502
Black national anthem sends MAGA into meltdown
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
502 points (92.8% liked)
News
39233 readers
1556 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Your statement presupposes that MAGAs are mad because this is somehow illegal. How did you come to such a conclusion?
They didn't, at least not in what I read.
They're just outlining how stupid the argument is.
They made 6 statements, each ending with "that's protected speech", referred to a "legal basis" and "legal status", and mentioned that the SuperbOwl was a private event, as if someone was implying otherwise. Not sure how else you interpret that but please share if you have another perspective.
E: LOL you people are literally delusional. Zero objectivity.
All of those six statements were predicated with “This is such a non-thing that it hurts to even consider how stupid it is.“
Ergo, let’s not make it a thing…
And then they immediately "made it a thing" by writing out a strawman argument, which I addressed. I don't understand where the confusion is coming from.
No, they didn't. The point that were made all stated that everything's protected by free speech. No one here is upset about the Black National Anthem being sung, you're just trying to stir up shit. Ergo, DON'T MAKE IT A THING.
Yes. They did.
Yes, I got that. My point (once again) is no one thinks it is illegal, which makes the argument it a strawman (ie: arguing against a point no one is making).
Oh look, another strawman.
I'm really not sure what this is supposed to mean in this context. I didn't "make it a thing". It was "made a thing" by whoever decided to sing it, the people who were upset by it, the article that was published, and the person replying to the article before I even knew it took place.
Oh look, someone trying to stir up a dumb argument on the internet because they need attention.
Yes, that's definitely what's happening. I need attention from anonymous strangers on the internet. 🤦♂️ It's definitely not that someone had a bad take. Deny deny deny.
ooh look, another strawman argument. strawman arguments all over the place today!
I don't think you understand what that means
I understand perfectly. It means this is not a thing, and you never should have tried to make it one.
😂 No, that's not what it means.
still wastin' that time I see
Are you actively trying to give us an example of what MAGA outrage actually looks like? Because from here, reading your rants…. You’re coming off like a very upset Trump supporter.
You replied to a comment with a laughing emoji and insist that I'm "outraged"? Look at yourself bud.
Oh I forgot, as long as you add a laughing emoji, you’re completely fine…. bud.
There's nothing in any of my comments to suggest that I'm "outraged". You can project whatever emotions you want onto my comments if that's what makes you happy. There's nothing I can do about it and don't care anyway. Just know that you're only lying to yourself.
You don't know what a straw man argument is do you?
Of course I do. I've already explained it elsewhere. It's when someone (like the person I replied to) fabricates a fallacious argument their opposition supposedly holds (like the idea that singing a particular song is illegal) and then tries to tear down the argument they themselves fabricated as evidence that their opposition is wrong.
You missed statement 0.
No. I didn't.
Oh okay so you chose to ignore it and draw your own conclusions at what point they were making, got it.
Once again, no, I did not.
Dog they just listed reasons they think the maga reaction is stupid and you've got a whole write up as to why maga doesn't care about legality. You missed the plot it's okay.
I did not write "a whole write up", dog. It was 2 sentences. All of their reasons were legal, which is what I addressed.
🤦♂️ No. Wrong again. My point was that it's not a legal issue.
We know that though. We know they only care because they're racist. The commenter doesn't care if it's a legal issue or not. They just think it's stupid and listed 6 reasons they think that. Move on it ain't that deep.
Then why did they take the time to list 6 reasons why it's legal? 🤷
Just put your shovel down and move on.
Because it highlights a very obvious reason they have no reason to complain other than racism. This is like the fucking "I like waffles" tweet manifesting itself.
LOL yes, let's make up fake arguments to tear down, then assert that the only possible answer is the argument we pulled out of our ass!
Are you suggesting there is a non-racist reason to be upset about the black national anthem?
There are racist reasons and there are what I would consider to be illegitimate, but also perfectly non-racist, reasons someone might be upset.
Replace the national anthem with fucking Alanis Morissette or literally anything else and people are going to be outraged.
E: no you guys are right, I don't know what I was thinking, everything bad is the fault of racism. I repent of my sins.
In this context "that's protected speech" means roughly, "STFU maga, nothing you can do about it, and you have no basis for your tantum."
No I did.
No I really did
Yes. It is. All the time.
Except it's not.
this pedantic bullshit isn't worth your time. don't let them distract you from important work.
The larger context of why anyone is talking about what is sung at the Super Bowl should have been enough of a set up, but apparently not.
This entire stunt is predicated on the right’s frustration that they couldn’t do anything about black athletes and allies being disrespectful during the National Anthem (a legally defined song with etiquette spelled out in the US legal code), which is protected speech.
Now, in my opinion, they have a Super Bowl to posture about eight months before a presidential election. They want sound bites and over-the-top reactions so that they can paint themselves the victims of a hypocritical, leftist, anti-freedom conspiratorial media machine. This part of that “projection” plank in the modern GOP.
My original post was simply outlining that no matter how you slice it, there is nothing to be mad about them “protesting” the Black National Anthem. I added in a rhetorical refrain to drive home the point while beating a dead horse for effect.
Thank you
Ah yes "known troll" = someone who disagrees with me. LOL sure bud
Good thing you blocked me.