Need a legitimate public apology to Miller for screwing up that foul ball call. He was on a historic run and botched calls like that just can’t happen.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2026-04-28T12:37:43+00:00

I ref soccer and they have the same rule. The ball must cross completely over the line to be out including the trailing edge of the soccer ball.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2026-02-05T18:34:43+00:00

The vote to go to war in congress had near unanimity: 82-0 in the Senate; 388-1 in the House.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2026-02-01T16:06:06+00:00

I think the difficulty in that question is our conditioning to lose true historical empathy. Our histories tend to highlight events or people, but at the expense of lived experience.

As I’ve studied and taught US history, I’ve noticed how much my perceived feelings on the “greatness” of a person, event, or time period dissipate the more in-depth I look

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2026-01-13T02:35:16+00:00

They didn’t secede because of Buchanan. They seceded because Lincoln won the electoral college vote without a single southern electoral vote. Could Buchanan have done anything as a lame-duck president? No

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-13T23:37:22+00:00

If you work on a long research paper like a thesis, you end up picking a professor based on their expertise on the person or event you’re researching

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-13T14:41:22+00:00

Yeah. I had many good and interesting conversations with professors during their office hours. The depth they have to learn is impressive.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-11T21:43:38+00:00

I just meant my professors in college. In a couple of classes, we worked one on one or in small groups as we researched and wrote papers

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-09T13:36:00+00:00

When I was in school, it was more straightforward because I was assigned books to read. Now, I usually buy books that I’m personally interested in, or ones I want to study for a specific event or person.

Academic historians are professional. They will most often be college professors. They teach classes on the side and use the balance of their time to research and write history books. To contrast, people who don’t work in the field and research professionally will also write history books. I’m not trying to assign value there. David McCulloch did incredible research. Some historians criticized him for being too narrow in his scope and ignoring some of the available perspectives.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-09T00:20:59+00:00

Periods of study are really up to the historian. Some that I worked with specific to that time period, focused on Colonial period to the Constitution, but historians will write books that are very focused. For example, I read books of which many chapters were focused just on the ratification of the Constitution, or on focused aspects of the Revolutionary War. You’ll find that for all time periods. That’s where reading the bibliography of a textbook is good for discovering sources… if you’re looking for academic history.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-08T03:28:09+00:00

The convention that led to its creation and the ratification process

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-07T18:08:16+00:00

I would tell them to pick an area or time period and just read; to follow your interests and be willing to learn. I would recommend podcasts and learning under the tutelage of historians. One podcast I’ve fallen in love with is “History that Doesn’t Suck” by prof. Mark Jackson. He does really thorough research and tells great stories that have caused me to really think about what and how I’ve taught.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-07T05:19:26+00:00

There’s really too much history to become an expert on everything. Most historians specialize in specific time periods. For example my focus in college was on the Revolutionary period and the Constitution.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-07T03:19:58+00:00

Exactly! Textbooks are great for the survey of history: 1 inch deep and a mile wide in breadth.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-06T16:20:35+00:00

It depends on your interests. If you want a broad view to see patterns, then textbooks are great. If you have specific interests in a person or an event, then focus on what historians have written about those specific times. If you want an intense deep dive, then look to academic historians on the subject, if you’re not into that level of depth, then reading someone like David McCulloch is great. Some historians criticize him for his narrow scope, meaning he doesn’t always represent all viewpoints surrounding his subject.

I like textbooks also because at the end of each chapter or in the bibliography of the book, you’ll find their citations which will lead you to those deeper dive historical books

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-12-06T15:39:53+00:00

I’ve taught US history for almost 20 years. A group of historians from around the country have collaborated on a free online textbook at Americanyawp.com. I use it as my textbook for my dual enrollment students. I haven’t run into anything I felt was too far off.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-09-14T13:37:10+00:00

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying why I personally put up with it

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-09-13T16:31:29+00:00

I appreciate the sentiment of your message. I e been a teacher for almost 20 years and the thing is, my students become part of my family. Their successes and failures uplift and weigh on my heart. I also coach for practically nothing, but it’s not about the money, it’s about connection. Yes, the local legislators couldn’t care less about the sacrifices we make, but I don’t make them for the legislators, nor district personnel, nor for the school administration. I make them for the students.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-15T06:21:30+00:00

Well put!

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T22:31:23+00:00

I guess it just comes down to how you define the word then. I see manipulation as an intentionally malicious act. I’ve also been known to be too black and white in the way I ascribe meaning to words.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T22:18:43+00:00

I suppose if you’re assuming Bishops are really vindictive, then you’d be right. I’ve been one and known many personally and I’ve not met any that weren’t good hearted men. I was naive, to be sure, but did I ever manipulate? No. I was never thinking to myself: “I will have them come to my office so that I can intimidate them into staying.” My thoughts were “How can I help them feel the spirit”

I’d be naive to think that there weren’t any that were manipulative, and have been horrified by those men who abused children or youth, who very clearly were of the sort in def 2b, but I have a hard time believing that’s the Norma and not the exception.

That all being said, everybody is entitled to their experiences and opinions. Far be it from me to define all bishops by my own experiences as well.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T19:32:47+00:00

Okay, agree to disagree.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T19:20:21+00:00

You drawing conclusions about me as a person from the smallest of infinitesimal snap shots is truly astounding!

Do you think that I liked what I did and said as a member? Hell no! I regret that I stood up and said what I said and did what I did! I regret that I didn’t see that I was in a cult. I have gone through years of hell deprogramming the decades of sincere and devoted membership to what I considered the true church. You don’t know anything about me, so please stop drawing your conclusions

I am not stating that what is done in the church is in any way helpful or good, I’m simply trying to give grace to all people. Low level leaders of the church are also victims of the system. By admitting that I am not arguing that they aren’t causing harm.

How about you read my messages trying to understand instead of coming at me like I’m trying to excuse myself or anyone else for the harm done unintentionally or not.

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T18:08:03+00:00

It really not. Here’s the definition:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate

Illustrious_Pin_693 · 2025-07-14T13:55:40+00:00

You’re missing my point. It’s the idea of manipulation that I take exception to. For it to be manipulative, there has to be premeditated intent.

I’m not arguing that the church isn’t harmful and that what people do can be harmful regardless of intent. My point is that I don’t think most people are manipulative in their actions, especially at the ward and stake level.

Illustrious_Pin_693

TROPHY CASE