I'm one of the scant percentage of conservatives who--maybe--understands nuance, but the vast majority are dammed fools, clinging to their guns and religion.

Spare me your lectures. The problem with this and so many issues, is neither side will concede any ground. Here, you want me to start? Police brutality is a real thing. Police officers, at times, behave well beyond the pale. People have died and been seriously injured as a result. In communities where this takes place, people should ask for and demand better police training and behavior.

I get it. But don't try to brow beat me into submission by shitting on my country's traditions. You're a he-man crusader, right? Next time you show up for your kid's football game, and the anthem is played, leave your hat on, fold your arms and take a knee. Do it in as central an area as possible. It's for the cause, right? If you piss off a few conservative old people, to hell with 'em.

I attempted to enter this discussion and keep it civil. I get tired of being labeled with BS and continually accused of being thick headed.

Maybe try to reason without the snark and come to the understanding that if you're going to win a debate, you're going to have to attempt to find common ground.
This is actually a pretty good start, to be honest. We should start with paragraph three next time.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 7:36:29 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 7:35 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Respectful question - what if we didn't play the anthem before the game and just let the players come out an play like they do in little league baseball?
In theory, I have no problem with that. Many think the anthem is played too often at sporting events. I'm inclined to agree. I like to hear it for Olympic events or for any international game like World Cup, because it's relevant. For every Sunday games, maybe it's unnecessary. Having said that, I do think there's something to the concept of bringing the fans together in something of a solemn moment. A moment of silence is not really appropriate, so if not the anthem, what then?

While I could support that solution, I have to also say it's a bit of a cop out. Kind of side-stepping an issue that begs to be addressed.
mail
person
Robert Fox
9/27/2017 7:42 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
This is actually a pretty good start, to be honest. We should start with paragraph three next time.
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 7:43:13 PM by Robert Fox
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
9/27/2017 8:09 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
I trust that you genuinely support the cause, and that you were a genuine supporter of the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s.

But I can't even imagine how you rationalize your support for the GOP given that support. I would be genuinely interested in trying to understand it, because in terms of both policy and rhetoric conservatism today feels very regressive in regards to Civil Rights. How do you, for instance, consider yourself a strong supporter of the Civil Rights movent and support a party that's systematically and blatantly pushing to make it more difficult for black citizens to vote? Those two things feel very at odds with one another, and it's hard for me to accept that you support the cause of this movement when you vote against the movement's interests.
Only time for a brief response, so I'll just list a two quick answers that can be expanded upon later:

1. I don't see voter ID laws as unreasonable; I don't see them as akin to poll taxes, KKK voter intimidation, etc.; requiring some minimal effort to register to vote and ID yourself when voting seems more than reasonable to me. As much as some try to paint this as a racial issue, I personally don't see it that way. There are probably as many whites who have minimal interest in politics who refuse to or don't care enough about voting to register and come to the polls with a proper ID. I believe it is very important to have integrity in our voting system, and voter ID laws seem to me to help in this regard.

2. I'm extremely pro-life. I would never knowingly vote for a candidate who supports abortion-on-demand. Except in rare circumstances I consider all abortions to be murder. There are a few situations (gross fetal deformity, certain genetic disorders that doom a person to a life of total misery, etc.) where I feel abortion might be justifiable homicide. And, as you probably know, proportionately many more black babies are aborted than white babies. And, the founder of Planned Parenthood had that as a actual goal. How can you support Planned Parenthood and then say you are for black rights? To reduce it to a bumper sticker: "I'm Pro Life and I Vote."
Appreciate the reply. Sorry, I missed this in all the hubbub earlier.

We don't agree on issue one, but I respect the thought you've put into it. I think the case in North Carolina in particular, where GOP emails were released about the strategy, undermined a lot of the GOP talking points about voter IDs. In that case, it was about race. They stated in plainly. Maybe that's not the case nationally, but it becomes hard to give them the benefit of the doubt after that.

As for two, I can respect that a single issue drives you more than others. I suspect voters with your profile are quite common on the right, and while we don't see eye-to-eye on this, I do respect your commitment to principles you believe in.
mail
person
cc-cat
9/27/2017 8:36 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Spare me your lectures. The problem with this and so many issues, is neither side will concede any ground. Here, you want me to start? Police brutality is a real thing. Police officers, at times, behave well beyond the pale. People have died and been seriously injured as a result. In communities where this takes place, people should ask for and demand better police training and behavior.
Indeed an excellent start - completely agree. We also need independent investigations and prosecutors in all cases involving a police shooting or assault since local DAs are often politically motivated and must work hand in hand with the police - so they are put in difficult situations.

We also need to get the police back on the street - yes walking a beat. Separation leads to suspicion. The more people know their local officer, the better the relationship. We need better officers which means better pay. Like teachers, we pay the police an embarrassing salary and then ask them to do an impossible and comprehensive job - officer, marriage councelor, social worker. Let's take some of the money assigned to building up the ammo and use it to expand the force and raise the pay.

I never called or implied you as a racist - but this (the reason for protest) is a racial issue and therefore the protest and the discussions will always have racial overtones and implications (and the President knows this) - so we must all be careful in the dialogue. (As I stated earlier, I don't feel race is the great divider, party is).

I never said I would take a knee, only that I support ones right to - and absolutely support their reasoning. And when the guy in front of me at the Panther game last Sunday (against the Saints) who I have shared Sunday's with for over 10 years sat in prayer last Sunday, I put my hand on his shoulder. Not to make a statement and not to piss off anyone (conservatives or otherwise), but to show this person I understand and support him. I know you understand his pain, and I'm sure would show support in your own way. And perhaps surprising, there was not an uproar in our section (section 545 Row 15). Perhaps he being in prayer made a difference.

(personally I think that will he part of the resolution. someone can kneel in prayer during the anthem - to offer prayer for OUR country, our leaders and our people).


Yes, we must start with common ground. with discussion. At the least the current demonstrations have created dialogue - at times heated. And at the end, we must all leave party and elections and perhaps even dome traditions aside and look for progress. Fifty years ago LBJ and others did, I'm not sure our politicians of today will, but the people will. As always we are better than our politicians, better than parties, better than our fringe yellers

(per the fringe, we just passed the 1-year anniversary of the Charlotte "riots" really not much rioting. Those arrested were mostly from out of town - in for the festivities. Once they left, we had peaceful protests the next few nights and dialogue. Same was true in Charlottesville. Most of the tiki trash were from out of state -- well out of state in many cases. We as a society need to tune out the Rush/Hannity/Sharpton/Jackson/tiki leaders, etc. and stay true to our hearts and souls, not the barkers).
Last Edited: 9/27/2017 8:51:45 PM by cc-cat
Showing Messages: 201 - 225 of 709
  • Previous
  • Next
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)