LeBron James on the Politics of Sports

Steve Tisch on the NFL and the National Anthem

On Roseanne and The Great Revolt

Coastal Elites are still trying to reconcile in their minds how Donald John Trump became the 45th President of the United States.  They were convicted that First Lady Senator Obama Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton would break the glass ceiling and be ushered into the Oval Office.  After all, she was pitted against a boorish Manhattan mogul who was a political novice and was alienated from key segments of his current political party. 

That unshakable arrogance makes the HBO excerpts  of Obama Administration point player Ben Rhodes on Election Night 2016 all the more delightful to those who chant "Drain the Swamp". In the aftermath of the election upset, Democrats pushed a Russian collusion conceit which managed to have a Special Counsel named but who garnered up scant evidence of a Russian nexus to Trump's campaign.

The mainstream media which became progressive provocateurs broadcast a bevy of anti-Trump material, gorgonizing anyone who supported President Trump as being a racist, sexist homophobic xenophobe instead of investigating how Mr. Trump was able to break the supposed Blue Wall for Democrats in the Upper Midwest. 

Salena Zito and Brad Todd's recent bestseller "The Great Revolt" (2018) examined seven groups of unlikely voters for a populist titularly Republican candidate.  Many of those groups, like "Red Blooded and Blue Collar", "Rough Rebounders" and "Perotistas" were either born and bred Democrats or previously unreliable voters.  During the promotional campaign for "The Great Revolt", Ms. Zito pointed to the resurgence of the Roseanne Show to illustrate how "The Forgotten Man" was gaining prominence in the body politic despite the barrage of anti-Trump sentiment on the airways.

When the Rosanne show was revived as a mid season replacement, it garnered 22 million viewers, in part because it portrayed Trump supporters as having reasons for their sentiments rather than a knee jerk condemnation of their politically incorrect heresy. 

Recently, Rosanne Barr tweeted a crude crack against Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett.  Despite Roseanne Barr offering a quick social media apology, the Roseanne Show was cancelled by by ABC Entertainment and the eleven seasons of reruns were pulled off Hulu and TVLand.  

Some Trump supporters saw nothing wrong with the controversial comparison, noting that Rosanne Barr has a history of making questionable quips. Conservatives have pointed out the numerous cases of hypocrisy that progressives say untoward things against their enemies and there are no consequences.  

MSNBC's Chris Hayes may have unwittingly revealed the progressive playbook by too overtly suggesting that Roseanne reflected the reputation of Trump voters as being racist, sexist, homophobic xenophobes.  But it was Todd Starnes who noted that ABC can't stomach Trump supporters. 

It is dubious that ABC will suffer from an acute boycott by incensed Rosanne viewers.  But their parent company Disney's stock sunk  2.3% on the news of the cancellation.  It may well be that the Rosanne Show is picked up by another outlet, as Fox Television is bringing back  back the ratings winning Tim Allen comedy  "Last Man Standing" which appeals to a conservative audience.  


There are other indications that the steamrolling of "Fly Over Country" values does not always work.  Despite the onslaught of publicity for Black Lives Matter and the Take The Knee campaigns, the NFL instituted a new policy that prohibits player protests on the field during the National Anthem.  Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones claims that Donald Trump told him "You can't win... this one lifts me" on the Take the Knee controversy.  That leads you to believe that Trump's popularity triumphs, rather than understanding that patriotic, non-politically correct American values are the crux of the ratings decline. 

Democrats and elites have positioned themselves to be progressive polemicists, thinking that their political prescriptions are inevitable in its ascent. Seeing the collapse in CNN's ratings and the incredible erosion of Democrat favorability in generic congressional polling ought to shake them of their smugness. 

Diamond and Silk on Taking a Knee During the National Anthem

Resisting New NFL National Anthem Rule

Tony Dungy on the Super Bowl

On the Attempted Sidelining of MLK's Legacy

Lou Holtz on the NFL's Take the Knee Conundrum

A Show After the Show for Ferguson the Play's Final Closing Curtain

Conservative entertainment activist Phelim Mc Aleer held the World Premiere of his  2015 play "Ferguson the Play" in New York City . The drama depicts the shooting of Michael Brown by a greater St. Louis police officer  in 2014 which sparked several days of rioting. This ugly incident which galvanized the Black Lives Matter movement under the ersatz slogan "Hands up, don't shoot."  Mc Aleer wrote the play because he believed that the truth that it was a defensive shooting was not getting out because of media bias buying into a progressive activist agenda.

What made Ferguson the play notable is that playwright McAleer constructed the verbatum theater completely using the released transcript of the Ferguson Grand Jury.  McAleer and director Jerry Dixon worked with a multi-racial cast to put on the controversial courtroom drama  for a short run at the 30th Street Playhouse in Manhattan.

On the closing night, Cedric Benjamin commadeered the stage at the close to voice his displeasure as he thought that the play was unbalanced and biased.





Director Jerry Dixon shut down the rogue actor's rant, but the histrionic polemic spilled out into the street, with actor Benjamin accusing playwright Mc Aleer  of "white arrogance".  




Mc Aleer later praised the director for shutting down the unscripted lecture by a cast member.

It seems ironic that the actor invoked arrogance against the playwright, who raised over  $51,000 in a crowdfunding campaign to mount the production, when the actor could not just say his lines. Mc Aleer deliberately brought Ferguson the play to New York after the cast of Hamilton accosted attendee then Vice President Elect Mike Pence to defy the conceit that conservatives are not welcomed in the New York theater community.

On the first production, which was a stage reading in 2015, nine members of the Los Angeles cast walked off, with one actor claiming that he did not trust Mc Aleer's motives.  At least those thespians were professional enough to disassociate themselves with a theatrical vehicle with which they could not agree.

Ironically, Cedric Benjamin's grand gesture might prove to be counterproductive.  It has drawn more attention to a small production, thrusting it into the news.  Phelim Mc Aleer continues to fund raise over the controversy with an expressed purpose of continuing to perform Ferguson the Play in New York.   Mc Aleer took great consolation that one BLM attendee who attended the play and left shocked and mystified that "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" was a lie.

Pollster George Barna recently sought to understand why evangelical Christians supported Donald Trump, who seemed to contradict many of their mores.  A large part of the answer is that SAGE-cons (Spiritually Aware Governmentally Engaged) conservatives have great distrust in the mainstream (a.ka. lamestream) media because of biased reporting against Trump that they now use alternate media sources to avoid "fake news".  By banding together on core issues like rule of law,  Barna contends that this 11% sliver of of the American electorate voting for Donald Trump was "The Day Christians Change America" (2017).

The strength of SAGE-cons influencing America was shown more than for Election 2016.  The informal boycotts by football fans of the NFL as they tolerate players who Take A Knee during the National Anthem has severely cut into attendance along with television ratings and is influencing advertisers like Papa John's Pizza to pull back.  Such a motivated minority of SAGE-cons may well see Ferguson the Play as a chance to actuate their ideas and counter the "fake news" phenomenon in entertainment as well as cultural conceits.

NFL Players Pissed Off at Trump

Fox Sports sideline reporter Pam Oliver predicted on MSNBC that NFL players will continue to Take the Knee throughout the regular season.  Oliver opined the protest is about President Trump, while others have pushed a Black Lives Matter motivation or even an anti-American animus.

Former President Clinton spokesman Joel Lockhart, reportedly advised the NFL to shift the symbolic protest to locking arms to show unity during the National Anthem.  Unfortunately, not all players adhered to this crisis management suggestion.  In addition, the lock step pose still did not allay the ire of many patriotic NFL fans. 

It is unclear what sort of behavior that League officials will tolerate.  In the past, the NFL has threatened New York team players  from donning decals  to show solidarity with 9/11 victims.  More recently, the NFL denied the Dallas Cowboys  permission to wear a "5" on their helmets  to remember the fallen law enforcement officers from a shooting.  Yet antics like Odell Beckham Jr. seems to be tolerated.

A better question is what NFL fans will tolerate.  Television ratings are markedly down. Long time fans are publicly burning licensed merchandise and even tickets. 

"Rev." Jesse Jackson's Cotton Picking Advice on Taking A Knee

Perhaps Jesse Jackson should remember that the First Amendment refers to the government making laws against the free exercise of speech. Private entities, such as a professional football team, can restrict or fine speech and behavior by their employees. Hence, the NFL's Take The Knee moment does not apply, notwithstanding President Trump's blue collar blurtation about "Sons of Bitches" who do not respect the flag or the National Anthem. 

Despite "Rev." Jackson's assertion that the Take The Knee protest is not about race, he uses a Cotton Picking analogy, which would be a micro-aggression if it was uttered by someone else.

Jackson's suggestion again demonstrates that he is more inclined to organize political factions than organizing a church much less evangelizing the Gospel.

UPDATE 10/23/2017

A month after first making his controversial "cotton picking" sports analogy, Jesse Jackson was still trying to make hay over the controversy on Fox Sports F1.

Rush Limbaugh on the NFL Taking the Knee for the National Anthem

Roger Goodell on NFL Conduct

Newt Gingrich on NFL's Take The Knee

A Favorable First Amendment Slant Should Save the Redskin's Trademark

For several years, there has been a politically correct effort to force the Washington Redskins to change their name.  In fact, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was convinced with withdraw the NFL franchise's trademark protection in 1999 and 2014, citing that "the term redskin" as derogatory and offensive even though the USPTO had approved the mark over 80 years before. Washington Redskin's owner Daniel Synder appealed claiming that case law and the weight of the evidence had been ignored.  A federal district court agreed with the Patent Office's withdrawal of the trademark in July 2015. 

However, a Federal Appeals court handed down a ruling which may well be a game changer.  The Portland Oregon dance rock band "The Slants" won a Federal Appeals Court case which began in 2011 over their provocative moniker.  The Slants are composed of Asian Pacific Island band members and pride themselves as taking on racism presumably by embracing a name which many consider to be ethnic slander. 

The Slants

In a December 22, 2015 decision, the Federal Appeals Court ruled:

“Many of the marks rejected as disparaging convey hurtful speech that harms members of oft-stigmatized communities. But the First Amendment protects even hurtful speech...

The government cannot refuse to register disparaging marks because it disapproves of the expressive messages conveyed by the marks."

That ruling ended The Slant's legal Misery, but also serves as a strong indication that the Redskin's ruling will not stand. The Redskins were stripped of trademark protection because of "hurtful speech".  In addition, the Redskin's case is even stronger as the USPTO had already approved the trademark years before and then sought to yank it away.  However, because the Redskin's appeal is in another circuit, the Slant's ruling is not automatically set a precedent.  And the US Supreme Court could also overturn the Slant's First Amendment trademark protection.

But until then..

UPDATE: 01/18/2017:  The Slants get their day at the highest court in the land as Lee v. Tam reaches the Supreme Court. The justices will decide whether the government can penalize free speech which it finds offensive or if the government granting a trademark protection allows it to disassociate from ideas which the public might find offensive 

UPDATE: 06/19/2017:  In an opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court ruled 8-0 that the government can not refuse to register trademarks that are considered offensive.  The Supreme Court's ruled that the disparagement part of the trademark law, which had been a provision in effect since 1946, is unconstitutional.

Most believe that the Supreme Court's holding will hail favorably for the Washington Redskin's trademark dispute.