alphaorange

It just gets old having to go back and explain every ****ing thing you post. I don't spend a whole lotta time writing these things. The whole gist is...and has been....are the traits that allow a person to be a winner or a leader a product of genetic make-up or "inborn"? To go back and try to make it into something other than that is not right. I've explained many times what this is about...including a post BEFORE you previously responded. I give you guys a lot of latitude in how you phrase things, choosing not to pick apart your phrases to distort the real meaning. If you wish to turn this into a forum of "contract language", count me out.

Besides, I see nothing in my post to suggest that killer instinct (it) is not a product of genetic make-up and therefore, technically, is consistent with my stance. A blue ribbon for you for finding a word that makes my last statement incorrect. Also, MJs killer instinct has little to do with the general idea of the post. It is a but one part of his qualities (the killer instinct, which by the way, and which was HONED by his competitions with his bro). Whether I said it or not (and I did) is irrelevant. Let's just break this down into simple concepts that can be responded to in simple ways.

My stance is that the traits that allow a person to become a leader,or winner at high levels is governed by genetic make-up. I supported this by citing actual research. All opposed to this idea please do not post back on anything that is not supported by some legitimate source, unless you qualify by stating it as your opinion. Simple rules, right? See who can follow them.