Nike takes sides, tapping Colin Kaepernick for new 'Just Do It' ad

  • Thread starter Thread starter HCTC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So he has shown through his actions that he wants The Star-Spangled Banner replaced as the national anthem? I’m pretty familiar with his actions and am not seeing it, you’re going to have to walk me through this one.
 
John24 said:
The next line just claims he didn’t think it through (think what through?). Neither line supports your claim that he is protesting the anthem.
Click to expand...
Are you having difficulty retracing your steps? Better get that checked out 👍
40.png
Nike takes sides, tapping Colin Kaepernick for new 'Just Do It' ad World News
YES HE IS, He’s doing a silent protest at/during the National Anthem. The National Anthem has zero, zilch, nada to do with local Police training and oversight. He would need to go to a city council meeting, if he really wanted to protest the Police.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Sure, I could urinate on your dog as a means to protest abortion. We’d probably end up talking about wetting on dogs more than abortion, but I could do it.

The goal may be noteworthy, but the means didn’t seem to be the wisest way to go about it, especially since the focus for the last 1.5 years has been on the flag protest and anthem, not on his cause.

In addition, he preached healing early on, and talked a good battle, trying to pretend cops aren’t the enemy, and neither are inner city youth.

Later that morning, he put on his “cops are pig” socks. He’s a fraud and a puppet for his wildly anti-white (from all accounts) girlfriend.

Enjoy your shoes.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Meinheimer said:
The goal may be noteworthy, but the means didn’t seem to be the wisest way to go about it, especially since the focus for the last 1.5 years has been on the flag protest and anthem, not on his cause.
Click to expand...
That’s only the focus of people desperate to discredit him. Oppressors reframing a protest is the oldest trick in the book.
 
qui_est_ce said:
40.png
John24:
40.png
Theo520:
Why ask me?
Click to expand...
You claimed he was protesting the anthem. I assumed you had some basis for that claim.
Click to expand...
His actions. Which BTW do nothing to stop violence. That’s called virtue signalling.
Click to expand...
“Virtue signalling” was originally a neutral term meaning a conspicuous expression of moral values. Recently it has been used as a pejorative meaning an empty or superficial support of certain political views. You assume, but do not prove, that CK’s protest is either empty or superficial. That is hard to prove, considering that he sacrificed to make that expression. I think the origin (neutral) definition of “virtue signaling” applies to CK. This would be more like Brett Kavanaugh signalling that he stands for the rule of law and upholding the constitution. It is signaling support for certain virtues, and there is nothing wrong with that.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Sure, I could urinate on your dog as a means to protest abortion. We’d probably end up talking about wetting on dogs more than abortion, but I could do it.

The goal may be noteworthy, but the means didn’t seem to be the wisest way to go about it, especially since the focus for the last 1.5 years has been on the flag protest and anthem, not on his cause.
Click to expand...
CK did nothing illegal or immoral in his protest. (I think it would be illegal if you urinated on my dog.) Also, the fact that the talk has been all about the flag and disrespecting troops, etc., has not been by CK’s choice. In fact that was a deliberate tactic by those who oppose his protest. One cannot blame CK for what his enemies make into talking points.
 
exnihilo said:
How about this. Jesus said the poor you will always have with you. I see many religious people say they want to end poverty. I’ll stick with Jesus on this.
Click to expand...
I think you have seriously misunderstood the Gospel.

I’m not sure if this is the result of your own choices, or of poor education.

But either way, you are way off base.
 
Theo520 said:
40.png
John24:
That’s only the focus of people desperate to discredit him. Oppressors reframing a protest is the oldest trick in the book.
Click to expand...
Or he’s just an obvious fraud
Click to expand...
Advocating for the poor when one is rich is just a recognition that the rich have more power and influence and are more effective in advocating for the poor than some poor person. Being rich does not make him a fraud. Besides, he was not actually advocating against poverty. He was advocating against mistreatment of minorities. Being rich does not invalidate his protest.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Also, the fact that the talk has been all about the flag and disrespecting troops, etc., has not been by CK’s choice.
Click to expand...
No, it was his choice
Instead of protesting when and how he did, he could have chosen a different approach that was actualy relevent to his intent.

He could have protested at a SF City council meeting if he was unhappy with Police brutality.

As I said before, he put a booger in his sister’s hamburger because he was mad at his brother, he was completely illogical in his protest.
 
Predictable nonsense. It is everyone who opposes the kneeling’s fault for not “getting it.”

The protestors have continued to double-down on their protest DESPITE the focus not being on their cause.

You cannot blame others for not responding to YOUR protest the way YOU want them to.

I don’t claim he doesn’t have the right to do as he is doing, but that he should be smart enough and care enough to realize it isn’t working as he intended. If Colin actually cared, as some protestors, they’d say fair or not, what I am doing isn’t have the intended affect. I need to pivot my means of delivery, because my message is getting lost. I also need to grow up, dump my crazy anti-white dude girlfriend who cost me my only job since leaving the Niners, and stop wearing childish clothing mocking police.

He doesn’t do any of that. I can only assume when one is willing to sacrifice their cause at the expense of their form of protest, that person cares more about the form of protest than the cause. He’s a fraud, and a pathetic role model for promoting harmony among cops and african-americans.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Advocating for the poor when one is rich is just a recognition that the rich have more power and influence and are more effective in advocating for the poor than some poor person.
Click to expand...
If you’re poor and object to inequality you’re a parasite who just wants free stuff. If you’re rich and object to inequality you’re a hypocrite.

If some Goldilocks just-right level of wealth for objecting to inequality exists it has yet to be discovered by science.
 
He is not protesting the anthem. He is protesting police brutality against blacks. He has been very clear about that. Conservatives refuse to accept that. If you want to argue against him protesting police brutality feel free to do so but you can’t just make his protest about something it’s not about.
 
John24 said:
If you’re rich and object to inequality you’re a hypocrite.
Click to expand...
I know. If you’re rich and you’re Donald Trump, that proves you’re a genius. If you’re rich and you’re a liberal, that proves you’re a hypocrite and anything you say can be discounted.

I can’t figure that one out.
 
Theo520 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Also, the fact that the talk has been all about the flag and disrespecting troops, etc., has not been by CK’s choice.
Click to expand...
No, it was his choice
Instead of protesting when and how he did, he could have chosen a different approach that was actualy relevent to his intent.
Click to expand...
He could have protested at a SF City Council meeting and raised awareness with 30 or 40 people in attendance, and maybe got a mention in a local paper that most people would not see. Or, he could do it how he did and make millions of people aware of the issue. I think he made the right choice. The fact that his enemies characterize it as disrespecting the troops in on them.
Dr_Meinheimer said:
Predictable nonsense. It is everyone who opposes the kneeling’s fault for not “getting it.”
Click to expand...
Oh, they “get it” all right. But those opposed to kneeling in protest will say it is about disrespecting the troops, etc., probably because they simply disagree that police brutality is a problem.
The protestors have continued to double-down on their protest DESPITE the focus not being on their cause.
Click to expand...
The focus, as defined by his enemies, is not CK’s focus.
You cannot blame others for not responding to YOUR protest the way YOU want them to.
Click to expand...
If it is done knowingly, yes. Yes I can.
I don’t claim he doesn’t have the right to do as he is doing, but that he should be smart enough and care enough to realize it isn’t working as he intended.
Click to expand...
I think it has worked out remarkably well. The first year CK protested, there were only three NFL players doing it. The next year it was over 200. That is “working out” just by raising awareness. I think any improvements we might have had in the past two years on police behavior (and there are some) can be partially credited to CK’s protest.
 
To many people, I would be considered “rich”, except to a person who really is rich. Never would I say that anyone at all could become rich. However, I just got finished reviewing the land titles of a couple in their seventies. Husband worked for the gas company as a quite ordinary worker. She worked as a clerk in a hospital. In the conversation, I learned that their net worth is over a million dollars. There was no luck involved in that. They just didn’t spend all their income for many years and invested it.

But I will say that anyone in this society who does not have some addiction, mental disorder or serious physical disorder, can earn a respectable 'cornbread living"; own a modest house, two cars, perhaps a bass boat, vacation to Vegas or Hot Springs, and can have a modest IRA. But having children out of wedlock, messing with drugs, not taking work seriously, will prevent it.
 
John24 said:
If you’re rich and object to inequality you’re a hypocrite.
Click to expand...
It’s more like if you’re rich and object, but don’t donate.

Searched and CK doesn’t seem to have donated much until this stunt of his in 2016, but has been commendable since then.
 
Ridgerunner said:
To many people, I would be considered “rich”, except to a person who really is rich. Never would I say that anyone at all could become rich. However, I just got finished reviewing the land titles of a couple in their seventies. Husband worked for the gas company as a quite ordinary worker. She worked as a clerk in a hospital. In the conversation, I learned that their net worth is over a million dollars. There was no luck involved in that. They just didn’t spend all their income for many years and invested it.

But I will say that anyone in this society who does not have some addiction, mental disorder or serious physical disorder, can earn a respectable 'cornbread living"; own a modest house, two cars, perhaps a bass boat, vacation to Vegas or Hot Springs, and can have a modest IRA. But having children out of wedlock, messing with drugs, not taking work seriously, will prevent it.
Click to expand...
You would be wrong.
 
Kmcicco2000 said:
He is not protesting the anthem. He is protesting police brutality against blacks. He has been very clear about that. Conservatives refuse to accept that. If you want to argue against him protesting police brutality feel free to do so but you can’t just make his protest about something it’s not about.
Click to expand...
He’s protesting people he doesn’t like. And that’s a lot of people.

I happened to see Shelby Steele on tv not too long ago. He’s black, but decries “white guilt”. He doesn’t deny that there is racism, but he considers “white guilt” a tactic that the left uses to silence opposition by shaming their opponents for something the opponent never actually did. Kapernink is “white guilting” a whole nation by doing it the way he’s doing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top