Sports "Journalist:" The American Flag Is "Political" And We Must Keep Politics Out of Sports By Not Showing the Flag

Professional jocksniffers are the worst jocksniffers.

I believe the statement he made is intended to be sarcastic/ironic. I think he's whining about people telling him "Keep politics out of sport," so now he's trying to mock those people by claiming the simple display of the American flag is "political."

Which is stupid. The flag has some political character, but it's anodyne and vague -- I wouldn't tell a sportscaster to keep his politics out of sports if he said something anodyne and vague like "We all would like to see all races advance" or that kind of thing.

That's not the sort of politics-in-sports people object to, of course. And nor should this twit (spelling error?) take issue with the flag.

But here's the latest bitchy buttercup, getting all buttery and cuppish.

This is how crazy 2017 has become. The American flag is now, according to one NBC Sports baseball writer, a political statement.

Delicate NBC snowflake Craig Calcaterra was triggered Sunday when a giant American flag covered the field at an Atlanta Braves game, with Old Glory gracing the Jumbotrons, and a stirring military flyover to cap it all.

"Will you keep politics out of sports, please. We like sports to be politics-free," Calcaterra tweeted.

Now when people tweeted back to him about hixr tizzy, he defended his claim, and made it sound like he was serious (and not just engaging in childish mocking) about the flag being political.

But I think this was just post hoc reasoning. I still think he was just being a little bitch in his first tweet:

"People often wrap themselves in the flag in order to achieve political ends ... Maybe a flag, in and of itself isn't always political. A two-acre flag with a military flyover is saying something very specific, however," Calcaterra tweeted.

@PastorKrahn tweeted, "@craigcalcaterra I think there was a time when love for country wasn't considered political. And a lot of people would like to return to that time."

Craig responded, "@PastorKrahn Getting there requires people to accept that those who question our leaders and do not support all military ventures can still be patriots."

So... he's admitting he has to "get" to that place of loving his country only after people "accept that those who question our leaders and do not still support all military ventures can still be patriots"?

By the way: Where was Calcaterra during Obama's endless Drone Strikes for Peace, or when Obama was presiding over the largest loss of American life in Afghanistan?

Was dissent the highest form of patriotism then? Or has it only regained its position as the highest form of patriotism since sometime between November 8, 2016 and January 9, 2017?

I also don't think he reads the newspapers much -- in the Republican Party, for example, there is a real debate over the Syria strike. There are also those in the Democrat Party praising it.

So opinions vary on this -- and there is no strong effort that I have seen to brand people who disagree as "not patriots" or whatever. The debate I'm seeing seems to be on the principles of the thing, and has not (yet) degenerated into simple attacks on an opponent's morality, character, and patriotism.

By the way, this bitchy buttercup did in fact confirm my hunch that he was attempting to "troll the stick-to-sports crowd" (that is, the people who say that when they pay to watch sports on ESPN, or make themselves available as passive advertising recipients for ESPN and the other networks, they want the their side of the bargain (the sports), not further advertising (the politics).

And also by the way, if you guessed this guy probably looked like Rick Wilson's younger, even sadder brother, you are an astute observer of the physical-psychological interplay in human development.

posted by Ace at 01:27 PM

| Access Comments