NM11046
-
Posts
7,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by NM11046
-
-
I'm curious on those who are in a "wait & see" stage regarding the legal trouble Trump has/is facing with lack of payment to vendors and employees. What exactly are you waiting to see? The USA Today story was very diligently investigated, all the news outlets (including Fox) are now running with it. The 3500 lawsuits are public knowledge - and I believe they are separate from the 1500 related to Trump University.
-
It's easy to make money when you don't have to pay your bills.
Not "don't have to" but choose not to.
-
Is it surprising to anyone that Donald Trump not only had multiple affairs with married women -- while married himself -- he saw fit to brag about it in his autobiography?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/27/christians-cringe-at-donald-trump-s-sexy-past.html
Don't care, myself, but Republicans and evangelical Christians might want to start scuttling off that moral high ground.
I have no idea why Trump won or tied the Evangelical vote in many of the primaries as I would prefer someone with a better personal compass. With that said, I do expect many of those Evangelicals who did not support him in the primaries to get on board as we are down to two deeply flawed candidates, and Trump at least offers a chance to reverse the negative direction this country has been on for years. Hillary will simply offer more of the same. Thus, I do now expect many of those Evangelicals that did not support Trump in the primary to get on board the Trump train.
Seriously. I need a Republican to walk me through the negatives that define the negative direction we're heading down, so we can figure out how they happened, how to stop them and/or whether they are actually bad.
And I need a good Christian to help me figure out why so many followers of Christ are opposed to feeding the hungry, helping the sick and loving thy neighbor, and instead support candidates who embrace guns, wage war and invite the money lenders INTO the temple.
Who is opposed to feeding the hungry, helping the sick, and loving thy neighbor?
Dude - come on! I'm thinking at this point you're just trolling.
-
I prefer to make my own educated decision based on what I see and what I read about in unbiased sources. And on top of that - My gut. Which has been right (not a placebo controlled trial) at least 95% of the time. Not on the supposed rumbles of people who may or may not have met the man behind closed doors on a good day. Why would you think that after he's elected suddenly we'll see this alter ego Trump? The worst in people comes out in stressful times, and it won't get less stressful for him if elected. I can't understand valuing someones opinion, (who you don't know from a hole in the wall) over documented instances and what you can see if you turn on a television or computer. If your mom or your 2nd grade teacher said she'd met him and he was wonderful that's one thing, but random folks - none of which will stand up and say it proudly? Nope.YOU DON'T SAY, HILLARY!https://twitter.com/AP/status/740657483417563136
From like two weeks ago:
I'm as worried about who comes after Trump, in his footsteps, as I am about a Trump presidency. There's a market for demagoguery in America, Trump is showing that very clearly. When you elect demagogues, you get dictators. History is rife with examples of that.
As I've stated before, this election is about the worse of two evils. On the one hand you have a bully and blowhard outside the political system that has a history of getting results. On the other hand you have a pathological liar who has spent her career inside the system and has little to show for it. Both candidates are deeply flawed when it comes to their character, and the election will come down to whether Americans want an insider or outsider.
That's the thing. What you see on TV and what the media advertises about Trump isn't who he is. There have been countless people who have come forward who have either worked for Trump, worked with him, or been around him, and all of them that I've heard have said that he's one of the most generous, respectful people they've ever met. I tend to listen to those opinions about a persons character before I would ever listen to someone in the media, or a career politician.
PS, my uncles friend's cousin met Mother Theresa and said she was an absolute loud mouth bully. It's true. One of the other nuns that lived with her said it too. My mechanic told me his neighbor told him so.
Why would I not take into account people who have worked along side him and say that he is one of the most respectful, generous people they have ever met? The best example would be from all the women in the smear article from the NYT. They were all quoted out of context, and they all came out and said nothing but good things about him.
On top of that, I look at how much his family loves and respects him, and how well he has raised them to be successful business people as well. Ivanka especially is an extremely impressive individual.
Finally, the stresses? Really? He has been in high pressure situations his whole life and made out pretty well. I have absolutely zero concern about him handling stress.
You know what - you've changed my mind. You're right, because it's far more common for the family of a public official (and that's what he is now) to not stand behind him and to instead say bad things. And if he's "made out" pretty well during bad situations in business then that's all I care about. Not how he's treated others, how he's considered people (their livelihood, their feelings, their rights) besides his own greed and financial benefit.
The president of the US is required to think beyond him/herself. To see a broader picture, the long term ramifications of any decision that he makes. He/she has to be able to put themselves in the shoes of the people that they represent, the rich and the poor, the white, christian, middle aged man and the old single woman, the young black/hispanic/asian/indian man. The american people, and those outside our little (and it is little) world - he/she has to be empathetic, decisive and respectful.
You're right Shark, Trump is all of those things. I'm sure the people on SharkTank think so, and so it must be the case.
(insert sarcasm here)
-
YOU DON'T SAY, HILLARY!
https://twitter.com/AP/status/740657483417563136
From like two weeks ago:
I'm as worried about who comes after Trump, in his footsteps, as I am about a Trump presidency. There's a market for demagoguery in America, Trump is showing that very clearly. When you elect demagogues, you get dictators. History is rife with examples of that.
As I've stated before, this election is about the worse of two evils. On the one hand you have a bully and blowhard outside the political system that has a history of getting results. On the other hand you have a pathological liar who has spent her career inside the system and has little to show for it. Both candidates are deeply flawed when it comes to their character, and the election will come down to whether Americans want an insider or outsider.
That's the thing. What you see on TV and what the media advertises about Trump isn't who he is. There have been countless people who have come forward who have either worked for Trump, worked with him, or been around him, and all of them that I've heard have said that he's one of the most generous, respectful people they've ever met. I tend to listen to those opinions about a persons character before I would ever listen to someone in the media, or a career politician.
I prefer to make my own educated decision based on what I see and what I read about in unbiased sources. And on top of that - My gut. Which has been right (not a placebo controlled trial) at least 95% of the time. Not on the supposed rumbles of people who may or may not have met the man behind closed doors on a good day. Why would you think that after he's elected suddenly we'll see this alter ego Trump? The worst in people comes out in stressful times, and it won't get less stressful for him if elected. I can't understand valuing someones opinion, (who you don't know from a hole in the wall) over documented instances and what you can see if you turn on a television or computer. If your mom or your 2nd grade teacher said she'd met him and he was wonderful that's one thing, but random folks - none of which will stand up and say it proudly? Nope.
PS, my uncles friend's cousin met Mother Theresa and said she was an absolute loud mouth bully. It's true. One of the other nuns that lived with her said it too. My mechanic told me his neighbor told him so.
-
Not gonna lie, I laughed a lot, even as someone who advocates for Trump. The only problem with this guy is he makes a career making jokes about other people, and that's not someone I'm ever going to listen to.
Here is an intelligent person who lays it out there (and she's really nice on the eyes as well):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQfIXixFi7o
Also, one thing to note is that Tomi was extremely against Trump because she thought he was rude, and she has since joined his side understanding his flaws but still understanding that he's the best remaining candidate.
Not gonna lie, I laughed a lot, even as someone who advocates for Trump. The only problem with this guy is he makes a career making jokes about other people, and that's not someone I'm ever going to listen to.
Here is an intelligent person who lays it out there (and she's really nice on the eyes as well):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQfIXixFi7o
Also, one thing to note is that Tomi was extremely against Trump because she thought he was rude, and she has since joined his side understanding his flaws but still understanding that he's the best remaining candidate.
Not sure if I'd bucket you as a sexist or a misogynist but either way you're an ass. If you had anyone starting to buy into your weird bs theories, you hopefully lost them with your 'easy on the eyes" comment. Do you not realize that by demeaning her with that comment you also take away any perceived legitimacy of her comments? I understand now why you're such a zombie like follower of Drumpf.
-
If there are tons of terrific reasons to support such an irreverent charlatan, I don't know what units you'd have to use to quantify the terrific reasons to oppose him.
Decency and competency, for starters.
I'd like to add self awareness and empathy, relateability.
SaveSave
If you add "nice" and "folksy" Mike Riley might as well be the next president.
If I wasn't being sarcastic about Drumph you'd be right.
-
But to be fair, I'd say Trump is the best candidate at using adjectives to describe himself. Not a lot of different ones mind you, but the consistent use of them when speaking about himself is indeed impressive. Terrific in fact.
-
If there are tons of terrific reasons to support such an irreverent charlatan, I don't know what units you'd have to use to quantify the terrific reasons to oppose him.
Decency and competency, for starters.
I'd like to add self awareness and empathy, relateability.
SaveSave
-
If there are tons of terrific reasons to support such an irreverent charlatan, I don't know what units you'd have to use to quantify the terrific reasons to oppose him.
Decency and competency, for starters.
I'd like to add self awareness and empathy, relateability.
-
I'm honestly curious: for the people who think Obama has been a disaster, what exactly did he do that prevented you from your own pursuit of life, liberty and happiness?
The question at this point is typically "are we better off than we were 8 years ago" and the answer is yes, of course, no question about it. And with genuine collaboration and debate rather than mere obstructionism, it could have been better.
The things going wrong with America are many years in the making, involve the exponential growth of income disparity and have been fed by both parties.
But it seems pretty clear to me the last thing we need right now is a thin-skinned billionaire who wants to take America back to a time that didn't exist.
What really blows my mind and confuses me are the folks that say he's been negative for race relations ... what the wha?
-
I suppose we should be OK with Hillary using unauthorized email like we were OK with Reagan having coke-fueled parties and Bush II dodging the draft, right?
Or is the fact that Hillary used email in the same way that Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice used email somehow a huge smoking gun?
Or is it just some stupid smoke screen that the gullible will latch onto....
Wait. Don't answer that.
Trump 2016.
lol
I don't understand how the misdeeds and the errors of others should excuse Hillary's behavior. I haven't really been one to raise much of a stink about any of them but two wrongs don't make a right. I thought you didn't like Hillary? One of the main reason I have been avoiding these political threads lately is, I dont think any of the candidates are worthy of being defended. I dont want anyone to think I support any of them because IMO that would be somewhat embarrassing and also extremely hard to get very enthusiastic about. I'm confused why anybody who regularly claims the same thing, that all the candidates are poor, so often is seen defending one of them. Is it just the least bad of the bad thing that makes her worthy of sticking up for? Or, do you think she's not really all that bad? Or, is it just the thrill of pointing out cases of perceived hypocrisy?
I don't mean to be getting on you specifically. I'm just dumbfounded by all the apparent support any of these wastes of air are garnering. Maybe I've just gotten too cynical.
You wouldn't be hearing about this if Hilary weren't running for office. You wouldn't care. It wouldn't be treated as "big news," because it wouldn't be. It'd be treated the same as when Colin Powell did it and Condoleeza Rice did it. With a "meh" and barely a mention in the news.
What you should be dumbfounded with is how shrill the attacks on Hillary are over something that at least two other Secretaries of State have done. What you should be dumbfounded about is how, 12 years after John Kerry was "swiftboated" in a crazy, stupid smear campaign, Americans are falling for the same kind of smear tactics again.
I guess it doesn't surprise me that a candidate for President is being highly, and maybe unfairly, scrutinized by supporters of the opponent. Also it doesn't surprise me that people will tend to ignore the flaws of the person they support and raise a bigger stink about the opponent. That's just human nature. I guess I'll just have to remain most dumbfounded by the fact that any of them have any supporters who think they're worth defending. I'm having trouble coming to terms with these being our choices. I don't want any of them to get a pass on anything even if the attack may be considered unfair. Made up and over played controversy has been a backbone of our political system forever. But totally worthless candidates for POTUS? I won't accept that.
Well written JJ - I agree with everything you said. What gets stuck in my craw however, are the lies that are being spewed and then believed by the simple minded folks who are unable or who choose not to think for themselves; weigh the lessor of two evils, sort through the truth from the made up stuff, research a candidate's overall history and make an educated decision. Anybody who depends on Trump to educate them about Hilary or vice versa (or their respective news stations) and votes based on the rhetoric they hear from their candidate is a fool. And we seem to have a boatload of them right now. Shame on us, the US should be better than that - think what image of normal this sets for younger people who as far as they know, this is the sort of candidate and the sort of campaigns that the US has.
Scrutiny - yes, it's expected and I think anyone who puts their name in the hat to run anticipates having to deal with it. But some of what's going on this year is just too much. The name calling, the immature twitter comments, the flippant disregard for other humans, the absolute made up on the spot lies. Why would any young person today live through this and say, "yeah, President is a job I want to strive for someday" or what middle aged person says, "yeah, I think my skeletons are not real bad, and I've got a tough skin, don't care about my family getting taken down, maybe I'll run in 4 years".
It's no wonder we have who we have to choose from today - who would want to go through all this and to get THAT job. It's no longer a respected position, at least by Americans - it's not a job that anybody can honestly look at and say, "I think I can get things done". It's a sad, sad time for America.
-
5
-
-
Her? Who are you talking about?
Must you keep doing this? In every thread in this forum?
God help us - he'll do it till somebody laughs, and thus it will go on forever.
-
Clinton is a female democratic version of Richard Nixon
Trump is, well, Trump. Cartoonish and a bull in a china shop, especially on foreign policy. (See what I did there?)
Trump is an orange version of SNLs Tommy Flanagan (the pathological Liar)
http://www.hulu.com/watch/10387-
1
-
-
Someone should let him know we have 307 All Time Academic All Americans and that the next college, Notre Dame has 231. It's not even close.
No one has better sports and academics than Nebraska.
http://forms.cosida.com/Academic%20All-America/aaaselections.aspx
I would agree, but would revise the statement by saying: nobody has better academic support for its athletes than Nebraska.
Playing devils advocate, there are plenty of other schools with higher ranking academic programs (depending on field of study), especially here in the B1G Ten.
The important thing is that the chances of an athlete succeeding in their academic pursuits is better here, regardless of sport or coach.
Hey IA State Huskers - not trolling here, seriously asking ... what's the source you use to back up the academic support for athletes at NE? How do we prove that the chances of an athlete succeeding is greater at NE than elsewhere?
For the 2014-15 year, Nebraska was 2nd in the B1G for GSR (graduation success rate) behind Northwestern. Source: http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/graduation-success-rate
Nebraska clocked in at 85% while Northwestern hit 97%. Closest to us was Rutgers at 83%.
If he truly wanted the best GSR school on his offer list...it would probably be Duke or Stanford.
But honestly, if he wants to see the best supported athletic program as far as academics, I can't think of any program out there that can rival ours...we've invested over 16.2 million in student athlete facilities, programs and assistance in the past 2-3 years...including, giving each student athlete a laptop to use during their time here. Source: http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=100&ATCLID=4270
As everyone here knows, tutors are available for large gaps of time for student athletes in a variety of subjects. There are 14 full time staff members that support these endeavors. Nebraska is VERY serious about student athlete education.
If it were me, I would make sure I put these programs at other schools up against what Nebraska offers and what it has achieved in the past. Using that formula, I truly believe that "there is no place like Nebraska".
Good info to have on hand - thank you. Lots of folks making broad statements on how great their education/graduation/academics program is (or isn't - not just talking NE here) but there doesn't seem to be a reputable source that can be pointed to as fact. I like having this info. Thank you.
-
Someone should let him know we have 307 All Time Academic All Americans and that the next college, Notre Dame has 231. It's not even close.
No one has better sports and academics than Nebraska.
http://forms.cosida.com/Academic%20All-America/aaaselections.aspx
I would agree, but would revise the statement by saying: nobody has better academic support for its athletes than Nebraska.
Playing devils advocate, there are plenty of other schools with higher ranking academic programs (depending on field of study), especially here in the B1G Ten.
The important thing is that the chances of an athlete succeeding in their academic pursuits is better here, regardless of sport or coach.
Hey IA State Huskers - not trolling here, seriously asking ... what's the source you use to back up the academic support for athletes at NE? How do we prove that the chances of an athlete succeeding is greater at NE than elsewhere?
-
Lol. I get the feeling he has a little more interest in us than Echols.
Oh boy. Here we go again
Or Hill?
-
Talk of a President repealing the 2nd Amendment - or any amendment, for that matter - inevitably points out the lack of education and critical thinking in this country. Presidents don't repeal amendments. In fact, Presidents play virtually no part in amendments.
To repeal an amendment, you have to pass a new amendment that "overwrites" the amendment to be repealed. That means you have to begin with a proposed amendment that must be voted approved by a 2/3 majority of both legislative bodies of the US Congress. The proposed Amendment must then be sent ot every individual State's legislature for consideration. Each state follows its own parliamentary process to arrive at a yea or nay on the proposed Amendment. For the proposed Amendment to become a Constitutional Amendment, 3/4 of the individual States must vote a final yea. With 50 states, the required number of State ratifications to adopt the new amendment is 38. Upon the confirmation of the 38th yea, the Amendment becomes part of the Constitution, amending, or changing, whatever the subject of the amendment covers--whether it be a new cause, or eliminating an old Amendment. That's why, of all the amendments, only a single one - just one - has ever been repealed (and that's why we can drink beer on game days, thank the gods).
See? No involvement by the President.
Further, every presidential race since at least Bush verses Dukakis has contained the claim that the Democratic candidate would "repeal the 2nd amendment". And in every case in which the Democrat won, the newly elected President has...done nothing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If folks will recall, that was the claim when Obama ran the first time. What happened? Well, no repeal (obviously, for the reason above) - but there was a hell of a run on gun purchases and ammo. Enough that ammo prices shot through the roof and gun owners complained long and loud.
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The people who swallow the claim that "Candidate X" will repeal the 2nd Amendment are those that lack sufficient education and any degree of critical thinking. They are the ones that wallow in propaganda and hype. Unfortunately, despite their ignorance they still are permitted to vote. Like I said, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
This is a discussion that comes up a lot during some of my lectures. How educated should one have to be to vote. I get very interesting answers.
When I asked if you were a teacher the other day you said no - what's the deal TeacherCD?
-
You know how the tapes recently came out with past conversations Trumps' "PR Guy" had with the press (you know, the guy who's voice sounded just like Trumps?) I can't imagine he has the time, but is it possible that he is on this board spouting his catch phrases? Some of the comments here are just a little too "straight from the mouth" of the master.
Ex. "He's a terrific sales-person, and as long as you aren't concerned with the confrontational style he has, his pitch is phenomenal."
"Trump's got a great track record of being one of the best negotiators in the world. Everything with foreign relations, trade, war, national debt, etc. "
-
Ugggh - hope he gets it together before - hate that we'd suddenly be in that cocky, trash talking mentality. I'd rather be the better sportsman and use bs like this to motivate our guys, not have to defend against.
First off, this was from Keyshawn Sr, not Junior.
I'm quite aware
Secondly, he went to USC so already dislikes Oregon
Okay ...
Thirdly- He is joking around and supporting the Huskers and his kid.
I understand he thinks it a joke and that you feel any press is good press
I am all on-board having some fun. Key is a talker and I am very ok with that!
You'll likely get to see more of it in the coming years I'm guessing. If he's doing it prior to Jr. even moving to Lincoln, it's not going to slow down once his kids' in the line up.
I just don't think it aligns much with our brand as "americas greatest college fb fans" or our coaching staff's philosophy on how one should conduct themselves.
Lighten up, blue hair.
People can have differing opinions. No need to call names because someone disagrees with yours.
-
Ugggh - hope he gets it together before - hate that we'd suddenly be in that cocky, trash talking mentality. I'd rather be the better sportsman and use bs like this to motivate our guys, not have to defend against.
First off, this was from Keyshawn Sr, not Junior.
I'm quite aware
Secondly, he went to USC so already dislikes Oregon
Okay ...
Thirdly- He is joking around and supporting the Huskers and his kid.
I understand he thinks it a joke and that you feel any press is good press
I am all on-board having some fun. Key is a talker and I am very ok with that!
You'll likely get to see more of it in the coming years I'm guessing. If he's doing it prior to Jr. even moving to Lincoln, it's not going to slow down once his kids' in the line up.
I just don't think it aligns much with our brand as "americas greatest college fb fans" or our coaching staff's philosophy on how one should conduct themselves.
-
Ugggh - hope he gets it together before - hate that we'd suddenly be in that cocky, trash talking mentality. I'd rather be the better sportsman and use bs like this to motivate our guys, not have to defend against.
This type of talk is not poor sportsmanship and is pretty normal throughout CFB. Not normally from a father of a player but hopefully Sr.'s swagger got passed down to son as well as athletic abilities. We need a little more testosterone running throughout the team. Just need to apply it while on the field, but hey, its a start!
Matter of opinion on the level of sportsmanship - I like the testosterone, just prefer it in the locker room and on the field. I'd prefer we get it done and let that speak for itself. Just like dancing in the end zone - I think it's more impactful to politely hand the ref the ball and get back to the sideline. Do your business. Don't talk about it, and certainly don't talk about it on twitter months before a game.
Look at the 92' Huskers vs. the Miami Hurricanes of the 80s'. I'd rather be the former and be respected for our talent than hated for our mouths.
-
Ugggh - hope he gets it together before - hate that we'd suddenly be in that cocky, trash talking mentality. I'd rather be the better sportsman and use bs like this to motivate our guys, not have to defend against.
Yeah, I'm sure none of our past or current players have ever trash talked an opponent.
Didn't say that did I? Said I didn't like it. That I'd prefer we be bigger than that and better sportsman, and I think on the whole historically Nebraska has been pretty good about walking the walk and not talking it. Can't do much to control ones parent, but hopefully the players are more cautious about what they put out publicly. It certainly wouldn't be reflective of how this coaching staff goes about their business.
-
Ugggh - hope he gets it together before Jr gets onto the field - hate that we'd suddenly be in that cocky, trash talking mentality. I'd rather be the better sportsman and use bs like this to motivate our guys, not have to defend against.
The Repub Debate
in Politics & Religion
Posted
EXCELLENT Zoogs. Thank you for sharing this.