An Open Letter to ABC Good Morning America & the NFL -- Boycott Them

I’ve been a viewer of GMA for many years (over 30 – since Joan Lunden & David Hartman), but that ended Monday, Sept. 25, 2017 – a month ago.  While entertaining and somewhat informative (I rely on other sources for more balance), I have long put up with occasionally clear political bias.  But your coverage that morning of the NFL protests was too much to stomach, and drove me over my threshold for tolerance.  I could just as well watch MSNBC for that kind of coverage.  I have now been watching the CBS morning program, because CBS had the courage to fire a VP who made such despicable remarks about the Las Vegas shooting victims.  I will never patronize anyone who contributes to legitimizing those who dishonor or threaten those brave protectors of society, who for instance performed so well in the Las Vegas shootings.   

I seriously doubt anyone at ABC will take the time to read or understand my reasoning because you are comfortable in your bubble, but I’ll first give bullet points before expounding.  I doubt you would make any changes as a result anyway, although I’m sure I represent a significant number of people.  But that’s alright – I’ll also post this open letter on Facebook and my political blog.  We have a right to protest, as well.

      1.    First  Amendment right & civil/moral right are 2 different things

2.       Biased promotion of the protest, in part to spite the president & the agenda of those who voted for him, and further divide the country at a dangerous time, is petty, undemocratic, unjournalistic and potentially even geopolitically dangerous

3.       Opportunistically politicizing the national anthem at a sporting event (the wrong venue) to intentionally offend many fans, who revere what the flag stands for more than football, is divisive and counterproductive, and promotes uncivility, & disrespect for others, the flag, the country, the sport and NFL rules

4.       Giving legitimacy to a movement built largely on misinformation, & that incites racial strife and venting (rather than dialogue) and police assassinations, is irresponsible and dishonest at best, and has blood on its hands at worst

Those in favor of the protests have been saying “it’s not about the flag or anthem.”  How many times have I heard Democrats on the Left say that whenever someone says it’s not about X, it really is about X.?  But they’ve made it about the flag, and dragged the flag into it, by choosing that venue for maximal impact.  And they wouldn’t if they had more respect for the flag and anthem and all they stand for.  So yes, as some are saying, it’s not only about the flag.  Nor is the NFL protest only about police shootings or inequality.  The divisiveness you’re promoting through biased coverage, while of course good for rousing the Democrat base, is bad for the country, and the effectiveness of its president at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of possible war with the 4^th largest military in the world (thanks in large part to the mess left by 2 Democrat presidents), and recovery of 2 states and a territory massively suffering from recent hurricanes.  And yes, such an isolated and reckless regime as N. Korea may interpret such open divisiveness and disrespect for our national symbols as weakness that they’d be tempted to exploit and take advantage of militarily.

Oliver Wendell Holmes penned the 5^th verse of the Star Spangled Banner during a time of great division in the Civil War:

“When our land is illum’d with Liberty’s smile,
If a foe from within strike a blow at her glory,
Down, down, with the traitor that dares to defile
The flag of her stars and the page of her story!
By the millions unchain’d who our birthright have gained
We will keep her bright blazon forever unstained!
And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave
While the land of the free is the home of the brave.”

Abraham Lincoln: “From whence shall we expect the approach of danger? Shall some trans-Atlantic military giant step the earth and crush us at a blow? Never. All the armies of Europe and Asia...could not by force take a drink from the Ohio River or make a track on the Blue Ridge in the trial of a thousand years. No, if destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we will live forever or die by suicide.”  -- Shame to those who contribute to the suicide.

Of course players have a constitutional right to do what they do – that’s not contested, and needn’t be continually brought up.  Just as many of the rest of us have the right to be offended, to voice it verbally and financially.  Conservatives are much more selective about boycotts than the Left.  I only wish I were a football fan so I could boycott more than just your program.  I cancelled my L.A. Times subscription years ago for similar reasons (bias), and I had to laugh when a work colleague recently called it a conservative paper – I said he must be left of Bernie Sanders.  And employers have the right to fire people who don’t adhere to codes of conduct agreed to upon hiring, e.g. players who agree to wear uniforms & stand during the national anthem.  Just as Trump indicated.  At my workplace, the conduct code prohibits wearing of clothing with controversial (e.g., political) logos, and political discussions – for good reason, to insure a collegial and non-threatening workplace for us and customers.  I could be disciplined or fired for breaking that code.  

There are reasons for such codes.  And if a football player belligerently went on the field without his uniform, of course he could/should be disciplined or fired.  Uniforms, as in the military, show they’re all on the same team, fighting together.  We salute and honor the flag & anthem to show we’re on the same team.  Not a perfect team, but a pretty darn good one, and we’ll rue the day if we allow or promote divisiveness that will bring this nation down.  But maybe that is what some want, to start all over again – as if there’s a better demonstrated model (certainly not failed Communism or socialism, or other totalitarian systems).  These protests by rich athletes are biting the hand that feeds them.  As are the outspoken entertainers at performances and awards ceremonies.

But legal right and moral right are two different things.  In a civil society, fortunately many act civilly without force of law.  Many of us also have the right to be offended by their actions – which is no doubt why they choose to protest the way they do.  But it doesn’t make us more sympathetic to their cause, and won’t cow us, unlike those who go along with it merely because of pressure or fad (now a coach has his 8 year old boys doing it), or to try to humor teammates for team cohesion, rather than true agreement or appropriateness (you can no doubt find many North Koreans who can relate to that).  And in fact, it works the opposite – it reinforces my disdain for the radicals in the Black Lives movement whose uncontrolled hatred and reckless actions and words have resulted in the large number of terrorist police assassinations recently, putting us all, but especially their communities, at risk.  It also reminds me of the hysteria & rhetoric that led to the recent shooting of many GOP congressmen, one of them nearly killed.  We conservatives have been lectured many times on our language (“hate speech”) and the negative effects it can have, but don’t you think you might benefit from a bit of your own advice?  Or do you think you’re above that, and always morally superior and exempt?  Or that you can just get away with it like Harvey Weinstein – for quite a while, but eventually the bills came due.

That, too, is a totally inappropriate approach to the perceived problems.  I say perceived, because the statistics have clearly shown that the rates of police shootings of unarmed Blacks, in similar circumstances as unarmed whites, is actually lower, and has decreased, due likely to the “Ferguson effect.”  And “perceived” because even the most frequently cited cases such as Ferguson are built on what is an established lie (“hands up, don’t shoot”), as clear testimony by Blacks to the Grand Jury showed.  And Obama’s AG looked very hard to find institutional racism in Ferguson, and couldn’t.  There may well be as strong a correlation of bad police interactions with poor people, regardless of race.  These are lies that the media seem all too happy to propagate.  Racism, contrary to their premise, is not systemic across the nation, or worthy of protesting the entire system, or random police assassinations, or protesting the one symbol that unites us, and represents the principles that have made us probably the most ethnically diverse, and least racist, nation in the world.  And in many other ways a great nation.  Not perfect, but great, and always dedicated to a “more perfect union.” 

I believe those who believe otherwise are simply uninformed, or untraveled, and don’t appreciate what they have.  I have been to 35 countries, on all continents but Antarctica, and lived in Europe for 2 years, and can vouch for the veracity of this.  I’m realistic enough to acknowledge that in an imperfect world, even in the best countries, there will be some exceptions, and cases of racism – even some police.  But that’s exactly the point – they are by far the exception.  When you make broad generalizations about police, or systemic racism, or white supremacy, you’re ignorantly going down the wrong path.  You’re fomenting divisiveness, that while perhaps yielding some short-term political benefit for the base of one group, will have nothing but negative consequences for the society as a whole in the longer run, and even, I believe, for the Black community in particular, where by far the largest number of shootings is black on black.  And if you are content to contribute to that, you do it to your own condemnation.

Proverbs 6: 16  ¶ These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17  A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

18  An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

19  A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

I think all too often the real racists see everything through race-colored glasses – looking so hard to find every last vestige of racism (even Obama acknowledged tremendous advances since the ‘50’s) that they find it in places it doesn’t, or likely doesn’t, exist, and blow any real racism they find way out of proportion to promote some political or even financial agenda.  Many effectively claim to read others’ minds, hearts and motives, based on a single inarticulate statement that could be interpreted as racism or white supremacy by the PC police.  Or based on a difference in policy approach to achieve what both sides seek to achieve -- true prosperity, better healthcare, etc.  Those who go through life with a victim mentality will be hateful/resentful and generally won’t take the personal responsibility to improve themselves and their situation, but rather resign themselves & make excuses, waiting for the “oppression” to cease.  It is cruel to indoctrinate young Blacks that the world (or country) is against them – it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.  One that is not based in truth, after a black president, Supreme Court justices, AG, secretary of state, secretary of defense, etc., etc.  

I have been highly critical of Democrat presidents long before Obama, and though I see the symbolic value of our first black president, and admired Obama’s family (as many do Trump’s), I don’t think it fair to call me, or anyone who criticized Obama over ideology or policy, a racist.  That’s ludicrous, and blatant political race-baiting, name-calling, and just avoiding any rational defense of the policies.  Just like many who call all whites or conservatives white supremacists and racists.  Wasn’t it Martin Luther King who looked forward to the day when all would be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character?  I find by that definition far fewer real racists who are conservative than progressive – those who constantly play upon racial identity politics and policy, and are far more prevalent than the real white supremacists. 

I think it an outrageous libel, driven by misrepresentation of his words, irrational emotion and resentment at an election loss, and dislike of his personality, that some call our president a white supremacist, or make Nazi comparisons.  And a real stretch to now accuse him of more preoccupation with criticizing the NFL protesters than with, for instance, helping Puerto Rico – clearly another racist accusation.  They (as well as most of the media, according to a Harvard survey) forsake objectivity and ignore all that he has been doing (besides tweeting) – a more energetic man and rigorous schedule at 70 than Obama at 56.  And ignore the logistical problems of a 3-front hurricane war, and especially for a remote island, and ignore all the efforts that have been made.  I would never say that Trump is always right, and in fact I opposed him vigorously on my blog during the primaries.  But neither would I say, like the impression I get from much of the mainstream media, that he is always wrong, and ignore the good accomplishments.  Just as the media seemed to fawn over Obama and give the impression that he was always right.  Journalistic standards have been sorely compromised.  In everyday language, “fake news.”

And no doubt the growth of the protests following Trump’s statements are out of spite primarily by those who always disliked Trump, not out of any greater belief or devotion to their so-called noble and pure cause.  After Accusing Trump with “it’s not just about the flag.”

I believe there are more appropriate, and effective, ways and venues for protesting or expression, without politicizing every last corner of public life (sports, the Emmys, etc., etc.).  You’re seeing some strong backlash to the protests, precisely because people feel so strongly about respecting that symbol that unites us and means so much to those who appreciate it.  Maybe our feelings are somewhat like an atheist coming into my church in the middle of a meeting or prayer and acting up.  Of course the Left is much less concerned about offending people who revere the flag or Christianity (or the Book of Mormon), than concerned about offending Muslims (or the Koran).  Gee, I wonder why that might be – could it be death threats by radicals?  What a noble and courageous and egalitarian reason!  And maybe our feelings about these protests against the American flag & anthem are also similar to our resentment at seeing immigrant activists carrying Mexican flags.  It couldn’t be more logically ridiculous or counterproductive.  And if media types can’t relate to or understand any of these analogies, let’s say they’re doing a live TV story and someone jumps in front of the camera for some cause or other unrelated to the story.  Maybe legal, but opportunistic and not considerate or civil, or appropriate, right?  We don’t go to sports events, or other entertainment, or church to hear political claptrap, and will resent it when it’s thrust upon us in other than appropriate venues where we go wanting and expecting to hear it, from more qualified people.  And we resent it when politically biased preaching or cheerleading masquerades as journalistic “reporting.”

I no more enjoy having Leftism/Progressivism thrust in my face by ill-informed entertainers in the media misusing their platform and celebrity than they would enjoy in-your-face conservatism in the same venue.  At least one knows to expect political commentary on partisan TV and radio programs, and one can choose whether to watch or listen.  Of course the Left doesn’t tolerate conservatives even speaking in meetings at public universities – e.g., the Antifa riots, and the hate speech they themselves spew.  There is much more hate on their side, as evidenced by their actions.  So much for the free speech movement of the ‘60’s, and liberal so-called “tolerance” and diversity.  And so much for ability to hear or effectively counter arguments with rationality rather than tantrums, name-calling, violence and intimidation – traditional tactics of the totalitarian Left from Lenin to Stalin to Mao to Castro, etc., etc.  But of course accusing conservatives of fascism is simply projection, and Leftist disinformation.  You can correct me the day you see Trump establishing the 3^rd Reich or any of its pillars.  In the meantime, please stop misusing language.

 

 “Well Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

  “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

The response is attributed to BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention.

McHenry’s notes were first published in The American Historical Review,vol. 11, 1906, and the anecdote on p. 618 reads: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy. A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.”