It seems to be like Groundhog Day in Washington where nothing gets done and we get nothing but finger pointing and blame games.
While the guy and gal working the part-time job (or looking for a job) is fighting to keep his family sheltered, we have legislators
more focused on telling how Roger Goodell should run the NFL, and our media telling us how we should feel when it comes to stories about Michael Sam.
Allow me to actually put a clear version of these stories rather than it be coated in red or blue paint.
Michael Sam got a big weight off of his shoulders. Some will deem him a hero. Some will be proud of him and think he is courageous. Some will think it is none of their business, and some will thump their chest and say it's an abomination.
The media will demonize anyone who doesn't find Michael Sam's announcement heroic or courageous, even if they choose to disagree with the lifestyle and wish him the best of luck.
This same media that also will go out of it's way to demonize Tim Tebow or Phil Robertson for being open about their Christianity.
This maybe a newsflash for some, but Christianity forbids homosexuality along with other sins.
This will definitely be a newsflash to some. The religions of Islam, Judaism, and Mormonism also forbids it (although there are fractions that will accept it).
Let me see if I can put this together in science:
From my observations, the Liberal media will demonize Christianity, but not be as harsh on Islam.
Some on the evangelical fringe will condemn those like Michael Sam, but will defend Tim Tebow and Phil Robertson.
Seems contradicting and a little intolerant, right?
Yes I know, the democratic side is usually the preacher of tolerance. Just look at the people who are trying to get Rush Limbaugh off the air, yet will look at what Melissa Harris-Perry says about Mitt Romney's grandchild as not a big deal.
For most sane people, Tim Tebow speaking out about his faith will not bother them and to some is refreshing. Nor will it bother them that Michael Sam announced he is gay. Mostly because sane people will treat it as his choice and wish him the best of luck.
This issue has, if it hasn't already, been politicized. As much as you may not want to hear it, this story will beaten into your head until he gets drafted or after his first season.
If he doesn't get picked high enough, it will be because he is gay. If he doesn't play, it will be because he is gay. If he doesn't have a successful NFL career, it will be because he was held back for his life choice. This will be the narrative.
Many times I've already debunked the significance of where you are drafted (Tom Brady 6th Round, JaMarcus Russell, 1st overall).
What is really different? Even if this wasn't announced, he still has the opportunity to make a career in the NFL.
It's stories like this that shed light on the hypocrisy of our political crusades (on both sides of the aisle).
And just as if Washington needs another distraction, two congressman are now trying to push Roger Goodell and tell him how he should run the NFL.
Maybe this is my fiscal conservative side coming out, but I'd think that if the marketbase (NFL fans) had a majority that believed it was time to change the name of the Washington Redskins; they, as consumers should be able to make that choice. Not anyone else.
Just like the #StopRush movement (which has less movement than someone's bowels), where idiots who are not a part of the consumer base (the listeners) are trying to dictate and terrorize businesses on what they can listen to.
Yet, most of them have no problem with what any other show host says if their comments are considered distasteful or off the wall.
If you ever want to know why nothing can get done, these two stories are great examples.
It's all or nothing.
The agendas outweigh the solutions.
And there is no compromise.
tol·er·ance
noun
noun: tolerance
1.
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
"the tolerance of corruption"
the capacity to endure continued subjection to something, esp. a drug, transplant, antigen, or environmental conditions, without adverse reaction.
plural noun: tolerances
"the desert camel shows the greatest tolerance to dehydration"
synonyms: | endurance of, resistance to, resilience to, resistance to, immunity to More
"she has a low tolerance to alcohol"
|
diminution in the body's response to a drug after continued use.
2.
an allowable amount of variation of a specified quantity, esp. in the dimensions of a machine or part.
"250 parts in his cars were made to tolerances of one thousandth of an inch"
Read that definition, and if the people who beat these drums were honest with themselves, they could see their hypocrisy. Conservative or Liberal. But let's be honest, they won't and probably never will.