And remind me, what was his crime again?

What I don’t get is that they suspended him for something that can not be proven in any way shape or form yet they ignored the fact that, on camera, he pulled up a woman’s shirt without her consent. That was straight assault right there, and Goodell was like, nah, were gonna go with the woman who asked people to lie…

Maybe the rest of you all need to learn to read better instead?

Cranston’s heart is in the right place, I can’t condemn him when I know he’s not a Trumptard or even a conservative.

Not a good look from a PR perspective. But that part has been singled out where it is nothing special.

We’re not there yet.

I wonder how compelling the players found the argument that this could impact revenue. Given the short-term nature of most players’ careers, and the longer-term guaranteed nature of the national tv deals, is that really the best argument?

Would it be naive of me to think that there was a way out of this that isn’t slimy? Granted there’s no union rep to ask, but would the protesters be (somewhat) mollified if the NFL said, “You know what? Now that you mention it, police brutality IS pretty bad. We’ll put $30 million a year into research, training, and…

All of these proposals, while well-meaning, fail to address the fundamental nature of using the anthem as a vehicle for demonstrating:

I’m kind of annoyed that there are so few comments remarking on this. That is a terrible press release, and if this were coming from the RNC, people here would be (rightly) tearing it to shreds.

That DNC statement is terrible. There’s no specific mention of Weinstein’s actions at all.

To preface, I voted for Hillary.

Go ahead and say it. The question was stupid. “Physicality of routes?” Seriously? I laughed too. Would trailblazer Pam Oliver or Cari Champion say something that dumb? No. The overreaction by white society is due to Cam being punished by them for nothing significant, while letting the Mannings, Bradys. and…

My personal feelings: fuck ‘em both. That’s the short answer.

It’s obviously not going to pass, Ryan will never allow it to set foot on the floor of the house. It is however a statement of intent from future presidential nominees who are looking to build their issues profile so Democrats can get an idea of what they stand for.

There’s no editorializing here. These are Donna Brazile’s words, she wrote them on her ipad, she sent them to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Where precisely would Wikileaks be inserting bias here?

There’s no editorializing here. These are Donna Brazile’s words, she wrote them on her ipad, she sent them to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Where precisely would Wikileaks be inserting bias here?

In my mind, it speaks to an organizational culture where rules were meant for other people.

It concerns me that so many people in the comments have no problems whatsoever that she leaked questions, but that they’re upset that this information was in an email.

It is still ridiculously FUCKED UP and if I choose to act like it isn’t that just makes me a dumbass, honestly.