As unwelcome as he seems to be, he should change his name to Colon Klapperdick.

just got done watching the Michael Bennett arrest video

over 20 minutes:

video at link

https://deadspin.com/new-micha...er-you-wa-1819024503

The author of the article claims the video "neither proves nor disproves any of what Bennett or the LVMPD have claimed about the encounter"

But you would need to be pretty thick not to watch and conclude the police thought he was a shooting suspect.

Also note that Bennett jumped over a fence and dropped 7 feet onto a busy roadway.



see Bennett lower left

Ouch! NFL TV ratings drop again as angry fans exercise their own rights

Pretty soon, it could be NFL team owners on their knees begging TV viewers to come back.

Once again in Week 4 of the 2017 season, as players continued their sitting-kneeling protests against something, former fans silently exercised their right of free speech using TV remotes.
TRENDING:
Ouch! NFL TV ratings drop again as angry fans exercise their own rights

Despite the always insightful, candid commentary of Jon Gruden, this week’s Monday Night game on ESPN lost audience again. It was actually a pretty good game, by all accounts. After the 29-20 win, Kansas City remained the only unbeaten team at 4-0, while Washington fell to 2-2.

This game though drew 13% fewer viewers than last week. And the drop was worse — 16% — in the key demo that ad buyers covet.

The game drew 11.9 million viewers, down almost two million from last week.

Perhaps even more disturbing for the 32 billionaire team owners, another sponsor pulled its ads over the protest controversy.

Said Steve Kalafer, a mega-car-dealer and baseball team owner in New Jersey:

The National Football League and its owners have shown their fans and marketing partners that they do not have a comprehensive policy to ensure that players stand and show respect for America and our flag during the playing of the national anthem. We have cancelled all of our NFL advertising (for 2017)…As the NFL parses the important nationwide issues of ‘social justice’ and ‘freedom of speech,’ it is clear that a firm direction by them is not forthcoming.

Kalafer said a decision on his 2018 substantial ad buy remained undecided now pending NFL action. He explained his problem is with the league and owners who failed to give direction to players on how best to exercise their free speech rights while also showing respect to the flag and National Anthem.

“Owners buried their heads in the sand,” Kalafer added.

The Wall Street Journal reported that despite an appearance of league unity, team owners clashed in a recent meeting over the league’s combative response to White House criticisms. “We made our point,” said league spokesman Joe Lockhart, who used to be Bill Clinton’s spokesman. “There was no point in responding to every tweet or every statement.”

Reaction against protests by the multi-millionaire players has been emotional and nationwide with President Trump weighing in. We wrote here Monday about a Georgia high school football team that had its own surprising patriotic response to the pro protests.

The next opportunity for angry fans to not view a televised NFL game comes Thursday evening when the Patriots visit the Buccaneers.

As a disappointed and likely apocryphal Hollywood producer once said about a box-office flop, “If people don’t want to come, you can’t stop them.”

https://hotair.com/archives/20...ver-player-protests/

Just saw that Budweiser has decided not to pull their advertising from the NFL. Knew they didn't have the spine to do it. They're owned by a European company that's run by a Brazilian.

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
Just saw that Budweiser has decided not to pull their advertising from the NFL. Knew they didn't have the spine to do it. They're owned by a European company that's run by a Brazilian.

I'll gladly avoid their piss-water from now on.

Boys, there are better beers out there.

quote:

Wasn't the NAACP gonna rain down Hell fire on the NFL if what's-his-name wasn't signed?

They were gonna; but then they realized that would put them more or less in alignment with American patriots, and they can't have that. So since we're banishing the NFL from TVs around the nation, they're in a real conundrum. See, if they ban the NFL, they're siding with the rest of us who think these shit-stains should stand for the anthem. But if they don't ban the NFL, they're kind of saying ole Crapperdick may have lost a job on his merits and not his skin color. They're in a tight spot. They have to wait for us to quit banning them so that they can start banning them.

Just another unfortunate example of whites appropriating black culture.

Notice the contrast between the antics of the NFL and the baseball teams just starting the playoffs.

Actually, it is even more vivid. Notice the Yankees are neatly groomed, no longhair, beards etc.

I am disappointed with Anheuser-Busch.

I think that they pussied out.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Notice the contrast between the antics of the NFL and the baseball teams just starting the playoffs.

Actually, it is even more vivid. Notice the Yankees are neatly groomed, no longhair, beards etc.

Our oldest son was a rebellious sort who had to learn not to step on a rake by doing it.....a lot. The second Jr darthfuster learned by watching his older brother suffer. Jr DF#2 has had a much smoother life.

I haven't watched football on tv in years. I could probably get interested if random staffing runs by a Warthog was involved.

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
Just saw that Budweiser has decided not to pull their advertising from the NFL. Knew they didn't have the spine to do it. They're owned by a European company that's run by a Brazilian.

Never thought they would drop it. All they wanted that "input" for was to use as leverage in negotiating a more favorable price for said sponsorship.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:

Boys, there are better beers out there.

Well now, there's an understatement.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
Just saw that Budweiser has decided not to pull their advertising from the NFL. Knew they didn't have the spine to do it. They're owned by a European company that's run by a Brazilian.

I'll gladly avoid their piss-water from now on.

Boys, there are better beers out there.

FIFY

(Didn't think they would, btw.)

Budweiser won't release the poll results or the comments, of course.
1. Yes, they probably will use it as a negotiating tactic for lower rates.
2. Budweiser is in the business of selling beer. Most people who watch football also drink beer. It's as simple as that. Of course, fewer eyeballs watching the NFL means they will pay less for those ads.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Budweiser won't release the poll results or the comments, of course.
1. Yes, they probably will use it as a negotiating tactic for lower rates.
2. Budweiser is in the business of selling beer. Most people who watch football also drink beer. It's as simple as that. Of course, fewer eyeballs watching the NFL means they will pay less for those ads.

Sad, but probably true.

Think, though, about the burning loyalty Anheuser-Busch would've/could've engendered in the majority of Americans who hold their flag and anthem in reverence had they only had the courage to follow through. It would've been worth more in terms of brand loyalty and consumption than all their NFL advertising budget could ever gain in a decade.

Any update on USAA?

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v...9001/?#sp=show-clips

NFL leadership shake-up could be in the future

Oct. 06, 2017 - 3:58 - FBN’s Deidre Bolton and radio talk show host Dom Giordano discuss whether NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will remain in his position, despite the recent kneeling controversy that infuriated many viewers.

As usual - Walter makes to much sense

Blacks vs. Police

Let’s throw out a few numbers so we can put in perspective the NFL players taking a knee during the playing of the national anthem. Many say they are protesting against police treatment of blacks and racial discrimination. We might ask just how much sense their protest makes.

According to The Washington Post, 737 people have been shot and killed by police this year in the United States. Of that number, there were 329 whites, 165 blacks, 112 Hispanics, 24 members of other races and 107 people whose race was unknown (http://tinyurl.com/zyz2tpq). In Illinois, home to one of our most dangerous cities — Chicago — 18 people have been shot and killed by police this year. In the city itself, police have shot and killed 10 people and shot and wounded 10 others. Somebody should ask the kneeling black NFL players why they are protesting this kind of killing in the Windy City and ignoring other sources of black death.

Here are the Chicago numbers for the ignored deaths. So far in 2017, there have been 533 murders and 2,880 shootings. On average, a person is shot every two hours and 17 minutes and murdered every 12 1/2 hours (http://tinyurl.com/o36cqfc). In 2016, when Colin Kaepernick started taking a knee, Chicago witnessed 806 murders and 4,379 shootings. It turns out that most of the murder victims are black. Adding to the tragedy is the fact that Chicago has a 12.7 percent murder clearance rate. That means that when a black person is murdered, his perpetrator is found and charged with his murder less than 13 percent of the time.

Similar statistics regarding police killing blacks versus blacks killing blacks apply to many of our predominantly black urban centers, such as Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, St. Louis and Oakland. Many Americans, including me, see the black NFL player protest of police brutality as pathetic, useless showboating. Seeing as these players have made no open protest against the thousands of blacks being murdered and maimed by blacks, they must view it as trivial in comparison with the police killings. Most of the police killings fit into the category of justified homicide.

NFL players are not by themselves. How much condemnation do black politicians, civil rights leaders and liberal whites give to the wanton black homicides in our cities? When have you heard them condemning the very low clearance rate, whereby most black murderers get away with murder? Do you believe they would be just as silent if it were the Ku Klux Klan committing the murders?

What’s to blame for this mayhem? If you ask an intellectual, a leftist or an academic in a sociology or psychology department, he will tell you that it is caused by poverty, discrimination and a lack of opportunities. But the black murder rate and other crime statistics in the 1940s and ’50s were not nearly so high as they are now. I wonder whether your intellectual, leftist or academic would explain that we had less black poverty, less racial discrimination and far greater opportunities for blacks during earlier periods than we do today. He’d have to be an unrepentant idiot to make such an utterance.

So what can be done? Black people need to find new heroes. Right now, at least in terms of the support given, their heroes are criminals such as Baltimore’s Freddie Gray, Ferguson’s Michael Brown and Florida’s Trayvon Martin. Black support tends to go toward the criminals in the community rather than to the overwhelming number of people in the community who are law-abiding. That needs to end. What also needs to end is the lack of respect for and cooperation with police officers. Some police are crooked, but black people are likelier to be victims of violent confrontations with police officers than whites simply because blacks commit more violent crimes than whites per capita.

For a race of people, these crime statistics are by no means flattering, but if something good is to be done about it, we cannot fall prey to the blame games that black politicians, black NFL players, civil rights leaders and white liberals want to play. If their vision is accepted, we can expect little improvement of the status quo.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=31162?omhide=true

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Budweiser won't release the poll results or the comments, of course.
1. Yes, they probably will use it as a negotiating tactic for lower rates.
2. Budweiser is in the business of selling beer. Most people who watch football also drink beer. It's as simple as that. Of course, fewer eyeballs watching the NFL means they will pay less for those ads.

Sad, but probably true.

Think, though, about the burning loyalty Anheuser-Busch would've/could've engendered in the majority of Americans who hold their flag and anthem in reverence had they only had the courage to follow through. It would've been worth more in terms of brand loyalty and consumption than all their NFL advertising budget could ever gain in a decade.

Anheuser Busch made a mistake in taking this poll in the first place. They probably never had any intention of pulling their ads they just wanted to give the perception that they were as pissed as their customers. Don't think they anticipated how pissed the customers were and the response they received which is why they won't release numbers or comments.

My guess is they will now lose customers based on many of these Joe six pack guys will realize they have been played.
Most these domestic bar beers taste the same after one or two anyhow.

Best thing to come from Budweiser are the Clydesdales any how.

There is respectful kneeling...



And then there is ignorant kneeling. The Clydesdales seem to have the IQ advantage.