ColoNoCoHusker

I agree BRB. I am having a real hard with JJ's ED's immigration logic that is essentially "there are problems in the world, therefore Muslims are terrorists". In the entire history of the US, immigration has always come from troubled areas or situations. People do not immigrate here for a lateral move or to be worse-off. They immigrate for a better opportunity. By definition we are always going to have immigration from troubled areas. To say that is a problem is to ignore why people immigrate. If you actually read the vetting done by the US Immigration office, you will see it does not have the holes you say it does. I do not know that any process will be absolutely perfect over any extended period of time. However, we have more terrorist activity being planned by American born citizens, many white Christians, than by Muslim refugees.

The amounts are abysmal but the focus & attempt to decrease the University subsidy is admirable. They've had a lot of bad AD decisions beyond the coaches so it's an uphill struggle for them if that doesn't improve. Once they get their full B1G share it should get better but solvency is by no means guaranteed...

While you may not have know this exact order & timing of events, I think it is disingenuous to say Trump or the GOP had to be this explicit in order for you to have any idea about this type of behavior. I am making this statement since you strike me as having good critical thinking skills... I am not trying to single you out and pile on, so I won't belabor the point. I appreciate your continued participation in this thread! *** In the interest of full disclosure, I do question how someone who can string three or more words together ends up in Iowa. ;P I say this as someone with family there (broken branch of the family tree as it were...)

It was a $10mil loan from the University. Most schools would increase fees or subsidies to the AD to cover. If you read the article, Rutgers has been decreasing reliance on University funds last few years. This is actually admirable...

I would agree with ColoradoHusk, RedDenver, BigRedN, etc that NU has a tendency to slow-play local talent. Even so, when a school like Stanford comes calling, it's a whole different ballgame. I love DONU, but Stanford offers a scholly to any NE kid, they should take it over any in-state offers, period. I remember when Frost was offered by Stanford back in 1993 most of the local talk radio said it was a "no-brainer" to take the Stanford offer even while saying Osborne needs to keep instate talent.

Bad cut & paste job... IIRC... Right now, imo, we are in the early stages of opposition to a "conservative upheaval" from several sectors. There is the cultural (racist/sexist/anti-PC crowd); religious; and financial (big corporations & wealthy). I think a big part of what is happening is latter group is using the first two groups to create a political smokescreen. One thing to keep in mind from the protests of the 1950s & 1960s is that public opinion changed when TV started showing police brutality, little girls outside bombed churches, dogs attacking protestors, etc. I think Trump & co will use disinformation and polarization tactics rather than direct confrontation. Trump's agenda is self-aggrandizing & financial gain; anything outside that is about keeping citizen's too busy "watching the birdy" to prevent selling himself & Fed government to the highest bidder. I think this is where his war on the media is dangerous. It's a delaying tactic and there is no way to put the argument to rest. Classic divide & conquer politics... Don't get me wrong, I think what Trump is doing is formulaic totalitarian. I also think he is a sexist, racist bigot at heart. I just think some of it is calculated to create distractions while he robs the bank. If our citizenry can shake off its apathy, this could get violent. It'll be interesting because I think both the right & left are feeling marginalized right now. If that continues at the current pace, then civil conflict becomes inevitable.

Neither one is that old. It's more fun to make fun of their age, tho...

I figured the Bill of rights to be decimated i.e. speech, guns, due process etc., government control over personal property and the like. The rhetoric the dems were throwing with the help of main stream media and hollywood. It had seemed as if Obama was going to have carte blanche with his agenda, and the "right" could pound sand I recall the rhetoric over Obama/Dems & 2nd Amendment issues. Outside of massively unfounded propaganda, I do not recall anything Obama actually said in his campaign to justify his wanting to dismantle any of the other Amendments. What specifically made you believe the bolded? Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press Amendment 2 - The Right to Bear Arms Amendment 3 - The Housing of Soldiers Amendment 4 - Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Amendment 5 - Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases Amendment 8 - Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden Amendment 9 - Other Rights Kept by the People Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People This article sums it up fairly good http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-obama-legacy-an-assault-on-the-bill-of-rights/article/2601342 That was an article written in 2016 and takes a lot of liberties besides being way after either of Obama's elections. To be more explicit in my original question: During the 2008 and/or 2012 Presidential election cycles, what specifically did Obama say/do that made you believe he would be dismantling the Bill of Rights as you believed? I am trying to understand at the time cast your vote; anecdotal answer is fine... I am not trying to pick on you and you are welcome to ignore this. I am interested in your response if you are willing to continue...

There are very few posters here that can speak firsthand to what it was like in the 1960s. Knap & JJ are in that age demographic; not sure about anyone else... Is a forceable change of government something that can happen in today's democratic world? - US is not a Democracy; there have been massive usurpations of our Republican ideal for a long-time. Historically, democracies & republics are one of the WORST types of government structure to prevent hostile takeovers/dictatorships. Ancient Romans & Greeks saw it first-hand; brief history of Britain points it out pretty clearly. France going from monarchy to republic to empirical monarchy show how difficult it is to avoid moving in that direction. I do not think we would see a banana republic style coup/hostile takeover. However, what is stopping the wholesale usurpation of individual rights? As long as POTUS & Congress work together, the military is kept in check as its oath is first & foremost to uphold the Constitution. Even if Trump & Congress suspended elections, I'm not sure the military would step-in. The only check left is courts who have no functional power, state government agencies which have yet to be wholly compromised (that by the way is easy to change), and individual willingness to "fight back". The direction Trump/GOP going is wholly unprecedented in our history. Before it gets violent, widespread voter & citizen would have to be overcome. For whatever ills the GOP has, I do not see them going that far. For a lot of America, today is not any different for them than a year ago... Nonviolent revolutions can any direction on the political spectrum. Potentially right now, there is essentially a nonviolent revolution using the Constitution to implement an historically conservative & noninclusive agenda. Right now, imo, we are in the early stages of a

I am so confused. What do we do when satire news is the same as the actual news??? http://www.theonion.com/live/president-donald-trump-first-100-days-55086/entry/108

I figured the Bill of rights to be decimated i.e. speech, guns, due process etc., government control over personal property and the like. The rhetoric the dems were throwing with the help of main stream media and hollywood. It had seemed as if Obama was going to have carte blanche with his agenda, and the "right" could pound sand I recall the rhetoric over Obama/Dems & 2nd Amendment issues. Outside of massively unfounded propaganda, I do not recall anything Obama actually said in his campaign to justify his wanting to dismantle any of the other Amendments. What specifically made you believe the bolded? Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press Amendment 2 - The Right to Bear Arms Amendment 3 - The Housing of Soldiers Amendment 4 - Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Amendment 5 - Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property Amendment 6 - Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases Amendment 8 - Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden Amendment 9 - Other Rights Kept by the People Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People

Knap - as a former HuskerBoard Mod: 1) Would it be a violation of the rules or a bannable offense if someone were to hope, out loud or via social media, for Russians to hack the forum to release the names of all those that voted for Trump? 2) Is there a virtual equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition on this forum that exists outside the woodshed? I am asking for a friend, so... It would be a bannable offense to actually hack HuskerBoard. It would probably not be a bannable offense to recruit others (Russian, Anonymous, NSA, etc) to do that for you, but it is not recommended. Everything is handled on a case-by-case basis, and if the Mods in their collective wisdom determine you've crossed the line, it's adios muchacho. I'm not sure about a virtual equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition outside the Shed. If it exists that would be... unexpected. I wasn't actually expecting a response as it was more tongue-in-cheek but thank you! Somewhat seriously, I really do hope people that voted for a candidate AND are now somewhat disgusted by that continue to learn from it. Large scale, I just don't see that happening... One problem with Populism is that eventually we actually end up in the extreme case.

Knap - as a former HuskerBoard Mod: 1) Would it be a violation of the rules or a bannable offense if someone were to hope, out loud or via social media, for Russians to hack the forum to release the names of all those that voted for Trump? 2) Is there a virtual equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition on this forum that exists outside the woodshed? I am asking for a friend, so...

I think the whole "buying in" thing was overblown in 2015, but that's just me. Gerry's INT's against Wisconsin enabled NU to take that game to OT, and he played well the rest of the season. Yes, him not going to class all season is very dumb, but he's only one player on a team of over 100 players. All it takes is one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel. Is that saying actually true? Like, if you have one spoiled apple are the other ones now bad too? The saying is true. One bad apple can and will spoil all the rest if left in the barrel. *Edit* You can save the barrel, or most of it, by removing the bad one(s) in time. However, left alone, that one bad apple WILL spoil all the rest. I have heard any spoiled perishable item stored in a confined space and in close proximity will accelerate spoilage. USDA refuses to confirm or deny at this time

I would think that they would have some sort of vaccine or antibiotics that the players could take but I guess not. Everyone knows ADSE is anti-vaxxer so no-way that's would be allowed. I'm not sure that we end up with more wins given the change on O but I at least feel like the D won't completely hang the team out to dry... I think it is now realistic (barely) we win 2 out of OSU/PSU/UW games

No problem, my fault for misunderstanding there, I apologize for that. I get to see our mental health system from a front row seat which is where I'm speaking from. It's really sad to see, folks need help and don't get it, not that ALL of the folks that get guns and go shoot up a place necessarily suffer from a mental disorder, but you could say a large number of them do. Our training in dealing with mentally ill folks has really picked up over the years because we're the ones called to deal with those folks and are picking up the slack of the mental healthcare system. That can cause a poor outcome from time-to-time unfortunately. If they don't do something with the mental healthcare system my view is they have no choice, but to do a more intensive background screening process, but you could do both of those things and it wouldn't hurt anything IMO. Mental illness is a 1 step forward, 2 steps back situation. The police chief for my area removed Officer training for dealing with the mentally impaired. His reasoning was there was no reason to treat them differently than any other criminal (literal wording). This is a very well-off area which makes this more sad. Additionally, there are few in-patient treatment centers remaining that are dedicated to dealing with mental illness. The biggest out here that remains is 1st a drug rehab & 2nd a mental illness facility. That sends the wrong message. There is so much that we can do to improve mental healthcare and also (unrelated or not) address preventable cases of gun violence yet nothing is done... That is an incredibly short-sited move on that Chief's part. Apparently he/she doesn't have an administration in place that is willing/able to caution him/her in making such a bone-headed decision. I've had advanced training as a supervisor in mental health training. It's incredibly important and I've used that training more times than I can count to bring a peaceful resolution to situations. I agree it's only one part, this is a complicated topic that has many moving parts to it. Identifying each part is important and then figuring out a plan of attack on each to help the situation is the first step to helping with this situation. The Commanders, Lt's, & Sgt's unanimously advised against it & fought it internally. I hate to say it, but the guy has some very bigoted notions and is OK putting his people in harm's way in this situation. In neighborhood watch meetings, this police chief explicitly advises block captains to use racial profiling as a primary measure for when to call-in suspicious activity. He is very politically savvy and well-spoken so he is able traction within the community on a lot of bad decisions... How this guy decreased domestic violence incidents is astoundingly unethical... Anywhoo

BRI - I enjoy your posting and from what I can tell, you are a good egg. However, Knapplc is spot on. None of this was unforeseen in the GOP Primary & National election. This is the consequence of voting for Trump as POTUS and/or GOP Congressional candidates. You may not have intended it, but Trump/GOP were pretty clear this is the road down which they wanted to travel. Calling that out is important. EDIT: I don't view this as blaming BRI and I hope BRI does not as well. I view it as group therapy of voting decisions and action/consequence analysis. BRI generally tries to maintain constructive dialogue on difficult topics. I hope this is not taken as blame storming...

Personally nothing. The only redeeming quality about him is that he is one of the few conservative voices in our left leaning Unicameral. What does anyone find defensible or redeeming about Ernie? Both men are reprehensible, but Ernie's actions as a state senator have almost always been within the bounds of the legislature's laws. Even when he says terrible things, he words them in just a way to avoid censure. I find few redeemable qualities in both men, but Chambers' positive impact on Omaha and the legislature definitely outweighs Kintner. It's not even close, despite my dislike for the man. Ernie has been in Nebraska politics for longer than most on this board have been alive (sorry to exclude you, Knapp ). I'm not his fan, but I have always believed he is motivated to serve his constituents and he is one of the few politicians that puts effort into staying "within the rules". He is very passionate and as such, it is easy to get an inflammatory sound bite. If EC's opponents had similar passion, zeal, and knowledge of the system, I think the good life would be much better...

Godwin's Law was funny when it was just idiots on the internet defaulting to Everything Bad = Hitler. At some point in our history, someone was going to attempt the totalitarian route. If it's happening now, we have to be able to sound the alarm without nimrods yapping about Godwin. It could be avoided but "that guy/political party that Paul von Hindenburg beat in the 1932 German election" doesn't flow off the tongue quite as easily... Would help Google's traffic, tho

No problem, my fault for misunderstanding there, I apologize for that. I get to see our mental health system from a front row seat which is where I'm speaking from. It's really sad to see, folks need help and don't get it, not that ALL of the folks that get guns and go shoot up a place necessarily suffer from a mental disorder, but you could say a large number of them do. Our training in dealing with mentally ill folks has really picked up over the years because we're the ones called to deal with those folks and are picking up the slack of the mental healthcare system. That can cause a poor outcome from time-to-time unfortunately. If they don't do something with the mental healthcare system my view is they have no choice, but to do a more intensive background screening process, but you could do both of those things and it wouldn't hurt anything IMO. Mental illness is a 1 step forward, 2 steps back situation. The police chief for my area removed Officer training for dealing with the mentally impaired. His reasoning was there was no reason to treat them differently than any other criminal (literal wording). This is a very well-off area which makes this more sad. Additionally, there are few in-patient treatment centers remaining that are dedicated to dealing with mental illness. The biggest out here that remains is 1st a drug rehab & 2nd a mental illness facility. That sends the wrong message. There is so much that we can do to improve mental healthcare and also (unrelated or not) address preventable cases of gun violence yet nothing is done...

No imagining. The website is built on Drupal which makes multi-language easier than ever. Drupal is what Yahoo.com and literally every online newspaper uses for content-sites. I am totally serious when I say it was way MORE work for them to REMOVE Spanish support from the site than to have kept it. I could see this happening as well....since 31 States already have designated English as the official language of their respective State. It's not something I would be against, either. I don't know the reasoning behind not having an official language. We clearly speak English as a primary language, so why not make it official? As long as we don't stop making information available in other languages for people who haven't learned English yet, what's the issue? When my ancestors came to America, they would work during the day, then take government-sponsored English language courses at night. I heard the same story from my in-laws about their parents. It makes sense to me to do that. The ACLU did a write-up on this a few years ago but I'm not finding the piece. IIRC, the main issues with having an official language was it was impossible to prevent this trampling the Bill of RIghts & Civil Liberties. Would it be illegal to speak non-English at home? Would it be conspiracy if two people conversed in non-English on the street in public? With how laws & our legal system works, it would be almost impossible to implement these types of limits at the Federal level. By comparison, the ACLU actually supported this being a States' right to determine as well... I will post it if I find it. Seriously - just how small must his below the belt Mr. Trump be? While I am obviously not a member of that group, there are many on this board that are. On their behalf, I take offense to you casting dispersions on the members of the below-the-belt-magnitudinally-challenged demographic based on the actions of one person (Trump). /sarcasm

I think it is great the Intercept posted that. I eagerly look forward to see the first whistle-blowers turned in by the NSA/FBI and the outcome of the ensuing court-battle(s). A number of the tools listed by the intercept would be grounds for dismissal from most Federal Agencies if found on an employee's personal computer. On top of that, there are the PRISM and other NSA programs that would facilitate tracking despite these protections. The FBI has been able to de-anonymize/track TOR users since at least 2014. There are also industry rumors the NSA has compromised the TOR network from inception... If nothing else, I think our population will learn more about electronic privacy over the next 4 years than I ever expected... ;-)

I look at it the same way. He will try to put some "protections" in place to prevent it occurring in the future... Just spit-balling but maybe have GOP volunteers vet completed ballots & destroy those found to be fraudulent?!? Or maybe hire someone from NC GOP to assist in this regard...