WrestlingRasta

Ok

It is not an official document no. It has bearing on how we are governed in that it is one of the foundational principles upon which the nation was developed. It is also a major ingredient into how this nation developed into, and still is, the greatest in the world.

The man is on an absolute hot streak of executive orders, you may not like them and you may not (I’m certainly laughing at some of them), but there are in fact other issues being addressed as well. Just like there has been way more than one person a year affected by men playing against women. You can’t make a very good argument when you can’t allow yourself to at least be accurate and realistic about what it is you are arguing against.

One person per year across all sports? Hmmm…interesting take. So the swimmer at U of Virginia, he only affected one person that whole year? We also had the high school male wrestler competing in the women’s division. He only affected one person all year? That’s just two examples, in just two sports. One HS, one college. And only one person affected in totality of both cases? Interesting take. You sure that’s this hill you want to stand on?

Cody is taller than Cael....seriously?

But doesn't Cody bring the balance??

You seem confused by what I’m saying so let me be a little more clear….. I’m saying you’re a piece of garbage.

You’ve just shown yourself to be complete and total douchebag that has no problem what so ever running his mouth about *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* he has no idea about. You are literally the worst kind of American. There are people being kicked out right now that deserve America more than you.

There’s no denying a significant bump in recruiting since the election. RV is obviously, as it appears all over this board, going through some serious things. I just hope these new recruits, and all the military, get used in appropriate purposes.

Actually….its not. Don’t let a small percentage that the media tells you to be mad at characterize the entire profession. A very noble profession that gets less of what it deserves, and more of…this Shameful.

Is this written on that statue resting on the coast of New Zealand that also reads “Give me your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuge of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempted tossed to me, I shine my lamp beside the Golden Door!” The answer is no, because that statue doesn’t exist in New Zealand. A different country built on different values. Not to mention the size of New Zealand doesn’t fully stretch even the eastern seaboard of the United States. Great comparison though.

ehhhh......the behavior isn't mastered by one party or the other. Its the individual. And they're everywhere. (And making everything Dem vs Rep is no better. Same level behavior, different details....)

Now? We’ve certainly seen the behavior you describe before. It’s nothing new.

Something something DS

That’s what you took from that. Not surprising. And still boring.

My take: It’s response. There have been in fact for decades been more qualified people passed over for jobs because of skin, gender, nationality, sexuality, etc etc…down right appearance. In response, movements and regulations have/had formed to move against this, which solicits a response. A response that solicits a response, which solicits a response, and so on until we get some of the ridiculous hires we had in the last administration solely in the name of diversity. Its simple. Don’t give a *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* what you do. You don’t force me to give a *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* what you do. We should all get along. The responsibility lies on both sides.

Can certainly agree with both parts of this. To answer the question at the end, and this is just my opinion, but it comes down to one word….entitlement. A lot of the current people walking around are used to us living in the greatest country in the world. And they expect it to be just is. Not really into what went into making this the greatest country in the world, and what really goes into maintaining as the greatest country in the world. They just expect it because it’s all they know. Many people, on ‘both sides of the aisle’, have gotten to the point they expect Utopia, otherwise we’re better off with Anarchy…if we can’t figure it out the way I want it we might as well just be on our own and be damned to think about anyone else. It comes down to perspective. If you have spent time in a number of different cultures around the world you won’t see our country as that horrible. Particularly based so heavily on who’s President. Even when we have a President who is a bumbling embicle, or a President who is a criminal fraud with a lot of smoke around sexual abuse and minors. Even with that…..we’re still doing a lot better than the vaaaaaaaast majority of the world. Which is evident by the amount of people from all over the world that would love to come and make a life here. At the end of the day, our own little world, here in America, is what we make of it. Sure this president or that president might tip the scale a little bit one way or the other..as it relates to our individual life and future…but at the end of the day our little world is what we make of it. If your little world here in America is so bad that you can’t stand to be here, that’s on you.

So your actual life, here in America, is actually really good. You’re mad at what the screen is telling you to be mad at. Either way, I’m sorry your focus and animosity is so cornered on that which is not a part of and not affecting your life. That sucks. I sure wouldn’t want to be stuck in that hell hole either.

Why would you want to keep your family in such a *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* hole? Don’t you care about their future?

This.

So is your comment including science teachers, math teachers, English teachers, automechanics teachers, woodshop teachers, metals teachers, etc etc? What about teachers who are on the conservative side of politics and don’t engage in any of the things you are mad at? Or does it just include the ones media tells you to be mad at? That’s a pretty full sweeping comment.

Are you okay? Maybe go to a walk and breathe a little bit. This is not healthy.

Something something DS How dare he not wipe the chin…

Working the tournament. Used to do alot with USA Wrestling and Boxing.

A long read but very interesting, written by a law professor at Indiana university who specializes in negotiation: “I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don't know, I'm an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes. Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of "The Art of the Deal," a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you've read The Art of the Deal, or if you've followed Trump lately, you'll know, even if you didn't know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call "distributive bargaining." Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you're fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump's world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins. The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don't have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over. The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can't demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren't binary. China's choices aren't (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don't buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation. One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you're going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don't have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won't agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you're going to have to find another cabinet maker. There isn't another Canada. So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already. Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem. Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that's just not how politics works, not over the long run. For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here's another huge problem for us. Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it. From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn't even bringing checkers to a chess match. He's bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.” — David Honig