funhusker

If "my guy" means "my President", then he was just as much yours as he was mine. Same as Trump is my President just as he is yours. I guess to bring it back to the point of my post. @Waldo, were you rooting for Obama to be successful in implementing his ideas to make the country better?

I can appreciate Damon's delivery. But I don't get the "everyone should root for the President" crap. I rooted against Trump as he tried to repeal Obamacare and make it harder for people to get coverage. I rooted against Trump as he was going to cut the taxes for the wealthy and raise the deficit. I rooted against Trump as he was trying to restrict travel to innocent people because they were Muslim. I rooted against Trump as he was separating families at the border as a matter of policy. I rooted against Trump as he recently shut down our government. I'm not going to cry and whine because the person I voted for didn't win the election. But I'm sure as hell not going to sit here and say, well I guess I'll give up my values and belief system so I can be happy the President accomplishes exactly what I don't want him/her to do....

I thought his name was Jesus?????

My one hope, when Trump was elected, was that America would see how important it is to become informed and have rational discussions. I didn't expect so many normal people "double down" on stupid.....

Trump has said a lot of stupid stuff. But, Trump has not declared a national emergency for the "rounding up of liberals" with the intent of making them go away. P.S.: I know this is all a "tongue in cheek" back and forth. I just wanted to show the proper use of the "eye roll".

That would be awesome! Not at all like our founders meant it all to work.... But it would be awesome, and I would love for that President to personally thank Trump and the conservative court for making it all possible But then, after enjoying the current policy of 2021, I would shudder the thoughts of 2025 when it was somehow determined an emergency by the next President to round up "liberals" and make them go away....

I take my kids every year, it's our new tradition. It's too damn expensive to take them to real games; they aren't old enough to really enjoy it all anyway (3rd grade). My wife and 3 kids go for $20.

yes

Disclaimer: I'm not planning on getting into an "abortion argument" here. Just wanted to point out that, even though Walsh is riled up, this is nothing new. New York is not allowing anything in his state today that wasn't allowed in Nebraska yesterday. At least in the articles I've read.

Depending on the intent and methods used in the early delivery, it most definitely can be considered an abortion. That's what "late term" abortions are. And your right, my wife recently has a "20 weeker" that looks like it is going to make it. But there are some pregnancies that can't be ended by vaginal delivery or c-section for whatever reason. But those of course wouldn't involve healthy babies, I don't think... Edit (2/3/19): My wife corrected me on the bolded, it is NOT accurate. She meant it "made" it through the night. After talking to her more this evening, she said any baby born before 25 weeks will most likely demand full medical care and isn't likely capable of normal life. She also mentioned a very unscientific poll between her coworkers that if they were to have a baby at 20 weeks, they would opt to "not resuscitate" because of the impending complications....

This is an abortion by induction. I can't answer the other part because I'm sure it's a case by case thing that I've been lucky enough to not have to deal with. But I find it hard to imagine that a pregnancy that is causing severe health issues for mom would involve a normal healthy baby. Maybe it is more common than we'd think, I don't know.

That would be a good question for my wife. But my understanding is that is what "aborting" a pregnancy is. I think the "problem" arises in keeping the baby in the womb when it is in the best interest for baby and not mom. For example, inducing the delivery of a dead fetus is recorded statistically as an aborted pregnancy.

If anything, this law shows how much shaky ground some states feel Roe v Wade is on. They felt the need to right Roe v Wade (and other decisions) into law so NY women, along with several other states, won't lose access to services.

I woman isn't just deciding to abort her baby at 8 months. It's only if the mother's health is at risk. This is legal in Nebraska too. "Abortion is illegal in Nebraska if the fetus is over 20 weeks post-fertilization (or 22 weeks after the woman’s last period.) They can only be carried out after this stage if the woman’s life is endangered or if her physical health is severely compromised. The rationale for this ruling was testimony that the fetus can feel pain at this point." https://assureomaha.com/abortion-and-nebraska-what-the-law-says

Sounds like Walsh is bring out a little fear mongering. The law is only putting on the books what was termed legal by Roe vs. Wade. The old law was outdated and overruled by the court's previous decision. What New York is "now allowing' was deemed legal when Roe v. Wade was passed. https://www.wvlt.tv/content/news/Late-term-abortions-allowed-in-NY-when-mothers-health-is-at-risk-504774072.html "Known as the Reproductive Health Act, the measure replaces a 1970 state abortion law that was passed three years before Roe legalized abortion nationwide. It codifies many abortion rights laid out in Roe and other court rulings, including a provision permitting late-term abortions when a woman’s health is endangered. The previous law, which was in conflict with Roe and other subsequent abortion rulings, only permitted abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy if a woman’s life was at risk."

Get a job like the rest of us, you mooch!!!!!! I'm sorry I'm no help. I live in Omaha and have insurance through my wife's employer also. Just couldn't resist the stupid Obamacare joke. Truly, best of luck to you and your wife on her venture. And I also hope you find good coverage. It sucks that two self employed people (hard working and earning it everyday) have to worry about such a thing. But here we are....

Judging by writing styles, it's entirely possible

It's amazing that the concept of wearing clothes to represent ideologies can be such a complicated topic.... Sometimes I wonder if people are really trying to make simple things complicated for the sake of argument, or if some people are truly incapable of wading through the nuances of everyday life. Edit: For example, there is a huge difference between a kid wearing a Husker t-shirt in Lincoln, NE and a kid in Somalia wearing a Huskers "2001 National Championship" t-shirt. One of these kids is probably a fan, the other just doesn't want a sunburn. If you can't discern between the two, well that's just sad...

I assumed he did support Castro and Malcolm X. If he really doesn't, then wtf is he wearing that shirt?

Rex, Suh, Ameer, Ganz, Henery

edit: I shouldn't watch the game, type on HB, and do homework at the same time....

I don't know. Reagan was, or very recently, President when most of these interviews took place. Trump has always just been a person who like to complain about things with no realistic strategy on how to fix it. https://www.npr.org/2017/01/20/510680463/donald-trumps-been-saying-the-same-thing-for-30-years Edit: Sorry @B.B. Hemingway I originally misread your post. At first blush, I thought you meant he wanted things to be like they were when Reagan was Pres...