How I truly feel about taking a knee


#41

The National Football League is now plunged into politics as players throughout the sport kneel for the national anthem and President Donald Trump continues to rebuke them publicly.

Undoubtedly, the situation has left many fans and non-fans of the league conflicted or angry.

This fiasco may, however, open the eyes of the public to a serious and generally unchecked issue: billionaire NFL owners sponging enormous amounts of money from taxpayers through crony capitalist schemes.

The fact is that a business that raked in $14 billion in revenue in 2016 is heavily subsidized by local, state, and federal money based on dubious claims about stimulating the economy.

The problem is rampant.

One report on Watchdog.org said that over the past two decades, the NFL has raked in about $7 billion of taxpayer money to spend on stadium renovation and building.

Another study from the Brookings Institution showed that federal taxpayers have subsidized the construction of 36 stadiums at a cost of over $3.2 billion since 2000.

Michael Sargent, an infrastructure expert at The Heritage Foundation, wrote about how sports teams use specially crafted tax breaks to get the public to finance their massive projects.

“Tax-exempt municipal bonds are typically reserved for public-use projects such as bridges, water systems, and other infrastructure,” Sargent wrote for The Daily Signal. “Yet because of a loophole in the tax code, private-use stadiums can take advantage of this tax break, and have done so prolifically.”

In fact, only a handful of NFL and other major league teams use privately-financed venues to host their games.

It would seem after sinking enormous investments into sports franchises, cities would reap serious financial benefits in return.

But this isn’t the case at all.

Research from George Mason University has shown that not only do communities gain almost no economic benefits from subsidized sports teams, but some findings “indicate harmful effects of sports on per capita income, wage and salary disbursements, and wages per job.”

Recently released polls show national anthem protests are deeply unpopular with the American people, but polls also show that the taxpayer funding of sports is also widely disliked.

When likely voters in Nevada were asked if they favored or opposed using $500 million in taxpayer dollars to fund a stadium for the Oakland Raiders to move to Las Vegas, they overwhelmingly said “no.”

According to the KTNV-TV 13 Action News/Rasmussen Reports poll, 60 percent of Nevada voters opposed the funding, and only 28 percent supported it.

Given the massive discontent over national anthem kneeling and rampant politicization of the once unifying sport of football, perhaps now Americans will turn a more skeptical eye toward how their sports teams rely on public money and actually do something about it.

There are some in Congress who have taken notice.

“In America, if you want to play sports, you’re free to do so. If you want to protest, you’re free to do so,” Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said in a Tuesday speech, according to The Washington Post. “But you should do so on your own time and on your own dime.”

Recent bipartisan legislation on Capitol Hill aimed to strip federal funding from sports teams. A bill sponsored by Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., would prevent teams from using municipal bonds that are exempt from federal taxes.

Rep. Steve Russell, R-Okla., introduced a similar bill in the House.

Lankford said in a statement in June:

The federal government is responsible for a lot of important functions, but financing sports stadiums for multimillion—sometimes billion—dollar franchises is definitely not one of them. Using billions of federal taxpayer dollars for the subsidization of private stadiums when we have real infrastructure needs in our country is not a good way to prioritize a limited amount of funds.
This movement has picked up steam in recent weeks, according to Kerry Picket of The Daily Caller.

On Tuesday, Gaetz became the lead sponsor of legislation that would end the tax-exempt status of professional sports leagues.

NFL and other sports teams have a deep financial interest in getting taxpayers to pay their bills, so it will take a widespread concerted effort on the part of the public to end this gravy train.

Since NFL billionaire owners have gone out of their way to accommodate millionaire players in standing down for the national anthem, perhaps taxpaying Americans should start withholding money from the privileged and let them all stand on their own two feet.

Now may be the perfect time to finally do it.

This article has been updated to include legislation sponsored by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.


#42

Taxpayers subsidize stadiums for mega rich owners and we get squat. POS football teams play 8 games a year in those stadiums. Mostly, they go unused the rest of year, but the stadiums are controlled by these bastards. Let the owners build their own stadiums for their new league of brain damaged kneelers.


#43

We started with a baseball team. To get the team required a tax payer stadium.

When the binds were paid off the football team, Denver donkos demanded a new stadium or the would move. To make the point they changed the name from the denver broncos to the broncos with new uniforms. Yes the tax payers bellied up to the bar for that one.

The Donkos get all the revenue from the stadium including when it’s used for other venues. The get the revenue from parking, concessions, programs, etc.
The city gets a 3 buck seat tax.
The burbs where most of the revenue is generated get squat.

Taxpayers cannot afford the tickets so they get to watch it on TV when it’s not black out or on cable and pay for it again.

p.s. The day the contract was signed for the new stadium, Pat Bolans net worth doubled.


#44

There’s another football league on the American landscape, and they just issued a scathing rebuke of the NFL’s national anthem protests.

Seriously, the Legends Football League, formerly known as the Lingerie Football League, is the voice of reason in the sports world these days.

The league, comprised of women playing football in lingerie, has echoed sentiments of President Donald Trump, declaring they will stand for the national anthem because “our nation’s flag and anthem are far too sacred.”

The women, unlike their male counterparts, will NOT take a knee.

“The LFL recognizes everyone’s First Amendment right to protest, but our nation’s flag and anthem are far too sacred,” the league said in a statement earlier this week. “Too many fellow Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice, so that our flag and anthem continue in all its majesty.”

“It symbolizes all the blood, sweat, and tears that have been shed so that we as Americans can raise our flag across our nation,” an announcer says during the video. “The LFL salutes all those who make this the greatest country in the world.”

“We stand in salute of our flag.”

Racist women.

Smart, tough, pro-American football players. Something becoming more and more scarce in the NFL these days.

Come to think of it, since Colin Kaepernick is desperate to get back into playing football, it looks like there are some openings in the LFL for those seeking to try out.

It should be noted however, that two LFL players last season did in fact kneel during the national anthem.

Before a game against the Omaha Heart, Los Angeles Temptation players Sherri Awagah and Danielle Harvey decided to kneel as they protested the Star Spangled Banner.

Oh well, maybe the XFL can make a comeback. There’s no way Vince McMahon would allow players to kneel unless they’re placed in a headlock.


#45

Taxpayers subsidize the MIC/Defense Contractor Industry and nations all around the world to boot. Everybody’s pissed about how their tax dollars are spent one way or another.


#46

I fear the first is to defend us from exogenous threats from other nations, the second, endogenous threats of realization.


#47

I won’t disagree with that.


#48

I would also say that with a government obsessed on GDP… the MIC is a lost leader to sustain the market… You can’t have continually expanding ‘free’ without continually expanding ability to pay for free… socialism is a killer of ‘free’ as much as it is its promise.


#49

I said I would wait to see if anyone talked about this but unfortunately none of the contributors thus far have had the desire.
I am glad you brought it up because it is probably the most graphic at showing the progressive ‘do gooder’ idea verses the rather disappointing outcome.

As you point out… Blacks tend to excel at and dominate in the sports fields of football and basketball and track and field… They are good at it and have shown quite clearly that they are buy displacing every white player who use to fill its ranks.

If one really believes in equality and thinks that diversity is a necessary quality of our society then any field that is not ‘skin deep’ racially diverse then this inequality within these fields of employment should be addressed by government intervention. Lets consider for a minute the affects that an affirmative action plan might have on the fields and indeed on the individuals who participate.

If we were to put players in the system based on their race rather than their innate ability we would quite graphically see two things… one, the performance of any team sport would immediately suffer the deficiency of a player unable to contribute at top level and in sports such as track and field, these players gifted positions via affirmative action would immediately and visibly be singled out as failures for being consistently last place. Of course beyond the long term psychological damage done to these recipients… in sports like football, they could and probably would suffer a catastrophic injury that would harm them both physically and mentally far into the future…

These affects of affirmative action may not be as noticeable as they would be in this example but placing an slightly above average person in an MIT seat could ruin their entire career. People placed into postilion that they did not earn not only hurts the productivity and effectiveness of the business they are placed in but damages the self esteem and future prospects when they fail to live up to the expectations of the position.

Much is made about US productivity and competitiveness… skin deep diversity is not a net positive for anyone… not even the people selected to participate.


#50

There is a ideology that is hostile toward everything that is centered around humanitarian things like providinlllllopfood, clothing, housing, education and healthcare to poor people that just bends some people’s minds when watching the same disciples of raise there can[quote=“docgreen2010, post:46, topic:5084, full:true”]

I fear the first is to defend us from exogenous threats from other nations, the second, endogenous threats of realization.
[/quote]


#51

Yes… there are people who just hate… there are also people like myself who have attempted for 20 years to engage the Great Society left about the many things they get and got wrong about programs that cause harm. It is all well and good to blanket brush people who believe that taking care of the actual poor, the actual disabled could and should be handled another way. At the end of the day, their is an ideology that is hostile towards independence and self reliance because dependency and control is the end goal… humanitarian care is just the excuse.


#52

This solidifies my belief that these guys were given grades in school at the behest of the athletics coach rather than absorbing any knowledge about how the world actually works. Of course it doesn’t help when they are egged on by a progressive ideology that thinks itself much more pervasive than it actually is…


#53

Some learn faster than others… this is much bigger of an issue that being a football fan. Of course the left’s narcissism has always out sized their actual popularity… and I’m thinking that they have been given rope to hang themselves… and they used it.


#54

Attempted for 20 years to engage the Great Society left about the many things they get and got wrong about programs that cause harm.

Isn’t this the results of governing from 80K feet (Washington) vs the local or state level?

How can you effectively address issues that impact California, making policy that isn’t an issue in Iowa?

At the state level, how do you address effectively issues in LA and SF when the issue doesn’t exist in Winton?

Are people poor, in need in the same way in Detroit as in Grand Rapids?

Is the cost of living in LA and NYC the same as in Pueblo?

And this is the ideology that harms the nation the most the one size fits all attitude of Washington as so well displayed in the ACA.


#55

Now tell me again who is supporting who?.. A letter like this doesn’t come out with some central committee thumbs up…


#56

This one is cute… I think that someone ought to tell these guess that if their roll models keep it up, they might just need to study for a grade because if the NFL goes down… scouts are going to find another job… right on

Kaeperneick’s tweet

A system that perpetually condones the killing of people, without consequence, doesn’t need to be revised, it needs to be dismantled!

Problem is, most cop related killings aren’t quite as cut and dried… I remember a New Jersey cop drew on me when he pulled me over and I hopped out of my car and reached for my license… this was 20 years ago… After everything calmed down I told him that it was normal in Texas… and he said… This ain’t Texas… We need cops… cops families need cops… cops want to go home to their families… don’t do stupid shit when you have to deal with a cop… I’m not saying that cops don’t need better training and perhaps even better selection… but cops need the benefit of the doubt.


#57

Every one has a right and I would say duty to protest a real or perceived wrong and that is not in question in my mind .
The issue to me is why during the national anthem ?
This has been going on for more then a year and the message has been muddled in my opinion the results are that nothing meaningful has changed with the exception of a player out of work .
Polling seems shows the nation at large split 44% for the demonstration and 48% against it .
Although judging by the response of the fans Booing and burning it seem to swing against the players and the N.F.L .
If the Bears Packers game is any indication it looks like the the owners the players and the NFL may have got the message that the fan base the people that pay their wages are unhappy .
Today will tell if this was just two Midwest teams doing the right thing thing or will the rest of the league will continue sit out the national anthem ? .


#58

As as he was a marginal player, that’s to be expected.

Th reality is the poll means nothing. The reality is can the NFL afford to lose half it’s viewership.


#59

I don’t think the networks would be happy with that losing half their viewership will cost them a lot of money .


#60

Animals on the loose …
imagehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/DK3x-eBVYAE7u2o.jpg:small