For me the football protest was never about disrespect to the American flag. It was about inserting politics where it doesn’t belong. Football players are far from voiceless. There is no particular need for them to hijack a portion of the game that is not theirs to pirate.
Their fans, on the other hand, must simply sit there and observe the mini protest as a small unexpected price attached to their tickets. The NFL, month by month, is sinking into unrelated and unnecessary causes, never going far enough for a casus belli, just enough to move the cause a bit further on. Do football games eventually become little more than Kabuki theater for SJW causes?
And the precedent of course is that employees may insert social comment when dealing with customers — with or without the permission of their boss. Starbucks did it with their race relation discussions before handing over the coffee. Stores are asking for donations to one cause or another to be added to the bill. Anyone familiar with story of the camel and tent knows where it goes from here. Your next trip to Lowe’s may involve a discussion of abortion rights.
Even commentators on the right have defended the players’ actions as free speech. Does this mean that companies must provide a platform for their employees to vent their views? Once again the Bill of Rights continues to evolve from constraints on the government to obligations on the governed.
Instead of letting the football issue fester and grow, Trump has brought the issue to the fore. Fans have a stark choice. Accept the SJW-ification of the sport or not. No government involvement needed. No organized protest needed. Here is a chance to show that aligning to social causes can be a frighteningly expensive experiment for a company. The disrespect to the flag just makes the boycott decision easier.
Isn’t this the complaint that conservatives have about the culture, that it moves relentlessly leftward? Exposing these festering sores, forcing the issue, is how that gets fixed.