The NFL vs. The White House

Opinion Piece

~Wisdom’s Opinion

I’ve been following the twitter exchange between Donald Trump and the NFL regarding those players who want to take a knee during the playing of the National Anthem. Although I don’t really follow football, it seems to me that the criticism the President’s tweets have stirred up has put the NFL in a difficult position. How do they support their team and also keep the fans and the President happy? I’ve read there was an NFL meeting last Wednesday to discuss how to handle this issue. I also just read an article about Eric Reid’s appearance on The View at which time he explained the reason behind the protest.

It is understandable that some people would be disappointed that members of the team they support appear to disrespect the anthem, American flag and those who have fought to protect that flag. I’m sure it’s also confusing to support a player and have him condemned by the president because the player chooses to take a knee. But here is the issue that concerns me the most: As American’s we are yet again being distracted from the real issue. Before the tweets started, I knew nothing about some players protesting; I suspect many of you didn’t either. Now the issue is in glaring headlines. The problem for me is that the headlines are about the wrong issue.

The issue we should be talking about, the issue the players want us to understand, is that they are protesting the way people of color are treated by police. That issue has been trampled over by whether or not NFL players should kneel during the anthem. As Eric Reid explained on The View: “When we first started this process, we decided to kneel as a sign of respect. It’s very confusing for me that it’s been misconstrued as disrespectful. This is a way for me to bring awareness around these issues (police treatment of people of color) in our country.”

Reid went on to say that this is a peaceful protest that is granted to every American by the Constitution. And I support that fact. I also support Reid’s suggestion that he would like to see a legislation change so police are not allowed to use lethal force when a citizen is unarmed. I’m sure that Reid, like you and I, understands the complications of this issue: How do police know whether or not a person is armed? It’s a fair question and would be a good point to start meaningful discussions.

I would add the following suggestion to Reid’s: The police force needs to spend more time understanding the stress level of their police force, especially those in the field. If a policeman shows signs of job fatigue there should be an acceptable way to help them; perhaps, they should be rotated behind a desk for a while or provided with mental health assistance. Do you remember when the Australian woman walked outside to talk with the two police officers who responded to her call for assistance? Something triggered the driver and he shot her from the car, across his partner. At the time, I was surprised that the responders were two rookies, one was on the force for two years and the other for only one year. Why weren’t they with veteran officers until they had more experience? There should be no shame for policepersons to get help if they suspect that they are having problems on the job. I had to do this once in a job and it helped immensely. It’s good for the employee and for the employer, especially the police force being able to avoid costly lawsuits.

So, let’s honor these players and not focus on the tweets from the president or on Vice President Pence who made a public statement by leaving a game when the players kneeled, and ask them to please focus on the heart of this matter: Change the manner in which people of color are treated by the police. And let’s be careful to not allow ourselves to be distracted from an important issue by an uproar over a side issue. Do the research and make up your own mind, even if it doesn’t align with our administration.

~ Youngster’s Opinion

I have a lot of the same opinions as Wisdom, but I too wanted to add to this piece.

I am saddened that the entire nation is talking about whether NFL players should stand or kneel for the National Anthem and ignoring the main issue. I’ve heard people say “that isn’t the time or place for them to protest,” so I ask you…when is the time and where is the place then?

People have tried protesting in cities, at courthouses and government buildings to be heard. They have pled to the media and their Representatives and Senators – all to no avail. It took Colin Kaepernick sitting on the sideline during the National Anthem for people to really start paying attention. But instead of asking “why is he doing that?” they just jumped to “he shouldn’t be doing that!” So again I ask you, what should they do to be heard when the conventional ways aren’t working?

The case that I am most familiar with is the Philando Castile case. When I saw the video of the shooting, I was heart-broken and appalled. (If you want to watch the video to make up your own mind, here is a link, but I warn you, the content is GRAPHIC: http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/06/22/philando-castile-facebook-and-dashcam-full-mashup-video-ctn.cnn ) Philando was clearly telling the officer that he had a gun and was licensed to carry it. The officer told him not to touch it and Philando tried to tell the officer that he wasn’t, he was reaching for his ID when the officer opened fire into the car shooting Philando 7 times while his girlfriend and her small daughter watched in horror.

After I saw the video I thought there was no way this officer could be acquitted. The evidence was so clear that this officer did something wrong and a man lost his life over it. And yet he was acquitted! No wonder the entire community was outraged! I was too! And this is, unfortunately, just one of many similar heartbreaking stories.

And so, Colin Kaepernick sat on the sideline during the National Anthem to bring awareness to these issues because the fact is, innocent Americans are dying at the hands of our own police. We should be focused on protecting the lives and well-being of our citizens first and foremost, which is the core of all of this!

 

 

Do you agree with what happened to Cam Newton?

Opinion Piece

If you have been following the news, you know that social media is all atwitter because of a misstatement by NFL player Cam Newton. To recap the situation, Newton was being interviewed by a female reporter when she asked him about another player calculating his routes. Newton began to smile and said with a laugh that it was funny hearing a female talk about routes. Right after that comment he became very serious and talked about the progress of the player in question.

I watched the tape a couple of times and from the look on Newton’s face I felt was joking, even being a little flirtatious. In Newton’s defense, as a knitter I can envision myself making a similar statement if a man began talking to me about how to knit or pearl.  I can hear myself saying something like: It sounds strange to hear a man talking about knitting, I’m not used to that. So, I’m glad I’ve never made such a statement in a public forum because it could be spread all over the social media platform.

Do I think Newton’s statement was politically correct; no, I do not. Would I have been offended were I the reporter; I probably would have. But do I think this issue should have caused such a storm on social media? No, I don’t. This situation should have been resolved between the people involved and not garnered comments from those on social media. Newton later made what seemed like a heartfelt apology to the public.

I grew to an adult during the feminist revolution so I, like most women, had to learn to counter such ignorant statement. A few that I remember include being told that one man would not rent an apartment to me because I was a single parent. Then there was the dentist who offered me a job but mentioned that he thought it was a shame I had children. I realized that no matter why I had to be late or miss work he would always blame it on my children, so I told him there was no shame regarding my children and I wouldn’t come to work for him.  When living in the south I was interviewing with the owner of a small company. He explained the position and when I asked what advancement was available, he sharply told me there was none because women shouldn’t be in the workplace but remain in the home. Before thanking him and preparing to leave, I asked him why his wife was working for him? Could I have made a bigger statement to each of these men, probably, but the possible consequence to me and my family was always foremost in my mind.

Today the immediate consequence to any public issue is through the speed something spreads through social media. A misstatement such as Newton’s can become so big that it has negative consequences to not only those involved, but to others. In his apology, Newton stated that he had learned a valuable lesson and that he wanted others to not be like him but to be better than him. I think it took courage to admit such a failing.

Eventually Newton’s statement will fall out of public awareness, as all things do. But it will always be available on social media and therefore can be brought out in the future pointing to yet another gaffe by Newton. The bigger consequence, I fear, may reflect on female reporters. I’m sure that the woman reporter feels justified that so many people are criticizing Newton for his insensitive remark, and so she should. But should we also consider the effect this uproar will have on Newton and other players? Will they become so concerned about making an offending statement that they will hesitate to be interviewed by women or hesitate to be open with them? My question is this: If you were in Newton’s place, how would you react to female reporters in the future?

~Written by Wisdom

A New Way to Look at Taxes

I work in corporate America in the retail sector. I am the mother of two small school-aged children. I also live in Southern California not that far away from the Mexico border. When Trump was elected and was talking about building a wall between Mexico and the US and that the wall would cost $1.8 billion, it actually made me angry for several reasons.

1. There is already a wall or fence along the border, so why do we need a new one? Can’t we just fix the one we already have and put that $1.8 billion to better use?
2. Why do we continue not to focus on our public school systems? Our children are our future and keeping them educated is vital to our continued success as a nation.
3. What about universal or affordable healthcare for all US citizens? Seeking medical treatment for an injury, accident, illness or disease should not make anyone go bankrupt.
4. And then came Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma. Our fellow Americans are going to need a lot of help and support to rebuild their cities and communities after the destruction from these storms.

So all of this got me thinking…

As I mentioned in the beginning, I work in corporate America, and the way that a consumer can essentially “cast their vote” on something is with their purchase. It’s called “buying power.” For example, every time you walk into a store, each product or brand you purchase is essentially casting a vote. You are telling the company that you like what they are selling and to keep making more. When people stop buying from a brand or stop buying a particular product; that is usually when you see them either go out of business or stop producing that particular product. You, the consumer, has that power!

So why don’t we have that type of power over our taxes?

That is still OUR money. We worked for it and earned it. So why don’t we have a say in how it is spent?

Now I know many of you might say, well by casting a vote for a President, you are saying how you want your taxes to be spent. But in reality, we are only voting for what they “say” they will spend the taxes on. Because as we have seen with many presidents, that usually changes once they get into office and realize the complexities of the government.

So what if the decision was put into our hands?

I realize a certain percent would need to go to things like social security, unemployment, interest payments on our loans, disaster recovery, etc. So for those things, let’s say 40% of your tax dollars automatically goes to support them.

But what if you got to cast your vote for the remaining 60% of your tax dollars. What if after you are done filing your taxes each year, a form popped up that asked for you to make the next year’s tax selection and allocation? See an example below:

Selection	Allocation
Healthcare	10%
Transportation	5%
Veteran Benefits	5%
Energy & Environment	5%
Food & Agriculture	5%
Homeland Security
Military	5%
Education	15%
International Affairs
Housing & Community	5%
Science	5%
	60%

 

This would not only put the “buying power” back into American’s hands, but it will also help to hold our government officials accountable for how they spend our hard-earned money.

What do you think? Hit me back with your comments!

~Written by “Youngster”

 

DACA and the Media

 

Early on September 14, CNBC posted:

• After a White House dinner, the previous night with Donald Trump, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Shumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released statements that: “We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides”.
• Democrats on Wednesday night said they’d reached a deal with Trump that would protect approximately 800,000 Dreamers from deportation, without Trump’s wall being part of the deal, but with other border security provisions included.

On Thursday morning Trump tweeted:

• There was no deal made on DACA, that an agreement would require massive security and would need to be voted on.
• Sarah Sanders also sent a tweet that although DACA and border security were both discussed, there was no agreement that the wall would be excluded.
• However, previous to his Thursday tweet, Trump had tweeted that Dreamers didn’t have to worry and gave the congress six months to develop and pass legislation covering DACA and immigration.

Please note: Trump has apparently softened his previously steadfast promise about building a wall across the board between Mexico and the US. He now suggests that “The wall was coming under the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls” which “will continue to be built” and paid for at a later time. There is an internet video of Trump making this statement to news people.

CNNs Thursday morning posts:

• Suggests that changes to Trump’s DACA stance has displeased his followers.
• Several pro-Trump news stations and reporters were very upset about this apparent turn away from Trump’s promises.

CSNBC posted that upon Trump’s return from Florida:

• Trump stated the government is “looking at allowing people to stay here”, referring to DACA. However, he said “we’re not looking at citizenship, we’re not looking at amnesty”.
• The article does not explain what a Dreamer’s status would be if they can’t receive amnesty or obtain citizenship.

After reading these posts, and others, I’m confused. Was there an agreement between Trump and Pelosi and Shumer that Trump later denied or was the statement by Pelosi and Shumer just hopeful? There were suggestions that the agreement was only to move forward with a DACA policy.

I’m sure we all agree that news organizations live by their ratings and therefore, work to get breaking news out as quickly as possible. But I wonder if you, like me, would prefer to have the news wait and present a full, confirmed story and not post things that are speculative and are then dubbed ‘fake news’? However, would the news people then need to determine what is speculation and what is true? Or is it better to learn about the confusion coming from the current administration?

Please send your thoughts and comments.

~Written by “Wisdom”