Colin Kaepernick Praises Cuban Dictator Fidel Castro

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

It was a variety of media people. I have never watched Jon Oliver, so I can't say if he is funny or not.

The point is, these liberal media people are completely clueless. If you were to watch them, and believe they had a clue, Trumps win would be a huge shock to you. All of the people you thought were so smart have been revealed as basically retarded.

They feel lied to, deceived, scammed etc. and are having a difficult time understanding reality.

Oliver is wrong a lot, and has a bad case of DDS but never the less he is funny

[bcking 3,157]

Oliver is wrong a lot, and has a bad case of DDS but never the less he is funny

DDS is what?

I don't think he is "wrong a lot" as much as he focuses on a topic with his slant and picks the videos and evidence that supports it. He doesn't always provide a well rounded view of issues. If it's inconvenient for his story he just won't mention it.

Most of what he talks about aren't things where people are "right" or "wrong". They are all grey area topics generally, he just leans strongly one way.

[MarkPerry 488]

Ya thanks. I don't watch sports. I know who he is (doesn't kneel during the national anthem...or doesn't put his hand on his heart. Something like that) I just have never understood why people care. If I did watch him it wouldn't be for his mind or his political opinions, it would be for his abiltiy to run and pass a ball on a field.

I agree. Just like almost any country if the person is a professional athlete or a singer or movie star there will be a group of people who will look up the them and hero worship them.. These football players get paid $20 million dollars per season to play a kids game, and many will look up to them. I think it is stupid they get paid that much, but also good for them if someone is dumb enough to pay that much. They don't save lives, They don't help society.

[MarkPerry 488]

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/11/25/colin-kaepernick-praises-fidel-castro-defends-t-shirt

If this guy was in another city and not the ultra liberal San Francisco. I can bet you one of his team mates would of already knocked all his teeth out of his mouth for his actions.

[smilesammich 10,727]

If this guy was in another city and not the ultra liberal San Francisco. I can bet you one of his team mates would of already knocked all his teeth out of his mouth for his actions.

i see why you're a trump fan. you really, really hate the first amendment.

[bcking 3,157]

If this guy was in another city and not the ultra liberal San Francisco. I can bet you one of his team mates would of already knocked all his teeth out of his mouth for his actions.

And then that other player would no longer have a job.

I don't care much for what the guy says or does, as I said before, but he has the right to say/do it without someone assaulting him.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

i see why you're a trump fan. you really, really hate the first amendment.

the first amendment does not mean there are not repercussions from what one says.

[smilesammich 10,727]

the first amendment does not mean there are not repercussions from what one says.

we're talking about ck and his right to exercise the first. he hasn't stepped outside of his protected right into the realm of questionable free speech that would deserve repercussion of physical violence as markperry suggests. precisely the opposite. ck has a right to his opinion and a right to voice it if he chooses. people can disagree with him, boycott whatever team he plays on, write furious letters to his coach/team owner and try to get him fired, but he doesn't deserve physical violence because he doesn't share you're personal opinion. come on charles, you're better than this.

[Teddy B 17,252]

the first amendment does not mean there are not repercussions from what one says.

Imagine if the 1st amendment was written like the VJ TOS?

[bcking 3,157]

the first amendment does not mean there are not repercussions from what one says.

"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."

Most would interpret that to mean that Congress should not pass any laws that punishes the freedom of speech. Otherwise it's not really "free".

Now yes there can be other repercussions from other sources (like the example of a teammate punching him in the face).

[smilesammich 10,727]

Now yes there can be other repercussions from other sources (like the example of a teammate punching him in the face).

but that repercussion could not be justified as righteous.

[Dakine10 5,452]

If this guy was in another city and not the ultra liberal San Francisco. I can bet you one of his team mates would of already knocked all his teeth out of his mouth for his actions.

Football players are drafted. Liberal football players don't all go play in San Francisco. He has as many players support him on other teams as he does on his own team.

[bcking 3,157]

we're talking about ck and his right to exercise the first. he hasn't stepped outside of his protected right into the realm of questionable free speech that would deserve repercussion of physical violence as markperry suggests. precisely the opposite. ck has a right to his opinion and a right to voice it if he chooses. people can disagree with him, boycott whatever team he plays on, write furious letters to his coach/team owner and try to get him fired, but he doesn't deserve physical violence because he doesn't share you're personal opinion. come on charles, you're better than this.

I think what charles was saying is you may have the freedom to speak your mind, and the government may not stop you, but other people may try to "punish you". If someone did punch the guy in the face, the guy who did the punching would get in trouble. However, prosecuting the assault wouldn't negative it happening. He still would have been punched in the face. So there are "repercussions" if other people don't agree with you and are willing to break the law to punish you.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Imagine if the 1st amendment was written like the VJ TOS?

Give it time.

[bcking 3,157]

but that repercussion could not be justified as righteous.

Of course not. Completely agree. However that doesn't negate that it happened.

If someone shot you in the face, it wouldn't be righteous. But you would still be shot in the face.

People are free to exercise their freedom of speech. They should feel safe in the knowledge that their government won't punish them. However, they need to accept the risk that some vigilante may try to punish them. Have you watched Black Mirror? The last episode of the newest season on Netflix addresses this a little bit.

Edited December 1, 2016 by bcking