@BShark I deleted my post when I realized I missed something. Or I would have deleted it but the site tells me I don't have that privilege. So I deleted the content.
mayjay
7180 posts
zzz
@tundrahok It was actually surprising how hard it is to find this record. Prob in NCAA record book but I deleted that pdf file when I ran too low on memory and needed to load something in a hurry.
@tundrahok Just saw your post. The article I posted a couple mins ago says a G Mason player went 10 for 10 in 2008.
Kubie said:
8-8 is a KU record for sure it may well be a ncaa record as well can’t find anything better so far
10 for 10 is the NCAA record for both men and women, unless someone broke it since this article.
He has bounced a couple of times back and forth to the Hornets G League team because he is the 3rd PG in their organization and they want him to get PT (the G League team uses the Hornets schemes). He had 31 points, seven rebounds, six assists and four steals last Saturday for Greensboro. Has only played 19 minutes in 2 games for the Hornets, so he is getting much needed experience. Still, Hornets' backup Tony Parker can't last forever at 36 yrs old, can he? So, there may be a space for DG yet this season.
BShark said:
HEM's coaching record is impeccable.
True for almost all of us, isn't it? I myself am unbeaten in Division 1!
@wissox A guy who built a deep, well-rounded squad that managed (along with Auburn) to beat loaded UK last year for the SEC regular season championship despite having much lower ranking players. The returnees include the top 5 scorers, one of whom is last year's SEC POY. Some analysts pick them as a F4 team.
He had trouble getting over the hump at the other UT with the several future NBA stars he had, but this Tennessee program he is building is not built around 5 stars. Barnes has always done well, and his squads beat KU sometimes. Tennessee also beat us before Barnes when KU went there as #1 (wife and I were there--sniff...), so they will no doubt play that up. And there is no doubt that Barnes will have something to prove "returning" to Big 12 play.
It is a tossup in my mind. Should be a great game.
@justanotherfan I understand where you are coming rrom, but I have to disagree about the two examples you cited. In the cake case, the comments were made by someone acting in a quasi-judicial capacity in a particular case involving weighing the rights of two parties in conflict. Animus against one side is highly relevant. The holding was limited to deciding that the party facing an apparent bias was entitled to an unbiased decision-maker.
In the second (third?) ban, the Court did not need to look at underlying motives because as an Executive Order, the ban could be examined purely on its face. Issued under the Presidential authority to restrict admission of aliens, it is more akin to a policy decision than a judicial decision. It would be an unimaginable nightmare if Executive Orders were subject to challenges solely because of a politician's extraneous comments that are not reflected in the mandate issued. Result oriented, I think, only in the sense of applying a heavy presumption of lawfulness of Executive action, just as courts are supposed to do whenever governmental action is challenged.
I do think in the bakery case that the Court should have reached the underlying issues, but in the ban, it was a foregone conclusion that eventually restrictions would be upheld.
@BeddieKU23 I think Vick will improve once he and the coaches not only determine all that QG and DD can do, but also how they should be used with Vick. He is like an X-factor, and last night it seemed he wasn't as involved in playmaking except as an afterthought. Q and D looked comfortable together; now, they need to add the exponential growth with Vick.
@wissox I read the thread after the game also, and noticed all of those comments, too. But I admit I myself was shouting at Vitale for the constant rah rah for ND football during live action!
@KirkIsMyHinrich What would you say if you were going to call him out?
:cartwheel_tone2:
@KUSTEVE I love how everyone wants to be able to do something and then wants to close down competition while trumpeting fairness. What is the position of the 2 would-be governors on the casino issue?
@FarmerJayhawk All that experience and expertise apparently didn't alert you to the idea that sometimes a guy claiming to admire dictators and fascists for their effectiveness might be tempted to emulate them. I think the political theorists who enacted the First Amendment had a good sense of the dangers posed by Trumpian-style attacks on the press as "enemies of the people," a phrase parroting Hitler and Stalin.
@JayHawkFanToo As always, you are arguing with someone else, rebutting positions I have not argued. I have never said Ford's allegations were true, only that I believe she believes them. And I have said it is too difficult to assess allegations about events that long ago, and that is why stautues of limitations exclude all but the most serious crime (murder) after a number of years.
What I have contended is that "uncorroborated" does not mean "disproven" and that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence supporting an in-depth investigation, and that the issue of a supreme court nomination merits taking sufficient time. The guy who should welcome one if he is innocent has been protected by shoddy Committee work and a perfunctory FBI investigation. The person who should oppose one if she is lying has laid her life open. The Republicans can bitch about the timing all they want, but anything they say is the height of hypocrisy after they ignored their most sacred constitutional duty in 2016.
The report glosses over the evidence about Kavanaugh lying in the hearing. Literally thousands of legal scholars, attorneys, and judges believed his conduct in the hearing, including his partisan attacks, constituted an independent basis to oppose his nomination.
Enough on this. He was confirmed. Just watch out for your wishes coming true, because ideological partisans like K have a way of screwing up legal certainty for everybody.
@BShark But you provoked an inquiry, and damned if the author of the WSJ article didn't used to be on the staff of the Duke Chronicle!
@BShark SCarolina product, and we need all the fun news we can find.
There is a video with 2 angles. Pretty cool. He also was reported to do a 45" vertical. Not bad for 285 lbs.
Crimsonorblue22 said:
I'm a lil bummed guys, nobody going to defend me here?
Sorry! I always try to have your back, but I missed this one until now because I saw little reason to get involved in this thread since the initial video is useless, and this alleged Angel something else indeed.
I can't see that you needed defending on this one, anyway! The comments about you reflected solely on his confusion and poor memory, and evinced some weird gender attribution of political bent. @JayHawkFanToo, however, did a nice job.
@JayHawkFanToo My reference to the Ramirez case was about the alleged FBI interview, about which the report is silent except relying on a CNN report that they conducted one. Highly professional job, that. I looked at all 414 pages trying to find the FBI report because I couldn't imagine you getting something so blatantly wrong. I guess we are alike in thinking that.
So Ford lay in wait for several years, laying the groundwork with several references to friends about a federal judge, so she could conveniently ambush Kavanaugh whom she knew way back when? The mind boggles at the intricacies of the scheme.
@JayHawkFanToo I cannot find any FBI report in those 414 pages. This is Grassley's Committee Report. I like the fact that, rather than including an FBI report, the document footnotes a CNN story saying that Ramirez was interviewed by the FBI with no further information. Good to have such a thorough investigation.
I still want someone to explain how Ford went about making up this story by telling people about it in 2012, 2013, 2016, and 2017.
@FarmerJayhawk Making it through the Civil War largely depended on a single man's decision to keep the Union intact. He had to violate the constitution to do it, but did not do so more than was necessary nor go nearly as far as he was urged. Similarly, another president in the 30's violated a number of laws to prepare the country and to aid allies so we could face down world-wide fascist threats in WW2. In the 80's we had a president whose greatest legacy is to have confronted an expansionist Soviet empire, resulting in its disintegration a few years later.
Each of those presidents had bitter opponents, but each of those presidents had a firm grasp of history and a vision of the enhanced democratic future for a greater nation. Now we have a president who, merely to attract more chanting supporters and cheerleaders to his rallies, has lined up in support of those who fondly celebrate the rebellion against the Union, who expresses sympathy for the rabble remnants of our fascist enemies calling them "good people," and who admires a brutal Russian near-dictator who arose out of the vicious Soviet KGB and who has succeeded in interfering with our democracy while our president attempts to stop even an inquiry into that effort's effects. This president's vision is limited to anything that gets him applause regardless of who he disrespects, regardless of the freedoms he threatens, and in apparent ignorance of the cost of discarding long-term allies for short-term political gain.
Democracy is always in peril. It is never self-perpetuating. Losing it only requires one person willing to discard the lessons of history and the teachings of the brilliant minds who have saved us before, coupled with passivity of millions of people who follow that person into oblivion.
@jayballer73 Contract extension! Because crappy programs always do that a couple months before firing someone. (So do corporations about to go under.) Just remember, you heard it here first!
@KUSTEVE Giggling is better for your neck. Unless you giggle at a gaggle of goggled Hell's Angels. Then what remains of your neck will gurgle at best.
@Texas-Hawk-10 "....those are penalties that result from the player making a mental mistake because they aren’t focused. That’s not something a coach can do for a player."
An exception should exist, however, if repetitive movement penalties by different players indicate the coaches are not getting everybody on the same page on timing.
@JayHawkFanToo What size goggles do you wear? Regular, or Rx?
@JayHawkFanToo You may have read 20 papers, but when you are choosing only to read ones that agree with a certain position, it means very little. The overwhelming weight of legal opinion in this country is that the 14th Amendment's clear language establishes birthright citizenship. Whether it should be changed is the very essence of a political issue.
If you think it simply requires a Trumpian SCOTUS to change an interpretation, please tell me how far back we go, because if there are a couple of illegals in someone's past, that means their current citizenship could be nullified.
I guess one idea that could excite two different conservative groups would be to extend the "personhood at conception" argument to its logical extreme: redefine "birth" to mean "creation" (i.e., conception). If you were not conceived in the US, you can't be a citizen just because Mommy came here hoping to deliver on US soil. No anchor babies, no maternity ward citizenship. Plan your honeymoons for the US, not your deliveries. Too late by then!
Warning! R-rated paragraph! Pardon my language, but that would require figuring out where the parents had sex--in other words, literally yet another "fucking" investigation.
@DoubleDD USA law, as does international law, gives them the right to apply for asylum as refugees. That is what Trump is pledging to prevent them from doing. Thus, the lawsuits, not a claim to be citizens.
Most countries in our hemisphere recognize birthright citizenship. About 36 altogether do, at last count, I believe.
@JayHawkFanToo Time again for better legal research. The 1884 decision was based on the fact that the Indians in question were born on reservations that technically are considered separate sovereigns although physically within the US. Therefore, they fell outside the "subject to jurisdiction" category under the legislation and/or treaties governing reservations. Congress, under its authority in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment and its authority to define the status of Indians and reservations, reversed the ruling in the 20's to make NAs full citizens, as are people born in territories.
The primary class of people that the jurisdiction clause was meant to exclude was diplomats' children. Trying to eliminate birthright citizenship of illegal aliens by EO saying they are not subject to US jurisdiction is crazy because with a stroke of the pen DT would immunize millions of adult illegals from criminal prosecution. After arguing how dangerous they are, is that what anyone on the Right wants?
Whether Congress could redefine it under their authority used for the Indians is a different question. It won't happen in our lifetimes.
No one has addressed the question of how an EO would be implemented. Except for naturalized citizens, Americans do not get issued citizenship papers, just birth certificates. Would the EO apply to everyone currently thinking they are citizens who cannot prove their parents entered legally? And would the proposal mean the children born here, if not citizens, are therefore illegally here like their parents? We could see generations of disenfranchised progeny if the EO were applied retroactively.
If it only applies prospectively after a certain date, again, how does someone go about proving the status of their parents and grandparents if one or the other were progeny of illegals? It would be inherently contradictory to say that the Amendment changed in meaning using a bright line test of the date an EO is issued.
Ironically, implementing an EO like this would likely require legislation creating a comprehensive immigration policy, including (bated breath . . .wait for it. . . . .) AMNESTY!
Does anyone want to see literally millions of lawsuits flooding the courts? Full employment for my brethren Esquires while the rest of the country descends into chaos.
@approxinfinity I definitely added more to that sentence and should have had more commas. Hoist on me own petard! Edit: "in" is the proper word for it is used with the writer's "intent . . . in" the passage.
As for how sentence meaning can change depending on how it sounds, here is an example (though not of punctuation) of a sentence in a criminal trial transcript:
"I never said she killed him."
What meaning did you glean? Now, reread it six times, each time particularly stressing a different word.
Punctuation can be played with, too. But more importantly, if you think commas are only to make sentences sound good and can be deleted by personal preference, they certainly can be added willy nilly, too. Remember the rabbit who eats, shoots, and leaves?
@approxinfinity The advantages of following rules are twofold. First, the writer doesn't have to make ad hoc decisions every time--just know and follow the rule. Easy as pie. Second, the writer by not making decisions about when to follow rules can ensure the greatest chance that the intent of the writer in the passage will be understood by the reader provided everyone uses the common rules.
Put together, those considerations mean that you don't have to figure out all possible misinterpretations by picking and choosing when to be "correct."
If you can always guarantee proper interpretations of your meaning, good on you! But furthering the notion that everyone can be so perfect is pretty short-sighted.
@approxinfinity You discerned an attempt to share meaningful thoughts from that introductory post? Hmmm....missed it, I guess. Mea culpa.
@bang_sheezo There is one certainty always proven when someone posts something like this: internet coverage extends to the far end of your large intestine, wherein resides what passes for your brain.
@dylans Are the Chinese producing fake honey from fake bees, which they must use to pollinate fake blossoms on fruit trees and fake flowers on clover, from whence the fake bees must make their fake honey? Cure for colony collapse? REAL fake news?
@justanotherfan I was going to try to explain that, but after so many fruitless tries in this thread previously I gave up and chose drinking instead. Lemon's comment would have been more easily understood had he used a couple simple explanatory words. Instead of saying "most terorist attacks in the US have been committed by white males" he said "white males are terrorists" leading to the misunderstanding that he was talking about all white males. His tying it to the idea of a ban made his point clear to anyone not primed by Hannity to whine about all the blame they think gets tossed their way.
Many people make that mistake of reversing order when talking about subsets of larger groups. I hate imprecise speech. English teachers used to really slam people for not getting this right, but I don't know if anyone pays attention. They certainly don't to the "neither...nor" or "not only...but also" rules.
@BeddieKU23 @BShark I am shocked at both of you in thinking the Regents meeting is useless. They are getting together to collect their shares of the rest of the money that has not been accounted for.
SC's heroically independent-minded Lindsey Graham has yanked another string to spin John McCain in his grave by immediately announcing he would introduce legislation to further Der Frumpster's desires.
BShark said:
News will come "soon". Billy Preston soon. :/
I had to laugh when I realized that you were NOT saying there would be a ruling on Billy soon.
@HighEliteMajor There couuld be some type of rule, formal or informal, against talking about anything once the NCAA has it. I am certain that discussing it, especially looking like you are denying any responsibility, couldn't help but look bad for a school that might be facing an "institutional control failure" allegation.
@dylans That Chinese manufacturing is hard to beat! But the product wasn't durable, unfortunately.
@dylans Tell that to Yao.
@jayballer73 Montgomery might be out of the NFL by the time the Packers get to use that 7th rd pick!
@approxinfinity Different teams.
@bmensch1 Look at Cole going to town! Over 18 ppg. Probably about 6 to 7 times his NBA avg for those bench years.
Missing TRob, too?
@Crimsonorblue22 In Japan apparently. I missed this August article.
Even the WSJ says no.
Rewriting the Fourteenth Amendment
https://www.wsj.com/articles/rewriting-the-fourteenth-amendment-1540939660 ↗
@KUSTEVE The newly elected right-wing President of Brazil is showing that the dangers we face have nothing to do with political ideology. The danger, as it was with the near simultaneous growth of Communism and Naziism in the 20's, is TOTALITARIANISM. Extremists, regardless of left or right, seek to destroy the rights of any opponents. This is a section from an article in The Nation:
Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s president-elect, who won Sunday’s second-round vote with a staggering 55 percent of the ballet, is an open fascist, a violent phobe of every decent thing. A misogynist who said he would rather see his son dead than accept him as gay, Bolsonaro is an agent of the world’s most reactionary tendencies, someone who joins fake-news-style social-media manipulation to old-fashioned death-squad repression. The makeup of Brazil’s congress looks grim as well, and the military will have his back—there’s little foreseeable break on what he can do. Markets are soaring. Global proud boys are dancing.
The mega-dozers are revving their engines, and the earth will be pushed to the limits, as Bolsonaro peeled off some of the landless vote by promising he’d remove prohibitions on colonizing the vast Amazon, even as his soy, lumber, mining, and cattle backers will lay waste to far larger swaths than any peasant ax could. “For Canadian business, a Bolsonaro presidency could open new investment opportunities,” the CBC reported last night shortly after the results were announced, “as he has pledged to slash environmental regulations in the Amazon rain forest and privatize some government-owned companies.” “Our Amazon is like a child with chickenpox, every dot you see is an indigenous reservation,” Bolsonaro has said, promising to do away with land set-asides for native peoples.
Brazil is one of the world’s largest economies, so it’s not hyperbole to say the election is a geopolitical Pittsburgh massacre. During the campaign, Bolsonaro’s supporters targeted his opponents for violent hate crimes, including carving a swastika into the skin of a 19-year-old woman carrying an LGBT flag. The crackdown on universities began even before his final victory. [EDIT by Mayjay: Over 20 universities were raided by military police, seeking teachers' materials about fascism.] Just a week ago, Brazil’s new president-elect pledged that upon winning he would carry out “a cleansing never before seen in the history of Brazil.” Last year, he said he’d “give carte blanche for the police to kill.” Election day wasn’t even over when São Paulo’s new governor said he’d pay for the “best lawyers” to defend police who execute criminals. The targets will be, overwhelmingly, poor urban black boys and men, along with rural land and environmental activists.
The most interesting thing is that he threw a tantrum when taken out of the game in their last possession. So people were saying it was all about him deciding to do whatever the hell he wanted.