He never apologized for respecting the flag. He apologized because he failed to recognize the cause behind the gesture. You can do both. I know because I do.

He didn't "fail" to recognize the cause behind the "gesture". The cause is based on a lie, first of all. But, for the sake of brevity, let's skip that part and assume that the cause was ever rooted in reality. The "gesture" was disrespectful. When the PA announcer says "everyone, please rise for the national anthem" and you sit on the bench, or take a knee, or turn your back (all of these things were done) you aren't fooling anyone with a brain that you are doing anything other than spiting the flag to show your disdain.

Everyone understood this, even though some tried to justify it, they knew what it was about. And, again, putting aside the fact that "systemic racism" is a total lie, if they wanted to protest, that was a poor time to do it. These are millionaires getting ready to play a game in front of thousands of fans who poured their hearts into their teams, and these guys picked THAT time to make their demonstrations of disgust for the very country which has afforded them the freedom to play a game and make a fortune.

Drew understood this, as well. But, suddenly, when the political climate heated up, the players became completely intolerant of Drew's opinion that protesting during the anthem was the wrong way to go. The players say it's not about the flag, but they won't protest at any other time. That is horse crap, and anyone who is remotely honest about it knows that.

Your personal story of flipping your stance is not necessarily surprising. There are certain people who I'd expect to do whatever makes their seat a little cooler. I thought Drew had a little more integrity, but apparently it was more important to patch things up and continue playing football, without worrying about whether or not his linemen would block for him.

Quite the contrary, in an area full of bigoted rednecks my corrected stance makes my seat quite a bit hotter. But, as you can see, a little bit of heat never bothered me. You see, being open-minded is a positive trait. But, I guess you don't need that since you have this amazing ability to read minds and know exactly what someone is thinking. You are going to believe what you want to believe and nothing will get in the way of that.

That why I mentioned the old saying earlier, "Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!" It means you are going to think or do whatever you want so go for it. No amount of logic will change your mind.

These supposed "bigoted rednecks" probably have no idea who you are, or what you believe, and don't particularly care. It's the people who supposedly "changed your mind" who you obviously are in contact with enough for them to talk you into "changing" your mind. The seat is always hotter with those you are most closely associated with, should they disagree with your point of view.

Also, there is a world of difference between being "open-minded" in the liberal sense you are parroting, which is to accept whatever narrative you are spoon fed by the political culture; and having a rational mind that follows facts and common sense.

And, no, the phrase you used does not mean "you're going to think or do whatever you want, so go for it". It means "get out, and don't stop on the way". It's merely further indication of your condescending, self-righteous "superfan" attitude that you lord over people. It's not a complicated thing to understand. But, you'll spin anything.

That's the way it has always been used where I was raised. But, you are sure to take it as you wish. So be it.

As for my circle of acquaintances, it is very diversified. Even within our Sunday school class (60+ pretty regular members) it ranges from extremely liberal to stanch conservatives. Albeit, the vast majority are nearer to the middle. Our teacher is a longtime basketball coach so we occasionally get off on tough topics such as this. Our conversations have most recently been shifted to facebook where I am friends with most of them. I've brought my "conversion" up in these conversations.

And "open-minded" in the sense I am using it is defined as - "the willingness to search actively for evidence against one's favored beliefs, plans, or goals, and to weigh such evidence fairly when it is available." That has no liberal or conservative connotations. It requires honest open-mindedness to be able to change one's mind.

I'd tell you to look up the definition of the phrase you used to verify that it means exactly what I said it means, but I am certain that you already know. You just pretend to be ignorant when you get caught with your foot in your mouth. That's alright, friend. I get it.

As for the definition you gave for open mindedness, that one is actually correct. However, your application of the term is clearly liberal. Liberals hijack lots of terms that don't mean what they think it means. Because, you see, some of us HAVE bothered to actively search for evidence, fairly, without the use of preconceptions. There are actual facts with statistical analysis, which myself, and several others on here, have displayed COUNTLESS times. Those facts refute the narrative of systemic racism.

It doesn't matter what your friends think, or how they feel. What evidence do THEY actually have to support their claims? None. But you've sided with their emotions. You call that open-minded, I call it willful ignorance.

And as it pertains to the method of protest, regardless of the narrative that drove it, the method was offensive to a lot of people for very valid reasons. The players never gave an adequate explanation as to HOW this was somehow NOT disrespectful toward the flag and the people it represents (which is all of us). They just said "it's not about the flag", and we're supposed to accept that. They say that because of all the backlash they received a couple of years ago. It's a cop out. The "reporters" at CNN say "we're just reporting the news". Are they? Is it POSSIBLE that people LIE when their character and reputation are under attack? Noooo, that never happens.

He just likes to argue for the sake of arguing. If this entire board supported kneeling for the anthem he would be against it. I highly doubt he really feels the way he presents himself.