Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CA Monk, post: 4708169, member: 5268"] These people who, in all likelihood, have no direct knowledge of the events support the coach over the School President. Why is there always another side to issues of obvious malfeasance (that's a nice word for what it was) and someone willing to unshakably support them even though the vast preponderance of the evidence indicates culpability? It makes me wonder...who's being the "Schill" here. People love being contrarian (or just plain ignorant when it suits them - OJ jurors, any # of political apologists I won't mention). They think it somehow burnishes their bona fides. As Lennon said, "Just Gimme Some Truth." [/QUOTE]