Ulty

well, if we can have an unlimited number of assistants and we think want to address every possible issue, maybe he can hire a Timeout/Clock Management Coach.

What would happen if John told the teachers that he wanted to be called Marvin or Darren? Would counselors call the parents?

Is this for any nickname, or is it only an issue if it is a gendered thing? For example, the attendance record shows that the kid's name is Nicholas, but everyone calls him Nick, and he prefers Nick. Does the teacher have to get the parent's permission before calling the kid Nick? Or is it only if Nicholas prefers to be called Nikki or Nicole?

Three things in life are certain: 1) death, 2) taxes, 3) if Devo posts a link, it is some inflammatory nonsense that he has no intention of actually vetting, and he will play dumb once he gets called out on it. You see an obviously bull$h!t claim like: and it doesn't even make you pause and think..."hmmm, does this even sound remotely plausible?" Your article doesn't even make any effort to substantiate that crap. Here is at least someone who decided to look into it with some critical thought: https://jabberwocking.com/wait-trans-athletes-have-won-890-medals-in-womens-sports/#comments

The correct word was actually "Stryme," which is a Yiddish name, in reference to a mythical Hebrew folk hero who conquered his foes against all odds, even in the face of recruiting disadvantages and east coast bias. This prayer started during the Devaney days, but of course there were no cameras in the locker room back then. Unbeknownst to most, Bob Devaney studied obscure old-world religious stories as a hobby. By the time the 90s rolled around, Osborne and his christocentric agenda steered the team away from honoring Stryme and intentionally created the current confusion between stride, strife, and stripes that we debate to this day. When the adulterated prayer became known to the public, poor Stryme was essentially erased from Husker lore. Never forget.

Listen guys: I know we've been through a lot of heartbreak over the past several years; I know that merely making a bowl game this year will be an improvement; I know that we have no room to get cocky or talk smack against anyone; and I know that our performance against CU last year was embarrassing. But despite our collective trauma and everyone hedging their bets when making any predictions this year, if our D is as good as its supposed to be, if Raiola is able to live up to even a fraction of the hype, and if we see any of the year 1-to-year 2 improvement that Rhule's history is capable of, we are going to be pretty good this year. Most of us are just afraid to say it out loud. When Colorado comes to town in 8 days, we are going to beat the $h!t out of those a$$h0les. Stop fretting. We've been through a lot of crap. I can't predict how many games we'll win or any future championships, but on Sept 7, the crowd will be loud, when Thunderstruck hits in the third quarter the celebration will begin, and when the game ends we will collectively experience the most cathartic moment in years. F^*k Colorado. We got this.

Who?

This is helpful info @knapplc and @JJ Husker. I turn 45 this year (f*#k, just looked at a calendar, it's only a couple of weeks away, damn), and my doctor has already given me ample warning about the good times on the horizon.

No judgment, but I have a very different mindset. A seatbelt has saved my life twice. I won't get in a car at any speed without buckling up, and I won't drive any passengers unless they do the same.

We should put a motorized statue of Taylor Martinez outside of K-State's stadium. On a track, just doing laps outside of the stadium at 20 mph.

Good lord, this post is almost too stupid to respond to, but I'm going to try anyway. You didn't think the evidence was there...based on the fact that she didn't report the assault for years? Based on her watching the Apprentice? When you mocked these behaviors is where you shamed her. You certainly have not presented any sort of legal argument for why you think Trump wasn't guilty. This is dumb. Really dumb. Uncharacteristically dumb for you. Amazing. You see, in the case I heard this week, I believe there wasn't enough evidence to show sexual misconduct. I am basing that decision after carefully listening to testimony, reviewing evidence, and weighing credibility. I am going to spend the next few days carefully crafting a report that articulates this decision while taking great care to not blame or shame the Complainant for her reactions. In the Trump/Carroll case, a jury carefully listened to testimony, reviewed evidence, and weighed credibility, and found in a court of law that there was sufficient evidence of his guilt. That's the way it works. Each finding for each specific case is based on the unique facts of that one case. If you think that your earlier post was not a version of victim shaming, yet my professional determination in a case that you know nothing about somehow does constitute victim shaming, well...hmmmmmm yourself. I do believe a jury of your peers right here on Huskerboard will review these posts and determine that you are talking out of your a$$.

RedDenver made it easy for you by bolding the most relevant content of your own post, but you are still being willfully obtuse. You shamed her for not behaving in the way that you would have expected a "real" sexual assault victim to behave. You don't believe her because she doesn't fit into YOUR expectations. Luckily, a jury actually weighed all of the facts and evidence, instead of slipping into Archy's judgment of post-sexual assault behaviors.

Yep. I just conducted a sexual assault hearing today. The Complainant did not come forward for almost a year after the alleged conduct, because it didn't dawn on her that some of the stuff her boyfriend did may have been considered assault, until after the relationship ended. Now, in this particular case, the evidence and the credible arguments were not sufficient to show that the boyfriend was responsible for assault. That doesn't mean that the report was false, it just means that the evidence wasn't there. I actually feel bad for both parties in this case.

No competent lawyer who values their reputation, their credibility, or their accounts billable would touch Trump with a 39 and a half foot pole. All he's left to pick from are quacks and losers. His next attorney, if he can find one, is going to be equally $h!tty or worse. Classic victim blaming here, nice job. Let's have a quick look at this: People who have been victimized/traumatized will not always act the way we might expect, which in turn makes it difficult to assess their claims. But it is extremely common for sexual assault survivors to not report their complaint or pursue any major action. This happens for a variety of reasons, and your victim-blaming posts is one of the responses that many survivors wish to avoid. Survivors fear retaliation. Survivors often realize the uphill battle that awaits them if they are bold enough to file the complaint, especially if there is no physical evidence or witnesses (which is the case the majority of the time). This is especially true when there is a real or perceived power imbalance and the perpetrator has more resources. On top of that, a traumatic response might make people do weird things. Victims return to their abusers all the time. Victims often remember events in a non-linear fashion. Victims might take unusual steps to try to reclaim control of the situation in their heads. I don't know why she enjoyed watching the Apprentice, but it is plausible to think that maybe she was trying to cope with the situation, trying to identify with her attack her, or otherwise trying to rationalize what happened. Maybe she was still drawn to Trump's power and charisma, even though she had been assaulted. We don't know for sure, but these are not foreign concepts if you are trauma-informed. As to the court case itself: he said/she said cases happen all the time with sexual assault matters. You know how these cases are decided when it is one person's word against another without much other evidence? You have to weigh credibility! Hell, given what we know about Donald Trump's credibility, I could probably accuse him of sexual assault and win. Because he has absolutely no credibility at all. You say his lawyers failed to have him testify? LOL! The man would either perjure himself or incriminate himself with every word that came out of his mouth. I'm not saying the civil case was a slam dunk; both sides still had to make compelling arguments. But a civil judgment does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If you have to base a lot of the decision on credibility, and the defendant behaves in the way Trump does - never presenting a cogent argument and only attacking, defaming, and making a fool of himself - winning this case was actually much easier than it would be for the typical sexual assault survivor. The hard part for her was coming forward in the first place, and withstanding Trump's nationwide army of dumbasses and people like you who would rather blame her than believe her.

Miami actually has a very good academic reputation. Unfortunately, the thuggish reputation of their football program overshadows it. On a side note, the Miami fans I met during the Rose Bowl week in 2001/2002 were some of the nicest, most respectful opposing fans I have ever met, which surprised me at the time.

Most Bama fans never went to college in the first place, so it makes sense that they would be sensitive about this.

They already realize this and just don't care. Which is why they want to suppress the vote, pack the courts, threaten judges and witnesses, storm the Capitol, etc.

I once saw a movie where a decades-long conflict involving everyone began with shipping routes being disputed and attacked. It was a pretty dumb movie but maybe a cautionary tale for us. I don't know the solution, but sending a couple of Jedi Knights to negotiate the conflict probably won't work.

Well, what I'm not gonna do is go back and watch a f#%king Texas game for no reason. That's a good way of looking at it. We can call Haarberg our own little Penix.

Last night was the first Washington game I had watched all season and didn't know what to expect out of Penix. I only watched the Huskers this year and very few other games. But what I saw was awfully familiar: little time to work in a collapsing pocket, missing wide open receivers, lack of touch on passes, and an ugly sidearm motion. Not impressive at all.

If I am Joe Biden, and the courts rule that a President is immune from all prosecution, I immediately start hunting down MAGA loyalists in the Senate and House. Just like Abraham Lincoln hunted vampires.

The fact that you were playing intramurals does nothing to negate the fact that our actual football team would have stomped an absolute f#%king mudhole in your friend and the rest of his Michigan teammates that year.

Ah, okay. Looked like a big group ( not sure if there were 4 kids or not ), but I tried not to stare and be “that guy.”