Tag Archives: politics

NFL Management Hypocrisy

Posted on by
Reply

This is from the NFL’s 2017 Rulebook; Section 4 Equipment, Uniforms, Player Appearance; Article 8 Personal Messages:

Throughout the period on game-day that a player is visible to the stadium and television audience (including in pregame warm-ups, in the bench area, and during postgame interviews in the locker room or on the field)….

The League will not grant permission for any club or player to wear, display, or otherwise convey messages, through helmet decals, arm bands, jersey patches, or other items affixed to game uniforms or equipment, which relate to political activities or causes, other non-football events, causes or campaigns, or charitable causes or campaigns.

This is the spirit, if not the letter, of the NFL’s pretended attitude toward on-field player political statements like attacking our flag and national anthem.

Plainly, NFL management has no standards it considers important enough to enforce.

A Packer Shows an Alternative

Posted on by
Reply

At the start of Thursday night’s NFL game, the Bears and Packers players stood for the national anthem with linked arms.  I’m frankly a squish about civilians and hands on hearts during the national anthem; that’s a practice that’s become so ubiquitous, long before the NFL’s current assault on our flag and our national anthem, that the failure to put one’s hand on one’s heart during the anthem has become—almost—OK.  The players all stood, no one kneeled, and that’s good progress.

However, this image presents Randall Cobb, Wide Receiver, standing on Aaron Rodgers’ (No 12) right, showing the way: linked arms and still with his hand on his heart.

The beauty of Cobb’s move is emphasized by the player on his right: linked arms with a Black Power clenched fist—a deprecation of our flag and anthem that only enhances Cobb’s gesture.

Some Early Thoughts on the Tax Reform Proposal

Posted on by
Reply

…triggered by Laura Saunders’ piece in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal.

Beginning with the headline and thesis of her piece: Winners and Losers Under the Trump Tax Plan. Because Government should be about picking winners and losers instead of just protecting a level free market for all.  Sure.

Now a couple of specifics.

People with large medical or disaster deductions. Each of these write-offs on Schedule A has significant hurdles and is only available to taxpayers with large unreimbursed expenses

This one isn’t particularly relevant to tax reform. It just means that four Republican Senators who prefer preserving Obamacare intact over even a first step toward repealing/replacing it need themselves to be replaced with Republican Senators who are serious about getting rid of Obamacare and its destructiveness.

Losing the State tax deduction? That only impacts a couple of States with enormous spending habits; those citizens need to correct their State government errors.  The citizens of the other States don’t need to be dragooned into indemnifying the foolishness of those couple of States.

The mortgage deduction loses value under tax reform? Yeah, and? Punish those who don’t itemize by taxing them more (vis., not raising the standard deduction) so others can have a deduction? Beyond the cynicism of this special interest nonsense, our tax code shouldn’t be in the business of social engineering in the first place.

This proposal is a good first step in tax reform.

Now we just need to disabuse politicians that every bill is the last word on a subject rather than an interim as we move toward our goal: a flat tax in the neighborhood of 10% on all income, regardless of source, and the elimination of all deductions, credits, and other froo-froo.

Taking a Knee vs Taking a Knee

Posted on by
Reply

The NFL and its players think taking a knee when our flag is displayed and our national anthem is played is appropriate.

Congressman Brian Mast (R, FL) had this on his Facebook page:

The NFL doles out penalties for celebrating a touchdown, but won’t require respect for our flag?

I have taken a knee after jumping out of a helicopter as we looked for the enemy, taken a knee in front of the Soldiers Cross as we mourned a fallen brother and taken a knee in church.

Here’s the image that accompanies his post:

Oh, yeah—I neglected to mention that Congressman Mast lost both legs to an IED while serving as a bomb disposal expert in Afghanistan.  And he’s still standing.

Crap.  If these “players”—to bang my drum—don’t liked some of the things our nation does, they should protest those things, they should argue against our nation’s doing them, they should go out and work actual solutions instead of attacking the symbols of the nation—and through that, the nation itself—that protects their right to do despicable things.

Instead of being a pack of porch dogs, they should get into the game.

 

H/t to FoxNews insider

On Catalonia’s Drive for Independence

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal argued against it Wednesday.  I disagree ( a surprise, I know).

Nor is such a referendum permitted by international law….

This is a domestic Spanish affair; dragging international law into the matter is just cynical.

…they [Catalonians] fail to acknowledge the price all Spain pays for the national defense and diplomacy that keep Catalonia secure.

This is a cost that Spain no longer would have to bear if Catalonia succeeds in secession. As the Spanish, Catalonians, and Tunku Varadarajan, who wrote the piece at the link, well know.

The separatists also do not mention that they would have to assume around 20% of Spain’s national debt were they ever to secede, and surmount a Spanish veto to be readmitted to the EU.

The one isn’t demonstrated; it’s only a claim by Spain. The other assumes they would want to join the EU; this is not a foregone conclusion, either.

Those who oppose Catalan independence are not going to show up to vote on Sunday.

That would be their choice in a democracy.

The only real argument against the referendum is its illegality under the Spanish constitution and a top Spanish court’s ruling. But, then, so was our own gunpoint revolution against the Crown illegal at the time.