Guy Chamberlin

Well I honestly thought I was in the Shed, and the post appears to have been pulled, but my point for people who actually read the posts is that there is NO legal burden for impeachment, and Donald Trump's actions -- which I listed in some detail -- are the most dangerous and appalling in presidential history. It's an opinion shared by most sentient grown-ups and requires no Constitutional quote -- though it's pretty much textbook sedition. It's an open and shut case, as the folks who spent two years trying to prosecute Benghazi would understand if they were the slightest bit honest. Here's another word I'm comfortable using: evil. This s#!t is evil. I'm really tired pretending it isn't and I will continue to insult you if you continue to sugarcoat it.

I read the San Francisco Chronicle every morning, and the Letters to the Editor unanimously agree with you: she's a f#&%ing idiot.

Ozigbo started 2018 as a fourth stringer, but felt like a featured back by the end of the year. That was predicated on Frost's decision to use him. Don't have to be elite, but 1,000 yard seasons aren't too much to ask.

The Democrats f#&%ed up both impeachments. These aren't legal cases and as such don't have the burden of legal prosecutions. They are simply to determine the fitness of Donald Trump to be president, and the case against Trump is wide and deep, including breeches of security, the emoluments clause, pathological lying, sabotaging the U.S. post office, intimidating state officials, aiding, abetting, and inciting domestic terrorists, etc., etc., etc. Trump's body of impeachable work is unprecedented. The list of witnesses you could bring would have been respected adults from many political persuasions. But by making Impeachment One entirely about a Ukrainian quid pro quo, the Dems hung everything on something that was plausibly deniable. Impeachment Two was whether Donald Trump directly advocated the violent invasion of the Capitol on January 6, also plausibly deniable if treated as a legal case. The difficultly proving this kind of intent is how mob bosses have always avoided prison terms -- even if everyone understands their underlying guilt. Then again, perhaps it doesn't matter. The most recent poll says 67% of Republicans supported overturning the 2020 election without a shred of actionable proof. American just took a sharp right into banana republic. Remember when folks thought Joe Biden would turn the U.S. into Venezuela? Turns out it was Donald Trump.

I thought Washington and Mills looked like a very Nebraska-worthy rushing attack. Even if they were getting yards on flare passes, it felt like part of the running game and a genuinely dangerous Frost offense. But when your quarterbacks become more effective runners than passers, the RBs don't get the touches -- and neither do the wide-receivers. I still think Nebraska will be a better rushing team when the quarterback is a better passer. I miss having a featured running back.

You can always bubble screen your way to a 70% completion rate, but two other things have to happen: it opens up your vertical running lanes and mid-range passing game. My understanding is that QB ratings are heavily weighted on two metrics: TD/Interception ratio, and average yards per pass attempt. Nebraska's YPA have been pretty low for years. They were really high when we were a run-first offense and our QBs were 50% completion guys.

Now I'm hearing that Luke McCaffrey left so he could be closer to Wan'dale Robinson's mother.

Thanks. That's an interesting perspective. Seems to be supported by examples from other team sports at all levels.

Bump. Old thread. Accused of being hysterical at the time. But I think it's going to be an open-ended question for years.

Of course we do.

Well that puts Martinez and Frost in an even odder position. Does Martinez want to go through the hard work and unnecessary academic year to play two more full seasons? With three years as a starter under his belt, does Martinez have any realistic shot at the NFL? And to my original point, McCaffrey was praised for winning a game with modest Martinez-like stats. Then when he lost a game with bad Martinez-like stats, we went back to Martinez. Who was, in fact, the better quarterback. But he also had three years under his belt in Frost's system. We seem to think Martinez can clean up his errant downfield throws, occasional bad decision making, and turnovers in his forth season as a stater, but we're also declaring freshman McCaffrey a washout who can't be expected to correct similar deficits. Do you give Adrian Martinez a fourth and fifth year to become a competitive Big 10 quarterback, while not allowing a McCaffrey or Smothers the same mistakes or learning curve?

Is that true? Did everyone automatically get a COVID do-over for 2020? Do you have to announce your intention to use that fifth year?

To be fair, the improvements we're asking Martinez to make as a Senior are pretty much the same improvements we'd ask McCaffrey to make as a sophomore.

That Atlantic article also jogged a memory about the post-Charlottesville reaction. At first, Trump failed to repudiate the racist march. Under pressure, he then read a prepared release strongly condemning white supremacism. The next day he was supposed to make a major announcement about infrastructure, perhaps the one issue in America everyone could agree on. That's where Trump went off-page, hijacked his own infrastructure announcement, and made the "good people on both sides" statement. Apparently he hated making the second statement strongly condemning white supremacism because he thought it made him look weak. That's your man, Archy.

This is an outstanding list, but if you only have time for one, The Atlantic's historic timeline tells you everything you need to know from the people who knew: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/trump-racism-comments/588067/

Here's the deal with Donald Trump. It's narcissism first. Everything else second. If you're Black and willing to say something nice about him, he'll invite you and Kim Kardashian to the Oval Office, or maybe make you an ineffective HUD secretary. If you're a Latino and you say something nice about him, his daughter will hawk your brand of canned beans to the media. If you're a North Korean dictator and you say something nice about him, he'll let you have whatever you want. But if your most loyal base is white and fearful, you'll tell them everything they want to hear. You will literally build walls instead of bridges to prove it. And you are loathe to condemn anyone who supports you. The Ku Klux Klan and the Proud Boys were never fazed by the tepid statements someone drafted for Trump. Rightwing extremists believed that for the first time in their lives, they had one of their own in the White House. So at the end of the day, Trump's most fervent loyalists were out in force, willing to overthrow the government in order to keep him in office. In that moment, his legacy on the line, Donald Trump could not have been more clear how he felt about the Confederates, Nazi's, QAnon whack jobs, and Camp Auschwitz jokesters that carried his banner: "You're special. We love you." Narcissist first. Racist second. But still a racist.

Far Left Salon magazine?

I'm mostly speaking to the Goebbels-like brilliance of Make America Great Again. It speaks to a time of uncomplicated White Supremacy, but wraps it in generic nostalgia for a time that didn't really exist. That means people who truly believe they're good people, and take pride in how well they get along with the black lady running the HR department, can encourage a white supremacy movement. They've got nothing against the gays and the blacks and the Hispanics, but they don't want them in their face, or protesting on their street, or crossing their border. Life was simpler when you didn't have to think about this stuff. Why are the liberals making us think about this stuff?

Jake Tapper is a Leftist?

Trump's statement? Sure. I'm trying to be charitable because I'm struggling with people I care about saying horrible things. But the idea of good people being led astray by racists and reactionaries goes to your point. However you want to slice it, they are racists for enabling racists. But are they redeemable? We need to build a political off-ramp that makes it easier.

I actually agreed with Donald Trump's infamous "good people on both sides" statement in the aftermath of Charlottesville. There are many interesting and inspiring cases of former white supremacists and violent rightwing activists renouncing their beliefs and actions and working for change and understanding. One was the Nebraska Ku Klux Klan grand dragon who had his life turned around by the Lincoln Rabbi he'd been threatening. https://www.robertglazer.com/friday-forward/love-hate/ It doesn't mean both sides are right. It means the good people on the bad side still have to change sides.

Okay. I'll celebrate today. But I usually have this song running in the back of my head.

All roads lead through Rick Astley. Sorry.

Looks like Lincoln had twice the number of protestors at its capitol.

I think Biden's cabinet is looking better than Trump's.