Trump Made NFL Protests About Him

Colin Kaepernick started protesting last year by taking a knee during the national Anthem. Ratings for the NFL started to slip as a few other players, all protesting the alleged racist Flag and country as well as the shootings of black men who get in trouble with the law (most shootings are justified) got in on the action.

This year more players knelt down to dishonor the nation that has given them so much. Face it, most of them are not the brightest bulbs in the box but they can play a child’s game well so they get paid handsomely. President Trump took exception to their kneeling or otherwise protesting the Anthem and voiced his displeasure in a speech by saying that any SOB who sits or kneels or otherwise protests during the Anthem should be fired.

In that instant Donald Trump took away the narrative that the protests were about inequality in this nation or about how poorly some perceive black men to be treated. In that moment Donald Trump put the spotlight on himself and in so doing exposed the reality of these protests. They suddenly were not about the racist country or the Flag that has flown for so long over the oppressive nation. No, it was about Trump and the distaste these snowflake athletes have for the man.

Trump took the focus off the Flag and off the narrative and put it on himself. Now he, instead of our Flag, was the one being attacked and the narrative about how racist everything America is vanished in a puff of bravado.

Interestingly there are people on the left, those who are supposed to be educated, who claim Trump is trampling on the free speech rights of the football players.

Those football players do not have free speech rights when they are at work anymore than the rest of us do. The First Amendment ONLY protects your rights from GOVERNMENT intrusion. Government cannot force religion on you or deny you the free exercise thereof. Government cannot deny your right to free speech or to peaceably gather or any other item protected in the First. Private employers, on the other hand, are not bound by that. The Constitution only limits what government can and cannot do. It does not limit the people of the nation. Private entities are able to tell you what you can and cannot talk about and there is nothing you can do.

If you think the players in the NFL have a right to free speech then explain why they get fined if they question a call by a referee after the game. Why do they get fined if they wear unapproved clothing to interviews? Why do they need permission to wear special shoes or place stickers on helmets? It is because they have no right to free speech.

In the case of the protests, they did not have the right but they certainly had permission. Their bosses allowed them to protest.

Which means, by the way, you can protest as well (and you don’t need permission) by not supporting the NFL.

Regardless of what you do or they do Donald Trump changed the narrative with a simple sentence in a speech and in so doing exposed a lot about the liberals and the lies they live.

My friend Don Surber has a great piece up as well.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


Race Not The Issue With Colin Kaepernick

Poor ole Colin Kaepernick has been having one heck of a time landing a job as a quarterback in the NFL. It all seems to have started after he took a knee to protest the supposed loss of life due to cops looking to exterminate black folks. Yes, Kaepernick was one of the loons who ignored the criminal acts leading up to the shootings and focused on the facts the police had to shoot someone. He knelt down in protest during the National Anthem during the football season and he wore clothing that showed police officers in an unfavorable light.

Only a fool thinks that all shootings (of people of all colors) by the police are correct and necessary. There are far too many trigger happy LEOs and we have seen the bad shootings that have come. Yes folks, those shootings were bad no matter what the POLICE review found.

But for the most part the huge majority of officers try to do a good job and try to steer away from confrontation. They just want to go home at the end of the day. The reality is many of the shootings of black folks is completely justified. People reach for things, rush the cops, try to get tough or try to intimidate and end up getting shot. To Kaepernick and the BLM crowd no shooting is ever justified, the cops are pigs who are wrong and America is racist.

Only a fool believes racism is the reason Kaepernick has not gotten a job. He might not be happy about it but the real reason is his actions are a distraction and most fans don’t like them. There was a recent stir when the Baltimore Ravens indicated they would consider signing him as a back up to Joe Flacco (particularly since Flacco injured his back). Fans by and large were not happy with the idea. A number of black folks chimed in to indicate that it was all racism and that if Kaepernick could help the team they should sign him and if they don’t sign him it is all because of racism.

Not quite little BLM snowflakes. The reality is Kaepernick would bring distraction and mayhem to a team. Why would any team want to bring the scrutiny and the media circus sure to follow Kaepernick particularly when he will be second string at best? I know teams could change his on field behavior. The person signing the paycheck gets to decide what behavior is acceptable so it would be easy for any team to require him to stand during the National Anthem and to forbid him from protesting during games or when representing the NFL. They could force him not to wear clothing that insults police officers or any other groups. But they probably can’t control his off field behavior, what he wears or says or does in his free time and they certainly could not control the circus surrounding him.

It is not racism to decide against signing Kaepernick. It is about listening to a fan base that does not want an anti American cop hater on their team.

I have heard the talk shows and the folks calling in who support Kaepernick and his “protests” claim he has a right to take a knee (he does not) and that he is being held out because he knelt down for something he truly believed in and that this would not happen to a white player so it must be raycis…..

Perhaps the name Tim Tebow will ring a bell. He was a white quarterback in the NFL and he also knelt down for something he truly believed in. He knelt down to honor G-d and give him praise and thanks. The very same people who think Kaepernick was justified in kneeling and is being black balled (no pun intended) because he did had no problem with Tebow being overlooked and labeled as a distraction because of his practice of kneeling.

That blows the argument that it would never happen to a white guy and if it is racist that Kaepernick is not working because of kneeling then it must be racist with regard to Tebow.

Especially when one considers whites might be the minority playing in the NFL…

There are consequences for things we do. Colin Kaepernick is discovering that right this very moment and race has nothing to do with it.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


Black Lies Matter

A man named Freddie Gray died while in the custody of the Baltimore City Police. Gray has a long record mostly for drug distribution and is likely not a good guy so the portrait of a great guy (a lie) is way over the top BUT he should not have died while in custody. Initial reports are that he suffered a spinal injury while in the custody of police and his requests for medical assistance fell on deaf ears.

No matter why he was arrested or what his history was he deserved better treatment and I hope this will all become clear after it is investigated. I say I hope because the police are conducting the investigation and that casts doubt on the integrity of the process. Officers are rarely found in the wrong when investigated by their own departments.

There are a lot of people in Baltimore who are upset about this and a large number of them decided to protest. I have no issue with peaceful protests. The act of protesting PEACEFULLY is part of what makes America great. The problems come when those protests end up interfering with the lives of other people or turn into riots.

It is great to protest but to block traffic and shut down businesses is interfering with the rights of others to move about unhampered and free of harassment.

When the protests turn to riots people get hurt and property gets damaged. The legal peaceful protest turns into an illegal act.

On Saturday night in Baltimore the protest turned into a riot as unlawful people began breaking windows of businesses, looting said businesses, damaging vehicles and attacking the public and the police.

People attending the Orioles game were not allowed to leave the stadium for a while because of the riots (this possibly unlawful detention is a subject that could have its own discussion). Perhaps the 30,000 or so people should have been unleashed on the rioters…

In any event, the Mayor of Baltimore, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, proved she is a lightweight who is unable to lead. On top of that, she and Elijah Cummings lied about the nature of the violence.

The mayor and Representative Cummings both stated that the riots were the result of outside agitators and that most of the people involved were not from Baltimore.

Al Shaprton, an outside agitator if ever there was one, will be going to Baltimore to get involved. You can bet that SRB and Cummings will welcome him and never think to blame any unrest on him.

First of all, how can they tell just by looking at the people? How did SRB and Cummings determine that these folks causing and participating in the riots were NOT from Baltimore?

The police arrest reports seem to paint another picture. Nearly all of those arrested for rioting were from Baltimore.

I am sure there were outside players who incited people but they are only part the reason for the riots. Those who participated were the major reason and most of them were from the city.

This lie is to paint a picture of a competent leader who has her finger on the pulse of the city and to keep people from drawing the conclusion that this all took place because of liberal rule, liberal policies and the liberal victim mindset.

SRB indicated that she told the police to protect the protestors and give them space. Fair enough. We can’t have them getting hit by cars or being attacked for peacefully protesting. But the dimwit also told police to give the rioters space to break things.

Many businesses were damaged and people were hurt. Property insurance usually has a clause that excludes damage from civil unrest. Will Baltimore write checks to the owners who lost property? Will the city pay for the damage it allowed to happen?

The police have some explaining to do with regard to how Gray ended up dead while under their control but they showed a lot of restraint during the rioting. Perhaps it is because they were following SRB’s orders but they showed restraint under very dangerous circumstances. A lot more people could have ended up hurt or dead if the police had been more aggressive (not that hurting rioters would be a bad thing).

The lack of spine SRB has and the lack of leadership during the outbreak of lawlessness will embolden those who wish to participate in more illegal and dangerous acts. Right now the police are on alert because rival gangs have banned together to stop killing each other and start killing police officers.

This is what happens in liberal run cities where people are lied to each and every day. They are held down by liberals and told they are victims. The people grown up with no desire to achieve and a belief that they are victims who can only be protected by the government.

The race hustlers and liberals like SRB and Cummings push that narrative and their lies have devastating consequences.

Yes, these black lies matter…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


Why Waste Money For Body Cameras?

B. Hussein Obama is looking to provide federal money (read taxpayer money) to equip police departments across the nation with body cameras that are worn by police officers so that everything they do (every encounter) is recorded.

It is not the place of the federal government to be doling out our money for things that affect state and local law enforcement. If individual states or localities want these cameras then they should pay for them. Federal tax dollars do not belong paying for these things but that is an issue for another day.

For today I am wondering how Obama or anyone else thinks cameras worn by police officers would make a difference. I have no issue with police officers wearing body cameras though I fail to see what value they have.

Let me explain. The body camera would record what the officer and the person with whom that officer interacted did. It would show who did what and it would either corroborate or refute the stories of the participants. So far that all seems good and who could argue with that? Hell, if Officer Wilson had been wearing a body camera we would know exactly what happened between him and Michael Brown.

But would it have mattered?

In Ferguson it would not matter. People were looking for a reason to riot and loot and cause mayhem. They would have done the same thing if Wilson had been indicted. The race pimps and the Media stoked that fire real good.

A camera in the Ferguson case might have shown Wilson to be lying but would it have resulted in an indictment? Given the evidence presented in the absence of a video I feel he should not have been indicted but I also know, based on cases where video IS available, he would likely not have been indicted even if the entire encounter had been recorded.

There are ample cases on the internet where police officers are recorded clearly violating the law and the rights of citizens. There are videos of officers shooting people (and dogs) for no reason. These police officers who are armed with batons, heavy flashlights (that can be used as a baton), Tasers, pepper spray and a firearm need only say they feared for their lives and they are deemed to have been justified in their actions even though these actions are taken against people who are UNARMED (since that seems to be a buzz word in the Brown case). I know I have said that unarmed does not mean harmless and I have seen plenty of videos where offices were perfectly justified in shooting unarmed people.

In those cases it is usually pretty clear. In those where the outrage is present it is usually obvious that the officer used excessive force. In these cases, where it is all caught in video, the officers are not indicted and are deemed to have acted appropriately and “within their training and department guidelines.”

So would a body camera make a difference?

The city of New York is having its turn at outrage over a Grand Jury decision. In this case an officer was not indicted for the death of a person who resisted arrest, was encountered by the officer and taken down. The guy ended up dying and it was all recorded. In the recording the person is taken to the ground and placed in some kind of choke hold and he is heard gasping and wheezing and saying that he can’t breathe. At what point does it become obvious the guy is in distress?

If this were a lone cop (the suspect was quite large) one might conclude that he did not let go because that could have been a ruse to attack the officer. But there are several other police officers present. All the cop on the ground has to say to his fellow officers is grab his arms guys, sir I am going to let you go so you can breathe but if you resist we will be right back where we started. With several other cops present there was no reason for this. [Please police officers save your righteous indignation and don’t waste my time telling me how tough it is on the street. Four or five armed to the teeth guys can handle a man who is having trouble breathing and who is NOT fighting. If not, turn in you badges.]

“All over America, cops are getting away with this,” added 22-year-old Demetri Green. “They’re the real gang in New York City. They’re the real gang in this county.” New York Daily News

In my opinion there was no need to begin with. This man was accused of selling untaxed cigarettes. Was it OK for him to die because he was allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes? It is not like this guy committed some violent felony and his resistance was non violent. He was simply accused of selling something the state did not get a cut of.

In my opinion those who said Trayvon was shot for carrying Skillets (Skittles to the literate among us) and that Mike Brown was shot for walking in the street are idiots and ignored the facts in the case. Both of the people killed in these cases were VIOLENT. They were attacking someone. The guy in New York was not attacking anyone. He was selling an untaxed tobacco product.

The question should not be whether the officer followed procedure it should be was his response appropriate for the infraction and was the result of his actions an acceptable consequence of the person’s crime. In other words, was too much force used for a guy allegedly committing a non violent crime? Hell, they don’t treat people carrying small amounts of marijuana in New York the way they treated the victim here and he had a LEGAL product when the police killed him.

Given the video that shows the entire episode (the video came from a bystander) and given the reality that a lot of force was used for a non violent crime and given the man can be heard gasping and wheezing and saying he could not breathe and given the medical examiner ruled this a homicide a reasonable person could conclude that the officer went overboard and caused this man’s death. The Grand Jury did not see it that way and refused to indict.

It is rare for a police officer to go before the Grand Jury for these things and it is rare for any officer to be found guilty of a crime when he uses force while doing his job even if it is clear that what he did was wrong (and would be illegal if we did it). This is true even when video evidence is present.

So I ask, what good would body cameras do?

It seems to me the cameras would only beneift cops. They could prove a citizen’s claim of abuse, foul language, or racial bias was untrue (as happened recently). Since clear video evidence of police wrong doing does not hold them accountable it is unlikely their own recordings would…

It will be interesting to see what happens in Ohio where it is obvious a cop murdered a child. The kid was playing with a toy gun and the police were called. When they arrive one of the Miami Vice wanna be cops shoots the kid dead seemingly before the police car comes to a stop. If this guy is found to have acted appropriately then maybe we really do need to burn the place to the ground and start over…

Obama Body Cam Request Takes a Hit

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


When Bush Did It The Left Went Nuts

Let me start off by saying I agree with bombing ISIS and any other terror group and I think the US should keep it up. I would say to bomb them back to the Stone Age but since they already live in that era I say bomb them back to before they existed. I have no problem with attacking them where they live rather than waiting for them to come here. I have no problem with preemptive strikes.

But I am not the problem here because I never held the view that we should not attack them.

Barack Obama and ALL the Democrats who opposed George Bush did though. They derided Bush for waging war in Iraq when they claimed Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and never attacked us. Afghanistan was the good war, they said.

So during Bush’s terms we had Code Pink and the rest of the anti war crowd along with the Democrats screaming about Bush’s War and George Bush attacking a nation that never attacked us, blah, blah.

Barack Obama arrived on the scene fresh from his community organizing state and US Senate gigs to claim the mantle of anti war hero and to stop George Bush’s illegal wars.

The US, along with coalition partners, has begun bombing ISIS and other terror groups in Syria. Syria has never attacked us and ISIS has never attacked out country. Yes, they murdered some Americans but they did not come to our home nation and attack us. Do I think we should avenge their deaths? Certainly but then again, I am not the problem.

The problem lies with those who were so vocal in their opposition to George Bush who now remain silent as their messiah attacks an enemy in a sovereign nation, one that did not attack us. The problem lies with those very groups who said we should not be at war and who told us to try and understand the other guy’s side of things.

Where are these groups now? Where is Nancy Pelosi? Where is Harry Reid? Where are the protest groups that were so up in arms about the Iraq war? Where are these people when Barack Obama is basically doing the same thing they attacked Bush for?

They are curiously silent on the matter.

George Bush got Congressional approval before he waged war and Barack Obama did not. George Bush told us exactly what would happen if we announced the date we were leaving and pulled completely out of the region and what he said would happen, did.

Barack Obama was against the war in Iraq and he campaigned on ending it. Barack Obama campaigned on what he perceived to be the lawless and unconstitutional acts of Bush and now he is doing the very things he campaigned against.

These people are hypocrites and it would do the nation well for them to lose their jobs in November (for those up for reelection). Barack Obama is a disgrace to this nation. Is he doing the right thing now? I think it is right to attack the enemy but I always did.

He did not. This is what happens when you have a progressive Alinskyite with no work experience, no military experience (and who actually loathes the military) and no real life experience running things.

Community organizers are rabble rousers, not leaders.

The left remains silent because it is their messiah who is doing the things they previously opposed.

We need to rally as a nation while we are at war but that does not mean we can’t question the integrity of the leader who took us to war.

If the nation had questioned that integrity during the campaign we might not have a hypocrite and first class amateur running things now.

And in all likeliness there would be no need for more war because the enemies would fear us.

No one fears Obama because he lacks anything resembling manhood and he is certainly not a warrior.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog