Nike: Betsy Ross Flag vs the Stars and Bars . . . Confederate flag wins?

WuWei · July 3, 2019, 12:54pm

Well that was stupid of them.

gooddad409 · July 3, 2019, 12:59pm

Don’t think i’ve ever owned a pair of Nike’s anyway.

DOLOOP · July 3, 2019, 1:09pm

Interesting that a lot of folks had to make it about military and stuff like that to obscure the message about police brutality.

Real Americans oppose police brutality. They recognize that the constitution has something to say about deprivation of life by agents of the government.

PurpnGold · July 3, 2019, 1:09pm

I’m not surprised

gooddad409 · July 3, 2019, 1:11pm

Which means what? They don’t suit either my feet or eyes.Over priced in many cases as well.

RoyalBlue · July 3, 2019, 1:16pm

True, but that’s not what Fox News and AM radio is telling him…

Roxiebelle · July 3, 2019, 1:25pm

And you wrote it very well (thank you for the OP) easy to understand & comprehend unless of course you’re a frazzled brained “can’t handle historic facts” liberal.

PurpnGold · July 3, 2019, 1:27pm

Don’t encourage him… it’s the typical wall of text with no specific meaning or point.

PurpnGold · July 3, 2019, 1:28pm

Nike isn’t really popular with the Boomer crowd. Nike caters to the 40 and below crowd. So I’m not surprised.

johnwk2 · July 3, 2019, 1:30pm

DOLOOP:

johnwk2:

It is absolutely mind numbing that the pin heads at Nike would intentionally recall a shoe featuring the Betsy Ross flag because it allegedly glorifies slavery and racism. Could it be that Nike may secretly embrace the Stars and Bars, which is the actual flag which flew in opposition to ending slavery and the United States?

Let us review some historical facts for the nitwits at Nike and regarding slavery in America.

Slavery was first introduced on America soil in the early 1600s when a number of slaves were brought to Jamestown, Virginia, a British colony. And millions more were introduced long before the establishment of the United States and its flag.

It was in 1776 and the Revolutionary War, and under what is believed to be a war fought under a Betsy Ross flag, that the good people of America gained their independence from foreign domination [the real culprit of slavery on American soil] and upon gaining their independence the people within a number of the states, exercising their newly found freedom, immediately moved to share the blessings of liberty to all by abolishing slavery!

For example, the people of Vermont took this immediate action in their 1777 declaration of rights, which declared “no … person born in this country, or brought here over sea, ought to beholden by law to serve any person as a servant, slave, or apprentice”. Likewise, the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780 declared that “all men are born free and equal” and was used by the court a few years after its adoption to legally forbid any person to be held as a slave. And, in 1787, the Northwest Ordinance, adopted by the Confederation Congress on July 13, 1787, declared “there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”

By the year 1788 all the states north of Maryland, except New York and New Jersey, had legislated to extinguish slavery, and by 1804 the remaining two northern states [N.Y. and N.J.] had put slavery to rest.

The truth is, the injustice of slavery was not an injustice inflicted or perpetrated by the government of the United States. Quite the contrary! Upon the creation of the United States government, as witnessed by Article 1, Sec. 2, Clause 3, of the Constitution of the United States, an aversion to slavery was expressed by a specific penalty imposed upon those states having state sponsored slavery. Unfortunately, the constitutional penalty for state-sponsored slavery has been distorted and mischaracterized over the years by race baiters and hustlers who claim the provision “made blacks three-fifths of a person.” But a review of the actual words of Article 1, Sec. 2, clause 3, reveals slave holding states were penalized by this provision which denied them full representation in Congress in proportion to their actual population size—the population of slaves not being fully counted when apportioning representatives among the states, which diminished the voting strength of slave holding states in Congress Assembled!

And then there’s Article 1, Section 9 of our original Constitution by which slavery was intended to be taxed into extinction by the federal government.

”The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”

Unfortunately, slavery did persist in America after the Revolutionary War, but it did so in a number of southern states and resulted in the War between the States, a war fought under two different flags, the Confederal Flag, and the United States flag which evolved from the Betsy Ross flag and eventually put slavery to rest in the southern states!

So why are the nitwits at Nike pulling a shoe with a flag that resembles the first flag of the United States ___ a flag under which America’s independence was won, a flag representing the northern states which defeated the South, put an end to slavery, and replaced the Confederate flag in the South? Does Niki secretly yearn to see the Confederate flag replace the Betsy Ross flag? Or, are the bone heads at Nike merely victims of a government school eduction/indoctrination?

JWK

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves. ___ Author unknown

None of this is relevant .

Truth and facts concerning our nation’s founding and the flag which flew during the Revolutionary War is not “relevant” when Nike portrays the flag in an erroneous evil light, and why the shoe was pulled?

The nitwits at Nike either do not know their history, or, they figured out another way to squeeze a dime by jumping on the hate America band wagon.

JWK
Without a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalism [our MSM], the crisis at our southern border would never have grown to what now amounts to an outright invasion and threatens the general welfare of the United states.

gooddad409 · July 3, 2019, 1:36pm

I think you have a point.

PurpnGold · July 3, 2019, 1:43pm

Is Nike erasing history by not releasing the sneaker? What damage has Nike done to the history of the flag by not producing these shoes?

johnwk2 · July 3, 2019, 1:51pm

The pin heads at Nike refuse to give praise to and acknowledge that thousands of Africans fought under the Betsy Ross flag to win America’s independence and their own freedom ___ the cause was just and noble. And now Nike wants to defame the symbol which gave birth to a new nation? The Betsy Ross flag has nothing in common with the Confederate flag. Does Nike really not know the difference?

JWK

Without a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalism [our MSM], the crisis at our southern border would never have grown to what now amounts to an outright invasion and threatens the general welfare of the United states.

PurpnGold · July 3, 2019, 1:52pm

Whhhhhhhhhat?

I’ll give you some time to figure out what is mind numbingly wrong about this statement l…

Toll_Collector · July 3, 2019, 1:57pm

Very possible, you could be right. I just don’t agree he isn’t anti American. You know he can be anti American because of XYZ, right? His target seems to be the flag. Twice now. The first being…

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,”

It sure sounds pretty clear to me that he resents this country for his reasons. Now this new issue, again the flag is the target to get his point across.

WuWei · July 3, 2019, 2:03pm

I agree. With everything except “real Americans”. As a country we have been brainwashed.

Do you feel the same way about the Oregon and Nevada ranchers and the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge?

WuWei · July 3, 2019, 2:04pm

None.

lessright · July 3, 2019, 2:30pm

You’re probably right. If I’m going to pay 2 to 3 times more for sneakers they better make me at least twice as sneaky. Otherwise what’s the use?

Toll_Collector · July 3, 2019, 2:52pm

I don’t know about making you more sneaky, but back in the mid 80s you could buy a pair of Air Jordan’s in any Foot Locker for 120 bucks. Yes they were 2-3 times the price of most. But they were also 10 times better and lasted a lot longer. Well worth the extra money.

lessright · July 3, 2019, 3:02pm

My great-grandson, like me, wants higher and faster, not longer lasting. In his case he grows out of them before he wears them out.

I’m probably dating myself (in case “great grandson” didn’t already do that) but when I was a kid, shoes didn’t have names beyond the brand, and “the brand” was converse.