Dissenters No Longer Welcome in the Land of the Free

ap_18009060465489_wide-8cdaaf3a50404001d3a807b8fe55dce3fb75210f-s800-c85From this: President Trump praised the NFL’s decision to mandate that players either stand for the national anthem or stay in the locker room in a TV interview that aired Thursday, and questioned whether players who choose not to stand “proudly” should be in the country at all. “Well, I think that’s good,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News. “I don’t think people should be staying in locker rooms, but still I think it’s good. You have to stand, proudly, for the national anthem or you shouldn’t be playing, you shouldn’t be there, maybe you shouldn’t be in the country.”

Of course, this raises some eyebrows, as it sounds rather authoritarian.  But doesn’t the Constitution permit the stifling of dissent? Can’t the president force us all to agree with him and not question his authority? How can we make America great again, if people are allowed to express disapproval?

Take me as an example.  Suppose I have views that diverge from that of the president–not saying that I do, but just suppose.  How much longer should I be allowed to remain in the land of the free and the home of the brave?  Two weeks?  A month?

But wait a second.  How can you tell whether I’m standing proudly? A new offense, perhaps–“ashamed while standing,” or maybe even “ambivalent while standing?” To get there, of course, we’d need something like Orwell’s thought crime; I guess I’m just lucky that no technology exists (yet) for the NSA to read my thoughts.

All kidding aside, if you think this is healthy for this country, you need a little refresher on the concept of democracy and the content of the U.S. Constitution.  

Tagged with: ,
2 comments on “Dissenters No Longer Welcome in the Land of the Free
  1. marcopolo says:

    Craig,

    Authoritarian ? Stifling dissent ? Unconstitutional ? Hmmmmm,… doesn’t the constitution allow the President, or anyone, freedom to express their views ? President trump has expressed his view, you remain free to express dissent.

    Football players are very highly paid athletes employed to perform in accordance with the wishes of their employers. No one is suggesting these employees don’t have the right to exercise their democratic right to protest, just not use their employers facilities or time to indulge in political activity.

    Hardly an unreasonable stipulation for guys paid an average of $80,000 per week, or in some cases, more than $1,000,000 per week !

  2. marcopolo says:

    Craig,

    I notice you made no mention of the President inviting to the White House the great-great niece of the cruelly treated first black heavyweight boxer, Jack Johnson. Linda Bell Haywood attended with other boxing luminaries while the President officially pardon her ancestor.

    For more than 40 years US presidents have been promising to pardon Jack Johnson for decades, ever since the biographical play and later film, The Great White Hope was released in 1970.

    Upon hearing of the opportunity pardon Johnson, in the President’s own words “Today we righted a wrong, Jack Johnson was not treated fairly, and we have corrected that and I’m very honored to have done it.”

    If you’re going to lambast the President for errors, surely it’s only fair to acknowledge when he gets it right !