JJ Husker

JJHusker has served me well for 13.5 years but I think it's time to go all in with the new DC. If all goes well, he could be the heir apparent for when Riley decides to step down.

I would like to change my name to El Diaco. Please make it so. Thank you.

Really liked everything he had to say. Am excited to see this new scheme and philosophy on the field. One let down though. He didn't say a bunch of crazy off the wall sfuff. That crazy crap Bob Diaco says thread is likely to suffer. I am disappoint.

Where's my horoscope? Bait & switch at its finest.

Well 2 of them would be Trump not committing to accept the results of the election when he did and the other would be protestors destroying stuff. There are plenty more wrongs that could be listed but those were the 2 that were on my mind at the time. I"m tired of Trump supporters claiming nobody would be protesting if Hillary would have been elected. Yeah, me too. I'm glad I didn't say that.

I don't, sorry Well dangit. How am I going to satiate this man crush? Haha! He is a cool speaker and excited. Maybe check YouTube? I just re-watched it by clicking on the video in the OP. Thanks. That didn't work for me the first time but it's good now.

I don't, sorry Well dangit. How am I going to satiate this man crush?

Looked into it a few years ago. The time and cost was nowhere near where you would think it should be, especially if there is more than one person travelling. I'll keep driving the 8 or so hours.

Does anybody know where a guy can view this press conference now that it's over? Couldn't find it at Huskers.com

Well 2 of them would be Trump not committing to accept the results of the election when he did and the other would be protestors destroying stuff. There are plenty more wrongs that could be listed but those were the 2 that were on my mind at the time.

People get cancer diagnoses out of the clear blue sky. And then what do you do? Just not accept healthcare? Accept it, run debt up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (two different family members have had cancer costing over two hundred thousand in healthcare), and then either spend the rest of your life in debt? Or you die, and your family is burdened with that debt? What's the solution there? You're OK with going into lifelong debt, not accepting healthcare you can't pay for, or passing that debt along to your kin? Why, when every other first-world nation has figured out how to treat their citizens without them going into debt? Why should America/Americans be uniquely burdened like this? Funny that you mention cancer. My grandma died from cancer when my dad was 11 years old. My grandpa would hear of a rumor of a new cure for cancer so he'd pack up grandma in the car and take off. He racked up a debt of over $250,000 in the late 40's/early 50's. He was a blacksmith and he still managed to repay every penny. Grandpa believed that you do what it takes to pay your debt as long as its honest work. They just don't make men like grandpa anymore. I'll ask that if things in America aren't to your liking, and you already know where things ARE to your liking, why have you not moved? Its a serious question because it's what I would do. Sorry Elf, that is pure bullsh#t. People should not have to go broke and work their whole lives to pay off medical care debt. There has to be a better way. What your Grandpa did was noble and to be commended but it shouldn't be required.

We had a good broker prior to the ACA, and I still consult with them from time to time when I have questions even though I am no longer purchasing anything through them (although I very well may be again soon). We literally looked at every plan available and for the last few years, Anthem BCBS was the best available for our very small group. A lot of the problem was that our group was fairly old (nobody under 40...) with no young pups to help balance it out. And now that I am in the Colo health exchange, I compare every available plan every year and so far, Kaiser has been my best option. I have no idea what they are like in the small group market but they are the best (at least premium wise) for my particular family situation. I would disagree with placing all the blame on insurance companies simply because they could raise premiums at will. All you need to do is look at how much healthcare costs have increased to see that a good portion of those premium increases were well founded. I won't say insurance companies had no hand in it or weren't greedy and bloated but they sure aren't the only ones to blame. Physicians making money extremely out of line with what normal folk earn, drug companies charging outrageous amounts for drugs and the FDA helps protect them doing it, all of the cover your ass testing providers do- necessary because of the prevalence of lawsuits, uninsured care costs being passed on to people who actually have insurance, lots of people who run to the doctor or emergency room every time they get a sniffle, layers and layers of paperwork and bureaucracy in hospitals and insurance companies. There are a bunch of reasons why the costs are out of control. The only one of these that the ACA began to try to address was stipulating that a certain percentage of their expenses had to go directly to patient care rather than layer upon layer of managers etc. But we all know how they get around that kind of "sounds good" bs. I do agree that it cannot be a free and open, for profit, industry. When the only choice you have is spend the money or ignore your health, it can't be. The system is completely f#cked up and broken. Whatever replacement they come up with, they need to maintain a mandate for coverage, continue covering all pre-existing conditions, have no lifetime cap, find a way to get everyone covered and then fix the real problem which is costs and premiums that are ridiculously out of control. It's been that way for a long, long time and it only has gotten worse since the ACA. A good start would be an overhaul of the FDA and their protectionist policies that let drug makers gouge us forever. All of the problems will be fixable if they just figure out a way to rein in costs. The big challenge will be doing that while maintaining accessibility of care. Sorry, I'll stop my rant now before I get really carried away.

I know, right? Who would be so petty as to not respect our nation's tradition of peaceful transition of power? Wrong + Wrong = Right?

I'm so proud to live in a country where diametrically opposed Presidents/Parties can have such a peaceful and congenial transfer of power. Many of the citizens of said country........not so much. I wonder if about 150 million 2nd place participation ribbons would help.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/820450166331346944 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/821342600322043905 He does have an ego problem, that's for sure.But I sure would hope he views it as a big day.

Why all the posts showing fewer people compared to Obama's inauguration? Does everyone realize the political makeup of DC is practically all democrat and recognize that one was for the first black President and the other is just another old white guy? Did anyone actually think the crowd would rival Obama's crowd? smh Or, is this just preemptive posting for when Trump claims it was the most huuuge event evar? Edit- or should I say when he manipulates the photos to make it look huuuge...

Am I alone in thinking that maybe, just maybe, some of those votes might get changed as the deadline approaches? Seems that some have admitted to nominating and seconding insincerely. Just a thought.

Dudeguyy- The only relief I experienced was the first year I changed from our small group company plan to the ACA plan, I was able to get a better plan for only slight increase from what I wouldve had to pay on my other renewal. Our company plan was with Anthem BCBS and I had cut it down to generic only Rx's and it had a little higher deductible, out of pocket etc. The ACA plan I went with Kaiser who had just expanded into our area. The prescription coverage was better and had lower deductible. The next year the premium went up 18% and this year almost 28%. I compared many different available plans and the only better premiums were real sh#t for coverage. I'm not sure if I fall into some unlucky category or not. That doesn't seem likely as I am in the same marketplace as anyone else. Of course I do not have an employer subsidizing any of my cost and I don't get any premium help from the government as I make too much money. So fAR I have been able to deduct the health premiums on my taxes since I am considered self employed. The other benefit (sort of) I got was I discontinued offering a health plan to my employees. Once the ACA came into being, I did not have to be worried or concerned about them being able to acquire coverage so I 86'D it. I absolutely hated the yearly rigamaroll of selecting a plan that fit everyone's needs and it was becoming cost prohibitive because I had to pay a certain minimum percentage of their premiums. So I gave them all a healthy raise and turned them loose to the marketplace or, in some cases, it allowed them to get on a spouses work plan that they were not eligible for when my company had it available. But my experience has been that prior to the ACA premium costs were increasing about 15% per year and after it has averaged about 20%+ per year. Those kind of increases are not and will not be sustainable for many people. Luckily, being the boss of me ;-) I have been able to adjust my pay as needed to cover my insurance increases. Business has been decent or that wouldn't be an option. Our plan covers a family of 4 and the monthly premium is about $1860 now. It's now more than our house payment. $4-$5K yearly cost increases cant be sustainable for a lot of people, can they? The threshold for premium assistance is well below my income and I'm feeling the pinch. Of course we have experienced some unusual healthcare costs as well. Maxed our out of pocket last year, so that sure didn't help. About $32K between premiums and care costs. It has to really suck for people near the threshold.

The media sure as hell, for all intents and purposes, ignored the possibility that Trump could actually win the election. I don't believe that is really even contestable. Read the link that Q posted above to see how their judgement was clouded by their preference for Hillary to be elected and for their ham-fisted approach at interpreting polling data. The hack job may well have been just enough to flip it to Trump but I believe our own media and possibly pollsters played a much more important role in helping to determine the outcome. And that is not to say they were pro Trump or anti Hillary but rather that they provided the incentive for many voters to show up and vote how they did.

That's a very interesting article and good post mortem on the election. Thanks for linking it Q. It would indicate that I have under estimated the amount of undecided voters and the effect of the hack job on the election results. I have admitted I may be wrong and this would indicate that I quite likely was wrong. I probably have let me personal disdain for both candidates cloud my perception of how other voters felt and how pliable they were to being swayed by what I viewed as just another pile of dirt on Hillary and the DNC. However, I would still maintain that it was US voters who decided this election by casting their votes and that a bigger influence on that was how the media presented and portrayed the candidates chances at winning. I think the bigger take away from that article is how and why the media got it so wrong. Not that I want the media to try to influence elections but it is rather obvious that they did, albeit conversely, by not acknowledging the legitimate chance Trump had to win it. I think maybe we were all guilty of that. I sure thought it was going to be a runaway HRC victory. How much of that was due to the subliminal media message, I guess we'll never know but I have to believe it was at least as influential as the release of the Comey report. Anyway I'll try to refrain from continuing this discussion in this thread because it is somewhat off topic.

Donald Trump is being sworn in as President of the United States tomorrow. I honestly have no idea how your response pertains to what you quoted me on.

I do feel that what Manning did is more disturbing (I wouldn't say a greater crime). She was trusted US personnel sworn to uphold our Constitution and defend our country. Putin is an adversarial Russian who as much should be expected from. That does not mean I condone what Putin did. They are both bad things. And I don't necessarily compare the crimes but I do compare peoples reactions to them. I originally commented that I saw a difference in the outcry here on HB but I have since recognized why that is somewhat logical given one of them happened 7 years ago and the other involves the President who will be inaugurated tomorrow. BTW- I don't see everybody you listed as necessarily "left-leaning". I'll leave it at that just to be mysterious.

This is where we have a slight difference of opinion. IMO it would have taken much more than this for Russia's actions to have a deciding affect on the outcome. Like I said, I could be wrong but, I don't think, with these candidates, there were too many voters on the fence subject to being swayed by this. I saw 4 pretty darn strong camps heading into the election; 1-Those that would never vote for either (me and some others here), 2-those that would never vote for Trump (you and some others here), 3- those that would never vote for Hillary (a few hereabouts) and 4- the large number of people who usually don't vote or were so disenchanted with the choice that they weren't going to bother to vote. Obviously there were some that were undecided and this could have influenced their vote. I just feel that had to be an extremely small handful of people. In that regard, the outcome is still our fault and our problem. We have to get better candidates and reduce the partisan rancor or we'll see more and more crap like this.

It is extremely troubling. The only way I've down played it at all is by saying that I think having more information at our disposal on the candidates is not a bad thing. That is not to say that how that information came to be divulged is a good thing.