trying to keep an open mind

[angrychair]

But taking a middle of the road position on this seems to leave NFL players and many others out in the cold.

“I love the National Anthem … and I love the First Amendment and I’ll just leave it that.”

Nancy Pelosi declines to take a position on the NFL anthem ruling, but says she wishes the players had been a bigger part of the decision cnn.it/2klNEmw #PelosiTownHall

Link to tweet

?s=21

[HopeAgain]

1. National Anthem is just a song

and the flag is just a piece of cloth. I live in a Country where people of color are arrested for nothing more than being black. Where they are shot for being black. Where they are beaten by police for being black.

We are separating immigrant children from their families and marking the immigrants with yellow bands. Respect has to be earned, and Americans have to live up to an ideal before I am going to act as if they do.

[vlyons]

27. Right on This

We Buddhists know that the anthem and the flag are both essentially empty of self existence. Actually all phenomena are completely devoid of self-existence. All these feelings and symbols that we impute onto the flag and the anthem exist only in our minds, if at all. Personally, if you want to stand or kneel, neither is a problem for me. If it weren't the flag that the deplorables were whining about, it would be something else. They are so deeply deluded with their own self-cherishing that they have no space to respect another's point of view.

[DFW]

2. Poor decision on Pelosi's part

I realize we have a 50 state strategy to worry about, but this one is a straight First Amendment question with no middle ground. You can't straddle the road with one foot on one side and one foot on the other side and claim to have a position.

[NCTraveler]

3. She shouldn't have a position on this.

She isn't Trump. She is more intelligent than that.

The attacks on Pelosi are pathetic.

Put your rig down.

[angrychair]

5. She shouldn't have a position?!?

She is the House minority leader and likely next Speaker of the House in a hand full of months. Her position on this matters a great deal. It is unequivocally a freedom of speech issue. Her position has significant weight in the Party and by taking no position at all leaves the vacuum to be filled with only the voices on the right and it supports them by saying nothing at all to the contrary.

[NCTraveler]

7. "It is unequivocally a freedom of speech issue."

You don't know what freedom of speech is. She does.

[angrychair]

9. Excuse me?

That was incredibly rude. I “don’t know what freedom of speech is”??? You don’t know me personally and I find your comment personally insulting and crass. You crossed a line and I respectfully request you consider removing your post.

[NCTraveler]

10. My post is completely accurate.

I don't see is as insulting or crass. It's simply obvious.

[angrychair]

12. Please proceed NCTraveler

To tell me how ignorant I am of freedom of speech.

[NCTraveler]

14. No problem.

You don't understand the basics of freedom of speech in American society.

Maybe you can highlight how it is an issue revolving around freedom of speech.

[angrychair]

15. How about you tell me how it is not

Since you are the expert...

[NCTraveler]

16. I did not make the claim.

It's yours to own. If you want to state how it is a freedom of speech issue you are more than welcome to. You won't because it is not. I would need to know how you feel it is in order to derail that line of improper thought. I simply don't know what you are thinking when you make that faulty claim.

[angrychair]

17. I would counter

That by implying “I do not know what freedom of speech is” you have premised at least some level of expertise in the subject otherwise it makes your claim baseless as a fact and solely an opinion. Because in order to make such a conjecture you would have to know the subject well enough to establish a considered position of judgment on who is and is not knowledgeable on freedom of speech.

With such an unequivocal statement you establish a position as a subject matter expert and therefore I would fully expect you to have the ability to explain how you came to a determination that I “do not know what freedom of speech is”.

[NCTraveler]

18. You have still made zero case for your false assertion.

You didn't when you made it and you still haven't.

Now you are following me around. Too cute.

[angrychair]

20. I didn't follow you

You decided to make an OP that was specifically related to the point we were discussing. Your intention was to draw me out of my OP since you failed to answer my question.

[NCTraveler]

22. "Your intention was to draw me out of my OP"

[NCTraveler]

19. I'll ask in a different way.

"It is unequivocally a freedom of speech issue. "

How so?

[angrychair]

24. Fine

Despite you failing to answer me on how you came by the assertion that I know nothing about freedom of speech I will answer your question anyway:

Yes, private and public sector employers have wide and significant ability to impact the freedom of speech (and expression) of their employee. Where the speech relates to political, social or other concern of the community that speech may be protected.
In Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 568, 88 S. Ct. 1731, 20 L. Ed. 2d 811 (1968) USSC,
Notably, if an employee’s speech cannot be fairly characterized as constituting speech on a matter of public concern, the public employer’s interest in managing its office outweighs any First Amendment rights of the employee. In other words, if an employee’s speech can be fairly described as relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community, it may be protected. Otherwise, it may not.

Trump, in his tweets and public comments has created a formal and hostile position to players taking a knee during the anthem.
As a direct result of that political pressure by a government official, the POTUS no less, team owners instituted a rule that creates a penalty for those that take a knee during the anthem in an attempt to dissuade or otherwise control that political expression.

Taking a knee during the national anthem is a political expression and is likely a protected form of free speech.

In pelosi’s own comments she conflates the knee taking during the anthem with freedom of speech

I love the National Anthem … and I love the First Amendment”

it’s implied she equated the taking of a knee to free speech.

Enough?

[NCTraveler]

25. You confirmed my initial assessment was correct.

"Enough?"

I expected nothing less.

[angrychair]

26. You continue to completely fail

To support your assertion.

I’ll ask again, differently:

How do you come by the determination that I know nothing about freedom of speech?

[NCTraveler]

29. The fail is in post 24.

I see no need to argue against it. No legitimate case was made to back up your faulty assertion.

[angrychair]

30. My point proven

You have made slanderous and baseless assertions and attacked me personally and failed at every opportunity to provide any evidence to support your position outside of snark and arrogance.

Just leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone.

[jalan48]

4. Well, that was inspiring.

[RandiFan1290]

6. It's time to come together

and get along

[angrychair]

8. What does that mean?

I’m supposed to start hugging trumpians and other republicans? NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

[Tipperary]

11. I think that poster was being sarcastic.

You may have missed it. And I might be wrong. But that is how I took it.

[angrychair]

13. That is what I was thinking

But wasn’t sure...I see you point though.

[Orsino]

21. Black Lives Matter...

...but it appears that November matters more.

[dalton99a]

23. "I love the National Anthem but I don't know the words"

"I love the First Amendment but I want to lock up the journalists I don't like"

[LenaBaby61]

28. tReasonous fatso's in essence telling those n-words to leave HIS country ...

If they don't stand for the flag/national anthem in their country too--a country where there's supposed to be freedom of speech and she has NO opinion?