It wasn’t long into President Donald Trump’s Administration before an uproar was caused. Throughout his campaign, President Trump made terrorism and radical Islam a focus of his presidential campaign, both in the Republican primary and general election. Now he’s following through on his promise to be firm on the foreign threat, but has he gone too far?
This is the debate raging across America. After the President temporarily halted immigration from seven nations via executive order, chaos at airports ensued and outrage resulted. Allegations of racism are renewed as opponents allege this is not a seven nation ban, but really a Muslim ban.
Now the supporters of President Trump must prepare for the intolerance of their political views. It would appear that, as opponents escalate hateful rhetoric, their allies in the mainstream media are going to look for celebrity targets.
One of these big name friends of President Trump is New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, who is preparing to face off against the Atlanta Falcons in the Super Bowl.
In a recent biased piece, USA Today claims that because San Francisco 49ers player Colin Kaepernick was criticized for sitting during the National Anthem at a football game, Brady should have to answer for being friends with someone. The article builds up Kaepernick to be a hero for sitting while others honor our country while demonizing Brady because he’s been friends with someone for years.
Brady has in the past responded to inquiries about his friendship with President Trump by stating he doesn’t agree with everything. Is that reasonable? To say otherwise implies we’re only friends with those who share our own political beliefs.
Does USA Today columnist Nancy Armour only befriend people within her intolerant liberal echo chamber?
The article essentially claims that Brady inserted himself into a national firestorm by being friends with the President prior to his run for President. Outside of this biased piece, most Brady-related news has been about the Super Bowl and the playoff run to this point.
Armour believes that because she loves Kaepernick’s brave actions sitting during a song, Brady should have to answer for personal relationships. Furthermore, if Brady doesn’t come out and respond to every action of his friends, he somehow endorses their actions.
What does Kaepernick have to do with Brady’s story? Absolutely nothing.
Brady and Kaepernick are two entirely different grades of football player. Brady has established his name on a competitive championship career. Kaepernick, on the other hand, made a name for himself by sitting during a song. Brady is going to be playing in the football championship game yet again, whereas Kaepernick is going to be doing some more sitting.
Kaepernick also asked for political attention, inserting himself into the national debate with his sitting skills. Brady has attempted to keep a focus on his professional career while not forcing his political opinions on others. USA Today’s Nancy Armour is only attempting to rewrite the narrative out of political convenience in an attempt to smear a football player in her quest against President Trump.