Arrowhead Pride

http://www2.kusports.com/polls/2012/jan/should-ku-fans-stop-shouting-home-chiefs-after-nat/results/

Here is a link to a poll on KUsports.com

Basically, I fall in the category of thinking it has no place in College sports since the Chiefs are a professional team. I personally hold the song sacred to me and would never actually finish that song with Chiefs. I understand that others feel differently and respect thier opinions, but if the Head Coach of the institiution you are at asks you to stop, why would you not? Also, I know that a Missouri person would actually say they would do it just to make Bill Self mad, but why would a true Missouri Tiger fan actually be at all the KU games? I hear they don’t ever show up for thier own. :)

Here is the link if anyone cares.

fleetmarine - January 20, 2012 reply

Forgot to put in there that I don't care if people do it in Arrowhead

I just won’t be one of them. And I think that it only makes sense in Arrowhead.

fleetmarine - January 20, 2012 reply

Pretty much agree with you.

Except it doesn’t bother me personally that other people sing it like that. I’m much more bothered when I see people fart around during the anthem, basically says they’re ignoring everything it stands for.

Personally, I don't care what it means to others

I don’t say the home of the Chiefs because of what it means to me personally. I think its ok at Arrowhead because it is a quirky thing. I understandt that, but there is NO reason to sing it ANYWHERE other than Arrowhead.

fleetmarine - January 20, 2012 reply

It's an Arrowhead thing

leave to the KUers to steal it.

Ah, random KU hate.

We should have a thread for that

One reason I like this blog, KU, KSU, and MU fans for the most part shut up and talk about the Chiefs

you spoke too soon, Fozzy (see below)

No matter how good gene pool, you will always get some retard that pisses in it.

Pictures of Bill Self boil the hate inside me!

Nothing random about KU hate.

It’s premeditated, directed, and justified.

TwelfthMan - January 20, 2012 reply

blah, blah, blah, take it to a Tigers board.

Can't blame him

This has been the slowest couple of days for chiefs news. It’s only natural we’d deviate into other subjects.

It has been slow and if he wants to turn this into a flame KU, flame MU, flame, KSU debate I can have a lot of fun with that

Just not really the right spot for it.

exactly TwelfthMan

I very much dislike it

anywhere.

Honestly I find it very offensive in that it is rude and disrespectful to the anthem and those who have sacrificed to give us our freedoms. I wish it would stop. I cringe every time the anthem is played in Arrowhead or anywhere in Kansas.

Like the freedom not to have our speech censors by jingoists?

Honestly I find it very offensive in that it is rude and disrespectful to the anthem and those who have sacrificed to give us our freedoms

Yes, even that

But, seriously, there are some things that should just be considered sacred. To me, the Arrowhead “Home of the Chiefs” is a bit taboo. I’m not saying you have to agree, just stating how I feel.

Besides, have you ever heard the saying, “just because you can, doesn’t mean you should?” Just because people can shout that and they have the “right” to do so, doesn’t make it appropriate, IMO.

A shitty song it is that became the National Anthem in 1931 is hardly sacred

Our anthem is such a downer and it just drones on and on. Oh Canada, there’s an anthem.

Sweet mother of mercy...

wow...

just…wow

KCTigerChief - January 20, 2012 reply

H2E ... do you know that at many events in Canada they sing about the first stanza of their anthem and then stop ...

esp in Western Canada … they just say “screw it, it’s too long” and get on with the race

Sounds like they know whats up....

Great song plus they fade it out before its starts droning on. Those Canuks are on to something.

(melodiously) (fortisimo----loud) OOOOHHHHHHHHHH CAAAANNNNNAAADDDDDDAAAAA!

(forgets next words and sings sheepishly) duh,duh,duh,duh………ehhhhhh……….hoser…………..

craig in calgary - January 20, 2012 reply

I've been to sporting events my entire life

That has never happened.
Canada is not as patriotic as the States, but we love our anthem.

I was not demeaning your country nor your

national anthem, I was just making a joke about the fact that most Americans only know the first two words of Canada’s national anthem. Now smoke a joint, drink a Molson’s and go back to bed until winter is over.

his reply was to me

Oh, well in that case, Ups meant the

utmost in disrespect. Lol……;>}

hey now!

I got that DIRECTLY from Prof Lawrence Larsen at UMKC in a course on Canadian History

I believe you...........

I have no reason not to……………

It wasn't a shitty song

It was a poetic description that Scott Francis Key accounted personally (if memory serves correctly) aboard a ship in captivity.

Artist (today) make the song/poem sound shitty with ad lip

I love our Arrowhead twist and as a service member I give a rats behind on if it’s respectful or degrading. It’s personalized taylored to KC and the chiefs our fanbase and the lore of a arrowhead. But this is just my POV exercised under my freedom of speech..

Mas Cervezas - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

One more thing

I don’t know that “jingoist” applies to my statement. Nowhere did I make mention of any aggressive or belligerent foreign policy.

I am one of those that "sacrificed"

and after serving my country for 23 years, I don’t see anything wrong with saying saying home of the Chiefs. I do think it should only be done at Chiefs games, but don’t think that means it should be restricted to Arrowhead. If a fan wants to yell it at an away game, they should be able to.

RedHatFan - January 20, 2012 reply

Edward Jones Dome?

That was hilarious....

Because there were more Chiefs fans in attendance than Rams fans. Rams fans stink.

Falcon58 - January 20, 2012 reply

I don't get what's so offensive about it

“O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave o’er the land of the free and home of the brave/Chiefs?”

To me, that’s just saying that Arrowhead/Kansas City is the home of the Chiefs, and yes, we’re proud and thankful that the “star-spangled banner” still flies here (i.e. we are proud Americans).

Ah, let the justification process begin

We can justify just about anything we do…no matter how “wrong” or actually illegal it may be.

Was the addition of "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1942 "wrong" or illegal?

Is it “wrong” or illegal that we only sing the first verse of the National Anthem and neglect to sing the other 3 (I believe). We are, after all, ignoring 75% of the song.

This

NJChieffan16 - January 20, 2012 reply

Well

if you’d like to try and get people to grasp the language well enough to not only sing, but understand the remaining three verses, feel free. You raise a good point though. Touche.

wwJamaalCharlesdo - January 20, 2012 reply

or maybe

just not look into it so much. Its just words and damnt you cant beat and the home of the CHIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEFS!

Any military member who thinks swapping a single word in a shitty song is disrespectful needs some thicker skin

Agreed...

The song is not being defamed by one word

NJChieffan16 - January 20, 2012 reply

Even though many of those same fighters love, yell, and support it...

Arrowhead only.

LET FREEDOM RING

Any where is alright by me. I served and even tear up ocassionally when the song is played. THE INTENT is not disrespectful. Oh and I would change the Anthem to AMERICA but, only the Ray Charles version.

Bleedingredandgold - January 20, 2012 reply

Too bad Ray is dead

Yell it everytime the anthem is played, no matter where I am, no exceptions.

Twins vs White Sox game in MN? Damn straight.
Jets vs Pats game at the Meadowlands? Sho nuff now
Arizona vs Nebraksa Holiday Bowl? You know that’s right

i actually agree with you on something

I’m not sure how I feel about that ;)

fongKC - January 20, 2012 reply

Gotta represent!

Anywhere and everywhere. I don’t see it as disrespectful to our country. Just more of a tradition

ChiefRoyal - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

but the tradition is and has been to sing the Anthem itself, not change the words ...

at least that WAS the tradition to begin with

by changing the words you change tradition itself … which means, in effect, it really isn’t a tradition … old or new … and becomes a meaningless popularity song du jour event

Well stated

wwJamaalCharlesdo - January 20, 2012 reply

RoughRiders minor league hockey game in Iowa? - Check

Cubs game in Wrigley (Not playing KC)? – Check
Rockies game in Denver (Not playing KC)? – Check
University of Iowa football game? – Check

KillaCity107 - January 20, 2012 reply

Yell it EVERYWHERE.

At the Olympics during the medal ceremony, at the end of each medalist’s anthem? You bet!

TwelfthMan - January 20, 2012 reply

Donnie Edwards

said it in his head every time even when he played for the Chargers!

Yes!

Hey, Joel why don't you do a survey

on who the fans think should be the Chiefs quarterback next year. The choices could be 1.) Matt Cassel 2.) Kyle Orton (not likely) 3.) un-named free agent 4.) rookie draft choice or 5.) other.

6. Anyone but Palko

LMAO!

Haven't we done several of these already?

Like in EVERY thread since before the season ended?

Falcon58 - January 20, 2012 reply

I just wanted to see what percentage of fans

wanted what.

Ugh, here we go again...

Just because someone says “Home of the Chiefs” at the end doesn’t equate to them walking up to a soldier and spitting in their face. And yes I only reserve it for Arrowhead. Last time I checked the Chiefs don’t play out in Lawrence. Guess it’s hard for those KU people to understand that.

RA_ChiefsFan - January 20, 2012 reply

As a Marine, I disagree with your sentiment.

I find it disrespectful. Of course, you have the right to do it…but that doesn’t make it right.

Don't get me wrong I respect the military and all the sacrifices that it requires to serve

What get’s me irritated about this debate is that many of us who do say “Home of the Chiefs” mean no disrespect. We just say it to support the team and because it’s become a tradition. For 10 days out of 365, and for one brief moment, saying “Home of the Chiefs” doesn’t mean I don’t love my country or support the many people who’ve served.

RA_ChiefsFan - January 20, 2012 reply

I tend to agree with this statement

While I do not say “Chiefs” personally…I have no problem with others doing it.

But only at Arrowhead. To do it anywhere else seems pretty damn silly, to me.

Intent vs Perception

You might not mean any disrespect, but that doesn’t mean others won’t feel disrespected by it.

You’ve changed the words to a song that is supposed to represent the nation as a whole. Now, you get support here because it’s a friendly (Chiefs) environment. But I know a lot of guys I served with get very touchy over these things.

Just something to consider.

True enough, but...

You can’t hardly slip off a fart anymore without offending someone.

In the grand scheme of things…I feel that Chiefs fans yelling “Home of the Chiefs” at Arrowhead is a pretty minor offense.

In the grand scheme

our society is slipping into a muddled mess because we marginalize everything and nothing means anything anymore. Come teach in a school sometime if you need to see examples of this.

I do (or have) and I know ... hoo boy do I know!

seriously, we have teachers being told that students are NOT allowed to get an F in HS Classes … regardless of what they do or don’t do

Exactly

and we can no longer group kids according to ability because they’ll “feel bad”. Guess what, having half a class of kids that are well beyond grade-level in reading, with the other half being below does not work. It’ like you and I having to practice 3rd grade math all day (well, maybe that wouldn’t be so bad for me) just because the others “need it”.

nodnodnod

and the list goes on … and on … and on

Ugh. I hated that.

Moved from a school that kept the classes grouped according to relative learning levels, to one that didn’t

Really killed off the desire to pay any attention at all, as 1/3 of the class got things on the first go round and were ready to move on, but ended up doodling / passing notes / sleeping while the teacher tried to catch everyone up to the same spot.

It’s not a knock on the kids that couldn’t pick it up as fast. It’s just frustrating for the kids that do, who then get put on the shelf and all forward momentum is list because of that policy.

"least restrictive environment"

while the teacher has to deal with 3 groups of students (ability wise) in each class … meaning 3 sets of learning expectations and practically 3 different lesson plans for each class per day

and the kids of lowest ability who don’t want to work (or can’t do it at that level) are then passed along to the next grade where they can’t do even more … yet they demand most of the teacher’s attention and time, while the best kids need to be challenged and are left to do the best they can on a self-motivated basis

Yup. Saw it first hand.

Hated it.

I lived it.

Luckily my mom raised hell and was successful in pushing the district to organize more upper level classes. And letting people get ahead in them.

misterbrain - January 20, 2012 reply

Luckily at least there was a G&T program.

But for the rest of the classes, after awhile getting an A felt awfully cheap.

I teach the upper level reading classes

and now we’re not even supposed to let kids know that this IS the upper level reading class…like they won’t figure that out. Now parents are raising holy hell because we’re separating the students….FML

gasp for shame ...

odd thing is, for those upper level kids … THAT’S the “least restrictive environment” … for THEM! you allow and encourage thinking and learning outside of the box, as well as critical thinking skills and teach them how to ask questions and how to find answers and how to learn and how to be creative …

yeah, horrible idea, huh!

No kidding

Now, when we’re pushing these kids beyond their core learning and reading, other students are being shoe-horned in here because they read “well enough” and are discipline issues elsewhere, so obviously putting them in here is a good idea. It’s always great having 15 kids who read well above grade level, in every quantifiable category, 5 who read above in most categories and 10 who are at or below in nearly every category. Class works REAL WELL that way.

see, this entire post is similar to the issues facing education right now

in schools, we try to force all students to learn everything the same way and at the same rate … but that doesn’t happen and CAN’T happen, because everyone has a different learning CAPACITY and different learning STYLE

the same is true of what is or isn’t perceived as offensive (such as the example with the Star Spangled Banner) … we’re all different on it, which is to be expected

the sad thing is that educators are blamed because everyone is different and has different capabilities … what SHOULD be happening is that schools adhere to the simple STANDARDS … learn THIS and move on, learn THAT and move on … learn fast, slow or in between, however it’s best for you

So....if she weighs the same as a duck

…she’s made of wood

BURN HER!

sorry, the word "duck: is the intellectual propert of Daffy, Inc (all rights reserved)

I don't do it because I personally don't think it's right...

But, it’s also not my place to tell others what they should feel is right.

That's very true...

however, they should also understand that not everyone holds the same sentiments.

Just because someone says "Home of the Chiefs" at the end doesn’t equate to them walking up to a soldier and spitting in their face.

If you’re not the one who feels their being spat at, how do you make this determination?

Is that truly how you feel?

Not to that extreme.

I feel that it is somewhat disrespectful as this is our national anthem, and not just some song on the radio.

However, I do know several guys who would probably fight you over it.

And I know people that would shoot or stab you for wearing the wrong colors in their neighborhood

That still doesn’t make it right.

Right or wrong isn't important.

The original poster said it doesn’t equate to spitting in a soldier’s face. I’m merely pointing out that he doesn’t know that.

Intent vs. Perception

That's a mad man's slippery slope though

There are some whose perception is that homosexuality is an unforgivable sin, and that all homosexuals should be killed.

It’s their perception, they should be able to act on that, right?

I mean, if it’s how they perceive things.

What are you talking about?

I’m trying to explain how the people specifically mentioned by the original poster (soldiers) may very well be offended.

I’m not justifying violence or any action taken against someone for any reason.

right ... but TRS is taking that notion to its logical conclusion

extreme as it is, to make a point

Thanks ups.

I give up, though.

People want to force away something they feel, by only their own perception, something that is offensive (in this case, “Chiefs!” in the anthem).

And yet at the same time, something that will offend others (for example, “Under God” in the Pledge) is fine and those non-believers should just man up and live with it.

People seem to only want the “because someone might find it offensive” doctrine to apply when it directly affects them.

I could give a shit less what someone finds offensive. As long as rights aren’t being violated, move along.

What have I forced?

At what point have I stated that you CANNOT do this?

I am pointing out to the original poster, that he can’t speak with any degree of authority as to whether or not this is disrespectful. Nobody can. Feeling disrespected is a perception.

Okay. So what about feeling disrespected, then?

When it’s clearly not at all the intent?

What would you like done about it? Anything at all? Or just stating you don’t like it?

Once again, okay fine. You don’t like it. So we’re on the same page then – you don’t like it, but it’s perfectly fine.

That's all I ever said.

I find it disrespectful. That’s how I perceive it. I understand that’s not the intent, but it doesn’t change how I feel about it.

Fair enough.

Sorry you feel that way then.

It’s a tough mindset for me to sympathize with – one of being offended.

On a somewhat related note on the topic of intent and disrespect – how many of your fellow soldiers that you personally know refer to residents of the Middle East (esp Afghanistan) as “Haji”?

A lot did at first.

Not so much after a few months out there. When you realize that most of them are normal people like you would find here. Especially when you understand that “Haji” is actually a term of respect to them.

Of course, there are always some idiots who hold on to it.

Yeah, I see it a lot here.

Many of the soldiers I interact with on a weekly basis do it just because that’s what people say.

But they’re using it as a sort of put down that they’ve kind of become desensitized to. There’s a negative connotation to it, but not to the likes of the dreaded N word or anything More akin to calling Brits “Limeys”.

Along the lines of calling Germans "Jerry" during WWI and WWII.

I say disrespectful shit all the time without the intent of disrespecting people

Cause I’m a goofy bastard and offensive shit is perfectly capable of flowing from my mouth unchecked from time to time.

You never really know who you’re going to disrespect sometimes – “oh Stevie, I’m sorry man, I didn’t know you’re 1/4 Eskimo and your dad has no legs.. honestly, I was just making a joke.”

If I actually know that someone finds something disrespectful and I continue to do it just to spite them, then things start to fall on my shoulders.

So I’ll side with Citadel 100% on his right to find it disrespectful. And if I were with him I would personally probably hold back on saying it in front of him. Just as I would make a “retard” comment around someone with a mentally handicapped child, etc. But that’s just me.

If KU were truly concerned with disrespectful

they’d have changed their mascot’s name to something that wasn’t associated with groups of douche bags that crossed the state line and murdered, raped, and burned whatever they could find.

Just saying.

But it's disguised as a bird

so that makes it okay.

At least they aren’t the friggin school in Utah that isn’t allowing their HS mascot to be Cougars because it is offensive to…no fucking shit…middle aged women.

That might be the best thing I've heard all day.

They should roll the opposite way and make the mascot a caricatured of Demi Moore or the hot older chick from the weather channel. That would make my day

but Daniel, remember also those "douchebags" were anti-slavery

as opposed to those in Missouri who obviously held such high standards for ALL people that they OWNED SLAVES

not that they’d harm said slaves, unless maybe they wanted their freedom or wanted to be treated like, you know, human beings

150 years and this argument is still going on

I’m starting to understand why this whole Israel/Palestine thing is never going to get solved lol

"Hey, Missouri is a pro-slave state!"

“Let’s go rape some women and burn some kids alive so they’ll stop mistreating people”

“YEAAHHHH!!!!!”

…somehow I don’t see much moral high-ground for the Jayhawkers in this.

Daniel, you catch on ... there is no moral high ground ... on EITHER side

that includes the MO side of the issue :-)

and I’m from MO

There is moral high-ground for MO

When you can separate the rules of a state from it’s people.

Currently, gay marriage is not legal in Missouri. It doesn’t mean everyone in the state is against it. Consequently, if a pro-gay marriage group from Iowa started a series of random bombings in Missouri to get Missouri to change it’s mind, all it would really do is kill innocent people and piss off Missourians.

Interesting stance

especially coming from a Chiefs fan.

I'm intrigued.

Elaborate?

As Chiefs fans

when it comes to moral high ground I’m not sure any “mascot” that is in reference to a group of people who have been attacked for their race/religion/beliefs can stand up to much scrutiny. Many Native Americans don’t believe it to be right using a symbol of their heritage as a mascot. Should the Chiefs change their mascot?

I don't think so

It’s simply my opinion, but I feel like the use of “Braves” or “Indians” or, yes, “Chiefs” is due to the respect for the culture, not disrespect. The Native American culture is seen as brave, strong, tough, and wise. Those are all very positive connotations.

The only one I think might should have been changed is Redskins. That seems a lot more slur-ish than any of the others

please don't think I'm condemning you

but with your statement of “If KU were truly concerned with disrespectful
they’d have changed their mascot’s name to something that wasn’t associated with groups of douche bags that crossed the state line and murdered, raped, and burned whatever they could find.” Now granted you are keying on KU feeling it is disrespectful but opinion wise many Native Americans feel that using teams names associated with their cultures is also disrespectful. But to you it is a non issue.Many oragizations have spoken out against the use “…. the condemnation of Indian mascots is supported by the American Indian Education Association, National Education Association, American Psychological Association and the American Indian Psychologists Association. The National Congress of American Indians, which has well over 300 Indian nations as members, has signed a resolution, condemning American Indian sports team mascots. A host of other organizations, Indian and non-Indian, join the condemnation.”
So to me – a stance against KU’s mascot name by a Chiefs fan is (not wrong or right) interesting. Afterall many Native Americans hate the fact that groups of douche bags murdered, raped, and burned whatever they could find long before anyone crossed any state lines.
Thanks for the stimulating conversation – no sarcasm intended.

I totally get that, and to an extent I agree

For me, it’s the difference between naming your team a theoretically non-offensive term (such as Chiefs or Braves…I do see where Indians could possibly be insensitive, and I certainly get Redskins) because of the positive connotations that go with it, and naming your team after a local group that committed numerous atrocities, simply because it’s part of your regions history.

At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law, it would be like the German national soccer team calling themselves the Nazis

And the pleasure’s been all mine. I like discussions without name-calling or slap-fighting.

but wait ... what happened to TRADITION?

you know … rape, pillage, burn, murder …

ok, sarcasm fully intended (come on, this is ME typing)

Rape, murder, arson and rape!

Thanks Daniel

Only one last thing to add.
Rock Chalk Jayhawk! ;-)

Good luck in he SEC in the future, I don’t know what I’m going to do with my muck fizzou shirt now.

You should take a picture of it and send it to KU's Chancellor

and tell him to make the Border War happen. Both teams have a prospective open date on Nov. 17th IIRC….just saying.

LOL

Good idea.
I imagine once everything cools down it’ll get done.

Good luck in the Texas league.

Hope you guys find a good way out of that mess. Too bad we couldn’t just kick them out and re-form the Big 8.

you know

looking back on it the SWC should have stayed intact. Would have made much more sense than all this current nonsense.

It's ridiculous that the Big 8 officially abandoned their history to "forge a new direction" (take Texas' money).

The SWC was arrogant enough to think they could have a successful all-Texas conference. I hate that my Big 8 bailed them out of that mistake. AND handed them the reins. Now, Texas arrogance is about to destroy its second conference in twenty years.

yesh! the TEXAS league ... funny

I did like the old Big 8

FWIW ... well said, Valk!

and I meant "wouldn't" in that last sentence, sheesh

not “would”

I would NOT make that joke.. whatever… you get it.

To add to this..

I could give a shit less what someone finds offensive, as long as that shit’s funny.

severn58 - January 20, 2012 reply

Not my quote...

I’m not offended when people do it. There’s not much I can do or say to help those that are. I don’t do it personally…so I’m certainly not going to apologize.

No, but that is the source of the conversation.

I’m not telling anyone to apologize for it. But at the same time, they shouldn’t just assume that everyone thinks it’s ok.

I get that

It’s pretty obvious that everyone doesn’t think it’s okay. But no matter what people do these days…there will be those that won’t like it, or be offended, or feel disrespected. That’s just the way things are.

pretty much, yes

so question: where DO you draw the line between “deal with it” and “you have no business or RIGHT” to say that?

at what point are words harmful?

Each of us has our own "line".

Therein lies the problem.

At the point where it can be legally defined as harassment.

That’s the point when rights are violated, and it becomes a matter of law.

as Scott said, it's a line, often a fine line

example: a group of Neo-Nazi Skinheads can LEGALLY march down the street with banners proclaiming “white power” etc etc etc

but they can NOT go directly up to someone and call him “Nigger” or “Jew Scumbag” or whatever … it really IS a “fine line” because to ME (personally) just “legally marching down the street” is an insult and racist and offensive

however, as has been said: those are the LEGAL RIGHTS that we ALL have

(just as long as we don’t try to download music … see THAT would be a HORRIBLE crime and we’d get tossed in prison)

Well just don't steal the music while downloading it and there's no issue

But screw SOPA and PIPA.

Kind of a well intended piece of legislation that was terrible because the people proposing the laws are so far removed, they have no idea about the things they’re trying to govern.

do you know the Supreme Court now wants to re-copyright tons of music, books and films that are already in Public Domain?

if I give you a copy of some music it’s legal, but if you download if (even from me with my consent) it’s illegal

huh? where’s the logic?

"give a copy of some music it's legal"

Give how?

burn it to a CD and hand it to you

not SELL it you, not profit by it in any way … just hand it to you as a gift

Pirate

You can make a copy for yourself.

You’re not supposed to make digital copies to distribute, whether to sell or not.

That’s not saying it doesn’t happen. But you’re still not supposed to.

why not? I can record off the radio for myself ...

… that’s the same as “making a copy” even if it’s just for me … but that’s not piracy

again, I’m not saying SELL anything

do you realize that if SOPA passes in present form and you post a video of Michael Jackson it’s a FIVE year prison sentence? the upshot? the doctor who prescribed the drugs that caused his OD death got FOUR years

tell me the logic in this, please

Why do you even suggest I support SOPA when I stated in as plain of English as possible a couple comments above how stupid I thought it was?

I swear man, sometimes you just make up things to try to argue about heh.

Originally, recording songs off the radio wasn’t a big deal. It was all analog, and there was quality loss from the original. It was seen as something that wouldn’t have a noticeable impact on product sales. There’s degradation in quality with each successive analog copy.

Then along came digital. Digital is 1’s and 0’s, and the 50th copy is exactly as good as the original. There’s no loss like there is in analog, which is energy in waves.

At that point it started becoming a problem.

It spiraled out of control at the point that people started making digital copies and distributing them – cutting into potential sales drastically.

But instead of working with their target market and working out a way around the problem that would endear them to their customers, the RIAA went all crazy draconian and took directly the opposite route.

They had the right intention, but took the waaaay wrong path to doing it. And now piracy has become so commonplace it’s gotten to be socially acceptable.

This has had many far reaching and terrible secondary, tertiary and farther reaching cascading effects on the entire music industry.

May be too late at this point. That’s what happens when technology leaps out ahead of those that run the major players in a major industry. Especially when those major players were catastrophically slow to adapt.

like Cassel, huh?

Especially when those major players were catastrophically slow to adapt.

No kidding.

Wish the guy hadn’t regressed. There was a glimmer of hope (but a lot of progress needed) at the end of 2010.

/sadface

he went back to the analog model

So does that make Palko a wax phonograph cylinder?

yup!

I chuckled

To you it is a minor offense.

You're looking at it all wrong

People aren’t disrespecting the country by saying “Chiefs!”

They love their team so much, they’re paying the country a compliment by showing how important the Chiefs are to them.

Agreed.

Arrowhead25 - January 20, 2012 reply

Oooh

umm…okay. Facetious? I’m banking on that.

Maybe you're looking at it all wrong?

Some things should be respected in their entirety and not compromised for any reason.

If it’s ok for you to replace “brave” with “Chiefs”, then anybody can replace any word with anything else they choose.

China reality bobblehead since 20th and forever limits football whistle orange

See? Now the song doesn't even make any sense.

You're right. Anybody can replace any word with anything else they choose.

Just because you don’t like it, doesn’t mean it isn’t right.

I’d rather not have someone else’s morality forced on me, when my actions have done no harm and infringed on no rights of theirs.

You’re more than welcome to just rolls your eyes at the people that do it and just ignore them, as their actions haven’t harmed you or infringed on your rights at all.

No harm done to either party, life goes on, the coin gets flipped, kickoff ensues and the game is on.

Go back to the original post on this thread.

Just because someone says "Home of the Chiefs" at the end doesn’t equate to them walking up to a soldier and spitting in their face.

What if the soldier does feel it equates that?

And if I spent my entire life on a blueberry farm, living and breathing blueberries

And that farm had been in my family for generations beyond public record, and my ancestors’ ancestors worked that blueberry farm, and blueberries were the most important thing to me in the world – and somebody says to me, “you know, I don’t really think blueberries are really worth a damn” – I’d still probably have to get over it.

If the soldier feels that saying “Chiefs!” at the end of the anthem is wrong, he doesn’t have to do it. That’s the great thing about this country. We don’t have to bow to a picture of The Great Leader and thank him every time we have a meal.

And we can show how awesome we think the Chiefs are by yelling, “Chiefs!” at the end of the anthem.

That's besides the point.

The poster essentially said that it isn’t offensive or disrespectful. But he cannot possibly speak for everyone, especially those that he specifically mentioned (soldiers).

Many soldiers don't give a tenth of a shit, though.

So now we’re just narrowing it down even farther to a sub-group of a sub-group.

At what point do we have to just say, “Well you don’t have to like it or participate in it. But it’s in no way violating your rights so just shrug it off”?

The phrase from Voltaire

“I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”

seems fitting.

At what point am I allowed to just say I (and many others) find it disrespectful and people respect that?

I’m not telling you that you can’t do it. I haven’t said that even once. In fact, I’m probably doing exactly what you just stated. I’m not telling people to get rid of it. I accept it for what it is. I find it disrespectful, so I don’t participate, but I don’t hate people for doing it.

But you can certainly meet me half way and acknowledge that there is room for reason that people would find it disrespectful.

There's a reason that anyone could be offended by anything.

I’m 100% with you in saying you don’t like it, as long as you don’t try to restrict others from doing it.

When that’s the case, we’re all on the same page.

So you can pitch in your “Dislike” button, and we’re all on our merry way.

mmmm... blueberries

Man don't even get me started.

They’ve moving up into the realm of bacon for me.

Can’t get enough lately for some reason.

Do you shop at Costco?

Best price per volume of blueberries you can find – it’s amazing.

You can go spend 3x or 4x at Ho Foods or Trader Joe’s or whatever, but I’ll never buy bberries anywhere but Costco if I have the choice.

You pregnant?

Man I hope so

Maternity leave would kick so much ass.

LMFAO

You may not necessarily enjoy what comes immediately BEFORE said leave though.

Yes, especially since I don't have the right parts for that.

I’d imagine it would be an uncomfortable fit.

That's what C-Sections are for

expect a longer recovery though

C-Section eh?

Well, maybe.

Will the doc come in looking like this?

nice!

wait … did you get PERMISSION to use that pic?

LOL

Good one, but way different scenario

I made no copy of it.

I didn’t distribute it.

This in no way impacts a market for that product.

That’s been discussed at great lengthy online. There’s a big checklist of reasons that show how linking a pic in a forum isn’t at all like distributing copies of games / movies / music / software. If I run out of lazy later today I’ll see if I can dig it up.

But it’s Friday. That’s a big “if” right now.

you made a digital copy right here in front of my eyes!

you, Sir, are a PIRATE!

and actually, you didn’t LINK to its original spot (technically) you reproduced it on this site instead …

not for a profit, of course! but still … a digital reproduction, and isn’t that the definition of piracy? :-)

No, just the governments (proposed) definition.

Which unfortunately is the only one that really matters

Nope. I didn't save the file.

I made no copies. I distributed no copies.

If you view the source code of the page and look at the link, you’ll see the actual file is still residing where it was being hosted before I searched out the image.

Essentially when it loads on this page, you’re looking at a little window to the server that the image is hosted on.

ok, so ... if I play music on an internet radio and you listen to it thru your computer ...

… while the actual file resides on my computer …

By posting it, you've technically "distibuted" it

That’s what an MPAA lawyer will say anyways.

then by posting an image it's also being distributed

Correct

so there it is ...

TRS is a PIrate … aaaarrrrgggghhhh!

Eh, I worked the better part of the last decade dealing specifically in copyright

Though I’ve been out of that industry for a couple of years now, and dealt specifically with music – so maybe MPAA related things are different.

But no, hot linking like that isn’t distributing. The place where the image is hosted is distributing it. They have the ability to block hotlinks.

Now if I saved the file and uploaded to my own photobucket / flickr / whatever, then yes I’d be distributing it.

You're right

but if the government writes a law that says it is distributing it (which they have and are trying to get it passed), then all that doesn’t matter.

ahhhhhhhhhhh, slippery slope there, huh

have to say it really is all getting to the point of being overly heavy-handed … like anything else, it seems, follow the money

Well fair compensation was the original intent of intellectual property

And I think authors and songwriters and movie makers should be compensated for their very specialized talents and skills.

But the governments attempts to protect that have been sloppy at best. And the respective industries protecting their IP’s have been sluggish to adapt, and pretty clumsy overall while attempting to do so.

no question they deserve fair compensation, totally agree

but at some point things enter into public domain and are used w/o regard to “intellectual property”

if they continue pretty soon we’ll have to pay to use the word “Chiefs” because the word itself is owned by Clark Hunt and the corporate entity

IOW, stop punishing people because technology has grown faster than the music (or movie) industry

after all, the “free file sharing” isn’t something where anyone INTENDS any harm (see how I did that?)

Also:

there is no such thing as removing something from the internet. See: the Barbara Streisand principle

No. Because I never argued intent.

Intent doesn’t matter in pirating downloads anymore than it does in saying “Chiefs” in the national anthem.

Rights are being violated (and revenue lost) by pirating software / movies / music / etc.

Rights are not being violated by saying “Chiefs!” at the end of the anthem in a public venue.

ok, fair enough as far as it goes ...

but you did use the image w/o paying for the reproduction of it in digital means … the image itself is from a movie owned by (universal or 20th century fox or whoever) thus you violated their rights to profit by using the digital reproduction of that particular frame from the movie w/o just and proper remuneration

(right?)

Unless it's a small portion

of a whole that’s used for education, satire, or discussion(?). Fair use (without looking it up).

Why I don't copy/paste

entire articles for Arrowheadlines. Trying to adhere to copyright law.

yup, and nobody wants to see Joel in prison for copyright violation

well, maybe this one guy named Bubba …

The site that's hosting it has made a copy of it.

I haven’t made a copy.

Neither has SBNation made a copy.

They’re just providing the window to look at the file hosted on the other site’s server.

Now whether or not they have permission to be hosting the image, I have no idea. You can take that up with them, though and go all MPAA if you feel the need.

You’re trying to argue principle against law here.

well yeah, you're using the technicality of the "make a digital copy" law

but that goes back to what we discussed earlier about digital v analog … all of which really goes to freedom of thought and expression v intellectual property v the underlying issue of profiting from such

isn’t this fun! :-)

Er, except none of those things have to do with linking a pic

And how does freedom of thought equate to ripping songs and giving them away so people can get away with not paying for a product?

you used the picture that you didn't own to express a thought ... and to entertain in a sense

is that picture not the intellectual property of the movie company that produced it?

it shows up on MY screen so in that sense it’s being reproduced … and in a loose sense you’re giving it away to me to see, for free … yet you didn’t pay foe the product (ie, the picture)

I don't think you're at all undestanding what it means to reproduce something.

You download a song from a file sharing site, you have a copy of that file on your hard drive (or thumb drive, or whatever you saved it to).

That’s having a copy.

If you go to the same artists youtube channel and stream the video for that same song – you haven’t made a copy. The video and the song that’s sync’d up to it are residing on youtube’s server, and if it’s the artist’s official youtube channel – then legally so.

That’s streaming. Not making a copy.

Hotlinking like we all do with images on the blog here is more akin to streaming – a copy is not being made. Just a link back to the original where it’s residing on its server.

And again, that’s not even touching on the fact that a quick hotlink to an externally hosted image isn’t potentially affecting any kind of revenue streams – which is what all that stuff is supposed to try to protect in the first place.

but SOPA is going to require all those copyrights be checked before videos go up

youtube is likely going to go dark if it’s passed, simply because nobody checks those copyrights

Heh, why are you trying to make a point that doesn't exist?

I’m as anti-SOPA and anti-PIPA as anyone.

For some reason you have it lodged in your head that thinking authors / songwriters / etc should be paid for their unique talents equates to thinking that SOPA / PIPA are even remotely good ideas.

They’re terribly worded bills that should never pass even close to how they’re written. Awful, awful legislation.

But that still doesn’t mean you should distribute free downloads of CD’s to everyone.

and what about public domain items?

Still need to compensate the musicians that perform the piece

Producers / engineers / anyone that may be involved in being compensated on a royalty basis instead of a lump sum basis.

If everything about something you’re trying to copy is public domain, it’s already legally free to do so. That’s what the public domain is.

If you want to put all the works of Shakespeare in a PDF and send to everyone you know – have fun. It’s legal, and Willy Shakes is long past any reasonable expectation of being compensated for his efforts there.

Not sure what you’re trying to get at?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/business/public-domain-works-can-be-copyrighted-anew-justices-rule.html

oh, I agree compensate the musicians ...

but the Supreme Court just ruled that public domain works can be copyrighted by Congress

welcome to the world of insanity, huh

Silly Ups,

not any public domain property. Basically extends the protection that US properties get to all properties.

Also, Congress doesn’t hold the copyright, the creator does.

but these are things that were not copyrighted, or were created before copyright laws

the example of Peter and the Wolf, for instace … schools will now hae to pay to perform it

and pay whom?

Estate of the author.

Until such time as 70 years have passed since the author died.

They’re simply applying the same law to foreign works that they’ve been applying to domestic works all along. It was a dumb oversight on Congress’s part in the first place to exclude foreign authors.

Eh, you're acting like it's some wholesale compensation for all PD works ever.

It’s for some during the timeframe that the PD requirement was being extended. People who created things within the last century.

Copyright law used to be very clunky in its first couple of forms as far as defining when something went into the Public Domain.

They’ve extended it a couple of times (up to life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 total years for a work made for hire in the act in 1976 – and again in 1998 the upped it to life plus 70 years, or 95 total years for a work for hire).

But there were cracks, loopholes and pitfalls that made foreign works be treated differently.

The justices aren’t saying that you can go back and now have to pay royalties to Shakespeare.

But foreign authors / composers who wrote things during a time where their US contemporaries would be compensated, will now be on equal footing.

So no, it’s not that – in your words – “Public domain works can be copyrighted by Congress.”

That’s just not true at all.

That article is saying things that got passed over due to a loophole (foreign works created between 1923 and 1989) – which should never have been PD to begin with, will now get a chance to receive some compensation until the normal term expires.

It’s nothing at all like what you said, heh.

l good, I was worried about having to pay The Bard every time I said "Alas, poor Yorick!"

but then, as Justice Breyer said:

… the majority’s approach did not take adequate account of the importance of free expression. "By removing material from the public domain, the statute, in literal terms, ‘abridges’ a pre-existing freedom to speak," he wrote, referring to a key word of the First Amendment.

free speech is going to cost a lot of money pretty soon

Eh, that's a bad choice of words.

It’s not restricting free speech.

It’s providing a means for some compensation for some people that got screwed over the first time through: foreign authors and composers.

Their works go right back into the public domain up such time as 70 years have passed since their death, like all other authors and composers.

Kind of a case of too little, too late.

I’m not a fan of putting something in PD then yanking it back out as a general principle. But this is just fixing something on things that should not have ever gone there in the first place.

The pathway to Hell is paved with good intentions

Is it okay to do things that are “wrong”, if you’re doing them for the “right” reasons?

you mean it isn't? ;-)

I know, huh … “the ends justify the means” and all that garbage

you'd have to assign a definition to "wrong"

And that would take too long.

you mean "because I said so" isn't enough?

So the good intent of trying to censor what people say at a ball game

Is brought on for the right reasons.

But brings about the wrong effect.

Interesting... but

The path to knighthood is paved with strength and nobility not LSD and sideburns.

So far I’ve only managed to shave my sideburns.

if you're not gonna drop that acid and nobody wants it ...

Electric kool aid acid test?

Magic Bus is ready to roll

Ken? Is taht you, Ken?

Many people that use the "N" word don't necessarily mean disrespect either

it’s just the way that they’re raised. Is that something we should also just shrug off?

I'm offended by it ... even in "casual conversation" by kids in the classes I teach (substitute)

and it’s true, just how they talk … it’s just that casual to them (Whitlock did a FABULOUS story once on how harmful the “ghetto rap” music is, the culture etc and how it’s hurting all people of color)

Sure. Roll your eyes at how ignorant it is, if you like

If it’s kids, maybe try to educate them on why it’s probably not such a smart thing to do.

But at the end of the day, it’s people using a word. And that’s even a much more extreme case than the Chiefs one.

last I checked

Arrowhead is in KC…which is in the US…So technically the US is the home of the Chiefs. :) I’m in the military and don’t have an issue, but that is why I serve to defend each of our rights and opinions. Go Chiefs!

tlback20 - January 20, 2012 reply

It should only be said at Arrowhead

It’s kind’ve dumb to be saying it at KU………home of the Jayhawks

KC_Chiefs - January 20, 2012 reply

I don't get saying it anywhere unless it's just for the sake of doing it.

Allen Fieldhouse is not the home of the Chiefs. Neither is Kauffman Stadium, Sprint Center, Faurot Field, the Independence Events Center, or Kemper Arena.

Right, but in the song they're singin bout 'merica!

And ’merica is the home of the Chiefs goldarnit.

Dallas just called, jerry Jones would like to speak to you for a moment ...

We got dibs - we were there first

Technically Dallas Texans franchise founded (AFL) – 8/14/1959
Dallas Cowboys franchise founded – 1/28/1960

I disagree

If there is enough chiefs fans at a sporting event to drown out the rest, then it sure is the home of the chiefs. Those fans just made it that for that night. ;)

fongKC - January 20, 2012 reply

He just mad his teams get knocked out of the tourney

by teams no one even knows

That means a whole lot coming from a Mizzou fan.

Mizzou is not picked to win almost every year and then gets bounced in the 1st or 2nd round

and Mizzou is one of the smallest teams and does pretty descent

Wow, what a terrible argument.

I believe what he meant to say was..

While still being a smaller team with a lot less advantages that kansas has Mizzou is still able to compete at a high level every year. Not to mention we completely dominate when it comes to football, wrestling, mens and women’s soccer, and baseball. But whose really counting

Only thing that counts

are championships.

Good luck in the SEC Mizzou

Ok, how about this

KU underachieves and MU overachieves

MU is always expected to be around the top of the league and, before this year, never have turned out that way. Not sure how that is overachieving. Not sure why you’re proud of low expectations either.

When is the last time Mizzou was pocked to finish tops in the league?

Im not saying we don’t underachieve at times, but we have never been picked to win the big 12 that i can remember.

Picked**

you missed the Stipo Era

Big 8 was awesome

unfortunately i did

too young for all that

ahhhhhhhhhhhh we had some teams, great rivalries with KU, K-State, OU ...

“Sit Down, Norm” from fans all over the league … damn it was beautiful

I said “around the top” as in the top 4-5 teams, and that happens almost every year. Not going to argue about it. You just be proud your team beats weak ass expectations.

no one is arguing

just a friendly debate about two teams we both like. And yes you could say at times we underachieve, but what about all the other sports we overachieve in? there are a lot more sports than just basketball my friend.

Shh, dont tell KU fans that there are other sports than basketball

Let them have their one. They are kind of slow and need all the praise they can get.

Yay! KU basketball makes your school so cool!

RememberDelaney37 - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

Did you hear how KU led the Big 12 in total recruiting budget last year?

I was flabbergasted that they beat out Texas. Gill must have been trying REALLY hard.

I just have to say......

Just because you haven’t heard of a team from the MISSOURI Valley Conference, doesn’t make them a team no one has ever heard of.

In fact, UNI is an equal offender in this argument:

2009: 9 seed UNI 69, 1 seed Kansas 67
1990: 14 seed UNI 74, 3 seed Missouri 71

There, now that we know both KU and Mizzou lose to “unknown” teams, can’t we all just get along?

UNIPanther - January 20, 2012 reply

I went to SMS/Missouri State

There is some really great basketball being played in the MO Valley conference

Chiefs fan in ST Louis - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

by teams no one even knows

When was the last time Missuri knocked out Ku ??

dbakerku - January 20, 2012 reply

You're free to do what you like

But it seems a bit silly to be at not only a different organization’s stadium/arena but a completely different sporting event – and still say “home of the Chiefs”. Why not say “home of the Beaks” or something more fitting?

I’m not going to go to a Titans game, or a Predators game or the the Olympics or The Masters (which I don’t think they play the Nat’l Anthem there but what do I know/care about golf) and yell out “home of the Chiefs”.

So personally, I’m a “do it at Arrowhead” supporter.

On a side note – do people get mad at Atlanta Braves fans if they add the “s” on when they sing it?

KU fans would have to say

Home of the choke artist

Not a KU fan but remind me how many Final Fours Missoura has been to?

What's Missouri got to do with anything in this article?

Just like a KU fan

even if your not a KU fan the first thing any of them will do when they hear something they don’t like is turn around and try to put down Missouri.

They won a title just a few years ago? How are they choke artists?

I never said anything about them being a choke artist

In fact i strongly disagree (when it comes to basketball) they are pretty good at finishing games and teams off, but i feel a lot of that credit goes to Bill Self

No you didn't, but the other cat did

If you look up a few inches you’ll see I was responding to him

oh my bad

i just assumed you were talking to me since it was under mine.

Come on, guys

This isn’t the KC Star comments section. Have some pride. Arrowhead Pride.

old_school - January 20, 2012 reply

Thanks, dad

Well I know you won't listen

I’m speaking to the others coming down to your level.

old_school - January 20, 2012 reply

Just a friendly debate

between bitter rivals, let us have a little more fun before the rivalry is over when Mizzou leaves for the SEC.

Yes, they did win back in 08

but usually they get knocked out in the 1st or 2nd round by a team no one has ever heard of until the tourny comes around

As a Mizzou fan

I would gladly take choking out in the first round to low ranked teams if it meant we won the NC every so often.

Hell, if we made it in the sweet 16 as often as they choke out in the 1st round I’d be happy.

I’m glad we have a solid team this year. We’re lookin good for a 1st round choke (please follow with a title at some point in my lifetime).

Yeah, with us all talking here on a Chiefs blog

I’m not going to make fun of anyone getting bounced in the first round of the post-season in any sport.

post season? I've heard of that ...

Yeah you know, it's that thing we occasionally drive by and wave at?

To the Chiefs

it is what MLB players refer to as “a cup of coffee”.

briefly ... in passing

Just wondering if a Norm Stewart symphathizer should be calling anyone else a choke artist

There were the losses to Bradley and Bucknell in the first round in successive years in 05-06 (I think?), which was a pretty big choke job.

That was a few years ago though.

you gots to admit that a #1 seed getting bounced inthe 1st & second rounds on the regular

is a pretty consisitent choke job history…a national title once every 2 decades, sure….but Mizzou has never been a #1 seed & picked by experts to win every year like KU.

IOW Mizzou lives down to expectations while the Jaychickens rarely live up to theirs? ;-)

yeah, but our football team is generally better and we all know football >>>> basketball

Champions decided by tournament > champions decided by computers

Champion is still a champion no matter what it took to get it

Was the National Championship game just simulated in Madden?

How was it decided by computers?

Guess it would be NCAA 12 or whatever

You get the point I’m making though.

he means the BCS deciding who goes to the national championship

how do you think the BCS works?

It decides who plays for the championship

It does not decide the championship. Big difference

yes and no

those not playing would disagree that it does not decide the championship

well, you & H are both right.

college hoops>>>>>>college football, but I’ll take Amurrcan football over everything else at all other levels.

oh yeah, March Madness ROCKS!

it’s the ONLY basketball I watch or give a rat’s ass about

I start paying attention in February.

If we are ranking American sports it goes

NFL > NCAA Bball > NCAA football > NBA > all the aother garbage

pretty much.

meh

screw NBA

I'd much rather watch an MLB game than NBA

The best explanation for what a foul is in basketball that was ever given to me was “when the ref blows his whistle”

that irritates me.

I'd rather watch paint dry than the NBA

watching paint dry>>>>>>>MLB

Maybe to you

I played baseball for 10 years, so I love watching an ace pitcher go about his business.

I can see where it’s be boring for people, but once you see all the little things that go on, it’s pretty fascinating.

I know that there's a lot of intricacies & strategy that goes on during every pitch

but in June & July it just drags for me. I would enjoy baseball more if the season & the games weren’t so long & drawn out.

well yeah, by July half or more of the teams are dead in the water

so that makes it a lot less interesting anyway (especially if it’s “your team” that’s dead)

I'll give you that.

as much as I love baseball, I usually get burnt out by about July, and then pick it back up in August when the pennant races start getting fun to watch.

I tend to skip the All-Star games too, just because they don’t seem to be as fun anymore. I hate that they tried to make them “matter”

We need people like you

for all sports.

I’m no fan of watching baseball (on TV), golf, nascar, or the NBA… but I’ll be damned if I want them to disappear from the face of the earth just because I would rather watch poop come out of a dog’s butt than watch those sports on TV.

I’m in support of anyone who gets jazzed about any sport of their choosing.

So +1 to you Daniel

Much thanks

it’s rough being a baseball fan when the commissioner wants to run the sport into the ground, and everyone seems to hate the sport to begin with.

I don't even qualify as a baseball fan.

I’m a less-than-baseball fan.

Because I’m a Mets fan.

And that’s just not baseball. =(

I have a good buddy who's a Mets fan.

I torture him constantly. He’ll usually retort something about “at least his team is a major league team” and it just degenerates from there.

Aw man, never torture a Mets fan

The Mets do it for us enough as it is.

(And FU Wilpon. FU in the A. Twice.)

lol

When you follow the Royals, it’s the only way to feel good about things, if only for a short fleeting moment.

Do Royals fans EVER feel good?

Not sure I’ve felt good about anything Royals in a while.

There’s always next year! LOL

It's about moments.

I loved seeing Eric Hosmer in his ML debut for example. I loved when Jeff Francis shut out the Cardinals in a complete game. It’s less about the season and more about the good times that occurred in that season, and since the good times seem to be few and far in between, it’s easy to remember them all.

All 7 of em!

LOL

lol exactly

Ignoring that bball is the most TV friendly sport...

The NBA has the best athletes in the world.

I'd put a top-tier NFL linebacker/DB up there with those guys

Maybe a few WR’s and RB’s as well.

Top to bottom though, you’re probably right.

No, if guys like CAlvin Johnson were big and fast enough

they’d be playing in the NBA. Hell, we’ve seen dudes who couldn’t hack it as b-ballers come in and dominate the NFL, looking at you Jimmy Graham, Tony G and Gates.

Why would they be in the NBA?

I guess I don’t see the appeal over football.

More money, less contact, longer careers

Face isn’t hidden by a helmet so more opportunities for endorsements

Maybe it's more about prestige

After all, the head cheerleader goes with the quarterback, not the point guard.

Dude, NBA groupies are the best there are

I'm just saying

No one has NBA Finals parties.

Football is America’s sport (sorry baseball). It’s what this country lives and breathes. It’s why companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to get their name mentioned during the Super Bowl. The NBA can’t come close to that level of popularity.

When you win the Super Bowl, you’ve pretty much won life. Everything else is gravy.

NFL Draft pulls better TV ratings

than NBA playoffs when head to head.

you're Jack Nicholson!

Laker girls>>>Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders

oh, they're very good athletes, w/o question

so is Tim Tebow for that matter

but to me it’s boring as hell and they’re pretty much all spoiled brats, many of them bordering on thugs

Pretty much all pro athletes are spoiled brats

Something about being coddled from the age of 12 on

hard to argue that

Only when considering the method used for deciding a champ

which kind of ruins the whole thing for me.

college football, that is…

Fair enough

Well, not really

if the teams playing are bunk, then the computers, ipso facto, have decided the champ.

I'll agree it's a shitty system, but again, it's not like you're national champion just because a bunch of computers and voters say you are.

If you don’t show up to the game (Lookin’ at you LSU) then you don’t win, and when you don’t win, you’re not a national champion.

so what's the reasoning they don't do an NFL style playoff?

Mainly, money

All the different little bowl organizations want their games to be played, and want them to “matter.” I’m mystified as to how the Meineke Car Care Bowl matters to begin with, but I digress.

the other smaller issues (which I wholeheartedly believe could be worked out easily enough if they sat down and did it) is that there are over 100 teams, all playing different levels of competition. Also, you have the conferences with AQ status not wanting to give that up, which is why you have West Virginia in a BCS bowl game this year (though kudos to them on an awesome performance).

Really, it all boils down to the fact that a lot of people make a lot of money off of the current system, and they’re hesitant to give it up.

As to the money issue

I still don’t get how there isn’t MORE money in a playoff system. The companies that sponsor these small bowls, could all fight, Super Bowl style, to advertise during the playoff games. The games would sell more tickets and way more people would watch them.

I think that there would be too

But I think they’re comfortable with the way things are, and if no one has to do any work, and still get paid like kings on the backs of student athletes, then that’s what matters to them.

they'd make money off a playoff system

keep the “minor” bowls … top 16 teams play, top 6 at home for first round

the remaining 8 after that go to the “major bowls” … round robin the Rose, Sugar, Fiesta whatever for the championship each year

8 v 1 Rose Bowl
7 v 2 Sugar Bowl
6 v 3 Orange Bowl
5 v 4 Whatever Bowl

see? one year Fiesta is for title, another year it’s Rose Bowl, another year a different bowl …

money galore and far more interesting, and more fair to all teams concerned

You're preaching to the choir

I think it would be super profitable, plus imagine the ratings boost for those TV broadcasts, as well as the increased revenue for the schools that move on.

I just think the NCAA is comfortable where they’re at, and until the push for a playoff system hits a fever-pitch, they ’ll keep things the way they are, with maybe very minimal changes.

The big conferences control where the money goes.

They know they’d make much more money with a playoff system, but they would have less control over where that money goes. Really all there is to it.

Not to mention

when you have to reach a certain number in a ranking system, the regular season becomes FAR more important…especially when considering SOS. No more pud games and everyone is far more interested.

Forget the obvious, there would be more games to make money off of aspect...

With a playoff, people would actually watch the other games. 95% of the bowl games are unwatchable if you don’t have ties to the schools.

Yes

So you really think

that a team that didn’t even win their own division, let alone their conference, deserves to be crowned (by computers and voters) NC?

If there was a playoff, there’d be no question that they deserved it. But essentially, the computers PUT them there otherwise there is not a snowball’s chance they’d be NC.

Frankly, No

I personally thought OSU deserved to be there. However, Alabama was no slouch this year, and you can’t really fault them too much when the team they lost their division to was the team they played in the NC.

It’s not like the computers randomly selected Baylor and threw them in there to play for the NC or anything.

They should take the top 8 seeds and do a playoff

instead of taking a month off and let the other schools play in the 100 bowl games

With you 100%

me too

Hate all those damn bowls

Being in the military myself

I don’t see a problem with it as it gets the troops (fans and players) motivated for the game. With that being said, it’s not the home of the Chiefs – it’s the home of the Jayhawks. Say Jayhawks or KU or something for that team. Leave the Chiefs for Arrowhead.

Ren - January 20, 2012 reply

at any sporting event

fongKC - January 20, 2012 reply

It's ok at Arrowhead because it's a tradition and has a reason there

Anywhere else, its just dumb.

Only at Arrowhead

It makes sense to say it at Arrowhead because it is the home of the Chiefs. This is just my opinion, but it sounds silly saying it anywhere else and I don’t think you prove any point by saying it anywhere else. Remember, the song is in honor of America, so I would think it is good to treat other venues with that respect.

old_school - January 20, 2012 reply

slow news day, huh?

reedeasy - January 20, 2012 via Android app reply

And yet I still allow this to distract me from work

someone shoot me in the face

Got a preference on type of ammo?

I can take a long lunch.

You’ll have to pay for my gas though.

Federal Premium is all you guys should ever be buying

Got a preference on type of ammo?

Maybe he loads his own

.478 Socom. It will make quick work of his face.

Meh, Mk316 mod 0

Aka the Osama killer.
/not yet verified but thats what we think

I didn't know we were sniping

because he invited someone to shoot him in the face. That round is a nice one though.

Alright alright - I'm back to work

offer to shoot me in the face has been rescinded.

Nice to know y’all were so eager to help though.

http://internetarmory.com/handgunammo.htm

You got it, .357 Federal Premium JHP, 96% stopping rate, 100% face stopping rate

It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking them up.

severn58 - January 20, 2012 reply

But could it stop the Elway Horseface?

Not sure if it could penetrate the teeth…

KansasCityShuffle - January 20, 2012 reply

Any where, any time, any place

If you disagree you’re clearly not a true Chiefs fan and therefore all hater’s

Holy mullet, Batman

Another lesson in “Why You’re Not a Real Fan”.

To prove your fanhood

everyone must yell it every hour on the hour for the next 24 hours wherever you are or you are not a real fan!!!!

It is the only way to prove it

km230015 - January 20, 2012 reply

You must chop down the largest tree in the wood wiiiiiith...

a herring.

fish abuse!

Some fish must be sacrificed for the sake of proving fanhood.

km230015 - January 20, 2012 reply

The welfare of the many is

greater than the personal sacrifice of the few. We herrings who are about to chop salute you!

AND POST FLAMED

Chiefs Fan in SC - January 20, 2012 reply

2010 preseason Chiefs vs. Falcons

I went this game in 2010 in Atlanta. I screamed out “Chiefs” at end of the National Anthem and enjoyed the heck out of it. No one near me did it. There where even some Chiefs fans (I use the term lightly) directly in front of me who turned around and looked at me like I was stupid. I said nothing because I knew they didn’t understand being a real Chiefs fan. I think any Chiefs fan should do it wherever the game is.

THIS ^^^^^^^

In our homes too. They are all homes of the CHIEFS~!!!!!!

College sports suck!

but ...

without ~~farm teams~~ NCAA football we wouldn’t have NFL-ready players

Truth.

But that’s all they’re good for, since only a small percentage of them are good enough to become pros, you get a lot of bad sports mixed with very little good.

Of course I hate basketball of all stripes anyway, but yeah…

Let my irrational disdain of college sports continue.

(I have softened up to college football a bit)

ArrowheadHunter - January 20, 2012 reply

People who's picture I'd rather never see on AP

Todd Haley… check
Bill Self… check
now you only need to add Charlie Weis on his rascal scooter and you got the hat trick today!

who cares what bill self thinks

Bill Self.

Say it anywhere you like

I can see bill self taking issue, he’s the basketball coach, but obviusly there are some serious chief fans at the ku basketball game. good for them

Arrowhead25 - January 20, 2012 reply

I voted only at Arrowhead...

But I’ve heard it done in very random places…. like the big company kickoff party that I went to in November for my current employer. I didn’t do it, but I had to laugh when a bunch of people did. It’s the easiest way to identify other Chiefs fans, that’s for sure!

Falcon58 - January 20, 2012 reply

People say it at Starlight Theatre...

during the National Anthem…it’s just a KC thing. Bill Self should STFU and get Charlie Weis a cookie.

chai1836 - January 20, 2012 reply

and no doubt he feels the same way about you ...

Great contribution...

to the conversation as always asshat.

chai1836 - January 20, 2012 reply

It is one of the MOST disrespectal acts

I have witnessed in sports, but it also reflect the lack of respect we seem to have for our country these days.

maddirishman - January 20, 2012 reply

It’s a song. How is that disrespectful?

It isn't.

Now if someone ended the Anthem with, “O’er the land of the free, and the home…of the….SCREW AMERICA!!1111 HAHAHAH, SOLDIERS SUCK!!! SUCK IT!!! GO NORTH KOREA WOOOO!!!!!!”

I could see how maybe someone might construe that as disrespectful.

In that case, I’d probably just check to see if their Ritalin scrip needed a refill or something.

Haha.

Very poetic.

YES intent counts

More disrespectful, I would suggest

is allowing someone to butcher it for the sake of a laugh (Ms. Barr) … I believe what we would call “making a mockery of it”.

I don’t feel like changing one word at the end of the song is making a mockery of it.

Sadly, it’s also one of those things that, if it does offend you or you find it disrespectful then you’re the one responsible for tolerating the offense. There are no grounds or basis for action that can dissuade it, i.e., it cannot be controlled or stopped.

So the options are – you don’t care and it doesn’t bother you and you go on with your day, or you care and it bothers you and you deal with it and go on with your day. Any other outcome to the situation, e.g. getting in an altercation or verbal spat as a result, is unnecessary and uncalled for as it will not change the viewpoint of either person involved.

Yeah. As I mentioned earlier

The only real way to look at it is – does this violate anyone’s rights?

If yes → proceed with legal action

If no → move along.

Wish people would realize that. Daily interactions would move along so much more smoothly.

But

Someone is WRONG on the Internet, DAMMIT!

It's all good. We got this.

ku alumni and lifetime chiefs fan

as an alumni of ku who joined others doing the chop while walking under the campanile, sp, i’ll say that im proud that ku fans shout chiefs at the end of the national anthem. i have to listen to all this “under god shit” and that offends me but i think people have the right to say whatever they want. if anybody from mu or ksu has a problem with it feel free to win a national championship in any sport, AT ALL and then i’ll listen to you about how fans from my school should act. despite popular belief bill self is only god while inside allenfield house. once he leaves all otherwordly powers vacate him till he reenters hollowed ground, everybody knows that ;)

chiefs&nachoS - January 20, 2012 reply

Anytime, anywhere

Chiefs Nation takin’ over!

Poll option missing

It SHOULD be said EVERYWHERE

THIS^^^^^^

ALWAYS REP YOUR SET!!!!

Bill Self should be more concerned with finding a better rug

Aint foolin’ anyone with that squirrel on his head

Needs to concern himself with the new deals at the Salty Iguana

Mi Ranchito > Salty Iguana

Ponchos > Mi Ranchito

Another Successful Tedford QB - January 20, 2012 reply

Ducks making moves! Too bad they can’t hang with the Bears….

It's whatever...

…people are going to do what they’re going to do.

jbj8609 - January 20, 2012 reply

Kansas has the best home court advantage in the nation

So IMO they can say it

Supersexy - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

Why is everyone concerned with offending military

when it comes to the changing of the last word? Last time I checked we are all (most of us) American and the anthem is for all of us, not just military. Why do we only need to make sure we aren’t offending them?

For the record I’m in the “Say it whenever and wherever camp” because it doesn’t offend me at all.

Bonofied - January 20, 2012 reply

training

while it is true that our military is comprised of the poorest and least educated people of our population it is also true that they are tried to kill people in a variety of ways. hence the “dont offend the military” ideology. i agree with you thou. way what you want.

chiefs&nachoS - January 20, 2012 reply

way to show your respect of the military!

Dumbest statement I've heard on AP

in a long time, congrats chiefs7natchos

Hoochdawg - January 20, 2012 reply

Wow, that's a pretty impressive use of ignorant generalizations.

Way to shoot for the high score.

check his scrip and see if needs more ritalin ;-)

I need more ritalin

comprised of poorest and least educated?

I would never say that – there are some (many) incredibly smart people in the military… and as much as we don’t consider it, there are affluent people that choose to serve their country as well.

Your last point is legit however – worst idea ever is to mess with ex military… especially Special Forces of any kind. That’s just asking for pain.

6/10

Because you’ll get several bites.

Yeah it was well trolled in principle

But lacked the execution to really lock down a high score.

He blew his nitrous too early.

didn’t leave anything for the home stretch.

Good approach but just didn't stick the landing?

This is butt funny, I like your style!

severn58 - January 20, 2012 reply

I don't see what the big deal is

I’m not really a fan for or against it. For anyone who is offended by it, what exactly is offensive about it other than the song is only 99% accurate lyrically now? It’s not like people are shouting “…and the home of the….F%#$ you baby killing soldiers!”

I’d more offended by people who talk, drink beer, don’t stand, don’t take their hat off, etc during the National Anthem. In my opinion, it makes Chiefs fans a lot more engaged in the entire Anthem than other places.

As for doing it at other places like KU basketball games

makes no sense to me. Do they do the Tomahawk Chop there as well? Lame. I’d like to think KU has enough of their own traditions already. Do Jayhawk fans yell Rock, Chalk, Jayhawk at Chiefs games?

I'd argue that those are the same people that shout it most of the time

cause that’s the only part they know cause they’ve been too busy with previous activities.

“Oh fuck, Tony, hang on..it’s my favorite part ‘CHIEEEEEEEEEFS!’. Now, about those white walls…”

Those two scenarios you mentioned are essentially the same thing; not having time to show homage to the anthem. It’s like the kids in school that bitch because “I got all the other steps right in this equation. How come I didn’t get credit? I only missed one step!” Sorry, kid, the answer is wrong whether you missed one step or seven.

You still didn't say why it's so offensive

instead you are just implying the people who typically disrespect the Anthem in the first place are the ones doing it. Not the case, majority of the people in the stadium are. The National Anthem is not a math equation. Hell, people who sing it don’t always do it word for word or change the inflections from the original melody. I guess those people are “disrespecting the military” because they aren’t following exactly how it was originally written.

They aren’t out burning the flag at mid-field here. It’s a harmless single word replacement (that’s even an indirect synonym for it) at the very end of the song. BFD. For how much those fans cheer and honor military members at the game, it’s obvious the intent was never to be disrespectful. Intent is what matters to me.

oh wow, man ... I'm sorry ... I didn't INTEND to plow my car into yours at 90 MPH and kill 17 people when your car was pushed into a schoolbus full of kids ...

honest, that wasn’t my INTENT

Yeah, that analogy really makes sense

Equating changing a word in a song to killing people.

you said it's all about intent ... granted I'm making a radical case in point here, but ...

well, making the point is my … intent

With words, intent matters.

Telling someone they should work out because you think they are a fatass is different then they should work out because it’s enjoyable and it makes you feel good.

...and I'm still waiting to hear what is so disrespectful about the word Chiefs at the end of it.

if someone, again using the soldier analogy, is upset by it ... it hurts THAT person ...

unintended to be sure, but nonetheless hurts … see?

the point really is “where’s the line?” … no harm, no foul? awesome … but unintened hard can be harm nonetheless … so do you then ask “how much harm” instead? then you’ve moved the line back …

so, how far do you move it before it’s no longer acceptable?

It's pretty plain to see.

Violation of rights.

People can claim to be offended by anything and everything. If you start restricting what people can say / do based on that, no one will ever be able to say anything. All we’ll be able to do is smile and wave. Until someone gets offended by that, too.

If something is bad enough to the point that it can legally be defined as harassment, then it’s a violation of rights and should be struck down.

Anything short of that is fair game, and should remain so.

ah, violation of rights ...

rights that, as you noted above regarding SOPA and file sharing, change with technology … amazing the effect of the internet, no?

question: at what point does my right NOT to hear you say something supersede YOUR right to say it? at what point IS something “harassment” … or rather, violation of rights?

you might want to crank up your music to 200 decibels in your car til someone can hear it vibrate a mile away … but someone ELSE has no desire to hear it at all … violation of privacy, no?

Since when do you have a right to not hear something that isn't harassment?

You are really grasping at straws trying to equate this with verbal harassment.

I don't have a right to peace and quiet without disturbance?

better check your local noise ordinance laws

What in the hell does that have to do with this?

Nobody is showing up outside your doorstep yelling “home of the CHIEFS”.

if you have to ask that question, I doubt any amount of explaining will suffice

sorry I intervened

You are talking about a completely different issue that doesn't even relate to the topic

Noise ordinances and verbal harassment have nothing to do with the National Anthem at a football stadium.

Why don’t you file a legal suit with the Kansas City Chiefs claiming the yelling of Chiefs at the end of the Star Spangled Banner violates your rights and see how far that goes.

Might want to read the back of your ticket though before lawyering up.

the issuee / topic is beyond that

you’re dealing with civil and human rights in all this … who’s to say what is or isn’t offensive to someone else? you? simply because you didn’t INTEND to offend? that’s ludicrous and naive

There's no right that protects anyone from being offended.

It’s too subjective of a thing.

So you’re trying to make a point that doesn’t really exist, here.

Why then does the FCC exist?

Because people were offended by some things that either were or might be said on television or radio. It happens all the time and because of it, federal regulations have been passed and federal boards have been created to monitor and police what gets put out over the air waves and into public consumption.

I guess because some things are over just about everyone's line

/shrug

Best I got.

Yet the majority of Americans identify with Judeo-Christian values

but a few people are so easily offended by them that it has become downright illegal for children to pray at school (even over their own lunch)? That certainly isn’t over everyone’s line.

I’m not trying to pot-shot you,here. I just feel you made a great comment that furthered my point. Thanks for that!

You're welcome I guess

not illegal most places for kids to pray over their own lunch btw. Usually it just has to do with school-sponsored prayers.

Maybe not "on the books"

But see how long kids are permitted to pray at lunch time if even one student or parent bitches to administration.

On the same token, you’d better not dare tell a Muslim that they can’t wear their face coverings or take time to pray or wash themselves or even that their Sharia law is superseded by the laws of this country…by gum, they’ll be offended and shit will change.

Likewise, try to tell an atheist that they have to respect the wishes of others who wish to pray to their God. That will offend them and shit will change.

I think it depends on the region

In some of the Bible Belt states, especially in smaller school districts, if a parent complained to an administrator about a kid praying over his lunch, that parent would be laughed at and asked to leave.

I live in the middle of the Bible Belt

Near Wichita, KS and that isn’t the case. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, man.

It seems that the only group that people can take shots at freely are Christians.

this is why our society is supposed to be free from religious intent AND oppression

I have no issue who prays to what or when or how, but please don’t force ME or MINE to pray or believe like you (or others)

I don’t care if someone doesn’t accept science and evolution, but please don;t try to FORCE me or others to believe “intelligent design”

what happens in PUBLIC should be w/o regard to color, race, religion etc etc ad nauseum

what happens in private … another story altogether

Sharia law is definitely superceded here

Sharia law says that if murder / manslaughter or something similar occurs, the victim’s family gets to decide the punishment.

That most certainly is not protected or condoned in the US.

There are plenty of differences where something allowed or required by Sharia law isn’t protected by US law.

So we would think

Sharia law is quietly, or not-so-quietly, making in-roads into the legal system of this country. Check it out. There have been American courts that have upheld Sharia law and essentially said that it has the same clout as United States laws.

Where?

Genuinely curious. I like to know where to avoid living.

Dammit, now I have to do research

I’d just say, stay away from the east coast…and Deerborn, MI.

I’ve seen stories on it…now I have to pirate some shit off the old intrawebs…

Ha! I already knew about those places.

You know what an ABC store is? First time I saw one and learned how they worked, in Virginia, I was just blown away. And then I was told they weren’t just in that one state. Still can’t believe that’s constitutional.

but growing up Jewish myself I was sure feeling out of place in school around holidays

I'm offended by that!

Just kidding.

The FCC should protect children.

Healthy grownups gotta be responsible for what goes on in their own heads. Taking offense to words happens entirely in your own head.

The FCC should protect children.

Now there’s a BS statement. PARENTS should protect their children. The more responsibility the government takes in “protecting” kids the less responsibility parents will take.

parents seem to take less and less responsibility regardless of what govt does

I see it every day

Do you think it helps that the government allows them to take less responsibility by taking care of their kids in every situation?

the govt doesn't take care of the kids ... what happens is those irresponsible kids grow up to be irresponsible adults

at that point it isn’t a govt problem, it’s a societal problem

Well if they don’t they certainly make an attempt. And it starts with little things like “protecting” the kids from bad stuff on TV.

I think I agree with your basic viewpoint,

but practically, that’s pretty damned tough. Without some FCC rules, the only way for parents to protect their kids would be to not allow any kids to watch TV or use the internet. And then society would crumble.

LMFAO

That’s what my 11 year-old thinks. He isn’t allowed to watch TV all week and if it gets taken on the weekends…FUCK!

I'm not going to argue that point

What I’m saying is that people who ARE offended by, or find this to be a disrespectful thing, do have the “right” to be offended simply by the fact that offices like the FCC exist. The FCC protects our “right” to not be offended.

I know there is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, in the Constitution that protects our “right to not be offended”, I know this. But still, it is a precedent to the perceived “right”.

There's no right to not be offended because it's not something real.

If somebody hits me, that causes physical damage. If somebody is playing loud music, that can be measured on a decibel scale. Taking offense is completely psychological and therefor is each individual’s own responsibility, unless they are too young or not healthy enough to be responsible for their own mind.

A long way of saying – if you’re offended, then that’s your problem, man.

Hence my use of "perceived right"

I know that the one offended has the obligation to move away from what is offensive, unless otherwise covered by legal statute. That being said, it still doesn’t mean that I don’t have the right to decry said offense and express my thoughts on the subject.

and to me that's the issue ... that one should HAVE to move at all

the one offended has the obligation to move away from what is offensive

why is it that those doing the offending don’t have the obligation to move?

I believe that in the long run, those who are offended

have the obligation to stop feeling offended.

The same could be said

that those doing the offending have the obligation to stop be self-righteous and at least attempt to see the other’s side.

Being offended by ideas is a learned behavior.

You’re not born loving your country, or knowing which words “should” piss you off. It’s a matter of education. I mean, life experience type education, not just in schools. If I don’t have the same life experience as you, how the hell can I ever really understand your point of view? I’d have to just depend on you telling me what’s offensive and what’s not, and nobody should have that kind of power over somebody else.

So those who don't like the "N" word

or the term “gay” should just shake it off and move on?

What if the people using those terms don’t know society considers them offensive? They are still hurting people, in some cases very badly.

Fuck, I’m starting to sound like a GD pussy…wussified country. SHIT! Anyway…awwww fuck it.

People who use the N word every day can't stand when it's said by somebody with a certain color skin.

There’s no logical sense to that kind of thing. So yeah, they should shake it off.

Brsrkr, no you can't understand how I grew up or someone else grew up

but some skinhead nazi type doesn’t have a “right” to go around shouting “nigger” blah blah blah … learned behavior? how about learning to BE offensive, same as anything else, right?

everything is learned behavior

What if that skinhead shouted "nigger" to a Ugandan?

The Ugandan wouldn’t have any idea he “should” be offended….unless somebody told him he should. That’s what makes taking offense an arbitrary act, and nobody should have to be responsible for others’ arbitrary acts.

if the Skinheads all went to Uganda that would be fine

they have a right to do so and I’d be delighted to assist them in that endeavor

Lol, now there's a reality show begging to happen!

Seriously though, I’ve known some damn fine skinheads. In Germany, US soldiers and local skinheads would hang out in the bars together. We watched each other’s backs in defense of roving bands of young Turkish punks who apparently had an inborn reflex to kick any turned back they saw, but only if they out-numbered said turned back by at least 3 to 1.

how does one go about that? ignore everything they've ever been taught to believe?

inflammatory and offensive terms and words can be hurled around freely and it’s all just peachy? if someone doesn’t like it well gee, that’s just too bad?

Try to explain how "home of the Chiefs" is inflammatory to, say, a Ugandan.

And then let him explain to you how making fun of ghosts and witches at halloween, which are very real and feared in many parts of Africa, is offensive.

There still needs to be a sensitivity to it

especially if it has been made known by said Ugandan. I also would guess that a Ugandan would take a national anthem much more seriously and might find it offensive, or at least off-putting, that we would trivialize such a proud thing as our anthem.

Sensitivity should be appreciated, but never mandated.

At the end of the day, yes.

Unless it devolves to the point of harassment (which can be legally defined).

I’ll defer to MN on that area, as my area of expertise in law is focused only in and around copyright.

The FCC exists because it was originally made to help regulate communications on an inter-state and international level from the US standpoint

Since radio stations could broadcast in one state and be heard in another, state-to-state legislation was too messy. It was too easy to overstep the bounds of another state’s law.

But it grew into a bloated and misguided bureaucratic piece of crap that felt the need to try to impose some kind of made up morality that it really to this day has no legal basis for doing so.

And thus setting precedent for the perceived "right" to not be offended

Yup, nanny state type stuff.

Agreed on the nanny-state

But it goes to show that the point of being offended by something can prove very powerful.

One of those things that require constant vigilance.

Price of freedom, etc.

Don't forget

the abuse of freedoms.

with freedom comes responsibility

I can't be responsible for everybody else's individual ideas.

If that were the case, there would be maybe six “legal” words that could actually be said out loud.

three of which would be ...

TOUCHDOWWWWNNNNNNNNN
KAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNSAS
CITYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Can't be offended by something people never say

/zing!

I'M offended by THAT!

I'm offended that yo're offended

How dare you

Your offense at his being offended

is offensive, sir. Good day!

I'm a night person! DON'T SAY GOOD DAY IN MY PRESENCE!

A donkey fan would be offended by that.

Maybe your topic is

all I’ve been saying is there is nothing about the “the home of the Chiefs” that violates anyone’s rights. Might offend someone, but you don’t have some sort of legal right to not be offended.

Show me where not being offended is a human right.

Human rights?

Sam D - January 20, 2012 reply

Speak for yourself

Yeah, I'll probably end up there

Probably heavily liquored up though.

Just be clothed

It’ll be an improvement.

Nag nag nag nag nag.

I can’t promise anything.

Fair enough

you two make SUCH a cute couple!

Odd compliment

But ill take it where I can get it. Muchas gracias

Alright, but just so we're clear

I’m the butch, and DH123 is the bitch.

(c’mon dammit, it’s your turn for a change)

whatever works for you two :-)

there's a lot of male bonding going on here

Lesser men would have cut and run by now.

Actually yes - there are city ordnances for noise violations for specifically that.

So you’ve stated something that already exists.

“Not hearing someone say something” isn’t a right. It’s been a bit since I read the Bill of Rights, but pretty sure that’s not guaranteed in any way shape or form. Especially in a public venue.

Rights didn’t change with technology. The ability to violate the rights of the IP holders did, though. And that’s the crux of the problem.

this ^^^

HA Ups always has to bitch

What a baby.

chai1836 - January 20, 2012 reply

I don't see any soldiers boycotting Arrowhead, apparently the vast majority of them have no problem with it.

In this day and age, you can say just about anything and there’s going to be at least one person who’s offended.

Essentially the anthem has become about the Kansas City Chiefs

and thus the importance is taken from the meaning. When people shout that it is as if they are placing a team that plays a game ahead of the country and those that have purchased their right to attend a sporting event. The song no longer represents our country and our pride for that country, but rather a team and a populace that quite frankly holds nothing as sacred anymore. That’s what’s offensive about it, to me at least.

If paying homage to the Chiefs through song and verse is so important, maybe we need to develop a fight song of sorts. You know, like “Hail to the Redskins”.

The only part that is paying homage to the Chiefs

is the very last word of the song. One word does not change the entire meaning and message of it. At that point, the song is over. Yelling “Chiefs” at the end is simply a transition from “honoring your country” to “time to watch some football” which is the primary purpose people are there for.

It doesn't change the meaning?

That’s what it appears to me. I don’t know how many times a word can be changed within the context of even a sentence and the entire meaning not be changed. Hell, even changing/omitting punctuation changes the meaning of a sentence.

Let’s eat, Grandma.
Let’s eat Grandma.

It's about both at the same time, for me.

I love my country, I love my Chiefs, and I’m damned happy to be living in my country and watching my Chiefs.

Your example has no context.

Of course the intended meaning of one sentence can be confused with different punctuation given no context. If that was in a story about a grandmother making a pie for her grandkids, I doubt anyone would be confused about what the intended meaning was.

The Star Spangled Banner has over 300 words in it and a couple minutes long. You honestly believe someone hearing it with the people yelling “Chiefs” at the end suddenly makes someone “oh, shit! That song was about the Chiefs? Almost thought we were singing about America there for a second.”

That's exactly what I'm saying

I find this as an extension to the decay of society as a whole. There used to be things in life that were respected, just because they were. They weren’t changed, on a whim for fun. I guess I’m just old-fashioned, but at the very least, the use of the word “Chiefs” at the end of the anthem trivializes all the words that came before. It sucks the meaning right out of it.

So from that response I can assume

you are just as if not more so offended by performers who personalize the Star Spangled Banner even though they are trying to do so in a respectful manner (ie NOT Rosanne Barr).

I find it a bit grandiose

but not offensive, in that they are conveying the message as written in the lyrics.

..and I agree that KU doing it is borderline disrespectful as it has no context there.

is that roast grandma or bbq grandma or fried grandma or baked?

LOL

Just suffice to say in one scenario, Grandma is happy. In the other, not so much.

..and what about my Ace Frehley example?

I guess people were just standing around honoring KISS for two minutes since they had no idea what the song was about being there were no words.

Violation of other's rights by your own criminal actions.

Kind of a bad analogy that time.

Actually Chief's is considered offensive in more than one segment of americans

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndU-BVhdOc4

I'm curious

were you offended when Ace Frehley did the National Anthem a couple years ago at Arrowhead? He didn’t even sing, just played it on guitar.

excellent point

CLK

If Bill Self doesn't like it, then everyone should do it

Sam D - January 20, 2012 reply

Yes!

Another Successful Tedford QB - January 20, 2012 reply

Self needs to stop whining

KU has had and will continue to have some of the best college hoops fans in the country. Constantly sold out, constantly rocking (even though they bitch about calls way too much). It’s one word at the beginning of the game. Chiefs and KU hoops are the only cool sports-related things in the whole area. Just shut up and worry about your product on the floor.

Even more amazing to see it happen in other stadiums. Like Edward Jones Dome...

I’m a season ticket holder from the St. Louis area, so when the Chiefs come to play @ Rams I always get tickets. Each time there has been enough red in the crowd that it sounds just like Arrowhead @ the end of the national anthem. Nothing more precious than seeing a Rams fan in front of me go “Awww Hell no, they really just did that in our stadium”.

Undaunted_Fish - January 20, 2012 reply

Should only be changed to Home of the Braves.

/Turner Field

It's disrespectful

When douche bags who sing the anthem try and put their own spin on it or skip lines. Saying it’s disrespectful cuz we change 1 word and for that we don’t respect our men and women of service is flat out fuckin stupid. Don’t know how many of my buddies who are in the military(I’m talkin crazy marines, die for America right now and tomorrow) who hit that line louder than me. And ya know why? They fought for our FREEDOM TO DO SO!

KCinIL - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

It could be argued

that your two points are the same thing.

Probably right

KCinIL - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

ROCK CHALK CHIIIIEEEEFFS!!!

Hinky Dink - January 20, 2012 reply

Don't ever say that again

There is no rock or chalk at arrowhead.

Yes, under Clark Arrowhead has not been rocking

I say it at every sporting event I go to

but I have issues so don’t mind me. I worked for a D1 program (albeit nowhere near the scope of KU) and why is the head coach worried about anything but the game during the anthem. For most involved with the game, the words are not even thought of unfortunately. The players and coaches are concerned (usually) about the first offensive and defensive possession.

I say worry about the game and let fans speak freely like we are given the right to do so. And worry more about how not to get beat by Northern Iowa, Bucknell, etc. in the big dance.

Steve_in_RI - January 20, 2012 reply

Lousiest debate I've ever seen on AP.

Thorman totalled trolled us on a slow news day

Well played, Joel. Well played.

Friggin troll

They gots to pay the bills.

Posting this topic was guaranteed to bring in the site hits.

It has KU vs Mizzou bait.

It has political bait.

It has NCAA bait.

Those Thorman kids now how to keep the cash flowing.

Masterful job actually

It’s kept me entertained during a 10 and a half hour workday, so I’m OK with it.

He's like a fucking Jedi, that Joel

Darth Joel and Darth Chris

It’s the Sith Rule of Two

I see you fought the urge to be a pirate

and post another amazing movie screen shot! LOL

Well played, sir.

There should be less faux patriotism

and more respect for your freedoms, land and fellow citizens.

Eat shit, commie.

Agreed, in principle

but isn’t that statement very akin to telling someone how to be a fan?

I agree there should be more respect for the country, it’s people and for just about everything in the world. How, though, can we decide what is “real” patriotism and “faux” patriotism?

I just meant singing a song doesn't do shit for your country.

Not really trying to define who is a patriotic and who isn’t, though.

Savvy

I concur, but do not cede to the notion that the song has no importance to either the country or its history.

Historically, yes.

At a football game, no.

How can the two be separated?

If the purpose for having the anthem at a sporting event is to remind us of our freedoms and the cost of said freedoms, then certainly there is great importance to the anthem, is there not?

We should sing a song about the Patriot Act and the NDAA.

Because the current song “reminding us of our freedoms” is not getting the job done.

A song about waterboarding would kickass

I’d sing it at every event.

if you sing it offkey and I have to listen ...

… that would be torture

There aren't many things I can do.

Like successfully tie my own shoes at least 3 times out of 5. Or make sense.

But dammit I can sing in key!

Frankly, some shit just doesn’t matter in certain venues. You spend 2 mins listening to the anthem, and then its forgotten and drowned out by the cheers of savage fans rooting for the home team to stomp a mud-hole into the opposing team.

But for those sacred two minutes… We were patriots.

I sing every word and say chiefs everytime. I don’t like when people sing it crazy. I don’t like that at the super bowl it’s lip sang. It’s your choice to fight for this country it’s not your choice with what other people do with those rights. I would like to thank anybody that has fought for my rights and that has served.

KC_Chiefs92 - January 20, 2012 reply

What's the difference

Between people changing the pacing or the tone or the pitch and people changing a word at the end? It’s all the same in my book.

Depends on if it sounds good or not

I’m ok with changing it up a little bit, if it’s done in a professional way. Singing it horribly off-key or something like that with the intent of it being a joke is what irks me.

Intentionally making a mockery of it is disgusting

That’s kind of what yelling “Chiefs” seems to me…like people are making a mockery of the anthem because the Chiefs are more important.

It's not a mockery at all

We don’t shout it as a fuckin joke or a slam towards the anthem, we say that shit with pride!

KCinIL - January 20, 2012 via mobile reply

So, if the people mocking the anthem are proud of it

it’s okay?

Satire is a form of protected free speech. Mockery is a form of satire.

So sure it’s okay.

You don’t have to like it. You don’t have to like seeing a Muslim woman wearing a hijab either. But you can’t really prevent either from happening.

If that hijab hides weapons or identity, sure we can prevent it from happening.

And we definitely should, for the safety of all. But only if said potential terrorist woman is attractive in her underwear.

Harrumph!

You've NEVER sang "...home of the chiefs!"?

Actually, no

You're not a fan.

I never sang it before.

But I just now did, in my office at work, so I can be a fan.

Welcome aboard.

Well, then...

dammit.

See you guys later.

Good ol Rosanne

Always and Forever

“HOME OF THE BRAVE”

slackator - January 20, 2012 reply

Rec

Enrico Palazzo... ahem.. Frank Drebin would like to say

Oh say can you see
By the dawn’s early light
What so proudly we hail
In the twilight’s last gleaming?
Whose bright stripes and broad stars
In the perilous night
For the ramparts we watched
uh, da-da-da-da-da-daaaa.
And the rocket’s red glare
Lots of bombs in the air
Gave proof to the night
That we still had our flag.
Oh say does that flag banner wave
Over a-a-all that’s free
And the home of the land
And the land of the – FREE!

LOL

But he’s just an idiot…he honestly doesn’t know better, so not being offended by him is easier.

Now, the writers on the other hand…those dirty, rat bastards….;)

Loved Frank

RIP Leslie

Leslie Nielsen was awesome.

surely we agree on this

not sure

reply fail!

of course I agree … and DON’T call me Shirley!

I just wanted to let you know - good luck. We're all counting on you.

Like a dwarf at a urinal, he should've stayed on his toes.

Or a dwarf at a nudist colony

Just keeps getting in everyone’s hair.

LMAO

ok

that made me laugh

GonzosDirtyTrailer - January 20, 2012 reply

I'll listen to people whine...

…about the sanctity of the national anthem the day it’s something other than an obligatory sports tradition. We ONLY sing it at freaking sports games, people.

Which is quite often for some people

As a parent of athletic children and a fan of sport, I get the anthem nearly every day of the week…and I love it.

Shouldnt be said AT ALL

Shouldnt be said at all in all honesty its disrespectful to the troops fighting and have fought in war to protect our freedoms so we can be foolish enough to yell “home of the chiefs” with that said, if it has to be said and hardcore chiefs fans cant control themselves than Arrowhead should be the ONLY place that it should ever be uttered. Doesn’t make sense to say it anywhere else.

DHY - January 20, 2012 reply

I've been a troop, and I don't feel disrespected by it.

And if you haven’t been a troop, then I hereby give you permission to stop feeling disrespected for me.

I personally think Chiefs are brave.

mistamic - January 20, 2012 reply

All Chiefs are braves

yet not all braves are Chiefs. True story.