TexasCHLforum.com

mojo84 wrote:So, Bruce is a lemming?

Canary.

Why would anyone enroll their child in such a school?

Even in kindergarten, we used to get in trouble for playing "too rough" with the girls.

This nation sickens me.

mojo84 wrote:There may be some truth to all this. What would you call Bruce Jenner other than a freak?

I know what I'd like to call him: "Not worthy of a national news story."

Back in the day, he became famous in the good way. He excelled at something, beat every other competitor, and did so on the world stage, representing the US well. He earned his fame, and I feel he deserved it. He had his day in the limelight, and then faded to the background like so many before him.

But since then, his prodigy (and extended family) have earned their notoriety in a less deserving way. The Kardashians (like Paris Hilton, Nicole Ritchie and the rest of the spoiled bunch) are simply a fabrication of a media-obsessed culture, and they make national headlines every time they pick their nose with the wrong finger (I wish that's all they did to attract attention, but this is a family place, so I'll refrain). Quite simply, they are famous BECAUSE they are famous. Bruce Jenner's return to the national spotlight tracked right along with their idiotic rise to the same. It would have been better for all of us had he remained the legend that he once was.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suggesting that we should install a Logan's Run - type time clock on all great people. Some (including our own Charlton Heston, and along the same lines, Chuck Norris) take their fame and leverage it in a way that many of us here appreciate. Others fade away with grace (e.g. Sean Connery was as huge as one could get, but his retirementhas been respectable, to say the least. Bruce Jenner's last few years have not elevated him to the bar set by these other famous folks.