Colin Kaepernick's Nike deal

The people who are burning shoes don't care. And they aren't exactly doing it for any reason other than they couldn't find a cross. Appealing to Christianity won't matter to them. They don't embrace it beyond claiming they aren't Jews or Muslims. But love thy neighbor, etc.? That's not in their wheelhouse.

Those people are white supremacists, a lot of them. Kindly appealing to them won't matter. I know you mean well, but you're barking at a wall.

I think that is a bit extreme to say these are white supremacists. I think it is more ignorance or totally understanding what Colin is trying to do. I think it is more a lack of understanding on each side.

Now granted there are probably some white supremacists doing this - but many are taking offense because they feel that is being disrespectful to the flag, to those that are fighting or have fought and put their lives on the line. I don't agree that this is the case, but this is what many of those individuals feel when they see this.

The reason I know this is my husband was formerly in the marines. I look at his facebook account (to see my daughter's pix from college as I don't have anything on my account) - and there are many pictures postings from some of his former marines he was in the service with. And some are angry because here they put their butt on the line and some bozo who just plays football is kneeling at the flag that they risked their life for.

To be honest I usually just scroll through those posting to see my daughter's stuff - but these are not guys who are white supremacists - they fought and have what they consider to be brothers all of ethnic backgrounds. Many are white that are married to spouses that are black, Hispanic and a variety of backgrounds.

I am just stating this as there seems to be anger on both sides and throwing out things about not embracing others and that you are a white supremacist because you protest Nike is just simply adding fuel to fire.

There needs to be respect and understanding on both sides.

Fortunately though most of my hubby's former military are of the opinion they do not agree with the kneeling as they feel it is disrespectful to the flag but he has every right as this is the very thing they have fought for - our freedoms. They feel more his choice in the way he is protesting is more mis-guided and there are better ways to handle this than kneeling at the one thing that is represented of what is giving him the right to protest as he chooses.

This gesture of burning the nike shoes may (I can't get into others heads so I will not say it is) be there way of protesting just as it is Colin's way of protesting. Why is one better than the other?

I personally don't think that kneeling during the national anthem disrespects veterans. I know that people have fought wars to be able to have freedom of speech, and Colin was exercising his freedom of speech. Why are people protesting so harshly. This man has not been able to find a job because of his protest, do you think this is fair. I would expect this to happen in a communist country, but not America where all races of people have fought for the right for freedom of speech. For someone to get so personally involved to attempt to keep this man unemployed is pure racism in my opinion.

Exactly - you personally do not. But some veterans do - how often do you hear similar things about almost anything - I don't find this offensive to women or to blacks or to anyone. But many in that particular group does.

Recently there have been schools changing mascots from Indians, and similar names as it may be offensive to native americans, others say no - it is actually a compliment - well some native americans find it offensive and some do not.

Are you a veteran? How you fought? I know some veterans that take it personally and are offended and others that say I don't like it but that is right. So who has the right to determine whether something is offensive to them or not? And why is one person's opinion of being offended trump another?

As far as him not finding work - he has been paid from Nike all along he isn't thirsting for money - that is not to say if the NFL is ganging up against him that isn't right - but that is on the NFL not the veterans or anyone else that also has the freedom to protest. And it is being fought in the court of law as it should be.

No I'm not a veteran nor have I fought in a war, but I know that what Kaepernick was attempting to protest against injustice. I know that people of all races have served in the army, but at one point the black men that served had to come home to injustice, and some were even killed. This is about Kaepernick being able to exercise his right of speech without retaliation against him.

I've served and I've never considered for one second that people standing were in any way respecting the military. They weren't disrespecting it either. Why the national anthem and the military is connected in this discussion is beyond me.

I agree that was what he was trying to do...and his intention was not to offend the military however some military members are offended. Do we discount their feelings?

My greater point was some of these protesters against Nike are current and former military and not racist as many are accusing.

I am simply saying you need to be open to both sides and respectful...how is either side to come together if you do not listen and respect the others feelings.

Bottom line Colin has the right to kneel and those that are offended by it have the exact same right to protest as well. Otherwise we no longer have a free country.

The intention of naming and keeping the name Red Skins as your team is not intended to be racist or offensive, but ask some native Americans if they feel otherwise.

My husband who served doesn't agree with Colin and finds it disrespectful but he says he has every right to do so. Others he knows from the military feel much more strongly that he is completely wrong.

So does your feelings or opinions supercede all these others? Are they all wrong and you are right? If they feel differently do they have the same freedoms to protest as Colin?

And why the military because most of the military I have seen making responses take the symbol of the flag to be freedom and what they represent in fighting for their country so they take it personally . Maybe they are just a bunch of jar heads but their feelings should be no different than anyone else.

That is all I am saying whichever you believe you should be able to protest and not called a racist because of it. Shouldn't everyone be on the same playing field or are other people's opinions more important so they can protest but if you don't agree they cannot protest.

I don't believe that this statement is reasonable at all. Anybody can call themselves "Native American", and lots of people do who have zero connection with traditional culture. It is my understanding that people who actually live in Native American communities, and who identify with Native American culture are quite offended. I have a Native American in my family (by marriage) who grew up in the culture. She is quite adamant about how racist this is seen by her community.

I don't see how anyone can support the use of the name "Redskin" without it being racist. We don't use the N-Word. Historically the word "Redskin" is just as offensive, the difference being that Native American cultures were systematically eradicated.

As a veteran, I respect the ideal to protest any way you see fit. However, in this instance you're confusing a few issues and attributing it to just one factor.

Kaep isn't simply kneeling, he IS protesting. It is in no way the same thing nor should carry the same weight as compared to kneeling as humility before God.

He had an opportunity to play football but his greed got in the way. His stats plummeted and when he was up for contract renewal he was offered a lot less than he thought he deserved. He chose free agency and wasn't picked up. What team wants a failing quarterback with baggage? None of them.

So now he's suing to get a job in the NFL, citing collusion. Football Johnny Manziel went to the Canadian football league to play, Kaep could do the same thing, improve his stats and regain experience. But he won't, he wants to force his "right" to play in the NFL.

Good luck with that, Kaep. Take your Nike's with ya.

That is exactly my point.

Thank you for being a veteran in the armed forces. I know that I have mixed a few other subjects in reference to Collin, but I am simply saying that there is injustice in our country, and he chose to bring this injustice to light by kneeling. If our country is just then he should not be penalized so harshly for his actions. Like you said, everybody has the right to protest, but I feel this protest is going beyond his being a football player, and this is bringing to light how harshly black people were treated in the past for voicing their opinions. I'm not trying to make anyone angrier, I am just saying, can't we stand together as a country and not show what appears to be hate when the usual norm for a black person is shook up. I say again thanks for your service

Everyone has the right to their feelings but not all feelings are equal. I read these advice columns and you will get something like "my adult son needed emergency surgery so I took out a $10K loan and gave him the money. Now my daughter is demanding I give her $10K too." The daughter is entitled to feel that way, but to me it makes no sense.

Let's consider why the athletes are protesting. They see violence against the black community on TV every day. While they are privileged in our society in general, that is no protection. They could be roughed up by the police just like those people we see on the news. I've posted the story of James Blake, top five US tennis player and Harvard grad who was attacked by a policeman with a history of complaints of racial bias while waiting outside his hotel for his ride to the US Open where he was to be a commentator. These athletes are protesting something real that impacts them. You might or might not agree with their position, but you probably at least intellectually understand where they are coming from.

Let's consider why those in the military are protesting. They feel disrespected because some black athletes won't stand for the anthem. Is that reasonable? Veterans are a privileged class in the US (and typically around the world.) I have complete strangers thank me for my service. I get significant discounts in stores, I pay about half what others pay for cell phone coverage, I have a reserved parking spot at the grocery store and a national holiday in my honor. (Yes, I take that parking spot.) I get respect from 300 million people. Is it reasonable to get butt hurt because a few people decide to protest something that is not even related to me? I say no. Those are their feelings and they are entitled to them, but no, I don't consider them as equal to those willing to risk their livelihoods to address a real wrong.

As a veteran, I truly appreciate Colin Kaepernick's persistent principals and dignified actions.

There are few things more annoying than when someone starts a political thread here that admonishes people for un-Christian behavior, but one of them is someone who does this and clearly demonstrates their own glaring shortage of Christian values.

You suggest that the Christian thing to do is understand the perspective of someone with whom you disagree, but your entire post violates this principle. You obviously haven’t even tried to put yourself, for a minute, in the place of the people burning their Nikes, or, I’m quite sure, anyone who objects to Colin Kaepernick’s political demonstrations and Nike’s endorsement of them. What’s more, you have the arrogance to assume that you can see into these people’s hearts and detect that they are racists.

This short opening post is choked with ridiculous assumptions based on sheer ignorance and prejudice.



To whom are you addressing this comment? What makes you assume any of the people burning Nikes are Christians? Did you see one of these videos wherein the man declares he is doing it in the name of Jesus? Of course not. It’s far more likely that you are operating with a cartoon version of the people who do not approve of Kaepernick and his antics. You saw a couple of white men burning their Nikes and immediately leaped to the conclusion that since a black man is involved, they must be racists and if they are racists the chances are they are conservative and Christian. It’s just common sense right?

You have no reason, other than your prejudicial bias, to believe that the small number of people burning their Nikes (BTW, get a grip it’s not a national epidemic) and the much larger group who disapprove of Kaepernick and Nike are motivated by racism. Your disparaging conclusion reflects an ugly inherent prejudice, but it is also based on considerable ignorance of the entire matter.

It’s impossible to say that there aren’t actual racists among those who disapprove of the man and the company, but it is a terribly unfair charge to level at all of the people who are displeased with him and Nike, and before you do it again elsewhere you should check your own Christian bonafides.

I certainly can’t speak for everyone who you are assuming to be racist, but I would bet quite a lot of money that I personally know a lot more people who disapprove of Kaepernick and Nike than you do and if you took a minute and tried to put yourself in their places (assuming you have any wiggle room within that narrow mind) you wouldn’t find it very hard to come up with alternative motivations.

The people I know or have read, consider his demonstration to be an offensive act of disrespect for the nation they love. It's difficult for me to believe that you seriously think that Kaepernick's kneeling is a sign of respect. Considering that he has not once suggested it was and that when he first engaged in his theatrics he wore socks that depicted police as pigs, and praised the brutal dictator Fidel Castro during one of his press conferences you would be foolish to continue to think this way.

They also believe, correctly, that Nike is cynically using the man's notoriety and controversial stance (popular among a great many people) to A) Sell more shoes and B) Cleanse themselves among progressives of the taint of their past and continuing abusive practices concerning overseas labor.

Nike is a nasty piece of work and not because it is using Kaepernick as a spokesman. It is a multinational corporation with nearly $35 billion in revenue in 2017; that pays its assembly line workers about 2.5 percent of production costs; that faces accusations that its factories bar independent inspections of working conditions; whose workers frequently faint from heat and exhaustion, and suffer wage theft, forced overtime, restrictions on their use of toilets, exposure to toxic solvents, and padlocked exit doors.

Your simplistic portrait of Kaepernick is difficult to take seriously, but perhaps it is genuinely based on ignorance in which case you should know:
A) This man, Kaepernick, is a millionaire and was smart enough to not blow the money he made playing football. From a financial standpoint, he doesn't need to work another day in his life.

B) Nike had an endorsement deal with Kaepernick prior to this recent announcement and, in fact, prior to the start of his antics. This is by no means the case of a desperate, unemployed man trying to find works so he can take care of his family

C) The man didn't simply kneel down during the anthem. If he had, people would just be wondering what the hell he was doing. It was a political demonstration and he was perfectly honest about that fact. He told anyone who would listen.

D) He has been very critical of police, the criminal justice system and America in general. This is perfectly fine. He has every right to do so, just like everyone burning their Nike shoes. The right to criticize America doesn't come with a right to be free of criticism for doing so. Criticizing Kaepernick and Nike is not preventing either of them from expressing their views, and it is simply stupid to suggest that it is ipso facto racism.

E) One of Nike's ad lines, in essence, claims that Kaepernick sacrificed everything for his cause. This is nonsense. Nothing like that has happened. His skills were on the decline. He was QB when the 49'ers last made it to the Super Bowl, but they lost and he was unable to get them back. NFL teams have every right to replace players with people they feel will do the job better and they do so all of the time. The 49ers didn't cut Kaepernick. They offered him less than he was making and wouldn't promise him the starting QB position so he left. The Denver Broncos offered him a job but it didn't match what he wanted and so he didn't take it. Obviously, this was his prerogative, but it's not true that he sacrificed his football career to take a stand about anything.

He didn't sacrifice his wealth. He's still a very wealthy man.

He is now much more famous than he ever was...even when he was playing in the Super Bowl. People who can't name a single other NFL player know who he is and he is in high demand for interviews by news and sports networks.

Not only has he not sacrificed everything, he hasn't sacrificed anything.

Referencing the Civil Rights Movement and MLK in the same post with Kaepernick reflects a poor appreciation of both.

Rev. Martin Luther King, Medger Evans, James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, Mickey Schwerner, Rev. George Lee, Lamar Smith, Harry and Harriette Moore and at least 35 other civil rights activists truly sacrificed everything for their cause. They all confronted oppressive, unjust institutional racism and they all were murdered.

The men and women who marched down the streets of Selma and Birmingham endured foul insults, rocks and spittle, fire hoses and police dogs. Those who were locals were all identified by the white-controlled city governments and you can rest assured that more than one of them suffered, at the very least, indignities and further injustice as a result of their participation. They all confronted oppressive, unjust institutional racism with a lot more on the line than an endorsement contract, or the starting quarterback position on an NFL team

Rosa Parks confronted blatant racism and injustice in the only way available to her and while, thankfully, she did not suffer bodily harm or the loss of her life as a result, she very easily could have.

The young men and women who braved the insults, taunts, and threats of racists by being the first of their race to integrate certain Southern schools sacrificed the normal life of a student that they had every right to expect and enjoy.

None of these people did so in expectation of any monetary reward or celebrity. None of them, to my knowledge, did so in ways that could easily be interpreted as disrespecting the nation that they simply wanted to treat them with the equality of justice and opportunity they deserved as citizens. They didn't riot, they didn't ambush and assassinate police officers, they didn't celebrate brutal dictators guilty of the very same oppression they were fighting, and, more to the point of this thread, they didn't in anyway rationalize or attempt to excuse such actions.

Attempting to favorably compare Kaepernick to any of these true heroes is ignorant and offensive. By comparison, he is a privileged dilettante playing at being a civil rights activist.

This is a faux controversy. Despite all the BS, it not about free speech. First of all, the NFL isn't the government and just as Facebook censoring conservative posts isn't a violation of the 1st Amendment, neither is anything the NFL might do about putting an end to "Take the Knee"

Secondly, the football field is the workplace for NFL players. What employer, outside of football, would tolerate one of its employees making any sort of political statement or demonstration in front of clients or customers, not to mention one that was guaranteed to piss off at least half of those witnessing it? The answer is none! None of the other professional sports do and neither would your employer or the employer of every other person posting at A2K. It's insane, and it's already resulted in a loss of revenue. Teams have every right to fine, suspend or fire any employee who does something like this...including players. You can bet your bottom that someone in the team's front office would get the ax if they did this. However, the owners (or at least a majority of them) are, apparently, gutless. I don't know how else to explain it. It's certainly not a matter of principle. These (mostly) men will pay violent miscreants (men who beat up their wives or girlfriends, sexually assault women in the bathrooms of bars, abuse their kids, repeatedly drive under the influence of booze and or drugs, carry unlicensed handguns, and even in one case was accused of murder) millions to play the game if they think it will help them win. They couldn't care less about morality and the character (good or bad) of a player as long as he gets them W's. Kaepernick wasn't blackballed because he was a troublemaker, he's not playing because he isn't worth the kind of money he wants. And once he was gone, the "Take the Knee" didn't stop and so revenues keep declining. The people who love Kap and find the Take the Knee demonstrations so heroic are, by and large, not football fans. They are not making up for the paying customers who have had it with the NFL.

I get why people have decided to boycott Nike and I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. People on the left do it all the time and that's fine too. I stopped buying Nike products when I first learned they used child labor in Asia to make their shoes. I then aped the couple of shirts and hats I had that bore their Swoosh so as not to be a walking billboard for them.

Nike made a decision as respects Kaepernick not only knowing full well that it would piss off a lot of people but counting on that fact. I don't believe it to be the case, but it wouldn't shock me to learn that they produced the shoe burning videos found across the internet. It's marketing team is clever enough to know that, in the main, liberals aren't cheering it's announcement because they're so engaged in Kaepernick's cause, but because they know it pisses off the conservatives they detest: generally men and regardless of gender, folks who view national symbols like the flag and the anthem as sacred... Trump voters. If they play this thing properly the Nike swoosh could become a symbol of the #Resistance and just as many Trump supporters wear MAGA hats to piss off liberals, liberals might start buying Nike products to piss off conservatives. The fact that they are trying to cash in on the deep division in this country is what infuriates me the most.

Even more than your very un-Christian attitude toward a great many of your fellow Americans.

This is a disappointingly absurd comment from someone who is usually much more rational.

Does your employer ask you to stand for the national anthem in a public spectacle of patriotism? If my employer did this, I would definitely complain. In any engineering profession, a company couldn't get away with this demand. People wouldn't stand for it.

I kind of agree with your points about business... although they are one sided.

But the NFL has really screwed itself here. I have no sympathy for them.

And the use of Patriotism by conservatives to shut down the Black Lives Matter movement (which undeniably has a valid point to make) is rather ugly.

I wonder if Finn realizes that Rosa Parks wasn't White.

Just curious, but did you intend that to have a double meaning, or was it a happy coincidence?