impartialobserver

I just followed the breadcrumbs that you laid down.

so any and all human relationships are centered around blow jobs.. who knew? By this logic.. you are quite the expert on performing these acts.

Nothing like some good old fashioned hyperbole.

just imploring you to back up your statements with something other than more opinion, rhetoric, assumptions, or propaganda. If I was to state that the unemployment rate in Montana is 3.3% for the month of March.. I could give you the numbers involved in that calculation and where they came from.

I can say with complete certainty that if these protesters were protesting against immigration or abortion.. the conservatives would change their tune instantly.

You really should my posts more carefully. this post ^^^ is based on the idea that I support flying a pride flag. Now.. read carefully again. I would support having no pride flags as a form of compromise with Deluge. His ideas would be a valid compromise.

I learned about it in 4th grade and am white.. was I beaten over the head with it. My point is that any mention of any kind of any length could be construed as CRT. When I learned about it in 4th grade ( and I am as white as white gets).. I did not feel any kind of shame. Bad stuff happened.. and I was not the perpetrator. folks can learn about atrocities and such and not have it be some form of virtual signaling.

I have zero problem with LGBTQ stuff but as a form of compromise.. I think it works. As for if the author is gay.. that would not qualify as LGTBQ literature

I could be in support of no pride flags or homosexual literature. As for CRT.. folks would interpret that as any mention of blacks being mistreated in the past as CRT. It is simple historical fact that we had slavery, jim crow laws, the KKK, and such. An example would be someone demanding that a mural at my kids school of MLK be taken down because it was CRT. Except that the mural dates from 1985 and there is no undue focus on it. Its one data point in the history of the US

Again.. you give no specifics. Failed.

Can you prove who the source is? Must be.. is not sufficient. Can you furnish the name of the source, the dollar amount, and some evidence of the transaction (check number).. or are you just guessing and can't just say that? the usual narrative is that folks roam around and are paid to protest something. They are like traveling magazine salesmen and get into character at each new protest. Your links do not support that narrative. They show folks protesting and then some non profit coming in after and aiding in their ability to continue their protest. lastly.. can you prove that in every protest that there are paid protestors who simply go from to town regardless of topic?

I am not sold on that idea either. Everybody makes these conspiratorial claims but when pressed for specifics, the usual response is "how else do you explain it. you must be stupid to not see the obvious". My response is then.. "if if it so obvious why can't you furnish details such as dollar amounts, who funds it, how they get the funds, etc?". For example, if I claim that player x is the reason that team x wins an NBA playoff game.. I can find a box score and it gives me specifics.

The internet allows to have all these strong opinions and not need to seriously take anybody else into account. The echo chamber allows us to be bold, uncompromising, outspoken, adamant slacktivists.

Can you prove that this is being funded? Spare me the impassioned opinions. Lets see a source, a dollar amount, names of recipients (actual names not simply libbies). Links to articles that agree is not sufficient either.

School policy.. maybe. However, our discussion is much more general. Should it be allowed to exist.. that is the question. I vote yes. However, my point in the beginning is that if you have the first amendment and the internet... the woke content is going to be created and not much you can do about it. There is a market for it. If that market does not contain you.. that means nothing. My friend owns a record store and guess what genre he sells the most of? Rap/ Hip-hop. Is he a fan of it? No. Am I? No again. Him and I not being a fan does not change this.

its only one place but I grew up in Boise, idaho.. there was one "gay bar" and even then it was not exclusively gay. The gays/lesbians still had to be selective about when to go this place. 1985.. there was no internet so tell me how gays found each other in 1985 (as an example). Your article while legit does not give many names. 25 or so is not all that numerous compared to the total elected from 1973 to the present. 1973 being the earliest date listed. I am talking about the concept in general. The AIDS epidemic at first was mostly contained to certain cities where the gay population was relatively high and known. But that is beside the point. The point is them being bold enough to enter the public or political realm. They do this because they can effortlessly and without confrontation band together. the anonymity of the internet emboldens folks.

It does seem strange to have a state owned media outlet. From what I have read, it is a public broadcaster and so the government is going to be involved in some way. If I am off base then fine. If not, does not seem sustainable.

So then lets ask.. how did the internet change things? First, for example if you were trans/gay/whatever in 1983 and you did not live in SF, LA, NYC, or Chicago.. you generally kept that to yourself. There was no open community for it in most places. Now.. the internet. The internet allows you to express yourself and in such a manner that there is no consequence. Yeah. so person xyz in Fargo, ND saw your profile or what you said on FB. You can keep scrolling them, block them, etc. If I was gay and wanted to find a group of like minded individuals, the internet is full of them. When you get a bunch of like minded individuals together and in a space where they have no dissenting views.. they embolden. And so on down the road.. they decide to enter the public realm and politics. Lastly, the internet has definitely helped the slow, steady campaign to have their way of life gain greater acceptance.

if we were to compare the total number of 2 and 4 colleges and universities to those having protests associated with this.. the number would be very small. There is no database so my guess is as good as any.

precisely. Hence why I get so very tired of him being the lead story. Seriously.. he is not that interesting.

You are free to complain to your hearts content.. and I am free to not. See how that works? Its not a 1st amendment violation to complain about it. Clear enough? My stance is that society should free to produce such content and the members of society should be free to like it or not. I do get the impression that you would support legislation that would ban "woke" content.

wife and kids would not be as excited but would love to see Toronto, Montreal, Moncton, and Halifax. Reno is quite the place. Being 30 minutes from the Sierra Nevadas is amazing Back to the topic.. when folks think about international players in the NBA, they rightfully think France, Serbia, Spain, Germany, and such. Well.. Canada has proven to be in that company and more are coming. Zach Edey (Purdue) is another canadian that will be drafted into the NBA.

Likewise.. most Americans will admit that NYC is amazing. Most being not the same as all. Plenty do not like big cities and all that come with it. Never been to Toronto but hoping in a few years to start branching out to the east for travel having seen the majority of the western US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadians_in_the_NBA It is interesting how 30 years ago.. there were very few canadian nba players. Today, they are quite a few and Toronto has become of the more fruitful recruiting grounds. Just look at the current playoffs. Jamal Murray (DEN), Ben Mathurin (IND), Nickell Alexander-Walker (MIN), and Shae Gilgeous-Alexander (OKC) are key contributors on teams that will make the second round at least if not more.

Your posts imply that I watch the woke content and therefore am ok with it. There are a lot of things that I do not like watching/listening but I am not going to support their being outlawed.. 1. old westerns 2. rap and hiphop 3. political news 4. soap operas. For the umpteenth time.. I have no problem with them being created because I can choose to not consume it.