JJ Husker

Same with texting while driving. Get caught looking at your phone, go to jail. Dead is dead. Yeah, I'll take an experienced driver with a .08 over the people convinced they can continue to have a text conversation behind the wheel. Why should a person take either one?

Okay.......so when are you going to start expressing a reasonable opinion? You have stated 3rd offense dui is not that big of a deal and provided some anecdotal evidence of how you drove drunk numerous times (was it 6-8 weekends in a row you should've got a dui...?) without harming anyone and this lucky occurrence leads you to believe that driving drunk is no big deal and that anyone who lives in the United States should just accept that possibly getting killed by a drunk driver is somehow an expected risk we all assume. Sorry, that isn't reasonable. In fact, it is the opposite of reasonable. You might want to start over.....or just quit before you say more things that make you look foolish and irresponsible.

A question out of sheer curiosity for those of you who live in Nebraska and don't like Hillary but think she is better than Trump (nothing wrong with that btw). Knapp I'm looking at you, and anyone else who says they don't really like Hillary.....why would you feel like you have to choose the lesser of 2 evils? It is pretty obvious that Trump will carry Nebraska, given that knowledge, why would anyone in Nebraska feel like they need to vote for either one to prevent wasting their vote? Seems like a perfect opportunity to cast a protest vote for Johnson or anyone other than those 2. Not to rub it in but that Nebraska Hillary vote is not going to help select who the next President is anyway. And the same goes for Trump, if you don't like him but think he is better than Hillary, why not vote for Johnson? Far be it from me to tell anyone who they should vote for but this seems prime to express displeasure with such lousy candidates from the 2 major parties. I arrived at that place in a bit tougher circumstances because my vote in Colorado could actually matter but I've decided I'm fed up with crap choices and I will be voting for Johnson. This question is not directed at anyone who really wants to vote for Hillary or Trump or for anyone who lives in a state that is actually up for grabs. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do in that case. Anyway, I'm just curious what the motivation is there.

Seems silly to pick teams we likely won't even play, so.... Oregon Wisconsin Ohio State Hopefully not at the expense of losing any other divisional games because the people choosing those seemingly "easy" opponents have a point too.

Just binged Stranger Things over the last couple days. Really good 8 part series. Curious what they'll do for season 2. A cross between Super 8 and Carrie is a good description.....might toss in a little bit of Stand By Me and Poltergeist also.

Now that you mention it......has anyone actually seen her birth certificate? What is she hiding by not releasing it?

I've never been to Fox & Hound but that is always the place ya hear about for Husker games in the Denver area. I would guess that is the place to be.

Drinking habits absolutely factor into BAC. Your liver processes alcohol faster the more used to drinking your body gets. The faster it's processed results in a lower BAC. That's why the more you drink, the higher your toleration is. To some extent yes, but as far as a discussion about drinking and driving, should people really allow for a little higher rate of processing? If a person has a drinking problem where higher or more frequent use of alcohol and their liver rate is playing a role, those are the people I'm most concerned about getting behind the wheel. The point is, don't drink and drive. Period. It's not worth it for anybody involved.

The misinformation about drinking and driving, alcohol in general and some of the nonchalant attitudes about dui's are just astonishing on this board. Here's one little gem to learn ya up. Blood alcohol content is simply a function of quantity, time and your body weight. It doesnt matter if you're used to drinking heavily or not. You will blow what the science of the matter dictates. Doesn't matter if you do it every day or once every 4 years. If you drink enough in a short enough time frame your BAC and reaction time will show it. So those of you who are under the impression that you can drink too much and still drive or have a lower BAC because you're "used to it" are severely and dangerously misinformed. If you drink and drive, do society and yourself a favor and just stop. That family that doesn't lose a father or mother or child because you behaved responsibly will really appreciate it.

I think they look pretty sharp. This may be the most we can hope for from Adidas. Voted like them, I think they could've done a bit more with them and I'm not a big fan of some of Adidas design tendencies (skinny N, stencil type elements, etc) but these are pretty cool.

Happy Bday Methuse.....err Knapp. Hope it's a good one.

Of course some of them exist. I've already explained twice why I don't think it is as many as you think it is. I just think many who are supporting him are doing it out of some sort of necessity and not necessarily a desire for most of what he is proposing or of him personally. Believe it or not, it is not that wild of a notion for someone to be so against Hillary or what they perceive to be pretty far left politics to latch onto another bad choice that they just don't see as being as bad. It doesnt make them died in the wool Trump lovers. They may feel it is their only option that isnt Hillary or the dems. That's just my opinion. At least I hope we don't have a significant portion of either party that really fully supports him or Hillary. I think the predominate view is, these are the candidates we got stuck with and now we have to beat the other side. That logic is pretty hard to argue with as I haven't seen very many at all that are happy with either one and that seems to be the rationale for most on either side. Most people are stuck in this lesser of two evils mode. If you disagree, fine, but don't act like it's some crazy idea. It's all we've seen on HB for quite some time. A few in this camp and a few in that camp and the vast majority stuck in between, dissatisfied with both but still planning on going with one of two worthless candidates.

It might be wishful thinking but, if he gets into the debates, anything is possible. He shows up a few times, is a voice of reason, isn't a liar, cheat, pompous ass and doesn't propose some crazy crap.......sure, why not.

Maybe I'm misreading the circumstances but, considering I don't know any people like that personally, I assume that maybe there aren't really that many of them. Trump winning the primary doesn't have to mean people really like him or agree with some of the crap he is/was spouting. I really think in this case all that it means is a whole bunch of unrepresented R's don't want anything to do with the dems, Hillary, Sanders, Obama, etc. It doesn't make that big of a difference in the end, but I think for this discussion it goes to the mindset of a rather large portion of the R party. I realize it is much more fun and advantageous for someone from the other side to paint the majority of the party in the worst possible light (and they've fully earned that treatment) but I just don't know these people. I like to think that not very many of them exist that really desire what they seem to be supporting. Who knows, I could be way off base.

Pretty sure my daughter is having some friends over to celebrate her birthday . Probably be out flippin burgers and dogs for them to eat, (I'll sneak a steak in there for me) Then when the game starts, I'll tell all her little punk friends to keep it down cuz the Husker game is on and don't even think about coming in the house while the game is on. I'll show them where the proper bushes are if they should have to relieve themselves. Then I'll watch the game completely undisturbed. Well, it will be sort of like that.

And like I said earlier but probably didn't articulate well enough, I really don't see that "wing" of the party. Sure there are a handful of extremists and racists and whatnot but I don't think we can assume that the likes of Trump or Cruz really have a supporting wing in the party. What I see is a bunch of republicans that are not real happy with the Democrat party or the liberal left and they are rebelling against that direction. Like I said earlier, they are anti-Democrat and anti-liberal left and they are latching on to any force that opposes that type of agenda. I can't really explain how a Rubio or Kasich or any of the other gazillion original Repubs didn't beat out Trump and Cruz sooner. I would have to attribute it to some extremely dissatisfied voices that really didn't think it could happen. I think some of the same thing happened on the dem side with Hillary and Sanders being the last 2 standing. It seems to be the way our system works anymore, go way to the extreme to hopefully get things going your way a little bit. Anyway, I just really can't imagine that a Trump or Cruz is what any significant part of the party actually wants. It may look very extreme but I don't think it is in reality. I could be wrong, but I sure don't know any of those people.

Good point. We never get even 5% of all the grand plans they toss around while campaigning and the little we do get is usually moderated pretty well by those who oppose it. That's probably pretty much the way want it anyway. Drastic change is usually worse than no change. I mean we do have it reasonably well here. No sense throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

When I think "Libertarian", the first thing that comes to mind is the social issues and keeping the government out of our personal lives. Like TG, I am pro life and against abortion but I also don't feel the govt has any business dictating that issue one way or the other. Just because I am against it doesn't mean I think there should be laws prohibiting it. I simply would like to see people plan better and take more responsibility for their actions and not use it as a go to solution. Also, I'm not real sure privatizing healthcare would work. Kind of been there and done that and it's a sh#t sandwich. The only way that works is if we agree to not care for people who don't have insurance and we all know that won't fly in a civilized society.

I probably just don't have a good idea of what all the LP desires I guess. You're right, some of that doesn't appeal to me, at least to the extent some of your examples indicate. However, I do believe in most of those things.....Actually, the more I think about them, they sound pretty good to me. I might go a little easier on some of the regulatory issues, like not completely eliminating the FDA or EPA but they sure could be reigned in a bit. And I dont see completely eliminating welfare, some people truly need a safety net so I would be more for reforming that. The only thing I really disagree with would be eliminating barriers to immigration and assuming that the law is the problem. Also, privatizing national parks seems a bit strange and of really low importance. I'm pretty good with the rest of those. Maybe I like Johnson even more than I realized.

Zoogs- I don't think the typical "Republican" is as far right or as far removed from libertarian as you think they are. I agree with all of the same stuff BRB lines out above and so did TG. And most R's that I know reject Trump and Cruz and much of what the Tea Party stands for. I have always identified as a Republican until recently. I have taken a few of the online political assessments and always fall in the libertarian category. And I also think you have a skewed sense of what most Libertarians stand for. Sure the textbook definition may viritually abolish government and social programs etc. but I don't think that is where the majority of libertarian lean I ng people want to go. Rand was probably a little extreme in that sense for most, I know he was for me. I think you feel the typical R is a lot further right and extreme than most really are. That likely comes from the party moving to be more anti-liberal and anti-democrat over the last several years. At least that is where I have been since early in GW's first term. It's not so much that the rank and file Repub supports the move further right as it is that most of them simply are rebelling against the dems moving further left. There are a whole bunch that lean more moderate that are not being represented by anyone. Some of them just haven't woken up and bailed on the party yet. That doesn't make them extremist Trump supporters it just makes them slow to act and probably quite ambivalent. I still have not personally talked to one single person who thinks Trump is what they want or need. There are a few here on HB that seem to like what he stands for but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of repubs are more like me and BRB and TG and I sure don't feel were as far right as you typically portray republicans to be.

I don't like the fact that article came from an outsider. I don't like that Brian Bennett is from ESPN. It is obvious that writer is throwing stones from a glass house. But, for the life of me, I can not disagree with one single word he wrote in that article. Not one.

Sounds to me like there is a big opening in Texas for some clinics that provide family planning, prenatal services and well childcare. Apparently this hole will have to be filled by an outfit that is not also the leading provider of abortions in the world. This eliminates Planeed Parenthood. I'm guessing that was the intention of the people in Texas, to quit public funding of abortions. But some will act like they are against prenatal services and healthcare in general. Surely somebody can fill the void left by the lack of funding for Baby Killers Inc.

I don't at all support Hillary Clinton. I definitely will not vote for her, I'll either vote third-party or abstain, but if I was forced with a gun to my head to pick between her and Trump, I'd pick her without a moment's hesitation. Okay, I'm sorry. I may have attributed a whole bunch of Hillary defending and Trump bashing to you in error. As you know, it's easy to read through all these comments, see 1 or 2 that you disagree with one person, and then assimilate all the other similar comments to that person. That is my fault for not realizing you were to the gun-at-the-head point with Hillary. That is pretty much where I am too. Although, I might be leaning towards just taking that bullet and letting it all be over with at this point.

Okay. You support Hillary Clinton and everything she stands for. That is fine. No, really. You haven't been one to say she is bad but better than so and so. If you like her and her policies, that is your right and privilege to support her. I disagree with it and think she is unworthy of support but everyone has different opinions. I just really tire of the people that won't own it to the extent you and dudeguyy and NM and a few others do. For some others, it is like they are being forced to support Hillary because Trump is just so much worse. Like I said, anybody that supports either one of these candidates at this point really should dispense with invoking how rotten the other is. Go ahead and support the candidate that best represents you and be proud of it. But you don't get to disown the inconveniences of that support with mere words. Sorry, I've just really soured on our whole political process. These 2 POS candidates have pushed me over the edge. Sure I'd like everyone to come to that realization with me but it isn't going to happen. BRB and myself have gotten there and hopefully many others that are simply ignoring this topic because of its uselessness. I just can't muster the energy or rationale to support either one. Anyway, go ahead and have fun in here. I probably won't visit this page again unless there is some earth shattering news on the election front.

Hey, I get that in many ways Trump is worse than Hillary. I. Get. It. But this false equivalency crap has to stop. There are not only two choices. It doesn't have to be this one or that one. Once a person gets beyon THAT brainwashing that our 2 party political system has been so successful with, then you can realize that "false equivalency" is not the problem. The problem is two candidates, neither of which is deserving of anyone's support. At this point, if a person supports either one of them, that speaks volumes about what that person really supports. I don't buy the excuse of "well yeah, my candidate is bad but your's is worse". That is something you would hear on a playground. How about this? If your candidate is bad, don't support them. That is the only way future prospects are going to learn. What you do by supporting liars and cheats and worthless human beings is help assure we'll get more like them in the future. It hurts our system. Reject all bad candidates. The fact another may be worse is just an excuse.