WrestlingRasta

One of those things where, I’m probably not going to put the time in, but interesting to see how many bouts at the Olympics were two Russians against each other, then to take it a step further, how many were two Dagestani?

I do, as indicated in my post above, I just don’t take any of his whining too seriously. Thats not a surprise around here…

Not too far fetched at all. Very legit. If your in the HS ranks what’s your #1 hallway recruiting tool…..wrestling is great for football!

They didn’t fall into a cult…not at all

Nope. Well aware. Just don’t care. You see, I’m not one who looks around for every reason to whine about how unfair the nut swing gets treated. I am of the belief he has made his bed, and I don’t mind him sleeping in it. But I know it hurts. Don’t worry, it’ll all be over soon.

Yes you got me, that delay took place yesterday, where’s I posted the timeline this morning. Good gotcha moment. I look forward to your next parroting act.

Thats what he’s having a hard time understanding, the judicial process. But being parrot boy sure is enlightening. When he comes up with a new nickname next week, how giggly are you going to get?

Appreciate the question. Greco is actually my #1 preference, but at this point I kind of roll with the tide.. That said, I’m going to introduce all three styles, and I would say I’m going to focus probably 70% on our feet. Particular with the younger groups it’s going to be more about fundamental movement and skills rather than a bunch of technique. In my area, you don’t hear much about, or see, the seven basic skills; the 3x5; and stuff like that.

It is not clear to you, and that is not a surprise.

It’s a kangaroo court because it is following the judicial process, now that’s an interesting take.

Judicial process: Step 1: Grand Jury invvrstigation Step 2: Grand jury puts forth indictments Step 3: trial on the charges in front of a jury of citizens Step 4: jury of citizens verdict Step 5, at a later time, sentencing. In this case, sentencing is set for Sept 18. (Information that is readily available if you’re interested).

Interesting topic at the right time. I’m in the process of opening a club that I’m going to run more like a rec program rather than a USAW club, basically for that exact purpose of not focusing on competition as much as development. Instead of a ‘season’ where we practice a couple times a week and tournament every Saturday, we are going to do six week sessions, throughout the calendar year. Community wide program not at all tied to a HS with the emphasis of just coming together and growing. Would love to take in any tips or feedbacks. Starting/ managing programs is nothing new to me, been doing it for years at every level, but it’s been in the focus of competition in the past. This is more of a recreational development for youth (with a couple HS training sessions thrown in each week as well)

Agreed. And I look forward to reading your next lecture to someone about ….”just because you don’t agree”

He’s popular?? “You’re such a big popular boy! Standing up there and getting all those popular votes!!”

It’s interesting that when I’m discussing a topic we’re not agreeing on, it’s full of contradiction, failure, illogical nonsense, biased emotion. But when I’m discussing a topic you do agree on, pretty much in the same manner and using the same forms of logic….you consider it a mic drop. I’ve said all along since joining, human behavior is an interesting thing.

This shows a fundamental difference in belief in what individual rights and freedoms are. One of those fundamentals is that your individual right and freedom ends at the point it begins to infringe upon mine. The dynamic here as it relates to the bathroom is that you are saying it is punishing the trans women for saying no to using the women’s bathroom, without consideration to the vast majority of women who feel an extreme invasion of their rights when a biological male enters their bathroom. And that is where the individual right of one infringes upon the other. An individual, biological man has the right to identify as a female. I will even say an individual has a right to ask to be addressed as a female. But that is where their right and freedom ends, because forcing me to recognize as a female, or allow to share the bathroom with my biological female children, is an invasion of their right and freedom. It is not fear, it is just as much personal liberty as someone who wants to identify that way. And just like I have no desire to force you (you being a trans woman in the scenario) to say you must identify as a male…..I am under no obligation to acknowledge you as a male. In THAT scenario, both person’s individual freedom’s are satisfied, and it has nothing to do with fear.

Biden was not on the ballot yet as he had not been officially designated as the democratic nominee, which takes place at the democratic national convention. RFK was on the ballot because he was the official nominee for, and as declared by (whatever party in that particular state, there were a few different parties throughout different states. As it goes by law and official record, Biden was never anything more than the presumed nominee.

Can you clarify where you read that he stated that's what they should be or shouldn't be doing? Because when I read, and then re-read his statement, what I am reading is his stating what they are doing. I don't see should be doing this or shouldn't be doing that anywhere in that statement regarding charges. And that should be is the central piece to your "I get a kick out of your circular argument".....argument, so it's kind of important whether or not that's what he said, or if that's just how you decided to accept it?

Ahhhh a new day, a new sunshine. Let us being.... 1. Never said they did...I said I agree with the law and they made a mistake. My point was it wasn't Trump walking in there saying he was going to take pictures and videos for political reasons...period. You can choose not to believe that but that is just your bias showing through. >> Can only assume that since you are taking such a hard and damning stance on that aspect, you must have been in the room and in the meetings prior to the visit where they were discussing their plans and intent for said visit, and then accompanied them on their visit, and therefore have first hand knowledge of intent and plas. And the fact that the Trump campaign released video of the gravesites almost immediately, but has not released video of the incident, that was verified by the Army and Pentagon, but would allegedly completely exonerate them from what they are accused. Is a person allowed critical thinking to factor that in, or is it just bias? 2. Again, your definition of losing their ducking minds and mine are different. I would, and apparently you would have too, handled the situation differently but to me it is just a case of he said she said and Trump and his team have every right to defend their position and story just as the woman does (again, I am not saying I agree with how they did it as again I wouldn't have done it that way, but it doesn't change the fact that maybe, just maybe their side of the story may be true. And again, is why I wish they would release the video of the incident. >> And since his definition is different that yours, it is just pure bias? As far as the video, I think we all would like it's release. Which begs three questions: 1) who took the video, 2) who has access and ability to release the video, 3) why have they not? 3. The same context I explained to Rasta...ex POTUS who just weeks early had an assassination attempt on his life...gee...maybe...just maybe his detail was a little more on edge, and rightfully so! If you think that that doesn't matter than once again, like him, it is pure bias and irrational mental gymnastics. >> If you truly believe that it is in any way excusable to shove an officer out of the way who is trying to forbid you from violating federal law, a law implemented solely for the respect of soldiers who were killed in battle, because you are an ex-president who got shot in the ear....and that anyone that thinks that is not excusable is nothing but bias and mental gymnastics........well we're just too far apart on what it means to be a decent human being to really cover this aspect any more. I'm still kind of shocked. If his detail is not able to conduct themselves in a professional manner, over something like a federal officer doing the right thing, then maybe they are not fit for that detail. 4. If that so called post on tikTok is in fact an ad (I don't have tikTok) than the Army should file an injunction to have it taken down as it violates federal law...and/or charge him and his campaign with a crime. >> This one is pretty interesting. This video has in fact been released, posted, and verified. But you don't have tikTok, so its "if so called video.... and if in fact", even though you don't have to have a tikTook account to very easily find it and watch it. I just don't get that, especially when your whole argument on anything about this situation that is counter to you, is nothing but pure bias.

Honest question....when considering the evolving state of the economy over the last four years, how much consideration are we giving to the pandemic significantly shutting the economic world down for a while, and the fact that while expenses have raised, those effects have been felt all over the world, not just America, and America has been and continues to recover at a better rate than the other first world countries across the globe. Sincerely asking how much that factors in to our thinking of the last four years, because that effort is an effort from both sides of the aisle.

Same. And music.

One view: more people turned out in 2020 than ever before because Trump “did what he said he was going to do” Another view: more people turned out than ever before because “cannot let Trump remain in the White House” For the noisiest of the populous, the correct answer is whichever side’s talking heads have gotten their claws into you. The “who do you trust” question isn’t really about trust. Just look around here, all kinds of people (both sides pretty much equally) talking about you can’t trust government, they’re all scum. But spend all day arguing in defense of your media outlets favorite government official. Talking about can’t trust the media, but fill the board with media clips like gotcha moments. If Trump wins (which I believe is very much a long shot at this point) I trust he’s going to do whatever he can to consolidate as much power he can and seek retribution. His speeches are less about policy and leadership and more about how unfair his life is. If Kamala wins I trust she’s going to do whatever she can to shore up complete support in the DEI realm, and her governing is going to be based on whatever can get her re-elected (which I guess is nothing new). I hope she realizes it’s the loudest, not the majority, that wants things like males in female sports and bathrooms, but I’m not confident. Don’t really trust either one of them…

If trans women are women, why the preclusion of “trans” or “identify as”?

That's a lot to type to be done with the discussion (yes it was same topic, an extension of that topic is not a different topic). Funny that Mr. Whackadoodle wants to talk about immature names.....and hypocrisy. This is how you end a conversation: Have a great weekend!!

Wait....I thought you no longer wanted to discuss. Well that didn't take long. Would you have been more comfortable if I said "whackadoodle", or one of those other terms, since you are so against name calling those who disagree with you. I just want to make sure I have the proper etiquette that keeps you comfortable.