The Left Will Provoke a Civil War

Continuing my previous post about the infeasibility of a “national divorce.”

You have to understand the Left is going to provoke a civil war.

One, their leaders, e.g., people in the Deep State, think they’re bullet-proof. I’m sure Rand Paul and Steve Scalise thought so too, and those incidents happened in non-war times. You’d think this would give the leftist leadership pause, but leftists aren’t known for adjusting their beliefs in response to reality.

Two, the powerful leftists are absolutely willing to “accept casualties” that will occur in a civil war. These people are psychotically evil; don’t think for a moment that millions of people dead is a bug to them. It’s a feature. Think I’m exaggerating? Ask yourself this: Did these people eagerly support the U.S.S.R., even after Stalin’s genocides were known?

Three, their left-wing followers farther down in the power structure – everyday lefties – are mostly incapable of believing a civil war can actually happen (they have no imagination in that respect) so they won’t back down to avoid one.

Four, the few everyday leftists who can believe a civil war is possible actually seem to believe that the immigrants they’re importing into the US (and every other western nation) will fight for them. Yes, they actually believe that immigrants are going to put their lives on the line protecting white liberals! LOL!!! Meanwhile, back in reality: As soon as the bullets start flying, the immigrants will scram for home! Jesus! White leftists may literally be infinitely stupid.

Five, many lefties in the universities, government, and media actually think that we don’t know that they’re our real enemy, and so they think that if a civil war does happen, it will consist of people on the right fighting with ISIS-type invaders, etc., while lefties sip latte in the Faculty Lounge of the Sociology Department. God, lefties are stupid. That immigrant thing is fooling almost no one on the right. Seriously, lefties, actually look through the comment trails of right-wing blogs some time. Everyone knows who the real enemies of western civilization are. On the rare occasion that someone says something assuming the invaders are the real enemy, other commenters jump in and correct them, pointing out that it’s actually the government and the media, etc.

The “Divorce” Thing Won’t Work

Recently the proposal for national divorce between Left and Right is bandied about more and more. Here’s the most recent example.

I’m glad to see that people on the right, judging by the comments at Vox Popoli, for example, are not falling for this delusion.

The divorce idea won’t work, for many reasons.

1) The Left doesn’t want it to work. Their entire thing is that they’re sado-control freaks. They don’t really believe in global warming or that it’s morally imperative to call a man in a dress a woman. Their thing is that they want to rule you against your will. That’s the whole point of leftism. They want to do things to you that you hate but are powerless to stop. That’s why we have to fight and defeat them. Please don’t think that they actually believe the things they say, e.g. that anyone who disagrees with Barack Obama about anything is a racist or whatever. What they want is to rule you against your will, without your consent, over your helpless objections. That’s their fantasy and their goal.

There is no other explanation for their insanity. Every other potential explanation fails. In their world you should not be allowed to call a male-to-female transvestite “him”… but you should be allowed to infect him with HIV without his knowledge. (See the movement to decriminalize knowingly infecting others with HIV without telling them.) Now ponder: Is there any way that a sane person could actually believe either of those things? Let alone both of them? That laws should prevent you from hurting someone’s feelings, but it’s OK to kill them? Please! Stop falling for the Left’s pretense that they believe whatever they claim to believe. They don’t.

A quick review of history reminds us that the bullshit rationales frequently change, but the last line of the argument is always the same:

“… therefore, it’s necessary to create an all-powerful totalitarian government and put me and people like me in charge of it.”

It used to be socialism, then it was briefly environmentalism, now it’s “You’re racist!” But the “conclusion” of the “argument” never changes.

This takes me to my next point.

2) The Left does not voluntarily let go of power.

They have stepped down, e.g., Obama leaving the White House in January 2017, because they knew there was no alternative. But when they think they have enough power to continue holding onto that power, as in the U.S.S.R., they don’t relinquish it until they have no choice, until it’s wrenched from their grasp.

And you think the Left is going to voluntarily let the Right walk away. No, not in a million years.

3) The Left is the parasite class. We, the hosts, will thrive without them. But they will not be better off without us. Parasites do not voluntarily let their hosts cast them off and escape.

The high-functioning ones who aren’t themselves directly dependent on welfare – Democrat politicians, e.g. – have parasites as their main constituency. And they can’t promise an ever-increasing rain of welfare goodies to a country composed of 90% parasites. There won’t be enough non-parasites to pay for it all!

4) If we did manage to break the country up into Right-Wing U.S.A. and Left-Wing U.S.A., they’d immediately start the subversion process against us, just as the U.S.S.R. did, and as many hostile foreign powers have done. They wouldn’t just leave us alone! People like them never have before! They always make it necessary to fight and defeat them.

5) Plus, we’d have even longer borders to defend. The invasion situation is an existential disaster for our country now. How would we survive if we had to, e.g., defend the entire border between California and the rest of the nation, in addition to what we’re trying to defend now? Be realistic.

6) Plus, how the fuck are we supposed to actually accomplish the ejection of leftists without civil war? Leftists aren’t going to voluntarily self-deport, for all the reasons I just mentioned. Additionally, you can’t tell a left-winger from a white right-winger just by looking, and they love infiltration and subversion from within. You know what leftists would really love? Staying in the Right-Wing U.S.A. and subverting its laws, culture, and new constitution right from the get-go. That would give these people screaming orgasms!

So we’d have to eject them after a period of naked violence. But the entire point of the divorce idea is to avoid a civil war, right? But implementing it would require a civil war! I’m not saying a civil war is avoidable. Au contraire, my entire point is that it’s not. It’s important to be realistic about that.

7) If the Left got a piece of the U.S.A., that would just be another advance and a secure base of operations from which they would launch their crusade to carve off even more of the U.S.A. That’s what they’ve always done for the last century or so. Victory doesn’t satisfy them; it just encourages them and sets up their next offensive.

E.g., the day after the Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is mandated by the Constitution (WTF?), the New York Times ran an editorial saying, Now on to the next campaign for gay rights.

It’s hard to think of something that would encourage them, energize them, and jack up their morale more, than carving off a piece of the United States of America itself. This nation, with its limited government, individual self-reliance, and gun-owning, freely-speaking people, has always been the Number One Enemy of the Left. If we lose a significant piece of our territory to them, that would be extremely bad for us in terms of the way it would energize them.

Furthermore, it would be just another instance of left-wing incrementalism. That’s how they try to accomplish all their goals, ever since they realized that outright Communist revolution was not going to happen in the U.S.A. Incrementalism is how they’re trying to kill off the Second Amendment, for example, as you might have noticed.

They want you to think that if you just appease them by carving off a chunk of your nation and ceding it to them, they’ll go away. Trust me, they laugh every time they read a right-winger write something like that. They’ll laugh at your naivete. Then they’ll take another piece. Then another…

No, the only way this ends is with a pile of bodies.

I don’t like it either! I had an entire life plan, and it did not involve a civil war started by power-mad psychotics! But we need to accept the hard fact that it’s now absolutely inevitable.

FISA Memo: FBI Lied to Obtain Wiretap Warrant on Trump Campaign

The just-released FISA memo can be read at innumerable links on the Net. (It’s only a few pages.) Here is one link:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-nunes-memo.html

The memo tells us this:

The FBI obtained a warrant under false pretenses to overturn the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election.

The FBI officials knew the allegations they used to get the warrant were at best unreliable, biased opposition research, and at worst total fabrications.

They knew the so-called Steele dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign, that is, by the political enemies of Trump. The FBI deliberately withheld this information from the FISA court when it asked the court for a surveillance warrant.

To surveil Trump, the FBI only needed to wiretap one member of the Trump campaign who would be communicating with Trump and other members of the campaign on a regular basis. The warrant for surveillance was for Carter Page, an advisor to the Trump campaign. Page communicated with people in the campaign, so all those people—including Donald Trump himself—had their communications heard by the FBI.

This happened in October 2016. The FBI’s hope was to obtain damaging information that could be used either to prevent Trump from being elected, or to have him impeached or distracted and politically hobbled if he won the election.

This is obvious because there was no legitimate basis for an investigation, as the FBI knew. And at least two FBI agents have said they wanted to keep Trump from being elected. At least one of those was participating in Mueller’s investigation until his anti-Trump statements became public. Additionally, then-FBI Director Comey protected Trump’s political opponent Hillary Clinton, even though she was known to have violated national security laws about the handling of classified information. Comey let her walk while his FBI was investigating her opponent, who was known to be innocent.

This is treason. Intelligence services conspired to, and attempted to, overturn the outcome of an American Presidential election.

The people involved should go to trial for treason, and if found guilty, should be subjected to the penalty the law provides for that crime.

George Washington’s Church Says Plaque Honoring Him Must Go

George Washington’s Church Says Plaque Honoring First President Must Come Down

Leaders at the church that George Washington attended decided that a plaque honoring the first president of the United States must be removed.

Christ Church in Alexandria, Virginia will take down a memorial marking the pew where Washington sat with his family, saying it is not acceptable to all worshipers.

“The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome,” leaders said, a reference to the fact that Washington was a slaveholder.

“Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques.”

First of all, bullshit to that last line. I can just see someone going up to the pastor and saying, “I was going to be a member of this church, but I’ve changed my mind because I’m convinced that the Washington thing means you’re going to try to enslave me.” Right.

Secondly, even if anyone said that, it would only prove that they’re insane, and that you don’t want them in your church.

To even bother engaging with the left is to engage with insanity, overt insanity.

Via Vox Day. Day’s headline:

Tell us again how they are real Americans.

Will we ever get away from identity politics?

I don’t think so, not in the long run.

Identity politics is the assertion “Because of my genetic characteristics” – genitals, skin color, whatever – “you owe me. You owe me affirmative action in job applications, welfare $$$, and you should ‘step back’ and defer to me.” (Fuck you, assholes.)

In terser form:

“Not because of anything I have done to earn it, but merely because of what I am, you owe me whatever I want.”

In totally terse form:

“I exist, therefore you owe me whatever I want.”

This is the ultimate dream of rabbits. It is rabbitry stripped down to its core, with all rhetorical obliqueness removed. The ancient dream of the ages, for rabbits, is just precisely this:

“I exist, therefore you owe me whatever I want.”

Once they have tried that assertion, there will be no going back. Anything else is weak tea compared to that.

They are eventually going to precipitate a civil war and people on both sides are going to be killed in large numbers. And yes, after that, fear of death will shut a lot of them up for a while. But it won’t be for as long as the naive will expect. Surprisingly soon after the civil war ends, a few rabbits will tentatively start in with the “You owe me because I exist” stuff again. We’ll defeat it, of course, but it will never go away. Like socialism (itself a less-overt expression of rabbitry), identity politics is too attractive to too large a set of people to ever really go away. I suspect it will be like herpes: Controllable to an extent, but once you’ve got it, you’ve got it forever.

Sad attention junkie calls for Trump’s resignation: Why now?

Hopeless loser Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (Dumbass – NY) is tweeting that Trump should resign due to sexual harassment claims against him. We’ve known about these accusations since before the election, so why renewed calls about it now?

(1) The most obvious: Democrats have really been taking a beating on the sexual harassment issue for the last couple of months, and they’re desperate to “even up the score” by taking out a Republican or three. The more high-profile the better.

Also, as of yesterday, when she flung the tweet out, the polls about Alabama were looking bad for Dems. That was even before one made allowance for the standard leftist bias. The implication is that the Dems will remain in a weak position in the Senate come 2018. They were hoping to move things a little in their direction by replacing a Rep with a Dem.

(2) Gillibrand is an attention whore; also, she’s testing the waters for a 2020 Presidential run. Nothing plays to the left-wing base right now like calling for Trump’s removal from the White House. God, how unhinged are you people? Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? There was an election. You lost. Jesus, get over it.

(3) It’s starting to dawn on some of the less moronic lefties that the Russia thing is a total wet firecracker. The “investigation” – an absolutely partisan, unfair, biased witchhunt – has been going on for months and they’ve got absolutely nothing whatsoever. Their big, huge bombshell was getting a former Trump associate (Flynn) to admit that he lied to the FBI about something that had nothing to do with Trump “colluding” with Russia over the 2016 election. (This whole thing has been so transparently baseless that I almost wrote “Trump” “colluding” with “Russia” over the “2016” “election”.)

This bullshit has been going on since before Mueller’s witchhunt. Recent revelations have uncovered the fact that people in the FBI are biased against the President. They really want to find him guilty of something serious. If there were the slightest hint of a scintilla of an iota of evidence, they would have uncovered it by now. It is hysterical, and not in the sense of “funny.”

So the less unhinged leftist politicians are getting ahead of the inevitable sad (for them) conclusion to the Russia thing and trying to find another way to get Trump out of the White House.

Hey assholes, I know how to have a chance of doing that: In 2020, repudiate your most extreme, insane, hate-filled whackos – the “trannies in your daughter’s high school bathroom, force people to bake gay wedding cakes at gunpoint, all whites are racist and should be genocided” psychotics – and run a campaign for normal, sane people.

“No way! We really like the insane psychotics! We really want to be evil and crazy, and to stay in power anyway! Making sure that innocent American girls are killed by illegal immigrants means a lot to us!”

And they wonder why we loathe them.

Roger Goodell: Moron, Loser

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell takes $89 million away from breast cancer and military charities to pay off SJWs:

http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2017/12/01/anthem-kneeler-says-nfl-siphoning-from-breast-cancer-military-donations-to-give-to-social-justice-causes/

Yeah, that will help with the NFL’s unprecedented decline in popularity and ratings.

Problem: Drop in viewer popularity and support.

Solution, by Roger Goodell: Offend your base more.

LOL, what an idiot.

Sexual Harassment: The Left’s Three Bad Options

November 2017: The proliferating sexual harassment scandals that started with Harvey Weinstein are now proliferating too rapidly for one to keep track. And they are disproportionately affecting leftist men. Enhancing the deliciousness is the fact that the left itself started this crap, back in the 1990s.

The left now has three bad options for dealing with the current sexual harassment conflagration:

1) Keep going with it, ruthlessly assailing the leftist men and ending their careers. In this scenario, Democrats like Al Franken and John Conyers are forced out of Congress. And many a leftist media personality is gone, gone, gone. The left doesn’t want this, obviously.

2) Admit that it has gone too far and try to step on the brakes. That means that a fullthroated affirmation of the presumption of innocence replaces the “Always believe a female accuser” thing that the left has embraced now. It also means a return to sanity about what constitutes “sexual harassment” and so forth. E.g., grabbing someone’s boobs is sexual harassment; saying something that some woman claims made her “feel uncomfortable” isn’t. This requires a return to sanity by the left and is therefore almost certainly off the table as an option.

The other problem with this option is that feminism is now such a huge part of the modern left. For the non-feminist left to try to excise the feminist branch would not be like excising a tumor; it would be like the tumor trying to excise the rest of the body.

Furthermore, the culture and incentives of “victimhood” are too deeply embedded in leftist constituencies for this to be stopped now. Victimhood claims now ARE the left; that’s what modern leftism IS. To admit, even as a theoretical possibility, that a claim of victimhood could ever be wrong would be to undercut the very foundations of modern leftism itself. They will never do this.

3) Explicitly say “It’s okay if leftist men do it, but not okay if non-leftist men do it.” They actually do go that far, some of them, but it’s not a convincing argument for sane people, naturally.

The problem for the left here, obviously, is that “Anyone who agrees with my politics should be allowed to get away with sexual molestation” is not going to be a winning argument with most people.

In the event, what they are actually going to do is try to have their cake and eat it too, as the left has always tried to do. That is, they will try to make a big deal out of it when men of the right commit some leftist sin, or are accused of doing so, but to totally ignore it, or do the minimum amount of media coverage and commentary possible, when men of the left do it or are accused of doing it. This is a bad choice for the left, especially now that we have the Net to provide information, but they may think that it’s their best of a set of bad options.

Memo to leftists: The actual best option is (2), Admit that it has gone too far and try to step on the brakes.

The left won’t want to do this, though, because it would constitute an admission that it is possible for a leftist witch hunt to go too far. For the left, even admitting that such a thing is possible in theory is unacceptable. So, while that would actually be best for everyone, it won’t happen.

This is one of the reasons, of many, that I hate sharing a planet with leftists. Out of spite and blind stubbornness, they will do everything in their power to AVOID win-win situations, if that requires admitting that non-leftists are correct about something.

ADDENDUM: Mike Pence’s rule about being alone with women who aren’t his wife doesn’t look so dumb now, does it, left-wing morons?

Does a Children’s Story NEED Gay Kangaroos?

In The Girl Who Fell Beneath Fairyland and Led the Revels There, a fantasy novel variously categorized as children’s or young adult– no, I’m not going to provide a link– writer Catherynne Valente launches a psychotically vicious attack on traditional marriage. Don’t worry, though; she’s not against all relationships: She also includes pro-homosexual propagandizing.

Soon after our heroine enters Fairyland, the poisonously hateful attack on marriage commences. It comes in the form of the Hreinn, creatures who if captured by hunters must do all their cooking, sewing, etc., for them, as well as bearing “the hunters’” children. This is not at all subtle in its bizarre feminist editorializing about traditional marriage being female slavery, ZOMG!!!! Yet the traditional marriage portrayed here has one massive element missing: The man.

What is he doing all day in this rad-fem scenario, while the Hreinn are forced to clean “his” house? Oh, right, working a 40-hour-a-week job to support himself and his wife. All this is completely absent from Valente’s portrayal. The Hreinn (housewives) bitch that they have to cook, but don’t discuss that the man is working to buy the food, or they wouldn’t have anything to cook! OR EAT. They kvetch about cleaning the house. Who is earning the money to pay for the house? Seriously, who is working to pay the mortgage to keep the rain off your brainless little head? In the insane feminist fantasyland, when men say they’re going to work, they’re really just drinking beer and having sex with supermodels while women are doing the housework.

Just in case you’ve ever wondered if feminists are actually as stupid and self-centered as they seem. Talk about “out of sight, out of mind”! If a feminazi can’t actually see you doing the work, it literally doesn’t occur to her that you might be doing work! There seems to be nothing in their heads except for the impressions created by immediate sense data.

“I’m here, vacuuming the rug, and he’s not! Bastard!”
“What do you think he’s doing right now?”
“I don’t know. Never thought about it!”
“Where do you get the clothes you complain about laundering?”
“What do you mean, where do I get them? They come from my closet, duh!”

This is immediately followed by an ethereal “Three cheers for lesbians!” Valente includes a lesbian couple and works in that the poor dears are oppressed. This is because… wait for it… people “look at them askance.” Oh my God! Call Amnesty International! (The funny thing is that since this is fiction, she could have had them getting lynched or whatever. But no, being looked at askance is oppression in this whacko’s worldview.)

The surreal pro-homosexual propaganda continues in a later chapter, where we get underground mining kangaroos, one of which has a gay lover. This is established somewhat elliptically, but that’s the best we can say of it. First, the kangaroo, a male, says of another kangaroo, “he broke my heart.” Now this by itself is ambiguous, but there’s more. The two kangas shared a stone and a few sentences later it is remarked that that kind of stone is for lovers. Oh, barf. What kind of sicko attacks man-woman marriage and feels a need to get in three cheers for gay animal sex?

In a children’s book?! How sick do you have to be to write that?

Must we have stumping for gay sex in a children’s book? Would a reasonable, non-ideological person say that’s the best decision? Is it okay to have just… stories? Just stories that don’t leap up and scream politics in your face?

The Left’s usual party line in this kind of context is, “But they show heterosexual lovers and spouses all the time in children’s books! That’s just as propagandistic!” No it isn’t! Portraying everyday normality, and portraying it as everyday normality, is not propagandistic. Getting up and whacking people upside the head with your special-interest political agenda is. “But…but… in your preferred approach, heterosexual relationships are portrayed as normal!” Yes, because heterosexual relationships are normal, you morons!

Gotta love that “portrayed,” by the way.

“Portraying” the sky as blue is not propagandistic. Portraying the sky as an orange background, with the first-string roster of the 1982 Hartford Whalers written across it in flaming green letters, is propagandistic. That’s because the second one is not true, you fucking psychos!

The thing about the gay sex element is, it isn’t about reproduction, even implicitly, since gay sex is not reproductive. Therefore, what we have here is the portrayal of pure sex, sex for its own sake. In a heterosexual relationship, it is all about reproduction, even if only obliquely, because that’s the entire evolutionary reason that sex exists. So even if your young child asks you questions about a man-woman marriage that force you to discuss the sex, you can mention genital intercourse and segue to having kids. I.e., the sex isn’t just about the sex. Do I actually have to say that sex for the sake of sex is inappropriate in a children’s story? Sex for the sake of sex is pornography. Literally, that’s the definition of pornography. I’m all for porn in its place, but in a children’s story?

What exactly are you going to tell your kid if s/he asks about specifics of these gay lovers? What are these gay kangas doing that makes them lovers, as opposed to friends? Well, they’re either sucking each other’s penises, having anal sex, or giving each other handjobs, or I guess, pawjobs. Or all three. There is nothing here about a reproductive sexual act that has some raison d’etre outside itself. No, there is just a couple of male kangaroos fucking each other in the ass.

In a novel intended for children.

So Catherine Valente is so evil and insane, so damaged, that she spews hate propaganda about man-woman marriage… but presents her ideal fantasy land announcing, “I have seen the future, and it is ass-ramming kangaroos.”

Look, people, I don’t mind adult male kangaroos sodomizing each other, in the privacy of their own San Francisco apartment, if that’s what they want to do. It just has no place in a children’s novel.

In 2016 the Left themselves rejected the short story Space Raptor Butt Invasion for a Hugo Award, apparently on the grounds that it wasn’t really a serious nominee for a Hugo. But we’re supposed to keep a solemn expression on our faces and nod profoundly as we contemplate the loving eroticism of kangaroos sixty-nining. People, Space Raptor Butt Invasion was a joke. And it wasn’t offered to children. Ass-ramming gay kangas is presented as serious, and material for children.

Grok this: The Left is not a political movement. It is sheer evil and insanity that has masked itself as a political movement for strategic reasons.

To put it another way, it is the political arm of insanity. The Left is like Hannibal Lechter in that scene from The Silence of the Lambs in which Lechter carves off the dead cop’s face and places it over his own face as a disguise. The Left is not “political” as healthy, sane people understand the word “political.” It is pure evil in political guise.

The Left gave up its last tiny shreds of sanity years ago. It’s now on the descent into the combination asylum and torture chamber that is Hell. And its goal is to drag everyone else there – including your kids – with it.

Last Post on the NFL Drama Queenery?

…at least, unless anything else noteworthy happens. This is a collection of miscellany pertaining to the recent drama queenery. What a pathetic spectacle: A bunch of 25-year-old men are acting like a bunch of spoiled, attention-whoring 13-year-old girls.

I’m going to take these in roughly sorta-kinda chronological order.

Two posts at Anonymous Conservative:

https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/more-nfl-datapoints-on-how-donald-will-win-bigly/

https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/now-trump-turns-the-nfl-debate/

Summary: Trump has balls and a brain. Thank God. Exactly what we need right now.

Broncos stand for anthem:
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/09/28/broncos-stand-national-anthem-vs-raiders/

Cail Corishev in the comments here:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/09/a-philosophy-of-defeat.html#comment-form

“No one knelt at the game last night. [Thursday September 28, 2017] There might still be some holdouts here and there, but it’s basically over.”

All Steelers stand for anthem Sunday October 1, 2017: https://twitter.com/SalenaZito/status/914536388342755328

DonSurber, October 1, 2017:
http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2017/10/how-trump-beat-nfl.html?spref=tw

The biggest story of the weekend is from Canton, Ohio, where suddenly — spontaneously — for no apparent reason but plain patriotism, the Pro Football Hall of Fame sprouted 800 American flags.

Heh heh heh heh heh heh.

NFL now the least-liked sport:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/shock-poll-nfl-now-least-liked-sport-core-fans-down-31/article/2636837

Massive viewer loss among key demographics:
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2017/10/06/through-week-4-nfl-massive-viewer-loss-among-key-demos/

Vox Popoli:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/10/nfl-week-5.html

Open thread for those still following. TNF down 12 percent, biggest decline to date the late double-header on CBS, which featured the Raiders vs Denver and was down 31 percent from last year.

Over just one month of player, coach, and owner protests of the flag and National Anthem, the National Football League has gone from America’s sport to the least liked of top professional and college sports, according to a new poll. From the end of August to the end of September, the favorable ratings for the NFL have dropped from 57 percent to 44 percent, and it has the highest unfavorable rating – 40 percent – of any big sport.

In a letter to NFL owners, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says:

We believe that everyone should stand for the National Anthem.

Ooooooooh! Saw the latest poll and ticket sales numbers, didya, Rog?

A commenter notes,

The NFL numbers must have been horrifically bad to force Goodell to so publicly bend the knee to Trump.

UPDATE:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/10/14/nfl-commissioner-caves-players-will-not-require-standing-anthem/
Ed Driscoll at Instapundit comments: “HE CHOSE…POORLY.”

Cratering ticket sales:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nfl-ticket-sales-plummet-179/article/2635955

The National Football League is feeling the impact of the “Trump Effect.”

Ticket sales since he called on team owners to fire players who take a knee to protest the National Anthem have cratered.

The online ticket reseller TickPick told Secrets that sales have dropped 17.9 percent, far more than the usual Week Three fall.

From TickPick:
17.9 percent decrease in NFL orders this week compared to the previous week.
Last year the drop was 10.8 percent in orders on Monday & Tuesday following Week Three games.

17.9/10.8 = 1.657. So in other words, the sales slump is 66% worse than usual.

That’s what happens when you humiliate yourself before black identity extremism.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/21056998/nfl-ratings-75-percent-week-6-2017-compared-2016
First they note that ratings are off by 7.5% compared to the first six weeks of 2016. Further down they note how bad it is compared to two seasons ago: “Compared with the first six weeks of the 2015 season, NFL ratings are off 18.7 percent…”

Oooooh! That’s gotta sting! Then:

In the past week, Credit Suisse lowered its price targets on both Fox and CBS stock, citing NFL ratings declines.

“If ratings don’t improve materially, we see a potential headwind to domestic advertising revenues,” the investment bank’s analyst Omar Sheikh wrote of Fox…

Of course, the NFL would never engage in spinning to deny the problem. Oh, wait:

Last year, the NFL attributed part of its viewership decline during the first nine weeks of the season to competition from presidential election coverage. Viewership was indeed better for the second half of the season, after the election, but it still finished down 8 percent, compared with 2015.