In response to D.G. Martin’s column, “The American flag and Nike’s shoe,” on July 9.
Title 4 of the U.S. code concerning the American flag is really a code of etiquette and not legally binding to prosecute someone who disregards it. However, I agree the FLAG should be respected and taken seriously about the ways of handling it. Personally, I wouldn’t agree with printing it on disposable items such as paper towels, napkins, garbage bags, etc., but I don’t see anything wrong with printing it on articles of clothing.
I doubt many men complained about the Wonder Woman uniform worn by Lynda Carter on the TV series of “Wonder Woman,” and maybe no women have complained about Captain America’s uniform. Also, has anyone complained about the U.S. government representation of Uncle Sam? My opinion is that on an article of clothing it just represents someone who is proud to be an American.
The bigger picture here is why Nike hired someone with as low a character as Colin Kaepernick to be a representative and advisor. Why the owners of Nike would kowtow to one man and take a shoe off the market just because this one man thinks the flag is offensive, is disgraceful and cowardly by Nike’s owners.
In case anyone doesn’t remember Kaepernick, he was the NFL quarterback who would protest and kneel during the National Anthem. He has worn socks with faces of pigs wearing police uniforms. He has worn t-shirts with pictures of the faces of Malcolm X (the black supremacist who was a member of the Nation of Islam) and Fiedel Castro (who was at one time the Communist dictator of Cuba and responsible for the deaths of many innocent victims). Does Nike think Kaepernick is some kind of “All American Boy” role model?
I don’t see how Nike can support and kiss the “you know what” of a person who disrespects all law enforcement by referring to them as pigs, and seems to have a fondness for a black supremacist and a killer dictator.
Mike Johnson
Laurel Hill