A video of a Hero

[Loyal Coug1]

Have no idea why my take is weird. He didn't say that is why he fought the Nazi's. HE fought the Nazi's to maintain "the good old days".

It is like when my dad who entered the Navy just after the Hitler finally killed himself. And my dad said when Colin Kapernak knelt during the national anthem he called it anti American and not what he fought for when he was in the Navy.

I said I thought that is exactly what you fought for, freedom of speech. So I think my dad is misguided in that he picks and chooses what is the "proper" freedom of speech.

Actually, I re-watched the video and that is NOT what he said. "Misguided" for storming the beaches of Normandy to save the free world. I generally practice poster amnesia, but I'm filing this one away for future reference. That is just so wrong, and your usual twist of bringing in some totally unrelated and irrelevant topic (Dad and Kaepernick) in is typical.

 

[CougEd]

Actually, I re-watched the video and that is NOT what he said. "Misguided" for storming the beaches of Normandy to save the free world. I generally practice poster amnesia, but I'm filing this one away for future reference. That is just so wrong, and your usual twist of bringing in some totally unrelated and irrelevant topic (Dad and Kaepernick) in is typical.

You can file what ever the hell you want . He fought for the good ole days . Right at minute 20 he says … no one will have the fun I had , no one will have the OPPORTUNITY I had. This is not what I fought for . He isn’t misguided for storming the beaches of Normandy or fighting the nazi’s, he is miguided for what he thought he was fighting for back home .

What do you think he means . What frickin opportunity is he, his kids being denied .
What is so hard for him that wasn’t worth it for him?

He is saying “it” without saying it . So when I say hero he appears to be misguided as to what he was fighting for back at home .

 

[CougEd]

Actually, I re-watched the video and that is NOT what he said. "Misguided" for storming the beaches of Normandy to save the free world. I generally practice poster amnesia, but I'm filing this one away for future reference. That is just so wrong, and your usual twist of bringing in some totally unrelated and irrelevant topic (Dad and Kaepernick) in is typical.

Loyal feel free to tell me what you believe he fight for and why he is crying about lack of opportunity.

 

[95coug]

Have no idea why my take is weird. He didn't say that is why he fought the Nazi's. HE fought the Nazi's to maintain "the good old days".

It is like when my dad who entered the Navy just after the Hitler finally killed himself. And my dad said when Colin Kapernak knelt during the national anthem he called it anti American and not what he fought for when he was in the Navy.

I said I thought that is exactly what you fought for, freedom of speech. So I think my dad is misguided in that he picks and chooses what is the "proper" freedom of speech.

That seems to be what most people are doing - choosing the speech that should be free based on the part they agree with.

Just look at all the groups and individuals (MTG, for one) trying to restrict what books should be available, particularly to kids. Even in Idaho there have been attempts to make laws that would fine librarians if kids read things that were deemed inappropriate. Fortunately, the governor vetoed it...although not for the right reasons.

A lot of those are based on LGBTQ concerns. A couple groups tried to ban a book about seahorses because it implied than males can carry babies (which in the case of seahorses, is actually biologically true). Some have tried to ban histories on civil rights or the civil war, because they portray white people, cops, and/or firefighters unfavorably. Yet they haven't tried to ban Mein Kampf.

It's a parent's job to decide what their kids can read. Any government restrictions should closely match the restrictions on free speech.

 

[CougEd]

That seems to be what most people are doing - choosing the speech that should be free based on the part they agree with.

Just look at all the groups and individuals (MTG, for one) trying to restrict what books should be available, particularly to kids. Even in Idaho there have been attempts to make laws that would fine librarians if kids read things that were deemed inappropriate. Fortunately, the governor vetoed it...although not for the right reasons.

A lot of those are based on LGBTQ concerns. A couple groups tried to ban a book about seahorses because it implied than males can carry babies (which in the case of seahorses, is actually biologically true). Some have tried to ban histories on civil rights or the civil war, because they portray white people, cops, and/or firefighters unfavorably. Yet they haven't tried to ban Mein Kampf.

It's a parent's job to decide what their kids can read. Any government restrictions should closely match the restrictions on free speech.

Bingo....

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

You serious, Clark?

With the world of information in a magic box at your fingertips and you’ve NEVER heard anything about young people dying linked to the vaccine?

Or is the disclaimer “news report”? Because CNN and MSNBC ain’t doing any legwork to dispel the corporate narrative. Too many Pfizer bucks coming in to upset the cash cow advertiser.

Use the magic machine.

It is amazing how dumb the usual neoMarxists here get when it comes to getting basic information. I’ll bet Wille isn’t even aware of the excess deaths phenomenon present in many countries since the jabs were imposed. But as you stated, if your only news sources are the corrupt lying corporate media (hmmm…who pays them a ton of advertising dollars…gee?), then perhaps you remain dumb to reality?

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

That seems to be what most people are doing - choosing the speech that should be free based on the part they agree with.

Just look at all the groups and individuals (MTG, for one) trying to restrict what books should be available, particularly to kids. Even in Idaho there have been attempts to make laws that would fine librarians if kids read things that were deemed inappropriate. Fortunately, the governor vetoed it...although not for the right reasons.

A lot of those are based on LGBTQ concerns. A couple groups tried to ban a book about seahorses because it implied than males can carry babies (which in the case of seahorses, is actually biologically true). Some have tried to ban histories on civil rights or the civil war, because they portray white people, cops, and/or firefighters unfavorably. Yet they haven't tried to ban Mein Kampf.

It's a parent's job to decide what their kids can read. Any government restrictions should closely match the restrictions on free speech.

Do you think any and all books should be available for school children in the school libraries paid for by tax dollars?

 

[Stretch 74]

Have no idea why my take is weird. He didn't say that is why he fought the Nazi's. HE fought the Nazi's to maintain "the good old days".

It is like when my dad who entered the Navy just after the Hitler finally killed himself. And my dad said when Colin Kapernak knelt during the national anthem he called it anti American and not what he fought for when he was in the Navy.

I said I thought that is exactly what you fought for, freedom of speech. So I think my dad is misguided in that he picks and chooses what is the "proper" freedom of speech.

You do realize that freedom of speech is NOT absolute, don't you? The common example is that you are not allowed to yell fire in a crowded theater, this inciting the crowd to panic all rush for the exits, likely causing injuries to theater patrons.

As for the kneeling, Colin was at his workplace, and if his employer, either SF or even the NFL had not wanted him to do that, he would not have the right to do it. Whatever he says or does on his OWN time is when he would basically have unfettered freedom of speech. Most folks I knew were more upset for SF and NFL for allowing it to happen than they were for CK actually doing.

However, what did upset many of us was that those doing that were trying to dictate what we thought of the kneeling. He claimed it was to protest one thing, but for what, when, and where it was done many of us took t as a huge insult to the military and all those that fought for our country. Supposedly, we were not allowed to perceive it that way, we simply MUST think of it in the way that CK thought, otherwise we were just racists. Well, Colin, just f*ck you and all that rest of your buddies that try to tell me what I see, what I think, how I perceive your actions.

And if he just had done it when not doing his employment duties, or protested by staying in the locker room during the National Anthem, I would just say to go ahead, you are free to do that.

 

[CougEd]

You do realize that freedom of speech is NOT absolute, don't you? The common example is that you are not allowed to yell fire in a crowded theater, this inciting the crowd to panic all rush for the exits, likely causing injuries to theater patrons.

As for the kneeling, Colin was at his workplace, and if his employer, either SF or even the NFL had not wanted him to do that, he would not have the right to do it. Whatever he says or does on his OWN time is when he would basically have unfettered freedom of speech. Most folks I knew were more upset for SF and NFL for allowing it to happen than they were for CK actually doing.

However, what did upset many of us was that those doing that were trying to dictate what we thought of the kneeling. He claimed it was to protest one thing, but for what, when, and where it was done many of us took t as a huge insult to the military and all those that fought for our country. Supposedly, we were not allowed to perceive it that way, we simply MUST think of it in the way that CK thought, otherwise we were just racists. Well, Colin, just f*ck you and all that rest of your buddies that try to tell me what I see, what I think, how I perceive your actions.

And if he just had done it when not doing his employment duties, or protested by staying in the locker room during the National Anthem, I would just say to go ahead, you are free to do that.

1) There is no nfl policy that prohibits a player from kneeling .

2) kapernak got his idea to kneel from a marine . He wasn’t looking to be center of attention . He was sitting on the bench trying to be low key.

3) Not sure how that is any more disrespectful than people in the bar , hallway and in stadium drinking , hats on and talking while the anthem is being played .

4) you have every right to state you don’t like it . I have the right to counter your opinion on. That is why veterans died for our country .

5) And ck has the right to return the f u to you. That is how freedom of speech works .

 

[mikalalas]

Have no idea why my take is weird. He didn't say that is why he fought the Nazi's. HE fought the Nazi's to maintain "the good old days".

It is like when my dad who entered the Navy just after the Hitler finally killed himself. And my dad said when Colin Kapernak knelt during the national anthem he called it anti American and not what he fought for when he was in the Navy.

I said I thought that is exactly what you fought for, freedom of speech. So I think my dad is misguided in that he picks and chooses what is the "proper" freedom of speech.

Ed, there are, have been people in this country that have been, are EXTREMELY ABUSIVE, MANIPULATIVE, POSSESSIVE, CONTROLATIVE, in a VERBAL way, with CUSSING, INSULTS, NAME CALLING, PROFANITY, EXTREME HARSHNESS, ETC, that have caused EXTREME HARM, have caused people to commit suicide, who have damaged, harmed people's reputations, WHO WERE ONLY TECHNICALLY EXERCISING THEIR FREE SPEECH RIGHT, and that while what they said caused HARM, their speech was BORDERLINE that, couldn't be proved as harmful in a court of law, and so because of that, their speech was technically free speech, etc, instead of the type of speech that goes beyond free speech, that illegal speech.

But even tho people can technically legally speak in the way above, does NOT mean they should, or should be allowed to do that, and does NOT mean that that's what WW2 Vets that fought in WW2, etc, died for, etc.

What you don't get Ed, is that Kneeling during the Anthem, DISRESPECTING ANTHEM, FLAG, VETS, etc, is, can be KINDA, SORTA, like the above example I made, used, and does harm.

That is why the USA government passed the USC, UMC code, law(the same law about not letting the flag touch ground, etc,), against flag burning(and flag burning is like and done for same reasons as kneeling during Anthem).

Then Supreme Court ruled against that law, and allowed flag burning.

That, those kind of things in the above examples is NOT what WW2 Vets, etc, died for ED.

Also ED, just because a person can either technically legally do something that harms, or can do harm, or can get away with doing a borderline, questionable, technically legal thing that can cause harm, etc, DOES NOT MEAN THEY SHOULD and DOES NOT MEAN it does not cause harm and does not mean that that, those type of things, and in the above examples are what WW2 Vets died for.

When people do those type of things ED, it causes WW2 Vets that died in WW2, etc, to ROLL OVER IN THEIR GRAVES ED.

 

[95coug]

Do you think any and all books should be available for school children in the school libraries paid for by tax dollars?

The point is that it isn’t up to me.

If it was, I wouldn’t be banning seahorses and things that are historically factual. In fact, off the top of my head, I can’t think of a title that I’d ban outright. I wouldn’t even ban Mein Kampf outright, but I’d certainly want it to be given context.

And, that’s key to a lot of books - someone needs to give kids context before they read them. A trans author writing a book about growing up feeling out of place should not be something the community is afraid of. Lots of kids feel out of place, what’s the harm in letting them hear about someone else who did? Should we really limit their reading to only stories of well-adjusted, popular, and “normal” childhoods? Or, just maybe might them feel worse? Reading different perspectives isn’t a bad thing. It actually promotes understanding, if it’s given context. Some understanding and ensuing dialog might just reduce some of the massive polarization we see everywhere now.

But, that would require that more parents actually engage with their kids and have conversations about uncomfortable topics. I guess it’s easier to just try to get those topics silenced and pretend they don’t exist…while we secretly watch porn, complain about sex ed in school, and read 50 shades of grey.

 

[Stretch 74]

1) There is no nfl policy that prohibits a player from kneeling .

2) kapernak got his idea to kneel from a marine . He wasn’t looking to be center of attention . He was sitting on the bench trying to be low key.

3) Not sure how that is any more disrespectful than people in the bar , hallway and in stadium drinking , hats on and talking while the anthem is being played .

4) you have every right to state you don’t like it . I have the right to counter your opinion on. That is why veterans died for our country .

5) And ck has the right to return the f u to you. That is how freedom of speech works .

1. I never said there WAS a policy, but they DO have the right to control clothing and behaviors that affect their brand. And we all know that they do control such things. I think they let it go for one of two reasons-either they agreed with him and wanted to push that message, or they were scared of a backlash from black players and fans.
2. Was he kneeling or sitting on a bench? Make up your mind. I recall seeing pics of him and then many others kneeling during the anthem.
3. Sure, all of those things are also disrespectful, but he was doing it as a protest and to draw attention to himself. The rest of them are just being rude, or drunk, or oblivious, or possibly may even be unaware that the anthem is even happening.
4. Yes, I do, and you have that right to give your opinion. Just as I have the right again to respond to educate you as to how you are wrong.
5. Sure, Colin can give me a hearty FU, but he has no right to try to insist how I am allowed to interpret his actions, or their meaning.

Are you coming to the C&G game Saturday?

 

[CougEd]

1. I never said there WAS a policy, but they DO have the right to control clothing and behaviors that affect their brand. And we all know that they do control such things. I think they let it go for one of two reasons-either they agreed with him and wanted to push that message, or they were scared of a backlash from black players and fans.
2. Was he kneeling or sitting on a bench? Make up your mind. I recall seeing pics of him and then many others kneeling during the anthem.
3. Sure, all of those things are also disrespectful, but he was doing it as a protest and to draw attention to himself. The rest of them are just being rude, or drunk, or oblivious, or possibly may even be unaware that the anthem is even happening.
4. Yes, I do, and you have that right to give your opinion. Just as I have the right again to respond to educate you as to how you are wrong.
5. Sure, Colin can give me a hearty FU, but he has no right to try to insist how I am allowed to interpret his actions, or their meaning.

Are you coming to the C&G game Saturday?

Easiest question first. I won't be unfortunately. I will be in Pullman twice over the next month, and couldn't squeeze in a third trip.

1) Of course the NFL was concerned about the black lash from its "human capital". Goodell finally said he handled CK poorly, and that he wished he had "listened" to players concern.

2) Sitting or kneeling? IS this a serious question? You really don't know the history? It was both. Originally during the national anthem he sat on the bench out of the spot light. No TV coverage, it was done for him and his feelings. Then it started to become a story. A marine that served in the Iraq war said during the anthem to protest kneel, don't sit, so he did. So really people who think kneeling is disrespectful blame the marine who suggested CK do so.

3) He was doing a protest, but did so originally where no one knew until it became a story. Him kneeling is no worse than 70% of the people with either their hats on, don't know where the flag is, talking etc I have seen before games.

4) Some day you actually may teach me something.

5) CK told you how to interpret his kneeling? He has your number? He has every right to "interpret what you are saying just as you pointed out in line item three.

 

[Stretch 74]

Easiest question first. I won't be unfortunately. I will be in Pullman twice over the next month, and couldn't squeeze in a third trip.

1) Of course the NFL was concerned about the black lash from its "human capital". Goodell finally said he handled CK poorly, and that he wished he had "listened" to players concern.

2) Sitting or kneeling? IS this a serious question? You really don't know the history? It was both. Originally during the national anthem he sat on the bench out of the spot light. No TV coverage, it was done for him and his feelings. Then it started to become a story. A marine that served in the Iraq war said during the anthem to protest kneel, don't sit, so he did. So really people who think kneeling is disrespectful blame the marine who suggested CK do so.

3) He was doing a protest, but did so originally where no one knew until it became a story. Him kneeling is no worse than 70% of the people with either their hats on, don't know where the flag is, talking etc I have seen before games.

4) Some day you actually may teach me something.

5) CK told you how to interpret his kneeling? He has your number? He has every right to "interpret what you are saying just as you pointed out in line item three.

Too bad you can't make it. Would have liked to meet up with you up there in the Big Buck Suites ($15/person!).

Yes, Colin and many, many others were trying to tell us how to think. They kept insisting that their actions were NOT insulting to those in the military, those that fought for freedom, for our country. Well, intended or not, it WAS seen as insulting to many of us. Kind of like when some group or other wants to protest something and they go out and shut down a freeway. Then they claim they didn't intend to bother anyone driving there that day. Yeah, right-you just gave the finger to all the drivers on the road that day.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Too bad you can't make it. Would have liked to meet up with you up there in the Big Buck Suites ($15/person!).

Yes, Colin and many, many others were trying to tell us how to think. They kept insisting that their actions were NOT insulting to those in the military, those that fought for freedom, for our country. Well, intended or not, it WAS seen as insulting to many of us. Kind of like when some group or other wants to protest something and they go out and shut down a freeway. Then they claim they didn't intend to bother anyone driving there that day. Yeah, right-you just gave the finger to all the drivers on the road that day.

What about inviting me? I'm way more fun than Ed. And way cuter too......

 

[Stretch 74]

Easiest question first. I won't be unfortunately. I will be in Pullman twice over the next month, and couldn't squeeze in a third trip.

1) Of course the NFL was concerned about the black lash from its "human capital". Goodell finally said he handled CK poorly, and that he wished he had "listened" to players concern.

2) Sitting or kneeling? IS this a serious question? You really don't know the history? It was both. Originally during the national anthem he sat on the bench out of the spot light. No TV coverage, it was done for him and his feelings. Then it started to become a story. A marine that served in the Iraq war said during the anthem to protest kneel, don't sit, so he did. So really people who think kneeling is disrespectful blame the marine who suggested CK do so.

3) He was doing a protest, but did so originally where no one knew until it became a story. Him kneeling is no worse than 70% of the people with either their hats on, don't know where the flag is, talking etc I have seen before games.

4) Some day you actually may teach me something.

5) CK told you how to interpret his kneeling? He has your number? He has every right to "interpret what you are saying just as you pointed out in line item three.

BTW, being in the mortgage business, what do you think about the new things Biden is doing-making people with good credit scores pay extra to allow more people with bad credit scores to buy a home? Isn't that pretty socialistic? And like "forgiving" student loan debt by having all the rest of us pay for it?

 

[Stretch 74]

What about inviting me? I'm way more fun than Ed. And way cuter too......

Sure, go ahead and look me up. I'll be the guy wearing the crimson Cougar hat!

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Sure, go ahead and look me up. I'll be the guy wearing the crimson Cougar hat!

That narrows it down!

 

[CougEd]

BTW, being in the mortgage business, what do you think about the new things Biden is doing-making people with good credit scores pay extra to allow more people with bad credit scores to buy a home? Isn't that pretty socialistic? And like "forgiving" student loan debt by having all the rest of us pay for it?

Well....not sure what you are referring to about Biden and the good credit people helping the bad credit people buy a home. Need a little more info because sometimes what people read isn't what truly is happening on the ground.

Forgiving student loans....I do have an opinion on that. And I will offer only a portion of how I feel about that. I feel no different about socialized repayment of student loans than those people who abused PPP money. Sterling Bank got tons of TARP money back in the day. They never paid it back. How is that not socialism.

How about a developer that screws up, files bankruptcy on his contractors and subs and gets to keep his buildings. That is a form of socialism.

Leo Mazzilo...CEO of Countrywide home loans back in the day. Came up with a brilliant loan. Zero Down, no income verification, and bad credit scores and nothing in the bank. What do you think happened on those loans.

Countrywide was going under. Tax payers gave him 150 million for him to Walk away and let Bank of America to take the portfolio.

So when it comes to "socialism", it is all about where you personally think the money should be spent. It's not socialism, it is a "bail out".

 

[CougEd]

Actually, I re-watched the video and that is NOT what he said. "Misguided" for storming the beaches of Normandy to save the free world. I generally practice poster amnesia, but I'm filing this one away for future reference. That is just so wrong, and your usual twist of bringing in some totally unrelated and irrelevant topic (Dad and Kaepernick) in is typical.

So Loyal let me ask you if the following scenario of a person is a “weird” twist on the misguided hero.

Let’s say David Dukes father who may have shared some his son’s beliefs about race and segregation .

But say his father stormed Normandy and was given several medals of honor.

But when interviewed he starts crying and saying this is not what people went to war for and died for, that they will never have the opportunity I had . It just not the same as it use to be .

Would he be a misguided hero for wanting life to go back to what he saw as a better time ?

Not sure what is si weird about that take that he may be a hero but misguided as to why he went to war for the country.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

So Loyal let me ask you if the following scenario of a person is a “weird” twist on the misguided hero.

Let’s say David Dukes father who may have shared some his son’s beliefs about race and segregation .

But say his father stormed Normandy and was given several medals of honor.

But when interviewed he starts crying and saying this is not what people went to war for and died for, that they will never have the opportunity I had . It just not the same as it use to be .

Would he be a misguided hero for wanting life to go back to what he saw as a better time ?

Not sure what is si weird about that take that he may be a hero but misguided as to why he went to war for the country.

Gawd Ed. Get a hobby. Your bizarre takes on shit drive me crazy. Love you buddy, but Goddamn.

 

[CougEd]

Gawd Ed. Get a hobby. Your bizarre takes on shit drive me crazy. Love you buddy, but Goddamn.

Why is that “bizarre” ? When someone talks about wanting the old days and lack of opportunity what the hell do you think they are talking about ?

 

[95coug]

BTW, being in the mortgage business, what do you think about the new things Biden is doing-making people with good credit scores pay extra to allow more people with bad credit scores to buy a home? Isn't that pretty socialistic? And like "forgiving" student loan debt by having all the rest of us pay for it?

Washington has been doing that for years with car insurance.
I really enjoyed it a few years back when they stopped letting rates be set with consideration of credit scores. Guess I should have stopped paying my bills. Never liked doing it anyway.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Why is that “bizarre” ? When someone talks about wanting the old days and lack of opportunity what the hell do you think they are talking about ?

Geezus Christ buddy. you want to argue about some WWII vet lamenting the old days, ad nauseum, in post after post? Like every other topic on this board - all you want to do is argue the other side. The sky is blue - no. it's green. The grass is green - no, it's blue. WTF is wrong with you?

 

[CougEd]

Geezus Christ buddy. you want to argue about some WWII vet lamenting the old days, ad nauseum, in post after post? Like every other topic on this board - all you want to do is argue the other side. The sky is blue - no. it's green. The grass is green - no, it's blue. WTF is wrong with you?

That is like me saying all you want to do is be the board nanny. Not sure my views are all that controversial. Abortion...I think that is such a tough issue. But it is not my place to tell a woman what to do with her body. I think for those who have a faith, and believe it goes against God's wishes, then they apparently will be punished, right. So why have double jeopardy.

Transgender. Another tough one. Being gay use to be taught is a mental illness. I am sure some still believe that. I believe the following ..why would anyone choose to be excluded, to be discriminated against. If these things were truly a choice why would someone pick the hardest road possible.

Second, and very important 100 trans kids in sports is very low on my list of priorities. School killing, inflation, democracy vs autocracy, crime, homelessness are much higher than 2 kids per state trying to play sports. If they let them compete and give them a participation ribbon(instead of a trophy) like Lia Thompson.

Guns....85% of people in this country agree with my views on guns.

As to the "hero", yeah, I get triggered when a white male thinks his "opportunities" are being stripped away and longs for the good ole days. Loyal, my life experiences I would gather greatly differ from yours. I have friends who grew up in Pullman and went to WSU. I have a good friend who grew up in Pullman and never left. My life experiences are very different than theirs. So of course I am sure we differ on many different things.

As to the hero, like I said it does trigger me when a white male complains about opportunity. Let me tell you about people who probably don't long for those good ole days. A relative or two of mine fought in WW2 and the Korean war. They were the back of the bus people. They fought for their country even without a promise of a better tomorrow.(and opportunity)

You know what their reward was after serving in WW2 and the Korean War. Well one brought over his wife who was not a US citizen. She was from a European country. She was able to vote before his family was able to vote. She was able to sit in a different place in a restaurant than he was. She was able to go to the "correct" bathroom, and she was able to sit in the front of the bus. The German prisoners of war were treated better than people of color that served our country.

So yeah, I get a little testy when I hear about people who look like the hero cry about the lack of opportunity and how they wish things were the same and what we are seeing today isn't what they fought for.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

That is like me saying all you want to do is be the board nanny. Not sure my views are all that controversial. Abortion...I think that is such a tough issue. But it is not my place to tell a woman what to do with her body. I think for those who have a faith, and believe it goes against God's wishes, then they apparently will be punished, right. So why have double jeopardy.

Transgender. Another tough one. Being gay use to be taught is a mental illness. I am sure some still believe that. I believe the following ..why would anyone choose to be excluded, to be discriminated against. If these things were truly a choice why would someone pick the hardest road possible.

Second, and very important 100 trans kids in sports is very low on my list of priorities. School killing, inflation, democracy vs autocracy, crime, homelessness are much higher than 2 kids per state trying to play sports. If they let them compete and give them a participation ribbon(instead of a trophy) like Lia Thompson.

Guns....85% of people in this country agree with my views on guns.

As to the "hero", yeah, I get triggered when a white male thinks his "opportunities" are being stripped away and longs for the good ole days. Loyal, my life experiences I would gather greatly differ from yours. I have friends who grew up in Pullman and went to WSU. I have a good friend who grew up in Pullman and never left. My life experiences are very different than theirs. So of course I am sure we differ on many different things.

As to the hero, like I said it does trigger me when a white male complains about opportunity. Let me tell you about people who probably don't long for those good ole days. A relative or two of mine fought in WW2 and the Korean war. They were the back of the bus people. They fought for their country even without a promise of a better tomorrow.(and opportunity)

You know what their reward was after serving in WW2 and the Korean War. Well one brought over his wife who was not a US citizen. She was from a European country. She was able to vote before his family was able to vote. She was able to sit in a different place in a restaurant than he was. She was able to go to the "correct" bathroom, and she was able to sit in the front of the bus. The German prisoners of war were treated better than people of color that served our country.

So yeah, I get a little testy when I hear about people who look like the hero cry about the lack of opportunity and how they wish things were the same and what we are seeing today isn't what they fought for.

You know I went to PHS with your Pullman buddy (good guy), and probably some of your other Pullman/WSU friends. I think it's time, for me at least, to take a timeout from the board and let others converse. You might think about it too. Peace.

 

[CougEd]

You know I went to PHS with your Pullman buddy (good guy), and probably some of your other Pullman/WSU friends. I think it's time, for me at least, to take a timeout from the board and let others converse. You might think about it too. Peace.

Others can converse and I can still be here. It’s called multitasking . And the good guy agrees with me 😜

And I sincerely appreciate your concern and opinion. (I am not being crass or ass… it is sincere)