Offensive Coordinating at GVSU

[XLFD]

Crimethink is alive and well outside of the George Orwell classic dystopian novel, 1984, and the accused are being punished by the state and their public institutions.  Some incredible stories have emerged recently in Michigan attacking the First Amendment rights of people whose thoughts were deemed worthy of punishment by public agencies which could not tolerate their 'unorthodoxy'.

Ironically enough, those wishing to punish the thoughtcrimes are those who claim to be the staunchest defenders (in their self-estimation) of the freedom of expression, while practicing their own bitter form of Nazism against that basic right.

From Allendale, an incident involving an interview taken with Grand Valley State University's offensive coordinator for the college's football team is under review by the referees.  Morris Berger, whose college degree was in history rather than football, spoke to the school’s student newspaper Grand Valley Lanthorn last week and was asked which three historical figures he would want to take do dinner, excluding famous athletes.  

One would think a football field general like Berger might choose somebody known for their strategic prowess in warfare and/or leadership.  Berger did, but he didn't choose to sup with George Patton, Norman Schwarzkopf, Ulysses Grant, or George Washington.  Instead he answered:

"This is probably not going to get a good review, but I’m going to say Adolf Hitler. It was obviously very sad and he had bad motives, but the way he was able to lead was second-to-none. How he rallied a group and a following, I want to know how he did that. Bad intentions of course, but you can’t deny he wasn’t a great leader."  

Dinner with Adolph Hitler?  Rather than look at Berger's reasons or his qualifiers, or of his understanding that this German leader was a sad individual who had bad motives and intentions, many of his employers at the university came to an unreasonable conclusion that Berger was a skinhead Nazi sympathizer and very publicly suspended him.  

“The comments made by Offensive Coordinator Morris Berger, as reported in The Lanthorn student newspaper, do not reflect the values of Grand Valley State University.  Berger has been suspended and the university is conducting a thorough investigation.”

Nothing better illustrates the lack of intellectual diversity at college campuses than this statement.  Berger was expressing his own opinion, he obviously does not condone what Hitler did with his life, but admired his ability to lead and rally groups-- probably because it's difficult for him to achieve that success with his own squad.  Winston Churchill, probably a better choice for a dinner partner, said admiringly about this heinous fiend's leadership ability:

"I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations... It would be indeed astonishing if, among 80,000,000 of people so varying in origin, creed, interest, and condition, there should be only one pattern of thought. It would not be natural: it is incredible. That [Hitler] has the power, and, alas! the will, to suppress all inconvenient opinions is no doubt true."

Berger's second dinner would have been with President John F. Kennedy, and it would be hard to think that the university would hold this historical figure in disdain.  Yet, they probably would if they learned that JFK once said in his book, "A Prelude to Leadership:  The Post War Diary" p, 73-4:

"After visiting these two places (Berchtesgaden and Obersalzberg) you can easily see how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived. He had boundless ambition for his country, which rendered him a menace to the peace of the world, but he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made."

Few would say the young JFK's admiration of the mystery/legend of Hitler which developed just after the war negatively affected his ethics during his presidency 15 years later.   And why would it?  Why is it that sensitive GVSU leaders and other knee-jerk hysterics have such limited thought processes so as to think that if a history major has a choice of who to have dinner with, he wouldn't choose somebody who is a bit of historical mystery and legend, especially in terms of 'offensive coordinating'?  

GVSU leadership could probably learn quite a bit about leadership if they ever considered themselves capable of having dinner with somebody who may not think exactly how they think (that's why they usually have dinner with their poodle).  Frankly, if somebody interested in history was to get this question asked of them, wouldn't you think they might choose people whose motives and reasonings they do not understand completely in historical context so that they could learn more in the ensuing conversation?  

Stunting the growth of intellectual diversity and knowledge should not be the purview of our universities, yet incidents like this shows that they are failing in those primary educational goals.  That's why he surely would have gotten a 'bad review' if he hadn't chose Hitler and yet chose his third dinner companion which was another historical figure recently made controversial and unacceptable to the revisionists:  Christopher Columbus.  

[Willy]

Imaging that! From the same university that allowed the Student Senate to ban the Pledge of Allegiance from their meetings. At GVSU a person cannot mention Hitler but they are allowed to take a course in Marxism taught by Marxist professors. At GVSU a person has the freedom to ditz the United States and be denied their right to free speech. Since this is a State funded university I would assume that the coach has the right to express thoughts without retribution.  History is history be it good or bad and should be open for for all to discuss. This is another example of the how leftists want to stifle civil liberties if they disagree with what is said.

[XLFD]

Thanks for tying that in to another recent story I ran with in November, I had actually forgot that was the same 'institute of higher learning' that hedged on the pledge.  When a university effectively condones ignoring a pledge to what makes this country special, it should be no surprise that they would suspend a person for saying they want to have dinner with someone whose history they do not totally approve of.  I am certain that university officials have more in common with Adolph Hitler, than this football coach.  

As an aside, if you had your choice of three historic figures to dine with who would it be?  Assume that you had a translation device, could catch them at any time during their life, and would be on equal terms with that person.   

At the top of my list would be Jesus of Nazareth at around the time of the Last Supper, not only could he answer some persistent questions regarding his life, but he could supposedly change my complimentary glass of water into wine and hundredfold my bread.

I would probably round it out with Albert Einstein and Marilyn Monroe to stimulate two different sides of my brain.

[Willy]

Excellent question X. After giving it much thought I have narrowed my list down to 3 persons. they are:

 
Mitochondrial EVE
This woman is thought to be the “mother” of all humans alive today. Seems like a big claim for scientists to make.So how do they know this?

MOSES
He may have been a historical person or just biblical but I chose him because of the Exodus story and what led up
to it. I would ask him if all the details really took place from  the pharaohs daughter finding him in the river to bringing the plagues upon Egypt, parting the sea and receiving the Ten Commandments. I would like to meet him while he received the Commandments from his boss so I could also talk to him.
 

SIR ISAAC NEWTON
Isaac Newton was an English physicist and mathematician famous for his laws of physics. He was a key figure in the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century.

I was going to include Moe Larry and Curly but I thought their comedy was to sophisticated  for Torch readers.

[XLFD]

Good choices, though I don't think you'd have a lot of good choices for dinner with 'Mitochondrial Eve'.
An interesting notion: Though we have both defended Coach Berger for making the choice for wanting to dine with Hitler (for his uncontested skills in people manipulation), three of our six dinner companion choices are Jewish. Would that make any difference in the minds of some Progressive silly people?

Likely not. The choices of Che Guevara, Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin as dinner buddies would seem unbelievably wacky to us, but neither of us would petition for a football coach to lose his job for it (unless his philosophy was costing the team wins).

[shinblind]

Consider what the repercussions would have been if he answered ''Dinner with President Trump.'' 

Really too horrible to contemplate.

[XLFD]

Mentioning dinner with Der Fuhrer apparently was horrible enough to halt Coach Berger's career, at least at GVSU, he wound up resigning over it.  Apparently now Grand Nanny State University has total control over who you cannot sup with in a hypothetical repast.  Rather than open the subject up to reasoned debate, like universities used to do, they conducted a meaningless closed investigation and pressured the guy to resign.  

[shinblind]

Heads up to the next OC at GVSU. The PC answers are Greta Thunberg, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, or Bernie Sanders.   All are alive, they have no awareness that GVSU exists, and no chance of anyone of them accepting.

[stump]

 Maybe he was just tired of the bullshit from the top administration. If I were he I would have hired a lawyer on his suspension , maybe he still will or did and will sue for unjust retribution.  Resigning might have hurt his cause , don't know.  

[Willy]

I'm going to take the side of Devil's advocate in this post. The coach admits that mentioning Hitler may cause some fallout. He states "This is probably not going to get a good review, but I’m going to say Adolf Hitler." He knew he was working at a liberal biased college controlled by leftists. If he wanted to be controversial he should have chosen his words carefully. He had every right to speak his mind but when surrounded by wolves you don't throw a piece of meat at their feet. One mistake in his comments was giving Hitler credit for being great leader ."Bad intentions of course, but you can’t deny he wasn’t a great leader."  Anyone familiar with the Nazi's and fascism knows that intimidation, coercion, threats, torture, imprisonment and even murder are the cornerstones of a dictator's process of gaining and controlling peoples minds. I think that was his big mistake and even though he was speaking historically his statement came across as being admiration. The University was wrong in censoring him and he should not have resigned but when you step in a puddle of crap you have to expect to come away with smelly shoes.