Is Colin Kaepernick Entitled to a Job?

Is anyone else tired of the sad little shit known as Colin Kaepernick?

Kaepernick made a decision to stage a protest while on his employer’s time. That decision had a consequence, he ultimately lost his job and no other team has picked him up.

Does this need collusion? Not really, why would a team owner want the added drama? He is a mediocre player so there is little reason for  team to wish to include him in a team sport.

Don’t get me wrong, he can certainly protest any issue that he wants provided that it is during HIS time. I do not support the method of his protest. I do however support that he has the right to do so.

If an actor chose to take a knee at the start of each day filming, how long would directors put up with it? Would they be forced to cast them for films?

If an ER doc chose to take a knee at any time a patient came to see them, would the hospitals appreciate the quality of care? Should they be saddled with the disruption?

If I were to participate in a protest on the clock, I would expect negative consequences. I would also expect hem to follow me for a while. We know that prospective employers can call previous employers and ask what our rehire status is… it is a fact of work life. If the prospective employer does not feel comfortable with the candidate, they will be apprehensive to hire. why is Kaepernick any different?

Perhaps if Colin were to include a clause in his contract to be a PROFESSIONAL player on game days and any other time that he is representing his team or the league including a significant financial penalty for breech he might find a team will to take him on.

He shit in his bed, now he has another decision, clean it up, or get comfortable in it.

tsk tsk tsk

Since my political beliefs are broad spectrum, I find the current consternation by the anti-gun gun crowd interesting… they are upset that the four gun control measure failed in the senate today. Now, we are talking about a population that is all about rights and civil liberties.

These same liberties include the premise that one is innocent until proven guilty.

 

Enter the crowds pushing for rumors to equate a criminal conviction… ask any vet is they have seen careers destroyed by unfounded rumors or not. So you are going to take away a popular right, based on a rumor?

Tell me that that feels good and why generations of solders put their lives on the line… Between this and the Muslim fear mongering of the Right, it sure reminds me of the McCarthy era.

 

Here they call for shaming of those that chose to stand on American judicial principles if nothing else… I think the shame is being misdirected. Shame should fall to those that want to make take away our founding principles. Closer and closer to the tipping point we go.

Go Topless or Not?

Okay, this last Sunday was a day of Go Topless protests around the world.

I have heard women of all ages, mid teens to well matured ladies, question why men (and many women for that matter) find breasts attractive.

It is a good question, one that I do not have an answer for. I will admit that I am not that concerned why.

The ladies’ argument was that they are just fatty tissue and no big deal.

 

Now if it is that nonchalant then why is the double standard in place to allow men to go topless but not women.

As we push further and further into equality, then why is this still an issue?

The only rationale that makes sense to me for the objection is low female.

 

What do you think? what other reasons can you think of to deny equality?

Perhaps you have arguments for equality…

 

Its Sheeeeeeple!

So here we see the government intruding into your lives and asking you to shed your rights yet again! This week it was Pennsylvania, and recently it was Texas.

There is a study to find out the statistics of drivers operating motor vehicles under the influence. Okay, I see some validity to the data to be collected. Just how voluntary is it if you are being required to be pulled over and coerced to provide a blood sample or cheeck swab?

Even if you do take the bribe err… incentive for the inconvienience. Are you going to get immunity from prosecution if you does have substances in your system?

Do you really trust that your DNA will not end up in a database somewhere?
If you do, have you not been watching the news, reading Twitter, Facebook, etc.?

Bottom line, these “stops” are unconstitutional. Be civil, but I would suggest that you not yield your rights.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/18/penn-police-pull-people-over-random-dna-tests-feds/

racist cops are at it again. (Phily PD)

I hope to see a certain feline’s position on this one.
I was only in Phily for a week so I did not have enough exposure to know if what I am about to describe is normal for the area.

I did watch/listen to the entire video. These cops sound very out of line. I did not see any probable cause for the stop, nor did the officers’ responses give anything that sound like they had cause.

These cops are pitching shit that that makes the rest of the law enforcement community look bad.

I have little reason to think that any real corrective actions will be taken against them. If this video has gone viral, then maybe there will be something that will come of this.

Since when is saying hi to a stranger probable cause to stop, detain, search, threaten, degrade someone?

Abuse of power has to be dealt with, plain and simple.

I picked up on this from the twitter feed of Shonda Rhimes. (love her shows and her feed)

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/14/footage_of_racist_philly_cops_goes_viral/

States and Nullification of Enforcement of Federal Laws

Does anyone else see this trend of states getting fed up with the federal government and enacting legislation (or coming close to anyway) that nullifies federal laws?

I find it interesting but a little unnerving.

Does this bring us closer to my concerns of civil unrest or rebellion?

  • More than a dozen state may be nullifying Obama Care
  • Missouri – The governor has a bill to consider nullification of federal gun laws
  • Kansas (and others)- passed a law that guns made and owned in Kansas were exempt from federal firearms laws
  • Washington and Colorado legalized recreational marijuana possession and use.
  • Washington legalizes gay marriage
  • Pennsylvania –  may be nullifying federal bans on some weapons and ammunition
  • or even the opposite, states try to help the feds by trying to enforce voting or immigration law and the feds can’t permit THAT.

I am sure that there are other examples.

So if states won’t enforce the federal laws, then I guess the feds will have to ramp up their staffing to be able to enforce their own laws.. What a concept.

At some point, the federal government went feral and now the states have decided that they need to take back some of their domain.

Do we see an end to this? What other areas will states start to take back?

How will the feds compensate for their losses in power?
The federal government need to constrict its size and power.

Will they have a flippin’ temper tantrum and over-react?

.

Ultra-Violet emailed me…

Okay, due to my broad political spectrum I am on lists from the uber-liberal to the soulless (and by soulless, I am referring to those FAR more to the right than anyone here) right.

Today I received one from Ultra-Violet that made me laugh and wish that I had more disposable income. I would rather buy one of these targets than sign their whiny-assed petition.

Their text is as follows:

A shooting target mannequin named the “The Ex,” a large-breasted woman who bleeds when shot, is being sold on Amazon.com. It’s manufactured by Zombie Industries, a company that was featured at the NRA convention last weekend.

Let’s review the facts: 57% of mass shootings involve incidents of domestic violence.1 The presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation increases the chance that a woman will be murdered by 500%.2 54% of women killed with guns are killed by intimate partners or family members.3 Gun violence against women is a serious problem.

But “The Ex” shooting target turns violence against women into a joke and promotes the idea that men should want to kill their ex-wives or ex-girlfriends. The sole Amazon.com review says, “This was a very original, cool way to kick off a bachelor party for a firearm enthusiast, such as myself.”4

Amazon.com recently came under fire for selling t-shirts that advocated for rape and domestic violence.5 After all that bad publicity, they won’t want to look like they’s promoting violence against women again. Zombie Industries has already had to pull a mannequin target that resembled President Obama,6 so they are definitely attracting media attention right now–and it’s just the kind of bad press Amazon doesn’t want. If we all speak up about this horrible “Ex” target we can get Amazon to do the right thing and stop carrying this dangerous product.

Add your name to the petition.

Violence against women may be a joke to the guys at Zombie Industries, but it’s life and death for thousands of women every day. Women in the U.S. are 11 times more likely to be killed with a gun than their counterparts in other high-income countries.7

Guns also quickly escalate domestic violence situations. As Kelly Starr of the Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence told NBC’s Brian Williams, “When there is a gun around is when we see domestic violence turn to murder.”8

And it’s not just in domestic violence situations where women are threatened with guns. 1 in 5 stalkers will threaten their victims with a weapon, and 78% of stalking victims are women.9

Zombie Industries crossed a line when they started making “The Ex” shooting target. Making light of violence against women is unacceptable, and Amazon.com shouldn’t be selling products that promote violence against women. If Amazon pulls “The Ex” shooting target, it will send a clear message that this won’t be tolerated in the mainstream.

Sign the petition. [I will certainly not stop their rights to petition whomever they want]

Thanks for speaking out,

Yes, I am speaking out… against Ultra-Violet. Get a grip, there is humor in life and sometimes in death.

If I were to choose to call my target, “The Ex”, it is well within my fucking rights to free speech! If I wanted to call it “Speaker of the House” or “Mr. President” it would STILL be within my rights.

I am still friends with my ex, so I would not use it in THAT context.

As to the claim of mass shootings, how do they define mass shootings? I did not see that cited in the article that they referenced from MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org.  I have a problem with illegals guns as well, but I also have a problem with illegals with guns…  I have plenty of problems many of them revolve around stupid laws, or the failure to enforce the laws that aren’t stupid.

I was behind Ultra-Violet on the Stubinville case, but with this one, I am on the opposite side.

Amending amendments

I am curious about the process and authority of altering amendments.

The process of making an amendment is pretty well known and not the easiest of tasks.

We have seen them get pretty well gutted, by legislation and the court, but I am wondering more of HOW they get screwed with.

The First Amendment is pretty clear, but yet we have thrashed over the years.

 

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

We know that religion is not is not really free in this country, nor is speech, the press has quit being an investigative tool. People’s rights to peaceably assemble has been nipped, and what is the federal petition process?

 

Some of this is cultural, but most of it has been the government just fucking us over, left and right.

BTW: for today we are containing this to the First Amendment.

IRS claims it can read your e-mail without a warrant

Anyone for a forth amendment discussion? Does, or should, the government have the right to peruse individual’s e-mail accounts, and chat history, without cause or a warrant?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57578839-38/irs-claims-it-can-read-your-e-mail-without-a-warrant/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title

If they are allowed to continue this practice, how long before corporations are given the same “rights”?

 

By, Eyes_Open

Gay Marriage; States rights, federal rights, or human rights

By Eyes_open

 

As the Supreme Court takes on the issue of California’s Proposition 8, and the federal DOMA, and Jeb Bush weighs in that he believes marriage should be a states rights issue, where do you stand on the issue of same-sex marriage, and why. Is it a matter that should be left to each state, should the federal government be involved and to what degree. Or is this a constitutional violation of civil rights, placing it in the hands of the Supreme Court.