Trump Embroiled In 2 Controversies About Professional Sports, Race And Culture
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick and outside linebacker Eli Harold kneel during the playing of the national anthem before an NFL game in 2016.
John Bazemore/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
John Bazemore/AP
In the span of less than 24 hours, President Trump catapulted himself into the center of two racially-charged controversies involving professional sports, reigniting criticism that he is divisive and insensitive — a month after Trump struggled with criticism of his multiple remarks in response to violence in Charlottesville, Va.
The president was stumping for Sen. Luther Strange, R-Ala., at a campaign rally Friday night, when he used a segue in his speech that was supposed to convince voters that continuing to have Strange in the Senate would make all Alabamans winners — an argument with emotional appeal in a state known for its fierce love of football.
And, while he was on the subject of football, Trump took the opportunity to expound on his thoughts regarding NFL players, like Colin Kaepernick, who last year began kneeling during the national anthem in protest over perceived social injustices against African-Americans. Trump’s take: It’s unpatriotic and NFL team owners should fire those refusing to stand.
“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the field right now,’ ” he said to roaring applause.
“He’s fired!” Trump said, paraphrasing his popular reality TV catchphrase.
Then Trump took on Stephen Curry of the NBA champion Golden State Warriors in a tweet Saturday morning. The president rescinded an offer for what has become a traditional celebratory visit to the White House for any championship team of a major professional sport.
He wrote: “Going to the White House is considered a great honor for a championship team. Stephen Curry is hesitating, therefore invitation is withdrawn!”
Going to the White House is considered a great honor for a championship team.Stephen Curry is hesitating,therefore invitation is withdrawn!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017
The president was reacting to Curry’s statement Friday that the popular star player didn’t want to visit the White House and meet with Trump because Curry believed passing on the traditional event sent the message that “we won’t stand for” some of Trump’s past remarks. “This is my opportunity to voice that,” Curry also said, of the possibility of not going to the White House as expected.
Saturday afternoon, Trump was back online attacking the NFL.
If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017
…our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU’RE FIRED. Find something else to do!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017
“If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL, or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU’RE FIRED. Find something else to do!” Trump tweeted.
While none of Trump’s tweets or remarks were explicitly about race, they led to an escalating war of words between the president and black athletes, activists and celebrities on social media. And the president, who was almost immediately cast as being divisive, took a serious pummeling from NFL team owners and notable black public figures.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement Saturday morning, “Divisive comments like these demonstrate an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL, our great game and all of our players.”
Late Friday night, before Trump had sparked controversy involving Curry, Max Garcia of the Denver Broncos couldn’t help comparing Trump’s comments about kneeling in the NFL during the campaign rally with how he responded to events in Charlottesville, Va., last month that left one counterprotester dead.
“What an emphatic response, where was this passion in response to Charlottesville…” Garcia wrote on Twitter with a video of Trump.
What an emphatic response, where was this passion in response to Charlottesville…? https://t.co/OkVZTdloXx
— Max Garcia (@MGarcia_76) September 23, 2017
Individual NFL teams, including the New York Giants, Miami Dolphins, Green Bay Packers and San Francisco 49ers all issued statements Saturday condemning Trump’s remarks.
Jed York of the San Francisco 49ers, for whom Kaepernick played last year when he began the kneeling protest, issued this statement:
“The callous and offensive comments made by the President are contradictory to what this great country stands for. Our players have exercised their rights as United States citizens in order to spark conversation and action to address social injustice.”
Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said, “Our country needs unifying leadership right now, not more divisiveness. We need to seek to understand each other and have civil discourse instead of condemnation and sound bites.”
Meanwhile, current and former luminaries in the NBA weighed in online Saturday expressing support for Curry and criticizing Trump.
Basketball megastar LeBron James, who has nearly as many followers on Twitter (38.4 million) as Trump does on his personal account (39 million), defended Curry, his sometimes rival on the court.
James wrote, “U bum @StephenCurry30 already said he ain’t going! So therefore ain’t no invite. Going to White House was a great honor until you showed up!”
U bum @StephenCurry30 already said he ain’t going! So therefore ain’t no invite. Going to White House was a great honor until you showed up!
— LeBron James (@KingJames) September 23, 2017
James’ tweet has been liked more than a 1.1 million times and retweeted more than a half million times. According to Twitter, the message is James’ most retweeted post to date.
James later recorded and posted a two-minute video to Twitter in which he said, “It’s not about dividing. We as American people need to come together even stronger.”
“It’s not about dividing. We as American people need to come together even stronger.” — @KingJames responds to @realDonaldTrump‘s comments. pic.twitter.com/UHpzXpb42K
— UNINTERRUPTED (@uninterrupted) September 23, 2017
Chris Paul, who plays for the Houston Rockets and is president of the NBA Players Association, questioned the president’s attention to the issue in the first place. “With everything that’s going on in our country, why are YOU focused on who’s kneeling and visiting the White House??? #StayInYoLane,” Paul wrote on Twitter.
Retired longtime Los Angeles Laker Kobe Bryant contributed this to the online conversation, suggesting Trump was not living up to his ubiquitous campaign slogan: “A #POTUS whose name alone creates division and anger. Whose words inspire dissension and hatred can’t possibly ‘Make America Great Again.’ “
A #POTUS whose name alone creates division and anger. Whose words inspire dissension and hatred can’t possibly “Make America Great Again”
— Kobe Bryant (@kobebryant) September 23, 2017
By Saturday afternoon, the Warriors formally announced they were not visiting the White House — or Trump. “We accept that President Trump has made it clear that we are not invited,” the team said in a statement. “In lieu of a visit to the White House,” the NBA champions added, “we have decided that we’ll constructively use our trip to the nation’s capital in February to celebrate equality, diversity and inclusion — the values we embrace as an organization.”
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said he was “disappointed” the team would not be visiting the White House. Curry, for his part, suggested Trump’s effort to target him was beneath the dignity of the presidency.
Cleveland Cavaliers forward LeBron James and Golden State Warriors guard Stephen Curry during the first half of Game 5 of basketball’s NBA Finals in Oakland, Calif., in June.
Ben Margot/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Ben Margot/AP
The dual controversies also elicited reaction Saturday from black celebrities including musician John Legend, actor Jesse Williams and filmmaker Ava DuVernay, among others.
Some politicians also joined the fray on Twitter.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., took a jab at Trump for comments he has made in the past ridiculing Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for being of prisoner of war. “And if a person wants the privilege of serving as President, they shouldn’t be allowed to disrespect military heroes who were taken prisoner,” Schiff tweeted.
And if a person wants the privilege of serving as President, they shouldn’t be allowed to disrespect military heroes who were taken prisoner https://t.co/mvuijIyXBc
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) September 23, 2017
California’s lieutenant governor and former San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, congratulated the Warriors for the stance. “Couldn’t be more proud of the @warriors. Thank you for speaking truth to power and standing up for our fundamental California values,” he wrote.
Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., a frequent critic of the country’s growing divisiveness, suggested that if the kneeling protest spread, NFL players would be playing into Trump’s hands: “btw, Trump wants you to kneel—because it divides the nation, with him and the flag on the same side. Don’t give him the attention he wants,” Sasse tweeted.
btw, Trump wants you to kneel–because it divides the nation, with him and the flag on the same side. Don’t give him the attention he wants. https://t.co/ic5Vc9oGyB
— Ben Sasse (@BenSasse) September 23, 2017
Seemingly answering Sasse, Trump backers argued the president’s comments have nothing to do with race and are purely about patriotism and respect for the flag.
“Has our world turned upside down! Our President criticized for believing our flag & anthem shoud be respected & honored #StandForTheFlag,” Ronna Romney, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, wrote on Twitter.
Former Trump campaign aide Corey Lewandowski expressed similar sentiments on Fox News Saturday.
Some in the Washington press corps wrote Saturday that the president is deliberately using coded language to appeal to his base of white voters who see themselves as part of an aggrieved group in America, rapidly losing power and influence relative to ethnic and racial minorities.
“To addressa largely white crowd as ‘people like yourselves,’ and refer to protesting athletes, often African American, as ‘those people,’ does nothing to heal the wounds of Charlottesville,” political journalist Mike Allen wrote on Axios.com Saturday morning.
Ron Brownstein, another seasoned political journalist in D.C., spent most of the day on Twitter putting forth the argument that exploiting racial and economic anxieties and divisions was one of Trump’s key political strategies.
“Point of this fight is not very hard to find- more signaling to white racial resentment, which has been central to Trump message from day 1,” Brownstein tweeted.
Brownstein reaffirmed his point in a later tweet when another journalist questioned whether Trump was utilizing any strategy at all. “Yes, pretty clearly from day 1: to appeal to parts of older, blue-collar, non-urban white America most uneasy about demographic & eco change,” Brownstein wrote.
Another journalist was more blunt. “There is an unmistakable racial element at play, since he is targeting prominent black players,” CNN media reporter Brian Stelter wrote Saturday afternoon about Trump’s NFL comments.
And Stelter’s CNN colleague Chris Cillizza saw something similar, writing Saturday that the context of Trump’s criticisms was inherently racial given that both the NBA and NFL have mostly white team owners and mostly black players. Cillizza went on to point out that Trump’s comments Friday and Saturday bore two rhetorical hallmarks that went back to his presidential campaign: using racially coded language and espousing a seemingly simplistic view of the black community.
Meanwhile, throughout most of Saturday the hashtag #TakeAKnee trended on Twitter across the U.S., as people sympathetic to Kaepernick wondered about what NFL players would do Sunday and as they talked about posting photos of themselves kneeling in solidarity.
Saturday night the Kaepernick-style protest spread to professional baseball.
Catcher Bruce Maxwell of the Oakland A’s took a knee during the national anthem before a game Saturday night in California. Like the rest of his team, Maxwell had his hand on his heart and was facing the flag; as Maxwell knelt, a teammate is shown in photos with a comforting hand on Maxwell’s shoulder.
Oakland Athletics catcher Bruce Maxwell kneels during the national anthem Saturday in Oakland. Maxwell is the first Major League Baseball player to kneel during the national anthem.
Eric Risberg/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Eric Risberg/AP
“This now has gone from just a BlackLives Matter topic to just complete inequality of any man or woman that wants to stand for Their rights!” Maxwell posted on Twitter Saturday.
Cancer Patient Says Condition Will Dictate Life Choices With ACA Repeal
At the age of 29, Molly Young was diagnosed with breast cancer. The Affordable Care Act has been paying for her treatments. NPR’s Michel Martin talks with Young about how she would fare under the new GOP plan.
MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
We want to talk a bit more about this key question of how the proposed Republican health care bill could affect people who need health care, particularly people with chronic or life-threatening health problems.
Molly Grace Young is a self-employed singer and music teacher living in Baltimore. Last year, at the age of 29, Young was able to get insurance through the Affordable Care Act. Just a month later, she felt a lump in her breast and she was diagnosed with breast cancer.
Luckily, her cancer treatment was covered. But under the proposed Republican health care plan, the extent of her future coverage is uncertain. Molly Young came in a few days ago. And I started our conversation by asking her where she is in her cancer treatment.
MOLLY YOUNG: I’ve had two surgeries. And I am two doses away from being done with chemotherapy. But I will have immunotherapy for a year and six weeks of radiation and five years of hormone therapy. And, yeah, it’s a road. It’s process. But I’m getting there.
MARTIN: Do you have any sense of how much all this would have cost without insurance? Or like, I mean…
YOUNG: Yeah.
MARTIN: …I know, like, looking at those bills has to be traumatic…
YOUNG: (Laughter) yeah.
MARTIN: …But have you ever kind of figured out, like, what the costs of all this treatment would have been?
YOUNG: Yeah. We’re about six months into a treatment process. And so far, out-of-pocket would have been over $120,000. I have a friend who’s going through chemo who every single dose was $25,000. So that was $150 for her right off the bat without anything else. As hard as I might work, I’m not going to be making that much.
MARTIN: You don’t have $120,000 sitting around?
YOUNG: No, I really don’t (laughter).
MARTIN: And just to reiterate for people who are wondering, like, OK, well, what about an employer? What about, like, that – you’re self-employed. You didn’t have an employer who offered insurance.
YOUNG: Right. It’s not that I’m unemployed or that I don’t work. I work very hard. But no one single job is a full-time job for me. It’s kind of a patchwork of a lot of different employments.
MARTIN: You were telling us that one of the reasons that you decided to speak up and, you know, talk about this publicly was that you have been following the efforts to repeal and replace, you know, Obamacare. Like, how have you been following that and what has struck you about that?
YOUNG: I distinctly remember driving home from one of my scans – one of my MRIs, which they’re terrifying, especially if you already have cancer and you know they’re just excavating for more. And you’re wondering, not even will I die, but how fast.
And I was driving home from that and I was listening to live coverage of debate, and it was just horrifying. It sounded so inhumane to me that people were arguing about whether or not people in my position should be allowed to be cared for and be saved because without coverage, without this treatment, I would just die and that’s it.
And it’s terrifying to hear how little people like me can matter in these issues. We’re not really focusing on actual human lives. We’re just looking at dollars and cents, which is a very morbid way to go about it.
MARTIN: When you get through this stage, you will be considered a person with a pre-existing condition. Is that a concern? Because part of this new iteration of the GOP health care plan would not require insurance plans to cover pre-existing conditions. So is that a concern?
YOUNG: Oh, absolutely. Cancer is a lifelong sentence. No matter what – no matter if I get through the next year or the next five years and everything’s fine and I’m eventually, hopefully, pronounced with no evidence of disease, NED, I have many, many years to worry about, not only a recurrence of breast cancer, but any other type of cancer in my body is now an elevated risk because I have been a cancer patient. So I’m absolutely a walking pre-existing condition for the rest of my life.
And as my life changes, if I have to sign up for a new plan somewhere and it’s in a state that decides that they don’t need to protect me, I will be in a position where I need more care than most people, but I have less access to it, which is a little unfair (laughter) in my opinion, but yeah.
MARTIN: So you really see it as something that can dictate the future course of your life, like where you can move and what job opportunities you can take.
YOUNG: Oh, absolutely. To look at it being a state-by-state issue, for someone like me or people with diabetes – the list goes on of all sorts of health concerns. And access to essential health benefits – we know that mammograms are one of the biggest reasons we do catch breast cancer early on in many patients. So if we suddenly have groups of states in our country that won’t provide that, that’s really a death sentence for plenty of Americans.
MARTIN: So before we let you go, I did – I do feel I need to ask you, though, if the people who are the proponents of this new approach or this – the Republican approach, argue that it would create more choice and lower costs. And I just have to ask you whether you think that’s possibly true.
YOUNG: As I said before – trying to educate myself about it – to me, as a patient, from the outside looking in, that looks like a great way to drive up costs and create a profit-based market to make money off of people like me who are dying for no reason.
I didn’t do anything to earn breast cancer. It’s not in my family. They tested my genes. It’s just bad luck. And the same way we as a country can look to any kind of natural disaster that just sort of happens and we all want to reach out and help one another, I think that’s no different than wanting to create more of a community in terms of health insurance and not have it be based on who can afford it.
And it’s very frustrating to me to hear lawmakers discuss this knowing that they’re in a tax bracket that they could probably take these costs on themselves, if they had to, out of pocket and also knowing that they’re not subjecting themselves to the same plan that we have to take on.
MARTIN: That’s Molly Grace Young. She spoke with us from our Washington, D.C., studios. Tomorrow, we will have several more conversations with people with different perspectives and opinions about the American health care system, including a deep dive on how a single-payer health system would work.
Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
Airline Safety And Smaller Seats
Airlines are packing more and more seats onto planes, and Clive Irving, aviation correspondent for The Daily Beast, tells NPR’s Scott Simon he’s concerned FAA safety tests are outdated.
SCOTT SIMON, HOST:
Did you take a flight this summer? Have your knees recovered? Airline seats have grown smaller. The spaces between them have grown tighter, all while Americans have grown wider. It’s made flying feel cramped and crowded. But are airlines less safe? A flyer’s advocate group sued the Federal Aviation Administration, contending that the ever-tighter cabins are indeed unsafe. And a D.C. circuit court found they’re right. But what does that mean for fliers? Clive Irving is an aviation correspondent for The Daily Beast and joins us now. Mr. Irving, thanks for being with us.
CLIVE IRVING: It’s a pleasure to be with you, Scott.
SIMON: Is it just harder to evacuate cramped planes?
IRVING: After the Flyers Rights action that you referred to, I decided to check into the whole regime of evacuation because we’re specifically talking about how you get out of the plane alive. And I found out that the evacuation tests have been unchanged for, like, 40 or 50 years. So you have a system to test evacuation which bears no relation to the real world.
SIMON: I think a lot of coach passengers have discovered nowadays they can’t even bend over and pick up their briefcase in front of the seat in front of them.
IRVING: Yeah. Yeah.
SIMON: And how would passengers brace, as they’re supposed to, on impact?
IRVING: That’s a good question because the card in the back of the seat which tells you what to do in a crash situation does include that brace position where you put your hands over your head and lean forward. Well, I tried this out in the space where it was only 28 inches between the rows. And it’s basically impossible you can’t brace for the crash. Now, it’s interesting that I’ve found out in contrast to that that the regulations cover the space allowed for the flight attendants, who are obviously crucial in evacuating a plane in an emergency. Their seats have a specified what they call head strike space – in other words, a space that has to be left clear so that they don’t strike the heads on anything – of 35 inches. So, in fact, no coach-class seat at the moment meets the standard that is applied for the flight attendants themselves.
SIMON: Let me ask you about the ruling of the D.C. circuit court. Could it really lead to some plausible change?
IRVING: What you’ve got here, Scott, is a situation where the airlines and the FAA can claim that they are compliant with regulations. And they are compliant with regulations because travel regulations themselves are not fit for purpose. And I think this Flyers Rights case has brought this to attention in a way that it’s not been alerted before. So I hope that one result of this will be that we will now take a fresh look. And the first thing that should happen, I think, is there should be a moratorium on shrinking the seats and the space any further than it is.
SIMON: Clive Irving, who’s the author of “Wide-Body: The Triumph Of The 747,” thanks so much for being with us.
IRVING: It was a pleasure.
Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
