These are some of the most visited and popular postings on this dzsokol.com web site:
These are some of the most visited and popular postings on this dzsokol.com web site:
It appears that more people are getting fed-up with these player “demonstrations”:
“After spending a week at work, hearing about the liberalism being forced on their kids at school, having liberalism shoved in their face by their local newspaper and being harangued by TV shows portraying people like them as creeps, a lot of conservative men like to relax by watching sports. Sports is a place where politics shouldn’t even be on the agenda….but IT IS.”
“Forget about rushing for 100 yards and throwing 4 touchdowns in a game; if you really want people to talk about you, just tell everyone about how racist America is and how awful the police are…”
September 23, 2016
From famous basketball coach Bobby Knight, his comments on Kaepernick:
“Were I a teammate, were I the coach, were I the owner, in a situation like that, I’d have gotten rid of the guy… It’s hard for me to imagine anybody that can fault the opportunities one has in this country. No country in the world provides better opportunities for people that are willing to work, willing to sacrifice and I would’ve had a very difficult time playing with a guy like that, coaching a guy like that, or having him as a teammate.”
September 21, 2016
According to a recent study, there is a supposed drop in viewership of NFL games at this point in the season:
The Eagles-Bears ratings declined by double digits from last year’s Week Two Monday Night Football contest and represents the lowest number since the franchise moved from ABC to ESPN. The NFL experienced drops, albeit smaller ones, for the Sunday slate, too.
September 19, 2016
With these ridiculous positions that they are taking about sports and politics, it appears that the NFL is running scared:
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says the league will encourage players to use their voice to promote social change as the demonstrations during the national anthem…
What social change is Mr. Goodell seeking and expecting? More public funding for stadiums? How about introducing socialism into the NFL? The players and fans should be the owners of the team.
I can’t imagine this support of player’s ‘protesting’ working out for the benefit of the league in the long run. It leaves a bad taste for the majority of the fans who don’t want to hear about politics with their sports. I don’t know about others, but I watch for the purity of the game –teamwork, effort, hitting, etc. Frankly, I don’t care for the commercials, halftime shows, etc. They’re not going to force me to ingest their extraneous crap. In fact, I don’t watch football live on TV anymore. I prefer the edited version where I can watch all the essential plays of the sport/game in under 30 minutes.
This focus on egotism and victimization by overpaid athletes is not very endearing to the people paying for all of it.
September 17, 2016
It makes you wonder. The NFL fines a player for excessive celebration after scoring a touchdown, yet maintains that players have constitutional rights to ignore the national anthem. Does anyone else see any hypocrisy here? Does this just reflect the NFL’s fear of ‘racism-to-explain-everything hate-mongers’?
September 15, 2016
Some early feedback:
Football fans have reacted to the constant player protests and national anthem controversies in a way that the NFL simply can’t miss: They’re not watching.
Some important facts that the Leftist supporters of violence in North Carolina may have overlooked:
Violence and looting have erupted on the streets of Charlotte, N.C. Those involved have tried to justify this behavior by claiming it’s a natural response to white racism endemic to the city’s law enforcement and justice system.
But that claim ignores highly salient facts concerning the incident that set off this latest wave of unrest. For starters, the police maintain that the dead man was armed. While angry protestors may choose not to believe that, there is no doubt that the police officer who shot Keith Lamont Scott is, himself, a black man. Moreover, the city’s police department is headed by a black police chief.
September 23, 2016
This is interesting news that 70% of those arrested in Charlotte came from out-of-state:
“This is not Charlotte that’s out here. These are outside entities that are coming in and causing these problems. These are not protestors, these are criminals.”
“We’ve got the instigators that are coming in from the outside. They were coming in on buses from out of state. If you go back and look at some of the arrests that were made last night. I can about say probably 70% of those had out-of-state IDs. They’re not coming from Charlotte.”
The 21st Century Messiah… or the Oracle from Chicago… or the Manchurian Marxist Moslem… or whatever you want to call him, delivered one of his latest melodious, conflicting, inane speeches at the UN:
None of this is any different from what President Obama has been saying for eight years. And during this time America’s global position has eroded, our friends have been confused, our enemies emboldened, a Caliphate established, and ethnic, racial, and economic tensions resurgent.
Not to worry. One more speech will do the trick.
I think that there is a possibility that Obama is the ultimate Trojan Horse in North America on behalf of the Moslem Caliphate — introduce divisive positions among the American citizens; bankrupt the nation and diminish the military strength; arm the terror-driven Iranians to the teeth; warmly embrace globalist positions that reduce borders; introduce open immigration that welcomes Moslems. What more could a US President do to pave the way for the subjugation of the United States?
Do you think these assertions are crazy? There are mountains of evidence to illustrate otherwise. Very recent examples include a story by the AP that essentially states that Obama is unwilling to support charges of genocide against ISIS; Or how about Obama vetoing bipartisan legislation that supports the ability to sue the Saudis for supporting terrorism during 9/11.
Should we stop to examine the relationship with Iran in greater detail? These are some pertinent comments from Adam Turner:
President Obama has certainly brought change to the Middle East. It may or may not have been the change that Americans were waiting for. But when it comes to the Islamist theocratic regime in Iran, there can be no doubt — Barack Obama was the U.S. President the Iranian’s were waiting for.
Is there a consistent pattern to Obama’s policy decisions?
Why would Obama, the Manchurian Marxist Moslem, want to comment about these crimes? Just because someone named Ahmed screamed ‘Allah Akbar’ before committing a terrorist act doesn’t mean anything… does it?
Obama has not publicly mentioned the Chelsea blast, the St. Cloud, Minnesota, mall attack Saturday night or the New Jersey bombings…
Well, Caroline has gone and done it again. She’s followed up her earlier editorial with this provocative commentary:
Most American Jews make their home on the political Left, and together with black Americans they comprise the most loyal Democratic voting bloc. American Jews have clung to the Democratic Party despite the fact that over the past decade and a half, their position in the party has become increasingly precarious.
On the one hand then, we have the Jewish Democrats who are faced with a party that is increasingly controlled by anti-Semitic forces. And on the other hand we are in the midst of the collective political suicide of the Jewish Republican establishment.
It is hard to know how Israel will be affected by the dramatic enfeeblement of the American Jewish community that we are now witnessing. The fact remains that the vast majority of American support for Israel comes from the evangelical Christian community.
What is clear enough though is that the political waning of the Jewish community across the political spectrum means that the golden era of American Jewry is not only over. It is gone.
July 4, 2014
A great editorial from Caroline Glick:
Defending Israel to an unsympathetic president from the Democratic Party is apparently too much to ask most pro-Israel American Jews to do.
And this is where Shavit’s book comes in.
By portraying Israel as a country that is morally deficient, Shavit gave the American Jewish community two gifts. First he gave them a way to feel morally superior, and therefore patronizing toward Israel. Israel, they can say, committed a massacre – and did so because its founding ideology is poisonous. American Jews would never do such a thing. But out of the kindness of their hearts, like Shavit, they will continue to love this unworthy cousin.
The second gift Shavit gave the American Jewish community was the ability to feel comfortable refusing to be inconvenienced for Israel.
Another great commentary from Victor Davis Hanson about The Legacies of Barack Obama:
Apparently Obama is veering even further to the left, in hopes of establishing a rhetorical progressive legacy in lieu of any lasting legislative or foreign-policy achievement. Turning the presidency into an edgy soapbox is seemingly all that is left of Obama’s promise to “fundamentally transform” the country.
But divisive sermonizing and the issuing of executive orders are not the same as successfully reforming our health-care system. The Affordable Care Act, born of exaggeration and untruth, is now in peril as insurers pull out and the costs of premiums and deductibles soar.
The U.S. economy — with its record-low growth over eight years, near-record labor non-participation rates, record national debt, and record consecutive years of zero interest rates — is not much of a legacy either. Racial relations in this country seem as bad as they have been in a half-century.
What, then, is the presidential legacy of Barack Obama?
It will not be found in either foreign- or domestic-policy accomplishment. More likely, he will be viewed as an outspoken progressive who left office loudly in the same manner that he entered it — as a critic of the culture and country in which he has thrived.
It is interesting to recall some prognostications about Obama from November 2008 when I was pondering “Will He be Like Kennedy, Carter, or Clinton?“. Or another posting from this blog entitled “More on Expectations from Our President“.
I have my opinion about how things actually turned out… what do you think?
There’s no better hypocrisy than having a Moslem in the corrupt UN telling the world to beware the violence from Trump, Wilders, and Farage… as he compares these politicians to leaders of ISIS:
Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, the United Nations’ high commissioner for human rights blasted nationalist populists like Donald Trump and Nigel Farage for using “tactics similar” to ISIS to frighten and reel in followers.
I don’t know but the last time I checked Trump, Wilders, and Farage were not advocating the beheading of people that they didn’t like.
Great commentary from Professor Reynolds:
So if the choice in 2016 is between one bad candidate and another (and it is) the question is, which one will do the least harm. And, judging by the civil service’s behavior, that’s got to be Trump. If Trump tries to target his enemies with the IRS, you can bet that he’ll get a lot of pushback — and the press, instead of explaining it away, will make a huge stink. If Trump engages in influence-peddling, or abuses secrecy laws, you can bet that, even if Trump’s appointees sit atop the DOJ or FBI, the civil service will ensure that things don’t get swept under the rug. And if Trump wants to go to war, he’ll get far more scrutiny than Hillary will get — or, in cases like her disastrous Libya invasion, has gotten.
So the message is clear. If you want good government, vote for Trump — he’s the only one who will make this whole checks-and-balances thing work.
A great commentary from Dennis Prager on the importance of the up-coming presidential election:
But I do not believe that the country will surely survive as the country it was founded to be. In that regard, we are at the most perilous tipping point of American history.
It is true that the country was threatened with survival in the 1860s, and only a terrible civil war kept it whole. But with the colossal and awful exception of slavery, neither side challenged the founding principles of America.
That is not the case today. One side seeks to undo just about every founding principle that made America exceptional. Important examples include small and limited government; preservation of the power of the states to serve as political and social laboratories; a belief in individual responsibility; a society rooted in Judeo-Christian morality — one composed of people who nearly all affirmed in God and Bible-based moral teachings; and a deep sense of a unifying American identity and destiny.
The left is successfully undoing every one of those founding principles.