A Green Beret get's it right about Kaepernick

[Harpy Eagle]

It doesn't take much for trumpanzees to denigrate our vets, does it?

The irony of these people saying that Kap is disrespecting Vets, then attack every vet that does not agree with them is sweet. Shame they are not smart enough to see it

Nobody claims he’s disrespectful to Vets, shitforbrains. He’s disrespectful to our nation.

A lot of people have claimed he is being disrespectful to Vets, do try and keep up.

 

[Mac1958]

Definitely one of my favorite stories of the year.

It really is okay to listen to each other and change our minds on stuff.

Your favorite stories?
Weird.
BTW, one former Green Beret saying Kaepernick is okay isn't a reflection of Special Forces mentality.
He's more likely the exception rather than the rule.
I already identified the most logical reason he feels this way, and it kind of blows the premise of this thread out of the water.

Yes, I don't like the rule - obediently following a simplistic partisan ideology like a trained seal, afraid and/or unable to formulate the slightest understanding of, or appreciation for, the thoughts and opinions who may dare to disagree.

So this is definitely one exception that I support and advocate.
.

Sorry, but I think this guy is simply giving in to peer pressure.

Just because he wants to stay friends with his former NFL team mates, doesn't mean he is doing anything that is worth admiring.

Being on an A Team means you'll be working with some of the most dedicated and patriotic individuals in the Army. My politics are slightly left of center whereas most of them are right of Ted Cruz. The most hated person in the Special Forces community is Jane Fonda. Right now Colin Kaepernick is right up there with her. I'm much more open minded about it and even I can see Kaepernick for what he is. After he turned down offers to play from a number of teams he showed his character, or lack of character. He would be a cancer on any team now. That's why he isn't playing. I don't support players that think more about themselves than they do their team mates. He doesn't want to play and teams agree that he shouldn't play if he doesn't want to.

Or it could just be that two men communicated with each other like adults, looked in the mirror, gave it some honest reflection, and decided to make minor changes.

Such behavior really is possible, and in fact, there was a time when it was considered a "good" thing, not a sign of weakness.
.

 

[Rustic]

Definitely one of my favorite stories of the year.

It really is okay to listen to each other and change our minds on stuff.

Your favorite stories?
Weird.
BTW, one former Green Beret saying Kaepernick is okay isn't a reflection of Special Forces mentality.
He's more likely the exception rather than the rule.
I already identified the most logical reason he feels this way, and it kind of blows the premise of this thread out of the water.

Yes, I don't like the rule - obediently following a simplistic partisan ideology like a trained seal, afraid and/or unable to formulate the slightest understanding of, or appreciation for, the thoughts and opinions who may dare to disagree.

So this is definitely one exception that I support and advocate.
.

Sorry, but I think this guy is simply giving in to peer pressure.

Just because he wants to stay friends with his former NFL team mates, doesn't mean he is doing anything that is worth admiring.

Being on an A Team means you'll be working with some of the most dedicated and patriotic individuals in the Army. My politics are slightly left of center whereas most of them are right of Ted Cruz. The most hated person in the Special Forces community is Jane Fonda. Right now Colin Kaepernick is right up there with her. I'm much more open minded about it and even I can see Kaepernick for what he is. After he turned down offers to play from a number of teams he showed his character, or lack of character. He would be a cancer on any team now. That's why he isn't playing. I don't support players that think more about themselves than they do their team mates. He doesn't want to play and teams agree that he shouldn't play if he doesn't want to.

Or it could just be that two adults communicated with each other like adults, looked in the mirror, and decided to make minor changes.

Such behavior really is possible, and in fact, there was a time when it was considered a "good" thing, not a sign of weakness.
.

Colin Kaepernick is an individual of the very low character… Anyone that would associate with him would be much the same

 

[Mac1958]

Definitely one of my favorite stories of the year.

It really is okay to listen to each other and change our minds on stuff.

Your favorite stories?
Weird.
BTW, one former Green Beret saying Kaepernick is okay isn't a reflection of Special Forces mentality.
He's more likely the exception rather than the rule.
I already identified the most logical reason he feels this way, and it kind of blows the premise of this thread out of the water.

Yes, I don't like the rule - obediently following a simplistic partisan ideology like a trained seal, afraid and/or unable to formulate the slightest understanding of, or appreciation for, the thoughts and opinions who may dare to disagree.

So this is definitely one exception that I support and advocate.
.

Sorry, but I think this guy is simply giving in to peer pressure.

Just because he wants to stay friends with his former NFL team mates, doesn't mean he is doing anything that is worth admiring.

Being on an A Team means you'll be working with some of the most dedicated and patriotic individuals in the Army. My politics are slightly left of center whereas most of them are right of Ted Cruz. The most hated person in the Special Forces community is Jane Fonda. Right now Colin Kaepernick is right up there with her. I'm much more open minded about it and even I can see Kaepernick for what he is. After he turned down offers to play from a number of teams he showed his character, or lack of character. He would be a cancer on any team now. That's why he isn't playing. I don't support players that think more about themselves than they do their team mates. He doesn't want to play and teams agree that he shouldn't play if he doesn't want to.

Or it could just be that two adults communicated with each other like adults, looked in the mirror, and decided to make minor changes.

Such behavior really is possible, and in fact, there was a time when it was considered a "good" thing, not a sign of weakness.
.

Colin Kaepernick is an individual of the very low character… Anyone that would associate with him would be much the same

I know you believe that.
.

 

[bodecea]

Since when is having the freedom to choice as opposed to being FORCED to hail a banner anti-Americanism?

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.
.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

 

[Mac1958]

Since when is having the freedom to choice as opposed to being FORCED to hail a banner anti-Americanism?

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

Nate Boyer ex Green Beret says about Kaepernick - he is an example of an open mind not a small closed mind.
"I'm not judging you for standing up for what you believe in," Boyer wrote. "It's your inalienable right. What you are doing takes a lot of courage, and I'd be lying if I said I knew what it was like to walk around in your shoes. I've never had to deal with prejudice because of the color of my skin, and for me to say I can relate to what you've gone through is as ignorant as someone who's never been in a combat zone telling me they understand what it's like to go to war."
He closed by promising to keep listening, with an open mind, about the protests.

"I look forward to the day you're once again inspired to stand during our national anthem," he wrote. "I'll be standing right there next to you. Keep on trying ... De Oppresso Liber."

Pretty strange.
He only served 6 years. I spent almost that amount of time on a team alone. It took me 7 years just to qualify to be considered for selection. I guess he was one of those Green Beret babies that never had to go through earning SGT stripes before qualifying. I noticed one of his pictures that he was wearing a 1st Group Flash on his beret.
Course....most guys on the teams would probably pack his shit and dump it outside of the teamroom and change the locks, essentially kicking him off the team for siding with Kaepernick.

Stolen valor?

I don't think so.
They had a program for awhile during Iraq that fast tracked people through training to fill the teams. They called these guys SF Babies. They even made selection shorter and easier for a time which they quickly corrected. Relaxing the standards only caused problems once they got to the Q Course. And an operator with no leadership experience was a detriment to any A Team.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Since when is having the freedom to choice as opposed to being FORCED to hail a banner anti-Americanism?

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Since when is having the freedom to choice as opposed to being FORCED to hail a banner anti-Americanism?

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

 

[Mac1958]

Since when is having the freedom to choice as opposed to being FORCED to hail a banner anti-Americanism?

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

Since few of my macro views on issues fall conveniently and obediently with either simplistic, shallow, binary views of either end of the spectrum, I don't know why you keep asking for them. I'd think it would be much easier for you to just approach your opposite, a hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, and have little online slap fights with them.

But, while I know I'm wasting my time, here are some random thoughts, since they're clearly so important to you:

• My definition of "Police Brutality" would mean that the officer has crossed the line that divides using appropriate and reasonable force, to more of a punitive, personal, out of control level of force that breaks department rules. Therefore, the percentage of the time that it is justified is very low.
• However, increased and aggressive force is often justified when subduing a suspect, and my guess is that such force is justified a vast majority of the time. If the cop were my brother or son, I'd want him to show enough force within the rules to insure his safety.
  
• As I've said many times here, there seems to be some kind of cultural thing within "black culture" that motivates many to fight and disobey cops. Of course, whenever I bring that up, the Regressive Lefties lose their shit on me and I'm a racist. Worse, the Regressive Left effectively enables the worst behaviors of minorities when they refuse to hold them accountable, no doubt because of the potential political ramifications.
  
• And, of course, the other end of the spectrum appears to be afraid to admit that excessive use of force does happen, that minorities are often treated unfairly, or that racism or bigotry even exists on their end, apparently because they have not yet been trained on admitting the obvious if it doesn't advance their myopic ideology.

There you go. You're welcome.
.

 

[Pogo]

A Green Beret. Single. One out of how many? And speaking for all Green Berets...or military? I think not.

Where does anyone suggest that?

Looks like on my screen the title describes a singular.

Exactly. Singular. But the OP seems to take it as ALL.
Just sayin'.

The title says "a Green Beret" (singular), cites him as "an example" (singular) and refers to his subject in the third person as "he" (singular). Nothing in there suggests a Composition Fallacy at all. He got it exactly right. It's you who's trying to suggest an implication that isn't there.

This board is of course infamous for its rampant Composition Fallacies starring "Democrats", "Liberals", "conservatives", "Muslims", "Mexicans", "Christians", "Republicans", "Flyovers", "Hollywood", "gun nuts", "thugs", "Joooos", all lumped into a bullshit gravy poured copiously over weak arguments. This OP actually took pains to get it right and avoid that, and you're trying to pretend it didn't. Why can't you allow credit where due?

By the way Gracie that finger's been up in the air more than four hours so you should see your doctor.

 

[Pogo]

Nate Boyer ex Green Beret says about Kaepernick - he is an example of an open mind not a small closed mind.
"I'm not judging you for standing up for what you believe in," Boyer wrote. "It's your inalienable right. What you are doing takes a lot of courage, and I'd be lying if I said I knew what it was like to walk around in your shoes. I've never had to deal with prejudice because of the color of my skin, and for me to say I can relate to what you've gone through is as ignorant as someone who's never been in a combat zone telling me they understand what it's like to go to war."
He closed by promising to keep listening, with an open mind, about the protests.

"I look forward to the day you're once again inspired to stand during our national anthem," he wrote. "I'll be standing right there next to you. Keep on trying ... De Oppresso Liber."

Pretty strange.
He only served 6 years. I spent almost that amount of time on a team alone. It took me 7 years just to qualify to be considered for selection. I guess he was one of those Green Beret babies that never had to go through earning SGT stripes before qualifying. I noticed one of his pictures that he was wearing a 3rd Group Flash on his beret.
Course....most guys on the teams would probably pack his shit and dump it outside of the teamroom and change the locks, essentially kicking him off the team for siding with Kaepernick.

He is one that will not trash you just because you both do not agree on an issue.
Thank you for your service.
But you reaction about another Green Beret says lot's about you.

The "issue" in question is whether someone is so disloyal to America that they can't just sit quietly during the anthem, but have to do the opposite of what is done to show loyalty.

Right now, as I call these kneelers anti-American pieces of shit, I am exercising my First Amendment right.

Do you want to "NOT JUDGE ME" for standing up for what I believe in?

Actually the issue is that your mind is so narrow that you can't see any interpretation outside your own simplistic dichotomy. To wit, you seem to believe parroting a jingoism exercise means "loyalty to America" and that's that --- unable to comprehend that a fetish worship has nothing to do with patriotism at all, and in fact is simply a tool to subjugate the masses to the State using a directed mob mentality.

No one wants to judge you for standing up if that's your preference. They just want the same consideration for theirs. No one is trying to coerce you to sit down, kneel or whatever. The only coercion is from your end. And that alone should tell you something.

 

[ElmerMudd]

A Green Beret. Single. One out of how many? And speaking for all Green Berets...or military? I think not.

Where does anyone suggest that?

Looks like on my screen the title describes a singular.

Exactly. Singular. But the OP seems to take it as ALL.
Just sayin'.

The title says "a Green Beret" (singular), cites him as "an example" (singular) and refers to his subject in the third person as "he" (singular). Nothing in there suggests a Composition Fallacy at all. He got it exactly right. It's you who's trying to suggest an implication that isn't there.

This board is of course infamous for its rampant Composition Fallacies starring "Democrats", "Liberals", "conservatives", "Muslims", "Mexicans", "Christians", "Republicans", "Flyovers", "Hollywood", "gun nuts", "thugs", "Joooos", all lumped into a bullshit gravy poured copiously over weak arguments. This OP actually took pains to get it right and avoid that, and you're trying to pretend it didn't. Why can't you allow credit where due?

By the way Gracie that finger's been up in the air more than four hours so you should see your doctor.

Thank you, Pogo.
Some people will never get it.

 

[BrokeLoser]

When you're trying to deflect from and avoid discussing the reason for exercising freedom of choice and kneeling.

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

Since few of my macro views on issues fall conveniently and obediently with either simplistic, shallow, binary views of either end of the spectrum, I don't know why you keep asking for them. I'd think it would be much easier for you to just approach your opposite, a hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, and have little online slap fights with them.

But, while I know I'm wasting my time, here are some random thoughts, since they're clearly so important to you:

• My definition of "Police Brutality" would mean that the officer has crossed the line that divides using appropriate and reasonable force, to more of a punitive, personal, out of control level of force that breaks department rules. Therefore, the percentage of the time that it is justified is very low.
• However, increased and aggressive force is often justified when subduing a suspect, and my guess is that such force is justified a vast majority of the time. If the cop were my brother or son, I'd want him to show enough force within the rules to insure his safety.
  
• As I've said many times here, there seems to be some kind of cultural thing within "black culture" that motivates many to fight and disobey cops. Of course, whenever I bring that up, the Regressive Lefties lose their shit on me and I'm a racist. Worse, the Regressive Left effectively enables the worst behaviors of minorities when they refuse to hold them accountable, no doubt because of the potential political ramifications.
  
• And, of course, the other end of the spectrum appears to be afraid to admit that excessive use of force does happen, that minorities are often treated unfairly, or that racism or bigotry even exists on their end, apparently because they have not yet been trained on admitting the obvious if it doesn't advance their myopic ideology.

There you go. You're welcome.
.

Well articulated and all...but once again, you’re very ambiguous in YOUR position and once again you toe that line and be sure to stay dead center. It’s quite fascinating really, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone do a better job walking the line and refusing to commit to a firm position better than you do.

 

[Mac1958]

Police brutality....I get it very well.

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

Since few of my macro views on issues fall conveniently and obediently with either simplistic, shallow, binary views of either end of the spectrum, I don't know why you keep asking for them. I'd think it would be much easier for you to just approach your opposite, a hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, and have little online slap fights with them.

But, while I know I'm wasting my time, here are some random thoughts, since they're clearly so important to you:

• My definition of "Police Brutality" would mean that the officer has crossed the line that divides using appropriate and reasonable force, to more of a punitive, personal, out of control level of force that breaks department rules. Therefore, the percentage of the time that it is justified is very low.
• However, increased and aggressive force is often justified when subduing a suspect, and my guess is that such force is justified a vast majority of the time. If the cop were my brother or son, I'd want him to show enough force within the rules to insure his safety.
  
• As I've said many times here, there seems to be some kind of cultural thing within "black culture" that motivates many to fight and disobey cops. Of course, whenever I bring that up, the Regressive Lefties lose their shit on me and I'm a racist. Worse, the Regressive Left effectively enables the worst behaviors of minorities when they refuse to hold them accountable, no doubt because of the potential political ramifications.
  
• And, of course, the other end of the spectrum appears to be afraid to admit that excessive use of force does happen, that minorities are often treated unfairly, or that racism or bigotry even exists on their end, apparently because they have not yet been trained on admitting the obvious if it doesn't advance their myopic ideology.

There you go. You're welcome.
.

Well articulated and all...but once again, you’re very ambiguous in YOUR position and once again you toe that line and be sure to stay dead center. It’s quite fascinating really, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone do a better job walking the line and refusing to commit to a firm position better than you do.

As I expected. I don't know what you want.

This is why I don't burn a lot of time on this kind of thing.
.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Well, so they don't want to discuss that, so they focus on other stuff instead.
.

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

Since few of my macro views on issues fall conveniently and obediently with either simplistic, shallow, binary views of either end of the spectrum, I don't know why you keep asking for them. I'd think it would be much easier for you to just approach your opposite, a hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, and have little online slap fights with them.

But, while I know I'm wasting my time, here are some random thoughts, since they're clearly so important to you:

• My definition of "Police Brutality" would mean that the officer has crossed the line that divides using appropriate and reasonable force, to more of a punitive, personal, out of control level of force that breaks department rules. Therefore, the percentage of the time that it is justified is very low.
• However, increased and aggressive force is often justified when subduing a suspect, and my guess is that such force is justified a vast majority of the time. If the cop were my brother or son, I'd want him to show enough force within the rules to insure his safety.
  
• As I've said many times here, there seems to be some kind of cultural thing within "black culture" that motivates many to fight and disobey cops. Of course, whenever I bring that up, the Regressive Lefties lose their shit on me and I'm a racist. Worse, the Regressive Left effectively enables the worst behaviors of minorities when they refuse to hold them accountable, no doubt because of the potential political ramifications.
  
• And, of course, the other end of the spectrum appears to be afraid to admit that excessive use of force does happen, that minorities are often treated unfairly, or that racism or bigotry even exists on their end, apparently because they have not yet been trained on admitting the obvious if it doesn't advance their myopic ideology.

There you go. You're welcome.
.

Well articulated and all...but once again, you’re very ambiguous in YOUR position and once again you toe that line and be sure to stay dead center. It’s quite fascinating really, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone do a better job walking the line and refusing to commit to a firm position better than you do.

As I expected. I don't know what you want.

This is why I don't burn a lot of time on this kind of thing.
.

I guess I’d like to see you stand for something just once. Take a firm, committed position on something. That whole “well golly gee, I see it from both sides” thing gets old. As the leader of your household how did you ever settle disagreements and disorder?

 

[Mac1958]

WHAT....Police brutality has been discussed to no end. Where have you been?

I’m curious Mac, I’d like to know your thoughts....semantics and hair splitting aside, is “police brutality” (as they say) EVER justified?
What percentage of the time would you GUESS it is justified?
How often would you GUESS Black folks are insubordinate and refuse to obey officer commands while being detained?
If you decide to pretend you didn’t see this post or if you tap dance around the questions I’ll totally understand.

Since few of my macro views on issues fall conveniently and obediently with either simplistic, shallow, binary views of either end of the spectrum, I don't know why you keep asking for them. I'd think it would be much easier for you to just approach your opposite, a hardcore left wing partisan ideologue, and have little online slap fights with them.

But, while I know I'm wasting my time, here are some random thoughts, since they're clearly so important to you:

• My definition of "Police Brutality" would mean that the officer has crossed the line that divides using appropriate and reasonable force, to more of a punitive, personal, out of control level of force that breaks department rules. Therefore, the percentage of the time that it is justified is very low.
• However, increased and aggressive force is often justified when subduing a suspect, and my guess is that such force is justified a vast majority of the time. If the cop were my brother or son, I'd want him to show enough force within the rules to insure his safety.
  
• As I've said many times here, there seems to be some kind of cultural thing within "black culture" that motivates many to fight and disobey cops. Of course, whenever I bring that up, the Regressive Lefties lose their shit on me and I'm a racist. Worse, the Regressive Left effectively enables the worst behaviors of minorities when they refuse to hold them accountable, no doubt because of the potential political ramifications.
  
• And, of course, the other end of the spectrum appears to be afraid to admit that excessive use of force does happen, that minorities are often treated unfairly, or that racism or bigotry even exists on their end, apparently because they have not yet been trained on admitting the obvious if it doesn't advance their myopic ideology.

There you go. You're welcome.
.

Well articulated and all...but once again, you’re very ambiguous in YOUR position and once again you toe that line and be sure to stay dead center. It’s quite fascinating really, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone do a better job walking the line and refusing to commit to a firm position better than you do.

As I expected. I don't know what you want.

This is why I don't burn a lot of time on this kind of thing.
.

I guess I’d like to see you stand for something just once. Take a firm, committed position on something. That whole “well golly gee, I see it from both sides” thing gets old. As the leader of your household how did you ever settle disagreements and disorder?

I took clear positions in my answer to you. Additionally my positions on the other issues are in the link at the end of the second line of my sig.

The fact that I don't obediently choose a side and stick with it no matter what clearly has you flummoxed. You asked what I thought, and I told you.

And my wife and daughters know they can come to me to help them settle disagreements and make important decisions because I can see the big picture, and I can help them think things through with logic and reason.

And in the future, please keep my family out of this.
.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

He's welcome to his opinion.
I still believe Kaphisdick is a putz, and has chosen the wrong time and place to air his protests.

 

[mudwhistle]

It doesn't take much for trumpanzees to denigrate our vets, does it?

The irony of these people saying that Kap is disrespecting Vets, then attack every vet that does not agree with them is sweet. Shame they are not smart enough to see it

Nobody claims he’s disrespectful to Vets, shitforbrains. He’s disrespectful to our nation.

Which is much worse.

 

[Gracie]

A Green Beret. Single. One out of how many? And speaking for all Green Berets...or military? I think not.

Where does anyone suggest that?

Looks like on my screen the title describes a singular.

Exactly. Singular. But the OP seems to take it as ALL.
Just sayin'.

The title says "a Green Beret" (singular), cites him as "an example" (singular) and refers to his subject in the third person as "he" (singular). Nothing in there suggests a Composition Fallacy at all. He got it exactly right. It's you who's trying to suggest an implication that isn't there.

This board is of course infamous for its rampant Composition Fallacies starring "Democrats", "Liberals", "conservatives", "Muslims", "Mexicans", "Christians", "Republicans", "Flyovers", "Hollywood", "gun nuts", "thugs", "Joooos", all lumped into a bullshit gravy poured copiously over weak arguments. This OP actually took pains to get it right and avoid that, and you're trying to pretend it didn't. Why can't you allow credit where due?

By the way Gracie that finger's been up in the air more than four hours so you should see your doctor.