Guy Chamberlin

Even if it were so, look at your other option... That's more than enough reason to consider, well... About anyone else. I'm having one hell of a problem figuring out which is worse. They both lie constantly and will say and do whatever it takes to reach their end goal no matter who stands in the way. And....both of them have this group of followers that keep trying their best to defend them. Nobody likes the lesser of two evil elections, and this may be the worst in history. But the often craven political calculation of the Clintons has typically resulted in mainstream compromise. They use polls and analytics and consultants and legislative math to make their decisions rather than burning ideological passion, and while this has always made them seem like cold, career wonks (not to mention hypocrites), the end result is a pretty good snapshot of what most of America wants and/or can live with. And before you freak out about that claim, study their actual policy decisions and voting records rather than repeating the right wing memes. If Donald Trump wants to Make America Great Again, he needs to pick the years we were great and try to replicate them. He could do worse than the 1990s, and of course he will. So I would definitely err on the side of Hillary Clinton.

Yeah. I really feel for Donald Trump. If only Hillary Clinton knew what it was like to be the target of such blind hatred, inaccurate accusations, partisan witch hunts and personal & physical mocking.

I agree there's a rush to judgement on Donald Trump at the moment that borders on overkill, and some of it is certainly unfair. But take away all the smoke, and there's still a lot of fire. Really dire warnings from informed non-partisans. There are so many reasons not to trust this man with our country that it's kinda mind-blowing we're even having this discussion.

Or you could take a single anecdotal endorsement by a former student, declare it "the other side of the story" and ignore tons of troubling evidence to the contrary.

Jordan Westerkamp needs 39 receptions and 742 yards to break Kenny Bell's career record. He needs 13 TDs to break Johnny Rodger's career TD reception record. I think he's already in the Highlight Reel Hall of Fame.

Scotsmen definitely aren't pussies or whiners. And Bernard Goldberg likes nothing better than irritating liberals. So if they're trying to warn you that Donald Trump is a thin-skinned bully who fails to deliver, you probably should listen: https://www.facebook.com/realsports/videos/1321308544565583/

Well that video is definitely a mixed bag of paranoia, compiled by an amateur videographer specializing in End Times Prophecies (lesson #1: always consider the source) I don't like the idea of flags being removed from firetrucks. I bet most people don't. But if you've ever attended a city council meeting in ANY city, you know you are always one local crank away from a free speech headache. This past weekend I marched in a Memorial Day Parade for our Democratic Congressman in perhaps the most liberal county in America, and American flags were waving left and right, including the firehouse where the pancake breakfast was held. I think we're still good on the flag front. The unexplained helicopters? Where does that fit in to flag removal and non-traditional sexual preference? It doesn't. Unless you're putting together the End Times playbook that was popular when Bill Clinton was president and hermaphrodite Janet Reno was his Attorney General and the black helicopters were coming to take your guns away. Tell you what: let's celebrate the freedom envisioned by our founding fathers and symbolized by the American flag by letting people pursue life, liberty and happiness however they choose. That actually is the American tradition.

OK...just need clarification on your terminology here. As far as who lies more..... Trump > Hillary > Sanders Correct? Correct. Both Sanders and Trump have been speaking with the blunt honesty of the candidate who traditionally has no chance of winning. It's a weird year for that. But you have to distinguish between Trump "saying whatever is on his mind/saying what people really think" and speaking the truth. Trump might "honestly" believe half the things he's saying. The other half is willful bullsh#t to stoke the voters. But in terms of vetted opinions and verifiable facts, Donald's a distant third.

You can definitely make a case against HIllary Clinton. Very powerful people with huge war chests and deep motivation have tried and failed to make anything stick. Doesn't mean she's clean. As a corporate lawyer, Arkansas politician and First Lady to a serial philanderer alone you can probably catch her in dozens of lies. As Secretary of State, she's probably par for the course. Maybe even a tick better than her predecessors. Understanding how the world really works, knowing some profound ugliness about America's role in these shitstorms, and issuing proclamations that aren't exactly true comes with the job description. Benghazi wouldn't have lasted more than a week in the news cycle during the Bush administration. If you're calling Hillary a liar, you'd need to measure her against the competition. She'd lose to Bernie Sanders but beat Trump silly. Ted Cruz was utterly full of sh#t. If you want to make a case for Hillary going to prison for abuse of power, you could. But you'd have to put her in line behind the Cheney's, Kissingers, Oliver North's and well, pretty much every U.S. President.

He mandated that PUBLIC SCHOOLS be forced into having gender neutral LOCKER ROOMS. While that doesn't affect me. It affects my neices, and my potential future daughters. If schools don't comply then federal funding goes out the window? This has gone from absurd to just down right biased and stupid Can you give us a link to this? I googled it and came up with a transgender issue where he said transgender kids should use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. I'm not coming up with where he directed schools that it should just be a free for all with one big locker room with both boys and girls basketball teams changing together and using the same showers. LINK Here is a link to an article about the directive the Obama administration issued to our schools. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/us/politics/obama-administration-to-issue-decree-on-transgender-access-to-school-restrooms.html?_r=0 If your only concern is about the possibility of one big free for all, common locker room with boys and girls teams changing and showering together, you're being purposefully obstinate about the repercussions of this. I too thought you had more on the ball. So, I guess you support this ruling and have plenty of good reasons why it is necessary. I would be most interested to know how you think hormonal teenage boys will not abuse this open invitation to enter girls bathrooms and locker rooms. Please share.......the reasons and/or whatever it is you may be smoking. My personal opinion is that (just like allowing Syrian Muslim terrorists into the country with no back ground checks) this issue is blown so out of proportion that it's unrecognizable. This isn't just a free for all where every boy who wants to can just go mingle with the girls while they are pissing. It's been pointed out already that this has to start with a guardian giving the school notice the kid is transgender. Also, it's been pointed out, what boy in HS is going to act transgender just to get into take a peek at the girls? As for the point Coach Power T is trying to make that all of a sudden this is going to allow so many more molestations because horrible men will have access to girls bathrooms. How come nobody is concerned about the same thing happening with men using bathrooms with little boys? Aren't there lots of incidents where men molest boys? If so, what is preventing that? This entire issue us hysteria created around politics by one side wanting to paint the other side as some horrible decision maker that is endangering our kids. In our school, I think we have had one transgender kid since I can even remember. It was CLEAR that this kid was different than the rest. The other kids just accepted her as who she was and it wasn't an issue. It's not like all of a sudden your school is going to have to deal with 30 kids who all of a sudden have decided to be transgender. You are right, the transgender issue has been blown way out of proportion, but that is the President's fault for singing in a law that isn't needed. Being "transgender" is a mental illness that doesn't need a law to allow mentally ill people to choose which bathroom they want to use. I realize that things are moving really fast these days. Legalized gay marriage was virtually unthinkable a decade ago, and the transgender spectrum wasn't even in the conversation. But it is quickly becoming obvious that transgender is no more a mental illness than homosexuality, and neither poses a threat to people in the heterosexual majority. I was fascinated to learn how many babies are born with conflicted genitalia and that obstetricians make binding surgical decisions within minutes of birth. Even without the external physical evidence, some people appear to be hardwired to another gender. A few don't necessarily identify with any gender. Being in a statistical minority doesn't make it a mental illness, although the social issues can definitely screw you up. What I'm learning most from my 13 year old son and 15 year old daughter: who really cares? If it's not hurting you, don't be a hater.

The media hasn't "done their job" in decades, mostly because of the decimation of print journalism and the consolidation of broadcast media, where news divisions were slashed because legitimate news gathering was slow and expensive and unable to return the investment. News divisions used to be considered prestigious, and the old school media barons allowed them to be loss leaders out of noble duty. It was very elitist in its way, but it was also highly professional. Reporters and their magazines/newspapers/networks may have had their leanings, but the reporting itself had to be solid. Not really sure what we have today. It's not good enough to say "there are two sides to every story" because chances are the sides aren't equal. Someone is lying slightly more than the other. A little digging and some editorial courage and you can figure it out. Also, there are generally way more than two sides to every story, but somewhere along the way anything political was shoved into a binary system. The Annenberg Foundation sponsors FactCheck.org. They're pretty good at objective research and apolitical mythbusting, but you're obliged to believe them even when they tell you things you don't want to hear.

How exactly does a wall on the southern border have anything to do with big government? It's supporting nationalism, nothing more. People like me who oppose big government support Trump because of his ideas to cut many of the over-reaching aspects of our government, and as a former educator who has seen how our educational system works first-hand, he is going to get rid of arbitrary testing and bring educational decisions to the state and local levels, which is how it SHOULD be. Building a 2,000 mile wall on the Mexican Border would be a massive undertaking by the federal government, not merely the construction but the maintenance and administration, and regardless of what Trump says in his stump speech, the cost would be footed by the American taxpayer. The purpose of the wall is the very definition of federal government over-reach, a wildly expensive and inefficient response to an issue way down the list of what America needs most at this time. It's a fact that the federal government has ballooned under Republican administrations despite their "small government" claims, and Trump sounds no different. Under the guise of patriotism, they are huge spenders, social engineers and wealth redistributors, merely funneling taxpayer money to their own colleagues, donors and agenda. Now who is this "former educator" you're speaking about, who has seen our education system first-hand? Did you mean you, or Trump?

I guess the real question is how much that wall would really cost to build and support, how would it return that investment, and whether that same amount of money could do vastly more beneficial things for more Americans. The very well-financed and clever drug cartels have elaborate tunnel systems that are a marvel of engineering and deceit. Maybe a 10 foot deep cement foundation would make you sleep better, or elect the guy who throws out random promises like "10 foot deep cement foundation" but that would merely be a fresh obstacle for a criminal enterprises that would laugh at the money America was throwing at an extremely temporary and ineffective solution. But the first question would be to determine how badly illegal immigration is hurting this country, and the answer is that it's not even remotely the menace Trump is promoting, and in many cases has a positive if problematic economic return. And it's less of a problem than it was a decade ago. As complicated as the issue may be, there are some facts on the subject, and they don't always support the anecdotal hate-spewing. http://www.newsweek.com/2015/10/23/myths-half-truths-about-immigration-reform-382855.html http://www.factcheck.org/2015/08/trumps-immigration-plan/ Sorry, Shark, but I'm still having a hard time figuring out how people who claim to hate Big Government, Big Spending, and ill-conceived Social Engineering would line up behind the man who wants to build a 2,000 mile wall on the Mexican border. Although as mentioned, I think Trump is enough of a businessman to know the wall is a terrible investment that will never work, but it sounds good when you're recruiting angry voters who have no desire to fact check him. What's kind of funny: if Donald Trump could snap his fingers and deport the 11 million illegal immigrants overnight, many of his Trump Enterprises would be gutted of the cheap employees he has always relied on.

I don't think Nebraska would have fared any better in the Big 12 than the Big 10, probably worse. The Big 12 was/is deep in teams with offenses designed to exploit Husker defenses. Huskers joined the Big 10 at what was perhaps a historic low for the conference. B10 has gotten better while the B12 seems to be slipping. Talking strictly football, here. Politically and administratively, the Big 12 is a mess.

If you were willing to spend tens of billions of dollars building a wall on the Mexican border, and the untold billions in Big Government Social Engineering to maintain it forever, rather than investing that money in the American infrastructure, you don't deserve a single vote. Especially when Mexican immigration isn't remotely the problem you're trying to advertise. And the drug cartels find it hilarious that you haven't noticed how well they build tunnels.

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.

If you look at the rise of fascism throughout history, it tends to involve someone blaming foreigners and minorities for a country's declining fortunes, both real and imagined, and uses ethnic nationalism in the guise of patriotism to rile the supposedly oppressed majority to take stupid, violent and counter-productive actions against their best interests. In fairness, I think Donald Trump has no intention of building a wall on the Mexican border. If you stop and think about it for a nano-second, it makes zero sense at any level. Donald Trump relies on people not stopping and thinking.

From an average person's standpoint, I can see how you think that. Have you ever watched Shark Tank? The Sharks invest in hundreds of companies on there, and not all of them become successful. The Sharks lose all or most of their money on a lot of their deals, but it's a law of averages. One investment that turns out great can make them millions and offset the ones that failed. That's how successful people work. They make quick, educated decisions and exhibit massive action. I will NOT critique Trump for several failed businesses, because that's a poor man's mindset. As far as the bankruptcies, of the 4 bankruptcies that he's filed for, 3 of them were on casinos. I think I see the problem. You're getting your financial perspective from"Shark Tank" and "The Apprentice." It's a tad more complicated than that, my friend.

If you can stand back and look at the available facts and history, Hillary Clinton is likely to run America as a moderate Republican. With Hillary Clinton in the White House, America is on a slippery slope to business as usual.

It is just stunning and depressing to read Trump supporters repeating the most simplistic propaganda while ignoring the most blatant facts. I have always avoided words like fascism and socialism because they aren't remotely accurate in describing American politics, but I find the sh#t being said at Trump rallies stone-cold chilling, and the potential for outright fascism far closer than I ever imagined in my lifetime.

I almost had 2 coronaries on that play alone. Yeah. I'm gonna go with this for absurd.

We did incredibly stupid things when we were teenagers. If anything, today's teenagers are more aware of the dangers of drugs and drunk driving, and the uncoolness of bullying, vandalism and other acting-out behavior. The "desire for acknowledgement" is a good point. Social media is a short cut for that. It's a parallel world that we did not have. Not necessarily good or bad, but a genuine game-changer. And I would argue that if you don't understand how posting compromising, insulting and sometimes illegal activity on the global and eternal internet might hurt you and others, then you don't understand consequences. I think social media has also created an entire "haters gonna hate" dynamic that I personally find over-inflated and tiresome. Teenagers will always be the same and the next generation will always think they're different, so take this with a grain of salt: the level of narcissism in this country has shot through the roof. And one of the key signs of narcissism is having no clue that you're a narcissist.

It's a combination of several factors, both internal and external. Rome didn't fall because of the Visigoths, it crumbled from within as well. All of those things played a role. What's galling about this book is that an external source seems to have intentionally harmed Nebraska both athletically and academically, abusing the power of his position to do so. I would love to hear his motives, or his explanation if he claims to have been unbiased through all of this. Of course he will claim no intentional harm. His explanation will be as accurate as a Texas public school history book.

Don't feel too bad. It certainly fits the word "absurd" better than most

Those were some pretty exciting runs AJ Bush was ripping off, but if he continues to hold the ball that way he's poised to become yet another turnover machine.