So essentially, you’re unable to articulate how Ginsburg was being racist. Could be because she wasn’t being racist in the slightest.

Some people watch and conclude that Black Lives Matter is fundamentally about disrespecting the nation and its government, and therefore I can easily see why Ginsburg wouldn’t find that an effective means of protest. Burning the American flag isn’t what turned the tide of opinion about the Vietnam War.

Kneeling is not that far from flag burning if you ask me. I’m not a fan of either but I don’t feel all that strongly about it either. Because I see both sides of it. Barry is just seeing the one side through his own political lens.

Currently he has a 10.4 million dollar contract with an additional 4 million in signing bonuses... so yes, I’d say he makes a good living.

For rich athletes, not standing during the anthem is the very definition of “the least you can do.”

Fuck Kaepernick and fuck you

Why? Maybe she just thinks it’s not an effective way to protest? (I tend to agree.)

You can be all for what Kaepernick is standing (or rather, not standing) for and still think it’s not an effective tool. Evidence: Most of the discussion was about whether or not he was respecting the flag, veterans, etc., and not on…

So... this means that the more nearly someone’s politics conform to your own, the more likable that person is. Which means that, to Barry Petchesky, the most likable person in the world is Barry Petchesky. Which is to say that this comment is self-regard masquerading as principle.

Pretty bush league to write an article and immediately comment yourself taking a shot at the subject of the article. If you felt this information was worthy, you should have put it in the article. As it is, you just look like a toolish jackass. I bet you “like” your own facebook posts, too.

But to her and a lot of people its not totally fine. I agree with the cause but completely disagree with his methods. Protesting the national anthem, regardless of the message is wrong. It looks like RBG and me agree on this one.

You working for this website makes you opinion highly suspect.

If you live in a bubble, sure.

It is not a bad opinion, its her opinion. Thinking someone is stupid for the way they exercise their rights is a great American freedom.

+1 This.

He writes for the former gawker media. Dissenting opinions are not only wrong, but evil!

He basically “liked a FB post” but IRL. Does it change anything at all? No. But if it makes him feel better about himself, then knock yourself out.

Subjecting people to ideological purity tests (like this article does) is what’s suspect. You act as if the only possible way someone could not agree with Kaepernick’s protest is if they are a full-fledged bigot.

Her friendship with Scalia reflects a trait that’s now viewed as a weakness, but is actually more or less…

Seriously. She’s disagreeing with them while upholding and defending their right to express their opinion.

I hear stuff like this and I wonder: really? Has he really “reignited” or advanced the discussion? Is there quantifiable proof? The advancement I’m seeing here is the race to see who can have the most original or creative National Anthem “protest.”

“I disagree with them but it’s their right to do it.”