ColoNoCoHusker

IDK what to say then. I was pretty clear on why I made the comparison. I don't know why that is hard for you to understand. My posting behavior has been inside the rules, why is that an issue??

EDIT: Missed the ignore part. Sorry to hear that as there was a time when I enjoyed your posts...

I am not offended by that word. It does set off my content filter if I view the site at work which is inconvenient. I'm not really sure why a political statement in a status update would be more offensive to someone than words that trigger content filters. I included that for a baseline reference to the hypocrisy you seem to have on when something is offensive. You misplaced/misinterpreted the reason for the comparison so please disregard it.

My intention was to follow up with the Mods to get a standard that all of us can understand and adhere to. I thought, incorrectly, if we had a Mod position, it would lesson you and your crew's frustrations. I apologize this went another way.

I hope that clears up my position

EDIT: And I reached out to a Mod since it was requested previously in the status chain but nothing was done... In hindsight, I should have left it alone

Thanks for chiming in

There seems to be a theme of people being offended by politically slanted comments outside the P&R forum, most recently in status updates. Ironically, the people most offended by this are also the members whose posts/status updates constantly set-off content alerts if I view the site from my office or via business phone/tablet. I could exempt myself from the content alerts but it is important I abide by the same rules to which I expect my employees to adhere. Specifically the use of slang in relation to the male anatomy...

While the "I'm offended" shtick is tiresome, I would like to do my part to prevent offending those with more delicate sensibilities than myself. I am not offended in the slightest by either of these referenced conditions/situations but I am happy to ensure other posters are able avoid being offended inasmuch as the rules allow. I would like to understand expectations in regards to these items as the bombast seems to be getting pretty deep and the rules are necessarily vague. Most probably to allow this to be handled case-by-case...

I appreciate your guidance in advance. Below is the status update thread for reference.

Status update thread:

In the Deed the Glory

I am tired of the political b.s. on this board. I come here for a break from it and it continues to spread out from its home.

Hide Comments

 

 

Seems gimickie too me. I could see it for training your eye to pick up movements on a fastball but I don't think I like for football.

 

 

If they can develop the tech to where a coach can go into a virtual playing field with his players and stop/pause/rewind/highlight elements, it would be infinitely valuable. Imagine the blackshirts and Diaco all in a room in VR and Diaco is in the middle of "live" game action showing players how to pick up route trees and stunt and blitz and such.

 

If only there is a way to simulate game play in real life. Could you imagine how much doing something like that would help?!

 

It sounds like they are working on it, right after making portable fire and suspender-less pants... ;P

 

 

Don't we still have 2 positions to fill if the 10th is approved? Is Bob Elliot an assistant or not!?

I've heard he's a consultant, not an assistant coach.

 

I think that's a possiblitly but haven't seen anything yet.

 

It will be kind of funny if everyone who's been quick to jump on how good of an assistant coach hire this is ends up doing all that for naught.

 

Isn't that basically what 'Bama does but on a larger scale with the non-coaching positions?

Honest question: If Elliott is not an assistant, does that mean Bullocks is in the mix for a coaching spot??

I appreciate it dudeguyy.

I think there's a conscious effort by Trump's administration to desensitize the nation to this discrimination. It hasn't even been a month and a lot of folks are completely fed up with the feminism/religion/racial discrimination talk. Most people have their own issues and it's easier for many to think it will never happen or at least to them. I just hope those of us that have been alert can continue to keep this up. I really don't see this getting checked unless the Repub's lose majority in the next Congressional elections.

A number of larger employers out here that rely on work visa/green card staff are putting formal contingency plans together for unexpectedly losing these staff. We have a couple very large healthcare clients putting together training for their non-citizen staff on what to do if they get detained. I never thought any of this would be a consideration for US companies let alone in Colorado. I find it hard to believe these companies would be taking these steps if the risk wasn't rooted strongly in reality...

I would agree with you on that. Our world and our country would be a much better place if that were the case, teach.

The "us & them" mentality in the WH exists at the expense of the entire nation and it proceeding apace faster than I anticipated. I've said it before, but it doesn't get much scarier than measuring value of say Mother Teresa based on gender first. This is proceeding down the worst-case that was visible several months ago. I'll admit that I'm not surprised but I had hoped to be wrong. I am more concerned than ever which I did not believe possible just a few days ago.

Hmmm, I don't think my words would support either your conclusion or the opposing conclusion. I know I didn't present it as a binary situation (either A or B).

What are you trying to say, teach?

 

 

I'm so sorry Colo - part of me really wonders if he has a stockpile of these moves set aside to launch when negative newsworthy items (i.e. Russia dossier) hit the streets about him.

 

He is officially starting to weed out by race. I'm just sick.

 

I spoke to my Aunt, finally. He applied for citizenship in November but while that is going through, he had to do his annual LPR registraton. Immigration confiscated his Green Card and told him he will get it back in 6 mos while they research his renewal. He's never had to surrender his card prior and it's required to carry that all times. When he asked about that, the Immigration Officer said if he isn't causing trouble, it won't be an issue, like every Brown skin is here to cause trouble...

 

His business dealings have required his LPR registration to be notarized/documented as part of numerous Government filings. His attorneys are pulling that together to get a court order allowing him to stay while he is without his Green Card. If he were picked up right now, he would be deported. His immigration attorney in LA states this is a calculated policy move to make Mexican LPRs illegal. It's selective right now and fortunately my uncle has the finances to fight this. I don't know whether to cry, vomit, or both.

 

What blows me away is my uncle is easily in the top 10% of this country by both wealth & income. We don't want the worst from Mexico but we don't want the best either?? Wtf, makes no sense.

 

I agree, he's starting by religion, now by race. This is going to get very, very bad for many good people.

 

That sucks...

 

But...why should he wealth or income matter? Like, why is someone that has wealth "the best". Or did you just mean that your uncle is a great guy regardless of his money?

 

I mean, if skin color shouldn't matter (it shouldn't), if religion shouldn't matter (it shouldn't) why should wealth or income?

 

I refer to that for several reasons. Most notably there is a specific category of Lawful Permanent Residents based on high level of investment in this country. Income/wealth is traditionally also a primary consideration for non-lottery Green Card allotment. The best comment was meant towards overall, not just the wealth/income. Based on traditional immigration rules, he scores at the top.

Not that I think wealth/income should be the primary consideration but from what you mention, it's the only one that is not protected for/against discrimination. It also illustrates that for the current administration, an immigrant's value is determined more by their skin color than by their contribution to our economic system and society.

Knap - can you stop tweeting at coaches so we can keep the good ones around??? This is gettin' redonkulous...

/s

Could really help with things like O & D reads as well as playbook tests. Would help free up time in practice while giving more dedicated time to decision making outside of practice. Sky's the limit really...

The NU vs Minny game in 2016 was broadcast in VR... First B1G game, 2nd College Football broadcast in VR.

At least in this thread I'm sure he'd have some bigoted pithy remark...

EDIT: fixed, NM is right

I'm so sorry Colo - part of me really wonders if he has a stockpile of these moves set aside to launch when negative newsworthy items (i.e. Russia dossier) hit the streets about him.

 

He is officially starting to weed out by race. I'm just sick.

I spoke to my Aunt, finally. He applied for citizenship in November but while that is going through, he had to do his annual LPR registraton. Immigration confiscated his Green Card and told him he will get it back in 6 mos while they research his renewal. He's never had to surrender his card prior and it's required to carry that all times. When he asked about that, the Immigration Officer said if he isn't causing trouble, it won't be an issue, like every Brown skin is here to cause trouble...

His business dealings have required his LPR registration to be notarized/documented as part of numerous Government filings. His attorneys are pulling that together to get a court order allowing him to stay while he is without his Green Card. If he were picked up right now, he would be deported. His immigration attorney in LA states this is a calculated policy move to make Mexican LPRs illegal. It's selective right now and fortunately my uncle has the finances to fight this. I don't know whether to cry, vomit, or both.

What blows me away is my uncle is easily in the top 10% of this country by both wealth & income. We don't want the worst from Mexico but we don't want the best either?? Wtf, makes no sense.

I agree, he's starting by religion, now by race. This is going to get very, very bad for many good people.

And so it begins ... Friday nights seem to be when triggers' get pulled (some speculate it's because Jared is logged out for Shabbat).

 

I think the timing of this is more tied to the distraction of the court case and ban then anything else.

 

Was just writing about this. I have an uncle who is a LPR from Mexico who was just ordered to surrender his Green Card this week as part of this crackdown. He is a wealthy land developer in SoCal, never been arrested, honorably discharged vet, LPR is current, etc. He applied for citizenship right after Trump won and somehow that placed him into an "extreme vetting" category. I am trying to get more detail but everything we know so far is pretty shady.

Under Miles we are a team of contradictions which makes it really hard to be on either side. I do think we are improving and Miles should have another season. These close games are like crazy pills...

I wonder whether the so-called president will try for an en banc review with the 9th Circuit. That would be fun, seeing him slapped down again, and then having the case either denied cert with the Supreme Court or affirmed due to a 4-4 vote, both of which are highly probable.

It will be interesting to see where it goes from here. Several legal analysts think with the Government's current argument it would be hard-pressed to get more 2 votes from SCOTUS. I had coffee with a colleague this morning that teaches law at DU and knows Gorsuch professionally. He has no doubt Gorsuch would uphold the Appeals Court ruling (against Government) based on existing arguments. He thinks SCOTUS would refer the case back to Federal court since the Government's position is not properly fleshed out.

It would be very easy for WH to demonstrate imminent threat if any of our various intel agencies were engaged on this (ala WMD in Iraq). He thinks the Government's lack of evidence shows our security services are completely out of the loop AND not in favor of it. His opinion is WH's is more concerned with a ruling that Trump's decisions are not reviewable than upholding of the ban. This is pretty interesting and shows the crazies in the WH right now...

I think the en banc review is the only option open if Trump wants to keep fighting it. Should be interesting

 

 

If we're going to spend billions on a wall, shouldn't we have a crystal-clear understanding that we're going to reap billions more in benefits from the wall?

 

What's the point of building an expensive wall that hurts America? Just to keep the Brown people out?

 

There's a strong case to be made that illegal immigrants are a net benefit to America, both economically and socially.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-thorny-economics-of-illegal-immigration-1454984443

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/203984-illegal-immigrants-benefit-the-us-economy

 

http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788

 

Trump's wall is being touted as a solution to a problem. But what's the problem?

 

 

In terms of immigrants, between 1998 and 2014, over 6,000 died in the process of crossing the border illegally - from a multitude of logistical reasons, mainly over-exposure. That's one problem that should be addressed.... Over double the number of Mexican citizens have died in the past decade illegally crossing the border, than the number of people that died on 9/11, but oh well, its a benefit to the economy. And that's not accounting the numbers killed by the cartels, who are funded by their US activities.

 

If a wall forces people to think twice before even setting off to cross illegally, then that is a good thing. Or if more of a police or military presence at the border would enable better medical aid to those migrants upon reaching the border, then that's a good thing. If there is a better option, I'm sure it would gain traction.

 

If people aren't capable of getting in legally because of some miscommunication or immigration-processing issue, or costs, or whatever, then the process needs to be improved to better work with those seeking entry into the US. That's something the US and Mexico should be working on continually.

 

If people aren't able to enter because of expected/suspected criminal activity, then I guess that's up for debate. If the criminal activity is real, then I have little sympathy. If the criminal activity is unwarranted, then that's unfair and should be addressed appropriately.

 

 

In terms of social/local issues, someone from a border state would know more than me. But I just have doubts that having illegals is better than having legal immigrants... If it is better, then maybe we should all just work toward becoming illegal citizens.

 

 

A wall will stop people crossing the border like Texas' frequent use of the death penalty prevents homicides.

 

To the bold, nobody said it's better.

 

Oade - I cannot find the LA Times article atm but will keep looking. IIRC, not too long ago there were 2k+ unaccompanied children being sent to the US via Mexico from Central American countries PER MONTH. I don't recall how many made it through but it was decently low. If parents/children are that desperate to get in, this wall will do nothing but possibly increase the death toll. Desperation is not logical, yes?

Knap - +1

 

 

 

Regarding illegal immigration, this baffles me. When you compare the cost to the U.S. from illegal immigration to the benefit, the U.S. receives far more than it pays. Illegal immigrants are not eligible for most forms of entitlements - President Clinton closed that door with his program on welfare reform, on which he campaigned. While a few individuals will attempt to gain benefits through fraudulent means, the overwhelming majority do not - they keep their heads down, do their jobs, send most of their earnings to family back in Mexico, and try to avoid at all costs any behaviors that would draw the attention of the government or law enforcement. For those who have babies born in the U.S., and remain, those children adapt the culture and language of the U.S. They do work that almost no Americans will do. They give more to the economy than they take. They almost never commit crimes. They want their children to acclimate the culture, do well in school, and become good citizens. And we want to keep them out...why?

 

Very interesting perspective AR, and I appreciate your thoughts. The subject of the wall is very interesting to me, and if you'll allow me to play devil's advocate here for the sake of some healthy discussion, I feel like these thoughts are a bit short-sighted. Yes, there are certainly an abundance of Mexican citizens who come to this country to work hard, send money back to their families, and to do the jobs that many others will not. But, to say that a "few individuals will attempt to gain benefits through fraudulent means" is really minimizing the impact that those individuals have. I wish that it were only a few, but that's not the case. Also, the statement that the children adapt to the US culture and language is partially true, but there are a lot of examples of that not being the case. The number of ESL classes that we have here in the SW would seem to indicate otherwise.

 

I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'm always interested in the perspective of others, especially those who do not live in border states. Here in Arizona, we have a fairly terrible reputation (a lot of it deserved) about our perceived racism towards Mexican citizens. However, living here definitely provides a different perspective on illegal immigration than those who do not live here will usually have. We have some very serious issues and challenges in this state due to illegal immigration, challenges that I don't believe that a giant wall will necessarily help. But, to state that the issues are few really does not seem accurate to me.

 

Again AR, not attacking your perspective. Your statements are always intelligent and well presented, and I appreciate that. I just thought I'd provide some contrary thoughts and opinions in the effort for good, healthy debate.

 

To the bolded:

 

Can you please explain how the number of ESL classes indicates that the children are not adapting to US culture and language?

 

I'll see what research I can find, but this is really from my personal experience of going to high school in southern California and raising kids here in Arizona. From our experience, there was absolutely no effort made in ESL classes to adapt to US culture, language, etc. Classes were taught entirely in Spanish, the curriculum was even changed to reflect Mexican culture and history. I'm not sure how this is showing any effort to make those adaptations.

 

Again, just my opinion based on personal experience. To be fair, I've also had the opportunity to meet many Mexican families who have done an amazing job adapting to the US culture. So, it's really a matter of how much emphasis the parents put on it.

 

My sister-in-law has taught/developed ESL programs (Spanish, Vietnamese, Filipino, Chinese) in SoCal (LA, SD, Yuma, SG Valley) and a few years ago moved to Phoenix to do the same. Her biggest criticism is the fly-by judgement of those NOT in ESL, especially of Spanish in AZ. It literally is exactly as you stated. As with anything else, it's easy to judge when you're on the outside.

Students generally move through ESL and assimilate at a very good rate overall. You would probably see that if you looked at the numbers provided by your school/school district.

This wall discussion is following the same bad model we saw in the immigration ban discussion.

We have policy which is supposed to come from top leadership. We develop procedures and tactics in support of that policy. HOW does building this wall improve our immigration policy or our ability to manage immigration?

I believe we need wide-scale immigration reform but I cannot see how the wall contributes to this, especially when WH has not articulated a formal policy. Is it the belief that a larger barrier = more safety? The Mongols breached the Great Wall of China several hundred years ago and I don't see our wall being more formidable...

As others have asked, what is the problem we are addressing and how does the wall do that?

So his defense was the presidential/governmental version of "because I said so"? His lawyers and Bannon are sure steering him wrong.

Pretty much. Listening to the interviews from the Washington Solicitor General, he tears apart the Federal Government defense as ignoring reality and jurisprudence. If you read the decision (QMany - looking at you), the majority of the decision addresses the Judiciary's right to review the Executive.

The argument was Judiciary doesn't have the right to review; by reviewing the EO the Judiciary has irreparably injured the Government; the EO is preventing imminent danger without providing an example of upcoming danger. Total Keystone Cops

Here's the Court of Appeals full decision in case anyone wants to read it. It's quite interesting and sounds like Trump's defense was half-baked. The core of the US Government defense was:

The Government contends that the district court lacked authority to enjoin enforcement of the Executive Order because the President has “unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens.” The Government does not merely argue that courts owe substantial deference to the immigration and national security policy determinations of the political branches

The court replied with:

There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy

They address discrimination, imminent threat, previous statement etc as well...

https://www.scribd.com/document/338917971/9th-Circuit-Travel-Ban-Stay-Ruling

 

 

 

Ooooooo....the little man is pissed.

I know GSG was trying to explain cap lock Friday/eve to him...

I like the throwback unis; those shoes in the locker are killer.