Thank you for your well written and thoughtful (as always) response. It does add clarity to your position. For me, some of the responses that share your view have seemed judgmental to one degree or another, first of the Kenosha Kid, but also of those of us here who fall somewhere on the "he was a hero" spectrum (Alpo's analysis of "it's binary" not withstanding
). From my perspective no one who believes he had every right to be there, or may themselves even choose to participate in like manner, is passing judgment on anyone who chooses to stay on the porch, or even inside. I don't want to assume what others are thinking/saying but I am strictly defending him, and defending my right to join in a similar manner, not necessarily encouraging others to join in in similar fashion. I guess I am here to question, decipher, and understand the logic.I've never had the honor of serving this country in uniform, nor taken any kinds of oaths. I have found myself in a situation where I very much felt like I was defending my homeland. It was many years ago, I was barely an adult, it had to do with a farm and a bank, and it was really my fathers fight, but I can't imagine feeling any more like we were defending the homeland than we did then. At some point, everyone may have to choose to defend their homeland. I believe this may be one of the ways the BLM ringleaders are able to so highly motivate the useful tools to do their bidding; protesting/rioting is their outlet (misguided as it may be) to the oppression that they feel, rightly or wrongly. Where is our point that we define "our homeland"? To me, it has to start way before my front porch; it's somewhere between the neighborhood and society in general. I would assume you feel the same when it comes to being a positive influence, I'm certainly not saying you don't, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that these people, while feeling some oppression, are not really defending their homeland, they are being manipulated and used, and will stand down when met with just the slightest resistance. When that happens, the actual ringleaders may be forced to be more involved in one way or another, and they can be dealt with more appropriately if identified correctly. ("more appropriately" is kinda like "more equal" in this example) Therefore, taking the fight to them can pay big dividends.
I'm all about the gray man theory and blending. I do not believe, however, that we should choose our actions based on what someone that has already many times over proven to have ulterior motives may say or think about us. There is always the choice of right over wrong (who am I sitting here telling you this?!?!) and that may involve disregarding how something may get spun. I understand, we also have to choose what hill to die on. I think that's what this boils down to, what hill to die on. Where that hill is for us. We've rolled over (my overgeneralized opinion of course) so far that we have nearly lost sight of our compass, I fear sometimes. I agree that my first job is to defend my family and home, and I would like to think that I would choose to expand the definition of home without worry of what someone, up to and including a jury of my peers, will say. I would like to see the perception of what the Kenosha Kid did be regarded as ok to do, not as something marginal. I believe in the spirit of America.
Concerning your comments on Trump, I feel very similarly, but if it seems a no-brainer that Trump will win I will vote for Jo Jorgenson, if nothing else to try to break the two party system and get some peoples' attention.
Last edited:
