BigRedBuster

Ha! Great minds think alike! Pretty sure the thumb print thingy was added with the iPhone 6. Gotta have the 4 digit code to get into this one.

What I'm going to find interesting is Bernie's response to questions about it? And.....is Hillary going to make an issue of the statement? And....if it were made by a middle aged white guy, it DEFINITELY would be described as sexist by more people than it is now.

Oh....this is going to get interesting. Can you imagine if this were said at a Republican rally? Rapper Killer Mike at Bernie Sanders rally: “a uterus doesn’t qualify you to be president”

No

Not really.

Similar to the many many times I have said Trump is an idiot with little to no protestation to the fact? Not in the slightest similar, because I have not similarly beleaguered you in those threads for other, similar accusations. It's entirely not the same thing. In any way. I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about all these other conservative leaning people on this board who you claim is protesting your claim but not protesting you saying Schumer is an idiot. Well....if all of those people are doing that because Scalia is conservative and Schumer a liberal (I'm assuming that's your assertion), then....wouldn't those same people protest me claiming Trump is an idiot?

Similar to the many many times I have said Trump is an idiot with little to no protestation to the fact?

Are you claiming I'm saying he isn't a bigot? If so, you obviously haven't read my posts.

I don't see you using quotes taken out of context to justify this stance. Schumer might be an idiot just like Scalia might be a bigot.

Had a very interesting conversation today with someone in the health insurance industry about ACA and the exchanges. He is of the opinion that in no way shape or form can it sustain itself the way it is right now. Here is his reasoning. When someone goes to the exchange, the government decides if they are below a certain income level and if they are, they subsidies the premiums. So, let's say the premium is $600 and the government agrees to subsidies the premium by $400. The person buys the policy and starts paying $200 for the insurance. Here's the problem, the government has not been paying the $400 to the insurance companies. This person claimed that Blue Cross alone in Nebraska is owed $50,000,000 from the government and they have no clue if they are ever going to get paid. He claimed this is a major reason why you are starting to see some companies drop out of being involved in the exchange. So, that's one company in a small state like Nebraska. If this is the case with every company selling on the exchange, how much do you think the government owes these insurance companies? If this is true, this could be a major bomb shell for the Republicans to drop on the Dems in the general election. Now, this is one guy telling me this but, like I said, he works within the insurance industry in Nebraska and I've gotten good information from him before on these issues. I would be very interested if anyone has more information on this topic.

Your confusion possibly is because you conveniently keep ignoring these two highlighted statements in Mavric's post. I'm not answering your poll in the other thread simply due to the fact I don't know him personally and have no way of knowing if he is bigoted or not. Your opinion is that he is based on his rulings. That doesn't make it so.

Some on here are funny. Do you actually keep track of who the up and coming University Chancellors are? Seriously??? This is not AD. I have never seen Albert's name associated with the Chancellor position and I would hope to God that the powers that be would have bigger issues in mind than the football team when picking the Chancellor.

Obviously the replacement will have no input in the next session starting on 2/22/16. I don't see a reason to rush into a nomination immediately unless he had someone already in mind in case something like this happened. If so, I would see it within the next couple weeks. Not sure how messy it gets if he waits long enough that the nomination goes into late summer or early fall with the election in November. I would actually hope something is done before the election. With a Democratic President and Republicans having control of congress, it gives us the best chance of a moderate being nominated and accepted.

Interesting. I'll study your link more later. One thing that was told to me yesterday that leaves me scratching my head. There is a larger town right next to us that has done major construction to their schools and they seem to have all the money in the world to do whatever they want. I asked how the heck can they do that when everyone's budgets are being cut? I was told that a number of years ago cities with large packing plants which caused their schools to have much more diversity sued the state over funding. Once the law suit was filed, those cities were able to get certain things changed that gives them much more funding than they used to get. I know I saw some figures last year and this community received a HUGE amount per student compared to what our school and others around it received. I'm not sure I was told the whole story behind that but, that's what I was told.

How is seeing more clearly the context to which quotes were said "whitewashing his words"?

Mavric clearly stated that his post doesn't necessarily disprove your assertion. However, it is very appropriate to make sure quotes are viewed in the correct context. If I were public figure, I would probably be heard saying things against abortion and how I don't agree with them and how I wish they could be greatly reduced. Those quotes could be used against me by the left claiming I am part of the "war on women" and maybe even claim I'm a bigot against women. In reality, I actually believe this debate doesn't belong in the political arena as it pertains to trying to ban abortions or even promote funding for more of them. So, to claim I am a bigot and want to take healthcare away from women due to my views abortions is wrong, is taking my quotes out of context and using them against me in a wrong way. Mavric is simply saying the same thing about most of the quotes you used.

Mavric, two good posts. My lack of information on the subject is one of the main reasons I started this thread. I also had a brief discussion with our Principal and Superintendent yesterday. I also wrote an email to our state Senator, who I know personally, to get more information from the other side. I understand that the issue is based on the formula (that nobody can seem to tell me exactly how it is calculated). So, what you are saying is that when valuations go up, we should be receiving more funding from the local property taxes so the state should be funding us less. If it is as simple as that, I see some major flaws in that system. Farm land is obviously the largest amount of assets that property taxes get their money from. For many years, farm land was valued at around 2,500 - 3,000 per acre and was fairly stable. Then, in the last 7-8 years, farm land has sky rocketed to 8,000 - 10,000. I have even seen some land go for as much as 12,000 per acre. At this time, commodities were at record levels. Corn was selling for around $7.00 per bushel. Farmers had great cash flows that could pay a lot in taxes. Well, this morning, our local elevator is buying corn at $3.35. Meanwhile, very few inputs have decreased even though when corn was going through the roof, they were rising right along with it. I believe the 3:35 is at or below what would be considered break even now. So, farmers are not in the same cash flow situation they were 3-4 years ago to be able to pay a lot more in taxes. (I'm assuming this is the source of the idea of Farmers vs schools) As everyone should understand, just because you have say $5,000,000 on the balance sheet in land, doesn't mean you have the cash flow to pay whatever is asked. I have been told we are close to maximizing our legal limit on property taxes. So, we have a little room to raise it but not really that much. The valuation on land has come down some since commodities have dropped. If you know the formula, I have a question. Obviously, it estimates how much in property taxes we should be able to get from local property. Is the valuation used in the formula, a value from the past 2-3 years? Or, does it look forward at what that value is going to be during the school year in question? I'm assuming the way the farm economy is going, the property taxes for the school year 2016-2017 is going to be lower than what it would have been in 2013-2014 or even 2014-2015. Thanks for the discussion.

Are you thinking about Holmes? He is a 5* recruit. I knew Holmes was a five star, regardless this guy is a four star and is talented. He is in the 500 mile radius and it would be a shame to lose this guy to Iowa. I was probably thinking Holmes like you said. I just thought maybe he dropped form a five star to a four star. but to me four star or higher is elite talent. He is a 4 star and I would absolutely love to have him. However he has a .8905 grade which is barely a 4 star by the skin of his teeth. Don't be shocked if he gets dropped to a 3 star at some point. That wouldn't change my feelings about wanting him.

A) So I can vote in the primary. A) I will give you that as an independent, primaries are pretty much meaningless to go to. However, that pretty much is the case just living in Nebraska. This is not true (that, as an Independent in Nebraska, primaries are meaningless). Not only do you have options to vote on in primaries, in Nebraska you have MORE options as an Independent than a person locked into one or the other party. From the Nebraska Sec. of State's voter registration FAQ: http://www.sos.ne.gov/elec/voter_info.html I'll admit this is worded somewhat oddly. I don't think that's an accident. What this means is that, when you go to your polling site as an Independent, you have your choice of ballots. You can vote straight Independent, without any senatorial or congressional ballots, or you can choose one or the other. So if this election you want to vote on the Democratic candidates, you can. Next election you want to vote for the Republican candidates, you can. You can change it up every time. When I go to vote, they ask me what ballot I want. I choose whichever race I think my vote will have the most impact, and I vote on that race. I voted in the Fisher/Bruning battle a while ago. I voted in the Democratic primary for Obama/against Clinton in 2008. As an Independent, I have more choices. I cannot imagine why anyone in Nebraska aligns with any specific party. I didn't know I could do that at the polling place. I would need to look at local and state races since the presidential primary doesn't mean jack in Nebraska.

Something dawned on me while listening to some "Republicans" talking about this. They seemed to think they need to wait till after the election so they don't have to deal with an Obama nominee (which they already have decided is going to be horrible and destroy everything we love about America). These people fully believe the Republicans are going to keep the majority in Congress. I'm not totally convinced of that. With only 23% of Americans identifying themselves as Republicans, I haven't seen any predictions yet, however, I wouldn't be too confident in that at this point in time.

LINK BATON ROUGE — Nicholls State University could be forced to close temporarily this year even under the best-case budget scenario presented to the Louisiana Legislature under a plan submitted to the University of Louisiana System. "Surely it won't come to that, but that is the current plan presented," University of Louisiana System President Dan Reneau said. But state Sen. Norby Chabert, R-Houma, a Nicholls State graduate, said he won't have it.

Umm...mu suggested i feared the tech revolution because it was bad for the conservative cause. When I stated I fear in todays day and age it has to do with the nasty partisanship. I actually think the tech revolution has given conservatives a voice they didnt have when the mainstream media was all there was. Now...u failed to address any points i made earlier including that you are viewing this topic and my response through your partisan lens. I would agree it is a good thing if it were actually true facts being passed around conservative circles on social media. However, the absolute crap I see being passed around by conservatives amazes me that these people actually believe this crap or think it's actually helping the cause by forwarding constantly stuff that clearly is produced for no other reason than to get a bunch of people foaming at the mouth no matter if it's true or not. A perfect example of this is how I found out Scalia had died. I saw a post on Facebook claiming it was a conspiracy from the left who killed him. Really??? The body isn't even cold yet and you've already put out crap claiming the left killed him? And people drink that up.

Like I said in the original post, our school system is seeing the same drastic cut in funding. I am slightly involved in our schools due to being on a committee trying to get a certain educational program started here that many other Nebraska schools have. I originally thought the funding problem was due to some mistake our administration had made. However, the York Schools post shows this is more wide spread than that. We were slapped in the face with the fact that our state funding is cut almost 30%. I am also involved enough to firmly believe that our school system isn't drastically wasting money. They have pinched pennies constantly when trying to provide our kids with as many opportunities as possible (however, still not to the level that we would like). At some point, there is a breaking point. I wish I knew more about the details of this issue. My fear is, the people of Nebraska put pressure on the legislators to cut taxes. The legislators find it much easier to cut school funding and put it out like it's the school system's fault than cut something else that affects more people and catch the flack from that.

I can understand that if this were a group that had played under this system for years. However, at the beginning of the year, all the players were playing under a new system with a new coach that probably wanted them to do things somewhat differently than the last coach. So, I guess I understand them not looking like a good offensive line early in the year and I also can understand the coach not wanting to rotate early so that the players that he believes are the best can start to figure things out.