Nebraska's Michael Rose-Ivey receives racial backlash for anthem protest

[Landlord]

 

Ah, GBRHouston, the great moral crusader of Huskerboard, wishing others would take the high road that he is on (and letting us know about it), and spending all his time talking about how he is trying to change the subject of what we are talking about back to the subject we should be talking about.

 

Oh praise him.

Ah, Landlord of Memorial Stadium, the sarcastic moral crusader of Huskerboard, knowing that I am by myself on here and trying to form constructive arguments when I keep being belittled, attacked, and sometimes have constructive arguments against me for having opinions different than the majority of people on this thread.

 

Oh praise him.

 

 

 

Thanks for this. 90% of your posts in this thread claim that 'the other side' is doing different things or stooping lower than you are, and you just proved yourself wrong by taking the bait so easily.

[GBRHouston]

 

 

Ah, GBRHouston, the great moral crusader of Huskerboard, wishing others would take the high road that he is on (and letting us know about it), and spending all his time talking about how he is trying to change the subject of what we are talking about back to the subject we should be talking about.

 

Oh praise him.

Ah, Landlord of Memorial Stadium, the sarcastic moral crusader of Huskerboard, knowing that I am by myself on here and trying to form constructive arguments when I keep being belittled, attacked, and sometimes have constructive arguments against me for having opinions different than the majority of people on this thread.

 

Oh praise him.

 

 

 

Thanks for this. 90% of your posts in this thread claim that 'the other side' is doing different things or stooping lower than you are, and you just proved yourself wrong by taking the bait so easily.

 

That is also called returning the sarcasm.

[GBRHouston]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I combined half the hate I have gotten on this thread and said it out loud, I would be rightfully banned. Calling someone "not worth talking to on this matter" or "ignorant" is not a way to sway them to your side. It is a way to get them pissed off and hate your side even more. Everybody has opinions that not everybody will agree with, but can't we at least be a bit respectful while still disagreeing?

You aren't going to be swayed. You've said so earlier in this thread. The fact that you ignore evidence that refutes points you try to make proves that you are ignorant to what the protests are about and have no desire to learn.

 

And like Nebfanatic said, ignorance is merely a lack of knowledge. There are many topics I am ignorant about. But I don't go on message boards to try and have a discussion about those topics.

I made my first comment on page 3 because I hate anthem protests. I wasn't intending to get this into it. Simple as that.

Nobody is forcing you to post in this thread.

 

But when you do, you are taking part in a discussion. If you refuse to see the other side and refuse to learn about why they are protesting, you are going to get backlash.

I see the other side, and I don't like it. Either you are doing the same thing as me, or you are refusing to see my side yourself.

You refuse to see the other side. I, along with several other posters, have tried to show you the other side and you refuse to read links, or listen to anything that doesn't align with your view.

 

I've seen your side. It's the side of intolerance and hate. And I can't be swayed to that side.

I have seen the links, and I still don't agree. My side is also not a side of intolerance and hate. I do not hate anyone on the other side. I just disagree. My side is simply the fact that I do not like protesting the anthem. Simple as that. Stop overthinking it.

Whether you like it or not, whether you want to or not, by saying African-American poverty has nothing to do with racism -- among other things you've posted -- you create an impenetrable wall of intolerance.

Oops, I keep forgetting about the MultiQuote feature. Oh well.

 

That is not intolerance. Intolerance is having a flat out hatred for people different than yourself. I can like the black community while disliking what they are doing. I am getting more intolerance and hatred for my opinion than what I am projecting out.

Not liking "what [the black community] is doing" is intolerance if you make absolutely no serious effort to try to empathize with the background they are coming from and look into the "why." You and lots of others often write that kind of thing off like it's nothing, and then say things like "it's a cultural problem."

 

When you say Blacks' persecution 50 years ago has nothing to do with the situation, you show a complete lack of understanding of the sitiation. It is one of the biggest factors there is.

 

That's not what we are focused on now, anyway. I may have been wrong about that, but not saying I was for sure. I am saying that I have a strong dislike for the way the protests happen, and that is what I would like to focus on, because we cannot force away what has happened in the past. We have to let it get better over time. Forcing doesn't work in most situations in life, so not sure why that would be different now.

 

 

I may be guilty of 3, and if I am guilty of 2 it's unconsciously. All the rest, I have not done to anyone else but people have done to me.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I combined half the hate I have gotten on this thread and said it out loud, I would be rightfully banned. Calling someone "not worth talking to on this matter" or "ignorant" is not a way to sway them to your side. It is a way to get them pissed off and hate your side even more. Everybody has opinions that not everybody will agree with, but can't we at least be a bit respectful while still disagreeing?

You aren't going to be swayed. You've said so earlier in this thread. The fact that you ignore evidence that refutes points you try to make proves that you are ignorant to what the protests are about and have no desire to learn.

 

And like Nebfanatic said, ignorance is merely a lack of knowledge. There are many topics I am ignorant about. But I don't go on message boards to try and have a discussion about those topics.

I made my first comment on page 3 because I hate anthem protests. I wasn't intending to get this into it. Simple as that.

Nobody is forcing you to post in this thread.

 

But when you do, you are taking part in a discussion. If you refuse to see the other side and refuse to learn about why they are protesting, you are going to get backlash.

I see the other side, and I don't like it. Either you are doing the same thing as me, or you are refusing to see my side yourself.

You refuse to see the other side. I, along with several other posters, have tried to show you the other side and you refuse to read links, or listen to anything that doesn't align with your view.

 

I've seen your side. It's the side of intolerance and hate. And I can't be swayed to that side.

I have seen the links, and I still don't agree. My side is also not a side of intolerance and hate. I do not hate anyone on the other side. I just disagree. My side is simply the fact that I do not like protesting the anthem. Simple as that. Stop overthinking it.

Whether you like it or not, whether you want to or not, by saying African-American poverty has nothing to do with racism -- among other things you've posted -- you create an impenetrable wall of intolerance.

Oops, I keep forgetting about the MultiQuote feature. Oh well.

 

That is not intolerance. Intolerance is having a flat out hatred for people different than yourself. I can like the black community while disliking what they are doing. I am getting more intolerance and hatred for my opinion than what I am projecting out.

Not liking "what [the black community] is doing" is intolerance if you make absolutely no serious effort to try to empathize with the background they are coming from and look into the "why." You and lots of others often write that kind of thing off like it's nothing, and then say things like "it's a cultural problem."

 

When you say Blacks' persecution 50 years ago has nothing to do with the situation, you show a complete lack of understanding of the sitiation. It is one of the biggest factors there is.

 

That's not what we are focused on now, anyway. I may have been wrong about that, but not saying I was for sure. I am saying that I have a strong dislike for the way the protests happen, and that is what I would like to focus on, because we cannot force away what has happened in the past. We have to let it get better over time. Forcing doesn't work in most situations in life, so not sure why that would be different now.

 

 

I may be guilty of 3, and if I am guilty of 2 it's unconsciously. All the rest, I have not done to anyone else but people have done to me.

 

 

Just when I worry that I might have been too hard on you I realize, no. No I wasn't.

 

It's ironic in a thread on victimhood.

[GBRHouston]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I combined half the hate I have gotten on this thread and said it out loud, I would be rightfully banned. Calling someone "not worth talking to on this matter" or "ignorant" is not a way to sway them to your side. It is a way to get them pissed off and hate your side even more. Everybody has opinions that not everybody will agree with, but can't we at least be a bit respectful while still disagreeing?

You aren't going to be swayed. You've said so earlier in this thread. The fact that you ignore evidence that refutes points you try to make proves that you are ignorant to what the protests are about and have no desire to learn.

 

And like Nebfanatic said, ignorance is merely a lack of knowledge. There are many topics I am ignorant about. But I don't go on message boards to try and have a discussion about those topics.

I made my first comment on page 3 because I hate anthem protests. I wasn't intending to get this into it. Simple as that.

Nobody is forcing you to post in this thread.

 

But when you do, you are taking part in a discussion. If you refuse to see the other side and refuse to learn about why they are protesting, you are going to get backlash.

I see the other side, and I don't like it. Either you are doing the same thing as me, or you are refusing to see my side yourself.

You refuse to see the other side. I, along with several other posters, have tried to show you the other side and you refuse to read links, or listen to anything that doesn't align with your view.

 

I've seen your side. It's the side of intolerance and hate. And I can't be swayed to that side.

I have seen the links, and I still don't agree. My side is also not a side of intolerance and hate. I do not hate anyone on the other side. I just disagree. My side is simply the fact that I do not like protesting the anthem. Simple as that. Stop overthinking it.

Whether you like it or not, whether you want to or not, by saying African-American poverty has nothing to do with racism -- among other things you've posted -- you create an impenetrable wall of intolerance.

Oops, I keep forgetting about the MultiQuote feature. Oh well.

 

That is not intolerance. Intolerance is having a flat out hatred for people different than yourself. I can like the black community while disliking what they are doing. I am getting more intolerance and hatred for my opinion than what I am projecting out.

Not liking "what [the black community] is doing" is intolerance if you make absolutely no serious effort to try to empathize with the background they are coming from and look into the "why." You and lots of others often write that kind of thing off like it's nothing, and then say things like "it's a cultural problem."

 

When you say Blacks' persecution 50 years ago has nothing to do with the situation, you show a complete lack of understanding of the sitiation. It is one of the biggest factors there is.

 

That's not what we are focused on now, anyway. I may have been wrong about that, but not saying I was for sure. I am saying that I have a strong dislike for the way the protests happen, and that is what I would like to focus on, because we cannot force away what has happened in the past. We have to let it get better over time. Forcing doesn't work in most situations in life, so not sure why that would be different now.

 

 

I may be guilty of 3, and if I am guilty of 2 it's unconsciously. All the rest, I have not done to anyone else but people have done to me.

 

 

Just when I worry that I might have been too hard on you I realize, no. No I wasn't.

 

It's ironic in a thread on victimhood.

 

I exaggerated when I said all the rest. I didn't say you specifically. In fact, I was actually able to respect you in a way. I won't say names, but you were not the hardest on me by far.

[zoogs]

I'm sympathetic to the idea that we shouldn't put in all these new rules on police. They have a dangerous job, though let's be clear that violent crime is not at an all-time high here; far from it.

 

More to the point, I think simple calls for more policy to be directed at police represent sort of the "easy way out" to me. We are eager to offload responsibility. Oh, yes, it's undeniable that there are incredible disparities that still persist. It's a nice fantasy to suppose that this is the fault of some prevalent breed of terrible racist policemen.

 

It's less comfortable to admit that it's all of us. A society that inherited various levels of racism, continues to not really want to confront that legacy fully. These things being true will always result in bad outcomes. I'd like to see a lot more justice, yes, but that starts with all of us. Rarely does it start with the casting of villains.

[Jim Hammer]

 

 

I do not think anyone that is not on my side is a bad person, I just disagree with them. I wish the other side thought that about people on my side.

Don't worry so much about "your side or "the other side".

 

You be you.

 

If I were the only one who felt the way I do about this issue and was going up against 200 or so other posters, I'd stick with my convictions if I felt strong enough, but I would also reexamine things to see why I was the only one who felt the way I did. I stick by my convictions, but keep an open mind in case I have made a mistake.

 

This is what I have been wanting to hear from everyone the past two pages. If everyone else was willing to put the knife down then I would too.

 

You misunderstand. You are on the wrong side here. The difference is you refuse to listen to the other side or make any attempt to understand it. I will stand by my convictions, but in the face of overwhelming opposition, I would try to understand the other side. You don't.

 

And your biggest problem as a poster is you keep changing your argument. If you had said I don't like the methods of the protest and left it at that, no one would care. But you keep doubling and tripling down on your take that everything is hunky-dory and no change needs to take place.

[GBRHouston]

 

 

 

I do not think anyone that is not on my side is a bad person, I just disagree with them. I wish the other side thought that about people on my side.

Don't worry so much about "your side or "the other side".

 

You be you.

 

If I were the only one who felt the way I do about this issue and was going up against 200 or so other posters, I'd stick with my convictions if I felt strong enough, but I would also reexamine things to see why I was the only one who felt the way I did. I stick by my convictions, but keep an open mind in case I have made a mistake.

 

This is what I have been wanting to hear from everyone the past two pages. If everyone else was willing to put the knife down then I would too.

 

You misunderstand. You are on the wrong side here. The difference is you refuse to listen to the other side or make any attempt to understand it. I will stand by my convictions, but in the face of overwhelming opposition, I would try to understand the other side. You don't.

 

And your biggest problem as a poster is you keep changing your argument. If you had said I don't like the methods of the protest and left it at that, no one would care. But you keep doubling and tripling down on your take that everything is hunky-dory and no change needs to take place.

 

I understand your side. I just don't agree with it. And I stand by cops. Any disrespect shown to them and I'll defend them. I have been harassed by power-hungry cops before for taking photos in a public place. The bad ones are a huge, huge minority.

[GSG]

Emails show a Nebraska regent was ‘embarrassed’ by Cornhusker football players’ protest

 

Correspondence obtained by SB Nation shows Hal Daub’s private messages prior to publicly criticizing a September protest

 

 

Up the administrative ladder at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, rage boiled from one specific leader. That anger mirrored a large section of Cornhusker fans after three players knelt and protested in September prior to the team facing Northwestern.

Emails obtained by SB Nation last week show that Regent Hal Daub had correspondence with President Hank Bounds and explained that he was disgusted with the way Michael Rose-Ivey, Mohamed Barry, and DaiShon Neal protested. He made it clear that the football field was not a “forum for personal, ethnic or racial grievances.”

[GBRHouston]

Emails show a Nebraska regent was ‘embarrassed’ by Cornhusker football players’ protest

 

Correspondence obtained by SB Nation shows Hal Daub’s private messages prior to publicly criticizing a September protest

 

 

Up the administrative ladder at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, rage boiled from one specific leader. That anger mirrored a large section of Cornhusker fans after three players knelt and protested in September prior to the team facing Northwestern.

Emails obtained by SB Nation last week show that Regent Hal Daub had correspondence with President Hank Bounds and explained that he was disgusted with the way Michael Rose-Ivey, Mohamed Barry, and DaiShon Neal protested. He made it clear that the football field was not a “forum for personal, ethnic or racial grievances.”

 

Kicking them off the team would be the wrong thing to do, but other than that, he is not wrong. There is definitely a time and place to do it. They can decide that for themselves. They chose the national anthem, which is the wrong time and place. It is disrespectful to the country to do that.

 

I like how Mike Riley is handling it, and it's probably how I would too. Staying out of it, and focusing on football. I like how MOST of the players are doing that, too.

[knapplc]

Chancellor Ronnie Green:

In support of our student athletes

by Ronnie Green · September 28, 2016

Students, faculty and staff-

As you know, the University of Nebraska has been in the spotlight over the last few days in regard to freedom of speech. This has been in response to a peaceful demonstration by three of our student athletes during the national anthem at the football game last Saturday.

NU President Bounds sent you an email earlier today expressing his unwavering support, and the University of Nebraska system’s principled support, of freedom of speech. We are proud and indeed fortunate to be engaged in the noble calling of higher education in the United States, and part of an organization that considers this freedom to be an indelible right.

I would add that the demonstration by our student-athletes represents the fact that we are an inclusive university; one that welcomes diverse views. The diversity in our thoughts and opinions is what leads to productive discourse. What isn’t productive, however, are threats or threatening behavior. I am saddened that the peaceful -- and by their intent respectful and prayer-centered -- actions of our students resulted in threats from a few individuals in public forums. I would encourage all to reflect on our beliefs on diversity and inclusion: “True excellence requires that each individual be able to work and learn in an atmosphere of respect, dignity, and acceptance. Our commitment requires each of us to continuously ensure our interactions be respectful, protect free speech and inspire academic freedom.”

While I fully recognize and appreciate that there are many who have strongly held views that this demonstration could have been achieved in a manner that did not conflate with the observance and allegiance to our national anthem, the fact remains that their personal choice to speak in this way is a protected right that we all are afforded by the Constitution. As pointed out so well by President Bounds, this same right allows our student athletes to kneel in prayer at midfield before or after competition – a tradition that is highly valued by many people as well.

Our student-athletes have provided us an opportunity to examine our own behaviors, engage in productive dialogue and consider alternate views about important issues of our time. This is essential at a place of higher learning.

There is indeed no place like Nebraska and I so appreciate your work and commitment to our mission.

Go Big Red.

President Hank Bounds:

President Bounds’ Statement on Free Speech

September 28, 2016

By Hank Bounds
President, University of Nebraska

To the University of Nebraska Community:

Over the past few days, our university has been at the center of a statewide conversation about free speech and the rights of student-athletes to peacefully protest. Many Nebraskans, including some of you, have expressed their opinions about the decision by three NU football players to kneel during the national anthem before Saturday's game. Some have been supportive. Others have disagreed, in some cases passionately so.

That all are free to share their view is the privilege of living in the greatest country in the world.

“College campuses, as much as any space, must be places where robust, even uncomfortable, debate is welcomed and encouraged. I want every student, faculty and staff member to know that I am unwavering in my support of your right to participate in these dialogues.”

I have served in the military. I understand love of country and love of the flag and I know that freedom is not free. I recognize that some are upset by what they saw on Saturday night. But let me be clear. The University of Nebraska will not restrict the First Amendment rights of any student or employee. Our position on this issue is abundantly clear. As stated in Board of Regents policy, which has been in place for almost a half-century: “Members of the academic community have the right to extensive latitude in making their opinions known… The public exploration and resolution of differing views can be successful only when groups and individuals discuss the issues in forums where the right to disagree, speak freely and be heard is preserved.”

The same freedoms that protect the speech of those who have joined the conversation in recent days also protect our students' speech – whether they're kneeling during the national anthem, holding the American flag on the field, praying after a game or expressing their opinion during class or on campus. All of that speech falls under the same category. All of it is protected.

Our nation is dealing with difficult issues today, as we have for virtually our entire history. Each of us will react differently. College campuses, as much as any space, must be places where robust, even uncomfortable, debate is welcomed and encouraged. I want every student, faculty and staff member to know that I am unwavering in my support of your right to participate in these dialogues in the manner you choose under the First Amendment and University of Nebraska policy.

Thank you for all that you do for the University of Nebraska. I am honored and humbled to serve with you.

 

 

 

We should be proud, as fans of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, to see such statements in response to the wrong-mindedness of some of our local politicians.

 

Not just because they're supporting the 1st Amendment freedoms of our students and student-athletes, but because it is the right thing to do.

[QMany]