Fru

Yes. Why would anyone ever want to pay attention to quotes, facts, statistics or empirically based analysis? http://www.cc.com/video-clips/e9z0ej/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-jordan-klepper-fingers-the-pulse---conspiracy-theories-thrive-at-a-donald-trump-rally The ending to this video sums it up nicely. "Do I have articles? No. Do I have facts? No. But my mind is made up"

Tell me again how Pence "killed it"

It's funny. I thought Pence came off as the smug, arrogant jerk. Calm? Sure. Knowledgeable? Hard to call him knowledgeable when he denies actual quotes and facts. I recall Kaine citing a labor statistic and Pence saying something along the lines of "Yeah you can throw out the numbers and stuff you want." Facts matter, whether you like it or not. Kaine challenged him to defend Trump. Which Pence couldn't do, or chose not to do. I'm not sure which is worse. Kaine interrupted plenty, but Pence also interrupted his fair share. Pence just seemed to make constant snarky comments "Career politician, God bless you for it" "I'm sure that played well in a focus group" "That's a good predone line" Maybe you enjoy hearing that, but it isn't adding content or substance which Pence had very little of in this debate. Saying he won on style points is like saying Oregon beat NU because their uniforms were cooler. Scoreboard or in this case, facts say differently.

I'm very surprised at how many people claim "Pence killed it." If by "killing it" you mean not defending his running mate and denying facts, then yeah, he hit it out of the park. To me Pence looked like he'd have rather been anywhere else in the world. His constant snarky under his breath comments, disdainful demeanor, and unwillingness to be accountable for his running mate made me dislike him even more.

As much as this dead horse has been beaten, all you need to do is a quick search and you should be able to find thread after thread in the archives to answer this question. While I realize this is a bye week, I'm not sure this can of worms needs to be opened during the season. Not trying to open a can of worms, just thought it was a relevant thought given the nature of the thread. And again, I'm aware of all the alleged stuff to have gone on, I just was curious if anyone had any insight as to what was BS and what might have had a little more weight.

I know some folks are touchy about divulging things, but what is the consensus about the "real" reason Solich was fired? I've heard a variety of things including messing around with coeds, boosters wives, coaches wives, impregnating a woman in David City, alcohol problems etc. Perhaps it was a variety. I don't know. I always thought Pederson just wanted NU to become USC. Flashy and NFL oriented, and Solich just didn't fit that mold.

I too have thought about if Crawford had chose football, or even if NU had snagged Zbikowski from Notre Dame. Though I don't know that it would've mattered much. I think Solich was a marked man.

Glad to hear you had such a great time!!! Whenever I walk up the ramp and see the crowd I always think of that scene in "Rudy" where Rudy's dad sees the Notre Dame stadium for the first time. "This is the most beautiful site these eyes have ever seen" (Granted I know it's Rudy and ND and I'm sure some folks on here will be all URGGH EFF NOTRE LAME, but relax, I'm making a point) That emotion is brilliantly captured on film. I admittedly get a little teary eyed every so often during a game. It can definitely stir all kinds of emotions, thoughts and memories. You think back to the first game your dad took you to, the first girl who you took a game to, the friend you went with and cheered like crazy as NU beat OU. You imagine the ghosts of coaches, players and past games happening on the field that lays right before you. Truly a special place.

Monte Christo Garth Glissman Frankie London Matt Turman Willard Witte

I think it's definitely a part. He was a household name before this election. If he was an unknown who just randomly burst on the scene and said the ridiculous things that he has, he probably wouldn't get away with it. Howard Dean let out a visceral scream of excitement and it ended his campaign. Trump said he'd date his own daughter if he could and he's the new GOP standard bearer.

Well if the comment sections of Politico and The Hill articles are reliable, Obama is going to declare martial law and call off the 2016 election altogether. So that coupled with a likely 7-0 Nebraska team heading into Wisconsin, and all the Harley Quinn costumes girls will be wearing downtown for Halloween will make for an entertaining October. I don't think there'll be any personally, but if I was to choose one it'd probably be one of the candidates capitalizing on some bit of new info from the other.

I'm genuinely asking, and not trying to inflame arguments or anything, but when you say you are 100% Pro Life, does that also translate to other political and social stances for you as well? Many times when I talk politics with folks, many folks claim to be Pro Life. However in other political stances folks who claim to be Pro Life are generally -in favor of war and military intervention -against addressing gun deaths -against universal health care coverage -against public assistance programs that largely assist children and the elderly -against regulation and protecting the environment These are all issues that concern life and well being. So you stating that you are 100% Pro Life, is that across the board? Or only for the issue of abortion? Again, I'm not trying to be inflammatory, or trying to create arguments. I'm genuinely trying to understand this, as it seems there is a lot of cognitive dissonance going on with folks who claim to be Pro Life. I'm at work, so don't have tons of time so this might not be as well articulated as I would hope; but here's my quick, and probably clumsy answer. I believe an unborn child has the same moral weight as a 3 month old. So, could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of a war, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of gun rights, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be opposed to universal healthcare, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against public assistance, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against environmental regulations, yes If you were more specifically asking my personal view on these issues, I don't have time right now other than to say they're varied. I guess I was asking if you held those seemingly contradicting beliefs, not hypothetically "Could someone believe this while also believing that." Can you see the difficulty in understanding how someone can call themselves "Pro Life" when it comes to abortion, but then want to deny healthcare to the sick, deny food assistance to the young and elderly, do nothing about the 30,000 gun deaths a year, not want to take action to take care of the environment, and be pro war? My view is that if you're going to call your self "Pro Life" then your other stances should reflect that as well. If you don't want healthcare for all, don't want to do anything about gun deaths, don't want to protect the environment, don't want children and the elderly to have food assistance, but then say people shouldn't get abortions, you're not really pro life, you're just anti-abortion. I disagree, you can be against and ever expanding gov't, and be pro life. I guess your phrase "100% Pro Choice" led me to believe that your value of life would be across the board, in all areas. Of all the issues I've listed, the only time life counts unconditionally is regarding the issue of abortion. Doesn't seem like 100% to me.

I'm genuinely asking, and not trying to inflame arguments or anything, but when you say you are 100% Pro Life, does that also translate to other political and social stances for you as well? Many times when I talk politics with folks, many folks claim to be Pro Life. However in other political stances folks who claim to be Pro Life are generally -in favor of war and military intervention -against addressing gun deaths -against universal health care coverage -against public assistance programs that largely assist children and the elderly -against regulation and protecting the environment These are all issues that concern life and well being. So you stating that you are 100% Pro Life, is that across the board? Or only for the issue of abortion? Again, I'm not trying to be inflammatory, or trying to create arguments. I'm genuinely trying to understand this, as it seems there is a lot of cognitive dissonance going on with folks who claim to be Pro Life. I'm at work, so don't have tons of time so this might not be as well articulated as I would hope; but here's my quick, and probably clumsy answer. I believe an unborn child has the same moral weight as a 3 month old. So, could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of a war, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of gun rights, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be opposed to universal healthcare, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against public assistance, yes could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against environmental regulations, yes If you were more specifically asking my personal view on these issues, I don't have time right now other than to say they're varied. I guess I was asking if you held those seemingly contradicting beliefs, not hypothetically "Could someone believe this while also believing that." Can you see the difficulty in understanding how someone can call themselves "Pro Life" when it comes to abortion, but then want to deny healthcare to the sick, deny food assistance to the young and elderly, do nothing about the 30,000 gun deaths a year, not want to take action to take care of the environment, and be pro war? My view is that if you're going to call your self "Pro Life" then your other stances should reflect that as well. If you don't want healthcare for all, don't want to do anything about gun deaths, don't want to protect the environment, don't want children and the elderly to have food assistance, but then say people shouldn't get abortions, you're not really pro life, you're just anti-abortion.

I'm genuinely asking, and not trying to inflame arguments or anything, but when you say you are 100% Pro Life, does that also translate to other political and social stances for you as well? Many times when I talk politics with folks, many folks claim to be Pro Life. However in other political stances folks who claim to be Pro Life are generally -in favor of war and military intervention -against addressing gun deaths -against universal health care coverage -against public assistance programs that largely assist children and the elderly -against regulation and protecting the environment These are all issues that concern life and well being. So you stating that you are 100% Pro Life, is that across the board? Or only for the issue of abortion? Again, I'm not trying to be inflammatory, or trying to create arguments. I'm genuinely trying to understand this, as it seems there is a lot of cognitive dissonance going on with folks who claim to be Pro Life.

See this is where I take issue with lots of Pro Lifers. Many (not saying you specifically, but many) Pro Lifers profess to be all about caring for the "ones who can't protect themselves" and that "every life is sacred." That's all well and good for a zygote, however when it comes to other issues concerning life and well being, Pro Lifers are often times anti universal healthcare, anti common sense gun control laws, pro war, anti public assistance programs which largely benefit children, the disabled and the elderly, anti regulation, and against Environmental Protection laws. You claim to be on the fence about this election because of your stance on abortion. Trump has often times questioned why other countries don't have and use nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons. That is literally the most deadly force the world has ever seen. But your biggest concern is someone's private choice to take the Plan B pill? You're genuinely considering someone who encourages use of the deadliest weapons on earth, but might vote for him because he is against abortion? That does not compute with me. I can very much appreciate someone's stance against abortion. Don't get me wrong. It's certainly not a fun topic. But abortion isn't going to matter a whole lot when Nukes are being launched across the globe. That is a big generalization, I don't think gun control has anything to do with abortion or killing. Take em away, people will still find ways to get them and kill people, its just how it is. Also, where are these "pro war" claims you get, was it President Bush's decision that all of a sudden speaks for every pro life person? Only congress can declared war not Trump, that is also something a lot of people forget about. Bush declared war with the approval of Congress, if Trump wanted to just attack some country because he has the power, congress has to approve it. The last thing before I get back on topic is abortion is taking away someones chance of life liberty and pursuit of happiness. I am voting Trump because he is pro-life, pro America, he isn't a globalist which is really good. The UN has tried to pass laws to limit our freedom actually, can't remember what they are called exactly but it limits how much water or electricity one can use, not a bad idea but that is an example of taking away a little bit of freedom. I think his trade deals will help us get money back and force other countries to pay tariffs like the US does. Also make companies that leave the country pay a fine is a good idea or a leaving fee can't remember exactly. Regardless that's a good way to keep companies and jobs in the US. Only way I don't vote for him is if he changes his stances on immigration, abortion or he says he won't fight for the people- so basically it would be hard for me to change my mind. Gun control has nothing to do with killing? 30,000 deaths a year from guns. If it were anything else causing that amount of deaths per year, it would certainly be addressed. But using your logic of "take guns away, people will still get them" one could argue that "making abortion illegal won't matter because people will still do it" Many Pro Lifers tend to be Republican, and many Republicans are very pro war. Cheney, Kristol, McCain, Graham etc. I was talking about having Pro War attitudes, not necessarily declaring war. You say Trump is Pro Life? Wanting to use nuclear weapons more often does not sound Pro Life to me. Also, this is how Trump treated family members health care coverage. I wonder how much he would truly care about the average joe. http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/what-sort-of-man-is-donald-trump "Even when it comes to a sick baby in his family, Donald Trump is all business. The megabuilder and his siblings Robert and Maryanne terminated their nephew’s family medical coverage a week after he challenged the will of their father, Fred Trump. “This was so shocking, so disappointing and so vindictive,” said niece Lisa Trump, whose son, William, was born 18 months ago at Mount Sinai Medical Center with a rare neurological disorder that produces violent seizures, brain damage and medical bills topping $300,000." Doesn't sound very Pro Life to me. Companies that leave the US? Like ... the companies that make Donald Trump Signature ties? Those kinds of companies? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHoYbfOWwAE2eCO.jpg Two wrongs don't make a right dude. Yeah if abortion is outlawed people would still do it, but it would have consequences. I also meant to say gun control doesn't have anything to do with abortion or killing of babies, I typed too fast on that one. The gun obviously does the killing we all know, but it is the intent of the person who kills also, so taking away guns will not stop killing period. It also prevents someone from defending themself in an attack by a thief etc. You are still generalizing on the pro war attitude man, but yes republican leaders may be pro war, that does not make every republican a war hawk. Trumps only war he would do is get rid of terrorists in the middle east, oh we are doing that right now with our current president. Only time he would use nuclear warfare is if someone else attacked, he says he just wants to be ready in case north korea were to use them. Overseas stuff, yea some of his merchandise is overseas but he says he will make a fee for companies leaving the US, because lots of stuff today is made in China, we all can agree with that. Back the Op, It would take something like him saying his voters are tools for his agenda for me not to vote for him. If he says that this election is over, but people will still vote for him. Ted Cruz said he supports Mr. Trump so I do as well. The Bush's have no impact on me about what they say or who they say they are voting for. I am voting for him more so on an Anti-Hillary type of voting, but he has some good things he says. I will admit he has said some really dumb stuff, but I think Hillary is worse and she will only allow terrorism to grow her and abroad. Two wrongs don't make a right? I was using your logic to point out why outlawing something "doesn't work." "Guns kill 30,000 a year, should we do something? Nah people will do it anyway, but abortions? That needs to be outlawed." And yeah, I was speaking generally on Republicans being pro war... because that tends to be the case. Trump said recently he would start a war over Syrians taunting US soldiers from a boat. He said you should be unpredictable with nuclear weapons. He supports other countries having nuclear weapons. That is terrifying.

Anybody here on the keto diet? I'm kind of a picky eater and I've been doing this diet since January. Lost 18 lbs, but I'm getting a little burned out on chicken, turkey, eggs and asparagus. Anyone have any meal suggestions?

Law

See this is where I take issue with lots of Pro Lifers. Many (not saying you specifically, but many) Pro Lifers profess to be all about caring for the "ones who can't protect themselves" and that "every life is sacred." That's all well and good for a zygote, however when it comes to other issues concerning life and well being, Pro Lifers are often times anti universal healthcare, anti common sense gun control laws, pro war, anti public assistance programs which largely benefit children, the disabled and the elderly, anti regulation, and against Environmental Protection laws. You claim to be on the fence about this election because of your stance on abortion. Trump has often times questioned why other countries don't have and use nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons. That is literally the most deadly force the world has ever seen. But your biggest concern is someone's private choice to take the Plan B pill? You're genuinely considering someone who encourages use of the deadliest weapons on earth, but might vote for him because he is against abortion? That does not compute with me. I can very much appreciate someone's stance against abortion. Don't get me wrong. It's certainly not a fun topic. But abortion isn't going to matter a whole lot when Nukes are being launched across the globe. I understand, most do (take issue) so don't feel like you are the first. For you and many, you make a strong case and I do my best to listen and try to understand where you are coming from. So let me clarify my thoughts if I may. (Abortion) It's not only a deep concern about the soon-to-be born that get wiped out. It's also a deep concern for the women - the mothers - that deal with their decision after the procedure, especially down the road. Many women are able to collect themselves, put it behind them and move on. I've heard their stories. I also hear the stories of the countless women who experience such grief, a loss, a pit, an emptiness, a sadness, that leads to a rooted deep, dark depression that they live with each day for years and years and years. And for some, their entire life. The decision can be so regretful and painful for so many that it's almost like two lives have died (unborn and mother). Sure the woman is still alive physically, but that's about all that's left behind. And for other women though, they go through the procedure a second time, even a third time. The numbers for that is staggering too. All in all, over 50 million abortions performed in our country since the 70's. To me that involves 100 million that is affected by this decision (counting the moms as I mentioned). I agree there are many other topics, including the one's you mention, that are very important to our country, and to me. There are views I like about the Dems, and views I don't, just like with the Rep party. No matter who becomes the POTUS, this person will not be able to please everybody. It has never happened before. I understand that my stance doesn't make a lot of sense to you as you try to compute it all. I am okay with that. I am not too complex, nor am I a bright, sophisticated or brilliant political thinker as so many here are. No matter how much I read and try to absorb on this political forum! Maybe that is why we have such smart people voting that understand more than I am able to understand about every important topic out there. But I will tell you this.... I will do my part as well by voting for lives as a start. Abortion is the opposite of life. And abortion ALWAYS matters. I appreciate your response, and the mature discourse we can have. My initial point was largely about how many profess to be Pro Life when it comes to abortion, but for many other issues regarding life and well being, they seem to care very little. Some genuine cognitive dissonance there with many folks. I know abortion is a deep issue for many people. Like I mentioned before, it's not a fun topic. It can certainly be a devastating experience for a person. I'd like to think that we as a society would be able to move past it as a form of birth control and reserve it for instances of rape and threat to life of the mother. I think that can be done with education and access to birth control, however that's a different discussion. Regarding this election and how it relates to abortion my second point was to look at the big picture. Like I mentioned before, Trump is an advocate for the promotion and use of nuclear weapons. If you are truly concerned about loss of life it does not get any bigger or more devastating than nuclear weapons.

Maybe it's just me, but I have heard very little Gerry bashing.

See this is where I take issue with lots of Pro Lifers. Many (not saying you specifically, but many) Pro Lifers profess to be all about caring for the "ones who can't protect themselves" and that "every life is sacred." That's all well and good for a zygote, however when it comes to other issues concerning life and well being, Pro Lifers are often times anti universal healthcare, anti common sense gun control laws, pro war, anti public assistance programs which largely benefit children, the disabled and the elderly, anti regulation, and against Environmental Protection laws. You claim to be on the fence about this election because of your stance on abortion. Trump has often times questioned why other countries don't have and use nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons. That is literally the most deadly force the world has ever seen. But your biggest concern is someone's private choice to take the Plan B pill? You're genuinely considering someone who encourages use of the deadliest weapons on earth, but might vote for him because he is against abortion? That does not compute with me. I can very much appreciate someone's stance against abortion. Don't get me wrong. It's certainly not a fun topic. But abortion isn't going to matter a whole lot when Nukes are being launched across the globe. That is a big generalization, I don't think gun control has anything to do with abortion or killing. Take em away, people will still find ways to get them and kill people, its just how it is. Also, where are these "pro war" claims you get, was it President Bush's decision that all of a sudden speaks for every pro life person? Only congress can declared war not Trump, that is also something a lot of people forget about. Bush declared war with the approval of Congress, if Trump wanted to just attack some country because he has the power, congress has to approve it. The last thing before I get back on topic is abortion is taking away someones chance of life liberty and pursuit of happiness. I am voting Trump because he is pro-life, pro America, he isn't a globalist which is really good. The UN has tried to pass laws to limit our freedom actually, can't remember what they are called exactly but it limits how much water or electricity one can use, not a bad idea but that is an example of taking away a little bit of freedom. I think his trade deals will help us get money back and force other countries to pay tariffs like the US does. Also make companies that leave the country pay a fine is a good idea or a leaving fee can't remember exactly. Regardless that's a good way to keep companies and jobs in the US. Only way I don't vote for him is if he changes his stances on immigration, abortion or he says he won't fight for the people- so basically it would be hard for me to change my mind. Gun control has nothing to do with killing? 30,000 deaths a year from guns. If it were anything else causing that amount of deaths per year, it would certainly be addressed. But using your logic of "take guns away, people will still get them" one could argue that "making abortion illegal won't matter because people will still do it" Many Pro Lifers tend to be Republican, and many Republicans are very pro war. Cheney, Kristol, McCain, Graham etc. I was talking about having Pro War attitudes, not necessarily declaring war. You say Trump is Pro Life? Wanting to use nuclear weapons more often does not sound Pro Life to me. Also, this is how Trump treated family members health care coverage. I wonder how much he would truly care about the average joe. http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/what-sort-of-man-is-donald-trump "Even when it comes to a sick baby in his family, Donald Trump is all business. The megabuilder and his siblings Robert and Maryanne terminated their nephew’s family medical coverage a week after he challenged the will of their father, Fred Trump. “This was so shocking, so disappointing and so vindictive,” said niece Lisa Trump, whose son, William, was born 18 months ago at Mount Sinai Medical Center with a rare neurological disorder that produces violent seizures, brain damage and medical bills topping $300,000." Doesn't sound very Pro Life to me. Companies that leave the US? Like ... the companies that make Donald Trump Signature ties? Those kinds of companies? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHoYbfOWwAE2eCO.jpg

In an election like this, I'll take someone who's already been in the White House for 8 years, been a Senator and been Secretary of State. That experience matters. I think Ted Cruz is one of the most repugnant humans alive, but I would not hesitate in picking him over Trump as well. I am not a fan of Hillary at all. But when you only have 2 choices... I'd begrudgingly go with her for 4 years, and hope for a much better choice in 2020.

See this is where I take issue with lots of Pro Lifers. Many (not saying you specifically, but many) Pro Lifers profess to be all about caring for the "ones who can't protect themselves" and that "every life is sacred." That's all well and good for a zygote, however when it comes to other issues concerning life and well being, Pro Lifers are often times anti universal healthcare, anti common sense gun control laws, pro war, anti public assistance programs which largely benefit children, the disabled and the elderly, anti regulation, and against Environmental Protection laws. You claim to be on the fence about this election because of your stance on abortion. Trump has often times questioned why other countries don't have and use nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons. That is literally the most deadly force the world has ever seen. But your biggest concern is someone's private choice to take the Plan B pill? You're genuinely considering someone who encourages use of the deadliest weapons on earth, but might vote for him because he is against abortion? That does not compute with me. I can very much appreciate someone's stance against abortion. Don't get me wrong. It's certainly not a fun topic. But abortion isn't going to matter a whole lot when Nukes are being launched across the globe.

This seems like symbolic justice to me, more than anything. Getting the right to sue the government of a country we think had something to do with 9/11? Could family members of innocent Iraqi civilians killed during the Iraq war sue the US government under the same precedence?

Nebraska will be back when a conference title is won.

We have talked to a bunch of your former teammates and we have yet to hear anybody say a good word about you. That is painful...even to us...and we are just two guys with a podcast. Why don't you come onto our show next week and set the record straight? The fact that you thought a guy on a message board named "Touchdown Tommie" was actually Tommie Frazier is enough for me to know that I will never ever need to listen to your podcast. Ever.