USA Today Attacks Caitlin Clark and Patrick Mahomes for Not Being Political, Jabs MJ for Good Measure
by Bryan Chai, The Western Journal Sep. 21, 2024
You truly don’t despise the establishment media enough.
That holds especially true when you’re dealing with a shamelessly liberal raglike USA Today.
The latest reminder about the stark decline of American journalism came on Sept. 13, when USA Today’s Nancy Armour penned one of the most inane, pathetic and infantilizing articles imaginable — the kind you actually have to read to believe.
The opening line alone deserves a hearty guffaw.
“Not every athlete can be LeBron James or Megan Rapinoe,” Armour wrote.
(And thank God for that. Those two are insufferable enough on their own.)
Armour then took a jab at NBA legend Michael Jordan, who infamously stayed away from politics, even to the chagrin of fellow prominent Chicagoan Barack Obama.
“Remember Michael Jordan’s comment about Republicans buying shoes?” Amrour continued. “There’s a long history of athletes putting as much space as possible between themselves and controversy, and what Caitlin Clark and Patrick Mahomes did this week was no different.”
Oh, brother.
For the blissfully unaware, in the week leading up to Armour’s hit piece, Indiana Fever rookie Caitlin Clark and Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes both declined to offer any sort of statement on who people should vote for in the forthcoming election.
Clark was dragged into this conversation when she liked a social media postfrom pop czarina Taylor Swift (Clark is a noted fan) touting her support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the topper of the Democratic presidential ticket. Clark has since declined to actually endorse a candidate.
Similarly, Mahomes was dragged into this cultural handwringing by virtue of his wife, Brittany Mahomes. She, not unlike Clark, liked a social media post, but in this case, it was a post in support of former President Donald Trump, the top of the Republican presidential ticket. When pressed on the backlash to that, Mahomes — just like Clark — effectively said he doesn’t care about a person’s politics, just how they treat other people.
These mature, thoughtful responses from Clark and Mahomes, however, don’t quite cut the mustard for Armour, who went seeking validation from David Niven, an associate professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati who teaches a course on sports and politics.
“It’s more than nothing, but it doesn’t put them on the front lines of the discussion,” Niven said.
“If you look at all this by the LeBron James standard, somebody who could not have been more outspoken … this looks like a little bit of a retreat,” Niven explained. “If you look at it by Derek Jeter and Michael Jordan’s standards, you’d say there’s still an awful lot of political activism out there.”
And that’s exactly where political activism should stay in sports, “out there,” because by definition, partisan politics will divide, or “part,” which is literally in the word.
Why is USA Today trying to encourage pro athletes to drive division?
Oh right, USA Today hates Trump and everything he stands for. Armour is trying so desperately to shame people for maybe-or-maybe-not supporting Trump, it’s actually somewhat embarrassing for her.
(And if there’s any question about where Armour’s politics stand, she dedicated entire paragraphs excoriating Trump and his running mate, Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance in her asinine piece.)
“Elite athletes are born with unique physical gifts and singular dedication,” Armour wrote at the end of her idiotic thesis. “Moral courage is something they have to find for themselves, and this week was a reminder that not many do.”
Oh, bugger off, Nancy. If Clark and Mahomes are missing “moral courage,” you’re missing “moral intellect” for jeering athletes who want nothing to do with divisive politics.
As the great Charles Barkley once said, “I am not a role model. I am not paid to be a role model. I am paid to wreak havoc on the basketball court. Parents should be role models.”
As long as Clark and Mahomes keep playing the way they do, that’s what matters most.
Leave the ideological and political equivocations out of sports. It’s really that simple, no matter how USA Today screeches about it.
As many know, I am a big Clark fan. Other than the fact it is no one’s business, another reason for her to stay silent is the fact it could adversely impact the huge influence she is having (financially) for the WNBA. Imagine the furor if she came out for Trump. They would be howling she should not have endorsed anyone.