Norm Peterson

In that particular passage you quoted, I was criticizing how policymakers seem to succumb to the phenomenon of groupthink too often. I don't want to get into a discussion of the reasons people may have had for protesting. I think some of them had good motives; others not so much. But people in Lincoln, Nebraska trying to shut down "O" street and in Omaha just showing up en masse to block the intersection of 72nd and Dodge, for example, and then expecting to be allowed to just do it, is something I have an issue with. There are ways of going about getting parade permits and holding rallies on the capitol steps. But you're not entitled to just show up and shut down a street. And it was troubling the way the cops just kind of stood down and allowed it for the most part. Police, in general, are not the problem. I cannot imagine what kind of community these agitators envision for themselves but I can guess that the reality of a world without cops would be quite different from the one they think they would get.

Great news, guys! I still have all my fingers and all my toes! And the hearing in both ears! #Post4thBlessings

Ask him if they send each other Christmas cards.

From what I observed, I suspect Lance Jeter was an acquired taste. He talked a lot of trash to his teammates during practices. And not in a good-natured, fun kind of way, but more of a try-to-get-in-their-heads kind of way. He was an alpha alpha dog and wanted to make clear his dominance in the hierarchy, so I could see why some might not have taken well to him as a teammate.

What else? A girl.

Shang Ping played professionally after college. He wasn't as bad as some might have thought. With all due respect to Doc Sadler, I don't think Doc's style was particularly a good fit for Shang. It was all Shang could do to understand Doc's southern twang English. He no doubt wasn't used to getting abused in practices. Doc didn't have a lot of patience for Shang's learning curve. And then when he tried to knee Chris Balham in the nads ... that was kinda it.

At times like this, I recall the words of Jimmy V: "Don't give up; don't EVER give up." Until that dude signs on the dotted line, it ain't over. Plenty of kids end up signing with schools that didn't make the final 10.

While I think her statement is compelling, I don't buy that there's only one opinion that can ever be allowed on almost any subject. You don't like having debate; you like shutting down debate. I find that to be pretty typical these days. We get a lot of group think in our public discussions, and we get a lot of the product of group think in our policies as a result. It's why the only possible answer to Covid was shutting down the entire economy, and anyone who questioned whether our social distancing guidelines were entirely necessary or whether something slightly more open/less restrictive might be allowable was accused of wanting to kill grandma. And then the #BLM protests occurred and it's like social distancing really wasn't all that important, apparently. After watching all these giant protests going on unimpeded by authorities throughout the country, explain again why so many people couldn't visit dying relatives in the hospital one last time and then couldn't hold a funeral service with more than a handful of people present. I've said my peace (or piece, if you'd prefer) on the subject of monuments. I've allowed as to how reasonable people could certainly differ and hold a contrary view. I haven't proclaimed my view to be the last word on any subject. And I'm not ready to start allowing others' views to be the final word on any subject for me.

Yeah, the cement hadn't quite dried yet when they took that statue down. He's probably not a very good standard-bearer for the "save the statues" movement. One difference is that Paterno's flaws weren't known when the statue was erected. The full history of Robert E. Lee was an open book for the last 150 years.

I have no problem with Kobe King for deciding not to come here. I can stomach that change of heart a lot better than Andrew Benedict Arnold III or Jordy Tschimanga bolting at a time when it was really too late to find a suitable replacement. I'm not going to judge Kobe's reasons. It's his life and he has to make decisions that he'll have to live with, so he has to be free to make that call. Just don't do it when it's too late for us to find someone else. Which he didn't. So, it's all good.

I can respect that there are well-meaning people of good will who would disagree with me on this. However, there's something that troubles me about removing things like statues. Maybe I was particularly struck by reading Orwell's "1984." Maybe it's the firmly ingrained view from my classically-liberal youth that the best antidote for speech that we don't like is not less speech but more speech. In part, it's probably the notion that removing things sets a precedent for the next group that comes along with an articulable grievance. Notably, concerns that the removal movement would spread have been realized. It's happened. It's no longer just about statues of Confederate generals from the Civil War. Then there's this whole cancel culture phenomenon and how the apparent standards aren't applied equally across the board. If you think a better statue could be built, then by all means build another statue. But I'm uneasy about the idea of tearing one down that's already there. And, for what it's worth, I have no problem with the government of the State of Mississippi voting this past week to change the state flag to remove the symbol of the Confederate flag from the design. I think that's appropriate and a good thing to do.

I've pondered your response here -- I have to assume this is a response to me -- and I guess I just have to venture a rejoinder. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect that you never served in the military and maybe never had a close relative who did. So you probably don't have the same frame of reference that I have. I think people often make the mistake of thinking that *your* reason for why you think a war was fought applies to everyone who participated in that war. I'd like to suggest to you that it's far more nuanced than that, and the reasons vary from soldier to soldier, and that the guys with actual boots on the ground who are being shot at might have had an entirely different reason for being there than the reasons the policy makers had for sending them there. I think your response presents a false dichotomy -- that you can only sympathize with one of the parties or the other -- and it carries an implication that I'm indifferent, or even hostile, to the emotions of the descendants of those slaves who were freed as a consequence of the Civil War. That's not a fair assumption, nor is it accurate. And you also ducked my question about whether there's room in our society to recognize and in some way remember if not honor those who gave their lives in that war on both sides of the fight. See, I was a soldier once. And I'm the son of a soldier. And I'm the direct descendent of men who served during the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Civil War, WWII, Korea and Viet Nam. So, I suppose I have a natural tendency to identify with and take ranks with those who actually answered the call of duty (as opposed to those who just played the video game.) I won't pretend that I've ever had bullets fired at me in anger but I have *enormous* respect for those who have, and I have some sense of what it's like for family members to see their dad bringing his web gear home and leaving it by the front door night after night in case he gets "that call." And I'm not going to apologize for having not only some sense of but also sympathy for what the surviving family members must have felt like when they received word that Johnny wouldn't come marching home again. And, if I'm honest, I guess I don't really care what some little pissant, who sat comfortably in his ivory tower judging those of us who answered the call, thinks about it.

He is mature beyond his years, that's for sure. Great kid. I hope he has the Husker career he dreams of.

I did not know this before I went out on my limb.

I'm not primarily concerned with sympathizing with the families of deceased confederate soldiers. I'm just saying I can see another side and think it's possible for reasonable people to disagree about whether such statuary should be allowed to exist. I also sympathize with the descendants of slaves who would walk around their own communities and see monuments of people who supported slavery. My primary concern, actually, is the notion of memory holing things that make us feel uncomfortable and the precedent it sets. And where does the mob stop? Because, as @cipsucks has pointed out, the mob has destroyed a lot of statues that don't fall under that broad category of "people who viewed/treated black people as livestock." (Do George Washington and Thomas Jefferson statues fall into that category, though? If so, should they be removed? If you think they should, can you at least acknowledge that reasonable people could differ with you on that point?) “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” George Orwell, "1984"