Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You want fireworks, go make a thread about one of the following:
1) Obama might not be the devil — but Bush is clearly the devil
2) There may be some validity to the science behind anthropic climate change — There may be some validity to natural climate change
3) Burger King’s gay pride burger — but Chick Fil-A cannot support tradition marriage
4) A social safety net is potentially beneficial to society — Entitlement and rampant abuse of the safety net do not occur
5) A graduated tax system could have merit — A VAT could not have merit
6) The refs aren’t solely responsible for State’s lack of success — No one has ever said this but don’t let the facts get in the wayThe fireworks go both ways with the extremes at either the left or right side. What is the point?
“What do you expect when the guy making basketball decisions is a UNC “grad” who years ago preferred Kwame Brown to Elton Brand?”
LMAO …. excellent point. I had forgotten about that.“Never thought I would see the day that the editorial in the Charlotte Observer welcomed the NCAA investigation of UNC and said it needed to be broad and thorough!” I agree although most of the editorials seem to imply it is needed in order to stop the constant UNC bashing from the sea of red and that those in the sea of red will be disappointed at the end of the day when not much extra is found (see Brett Friedlander from the Wilmington Star-News for an example).
On a positive note the Charlotte Observer had four negative articles about PJ anbd UNC this morning. Some notable statements:
Hairston has decided to stay away from the Triangle area in the future, said Joy Cook, who operates Joy Cook Public Relations Group in Greensboro and works with him.
“It’s unfortunate and we look forward to the fact that P.J.’s in Charlotte right now getting ready to practice with the team and connecting with his colleagues,” Cook said. “He regrets and hates the situation happened, but it’s still important for him to still feel connected to the (Triangle) community, that’s why he was even there in the first place.
I am curious as to how much more connected witht the Triangle community PJ would like to be. I mean he connected pretty well at the YMCA on Sunday.
“He’s really passionate and in the future he really wants to work with young guys. But he has put himself in a self-imposed exile from Durham because he does understand, and like he’s said before publicly, that by giving him an opportunity he’s ready for his new beginning. So that’s what he’s focused on.”
I would try using a PR firm that understands basic reading, writing and comprehension.
Cook, the public relations agent, said, “P.J. is a young man who’s trying to navigate certain processes and has cut all ties with former friends and people he’s been around. He’s really excited with playing with his teammates in Charlotte.
He cut all ties? Really? So Josh Gordon was driving PJ car and was bailed out by Fats. Yet he has cut all ties?
I’ve seen his show. Would not say he is the best but would not call him a turd either. I see him about as funny as Stewart and more than Colbert.
You wrote this “Why are you stirring the pot? We sort of had this back on track and were having a conversation, and now you’re being a dick.”
Why don’t you follow your own advice? I thought this was a dead topic but you keep stirring it back up. Everyone is a dick but you I guess.
“I think we all know who’s responsible for the ills of this country.”
Why are you stirring the pot? We sort of had this back on track and were having a conversation, and now you’re being a dick. — LOL
Gordon’s $500 bond was paid by Haydn “Fats” Thomas, a convicted felon from Durham who is linked to Hairston and to the rental cars he was driving in a series of traffic stops in the summer of 2013. Hairston’s off-the-court troubles before what would have been his junior season led to his dismissal from UNC.
I am still confused as to how the PJ thing played out with UNC just “abandoning” him and no NCAA investigation into the “Fats” connection with UNC athletes. Then again if you repeat “nothing to see here” enough I guess people beleive it.
I am also consistently amazed at how the Bobcats continue to draft/trade for UNC players. You would think after the first few they would have learned there lesson.
“To me, that doesn’t sound particularly political. And the Redskins still have the ability to appeal the decision and have it overturned again, so to me it looks like the system is working as intended.”
Glad I could upgrade your understanding of the TTAP and the civil case to the lawyer/rule of law level from your previous Huffington Post level. It was quite apparent your never read and understood the rule of law in play on either case.
Then again as a butt-hurt conservative I tend to gather facts first since the “other side” is held to a higher standard than just have Ms. Huffington or NY Times say something so therefore it must be true and you are a butt hurt woman immigration gay hating angry white man if you disagree.
Having said that, it was exposed, and is being investigated, so I would say that part of the system is working as intended.———–>
You really believe that??? If what you wrote was true then the AG would have assigned an independent special investigator and prosecutor. Instead we have anyone questioning the issue labelled a “butthurt conservative” and the POTUS making a mockery of the professional nature of the office with his sarcastic mockery of those who dare to question him on anything.We’re supposed to have a system of checks and balances. It was anticipated that different branches of the government would behave badly from time to time. ———–>
Behaving badly from time to time is a fair cry from the possibility that a sitting POTUS and/or those in his administration used the IRS to influence an election and silence critics. During Watergate even the POTUS supporters acknowledged that the potential serious implications of the allegations and erased tape warranted the needed for outside investigation. I can’t begin to comprehend how you think the check and balances are in play here.Just because I know it is coming and because I don’t want to try and explain it all here is part of an article from Smithsonian explaining it.
“The Patent Office made a similar ruling in 1999, but it was overturned on appeal. An article from last fall in Forbes has a great explanation of why exactly the ruling was overturned:
Laches is an equitable legal defense, under which claims can be barred if a person waits too long to bring them. In the Harjo litigation, the district court found that the plaintiffs’ claims were barred using laches, because the Redskins were awarded their first trademark in 1967. The Harjo plaintiffs, however, didn’t bring their case until 1992–some 25 years after the Redskins’ first trademark was approved.
The time clock for the doctrine of laches begins ticking when a plaintiff reaches the age of majority. In the Harjo case, the youngest plaintiff was only one-year-old in 1967, when the Redskins obtained their first trademark. However, on remand, the district court found that even this plaintiff’s case violated the doctrine of laches, since he waited eight years after reaching the age of majority to bring his case.
The age of majority varies by state, but is usually between 18 and 21. In the current case, the suit was filed when the plaintiffs were between 18 and 24, so they should be able to avoid the same laches pitfall of the case that came before.”
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/redskins-trademark-registration-cancelled-us-patent-office-180951776/#gjUZByspibcgsHcQ.99
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! http://bit.ly/1cGUiGv
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on TwitterA large part of why the federal court overuled was because of the doctrine of laches, or, there was an unreasonable delay in filing the claim. — Half correct. —> “Pro Football appealed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and won: the court overruled the Board’s decision, holding – bear with me, this is the important part – that the evidence concerning the disparaging nature of the term “redskins” in 1967 was insufficient. The petitioners then appealed to D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the district court – without disturbing the ruling on insufficient evidence. The six registrations – which had remained intact throughout the appeal process – were thus definitively preserved.”
Another court ruled that laches was applied inappropriately, which opened it up for them to file another claim. — Nice try but an incorrect statment. —-> The Blackhorse claim was was basically a re-do of Harjo, with different (younger) plaintiffs to get around the previous successful defense based on lackes but with essentially the same evidence. The parties stipulated that all the testimony, expert reports, affidavits, and other documents from Harjo would be received into evidence in Blackhorse as well, and the new petitioners made a strategic decision not to add any substantial new evidence. You can read the stipulation from the Harjo TTAP and civil cases in the files for the Blackhorse case on the TTAP website. The Blackhorse case was even suspended multiple times waiting for the civil action to be finished on Harjo.
What evidence do you have to show that this was a political decision, other than the fact that you disagree with it?
The fact that the same body of evidence used in the prior 1992 case of which the TTAB found in favor of rejecting the trademark was overruled by federal court. No new evidence was presented in this case yet the TTAB ruled in exactly the same way. We will see how “rule of law” applies this time.
I saw no evidence to support their “finding” relating to 1967 thoughts. Did you?
If you read it then I assume you realize the relevant legal question is whether at the time the trademark was registered whether it was disparaging. That means that the challengers to the trademark must submit evidence that the trademark would be considered disparaging as they were registered. The trademark was registered in 1967. Where is the evidence that in 1967 the term was offensive? If so why did anyone wait until 1992 to file the first case? Where was the evidence that showed what public opinion was back in 1967?
Whether the mark is politically incorrect or disparaging today is completely irrelevant from a legal standpoint. The evidence the TTAB did use was a National Congress of American Indians’ (“NCAI”) 1993 Resolution 93- 11. What someone said or thought in 1993 is wholly irrelevant to the question of whether in 1967 a trademark was offensive.
Just because 50 senators and a president have inserted themselves into the discussion does not mean that “rule of law” should be ignored.
You’re another butt hurt conservative talk radio parrot who has decided that since I haven’t jumped on the grrr first amendment Obama is the worst open carry in Starbucks Ayn Rand 4 Lyfe bandwagon that I must be a brainwashed liberal.
This is the problem with you …. you took my critcal assessment of the adminstration (and your defending of it) as meaning I am a hard core conservative who wants to carry guns to Starbucks and is racist. You are far from the truth. I just happen to like the truth, hate liars and especially hate being successful and intelligent but having someone at the POTUS level always speak down to me and tell me why I should not care that he is dishonest and does whatever he thinks he should regardless of 48-52% of the country’s wishes depending on what issue you are discussing.
I most certianly did read the TTAB. What is your point? Am I supposed to magically understand how a politically motivated PC ruling makes sense from reading it? I am supposed to magically agree with your viewpoint even though a unbiased review of both sides of the discussion could allow one to reach the conclusion this was government overreach.
If you want to pretend you are smarter than others and conclude that any who disagree with the administration are hard core conservatives who hate American then be my guest. I can’t keep you from being too stupid to realize there are two valid sides to most issues and that when you incorporate both sides into a solution it is usally better than a one-sided viewpoint. However you and this administration seems to miss the civic lessons in high school that explained how a democaracy worked.
Pakfanistan:
Again, what are you talking about?
Who said Fighting Sioux is offensive?
I can’t find anything on the Fighting Christians, other than they changed their name. There was one reference to changing demographics at the school.
Ol’Miss, debatable, and depends on your opinion of the reason for the civil war.
Who has ever claimed ‘Warriors’ is offensive? Why does the word warrior refer to Native Americans? Is the Wounded Warrior project a Native American organization?
What are you talking about?The fact that you don’t know about any of these stupid name changes shows you have no real interest in Native Americans or the issue but rather are just a shrill for the adminstration as this was one of several recent “decisions and releases” to cloud and cover over the possiblity that people might start asking real Watergate type questions about the IRS investigation. This country has so lost its way to critical thinking and “trust but verify”. We now accept that our president resorts to open mockery and flat out “asshole” behavior to those who disagree with him all the while refusing to work together to develop compromise because he has people like pakfanistan out there to be as offensive as hell to those who dare to have a different viewpoint all the while calling that said viewpoint offensive.
Hungwolf:
So while the UNC Board handcuffed our program making us mediocre and an after thought in the college basketball world; Bill Friday with the UNC Power players, John Swofford, and Dean Smith set up an entire system of bogus classes to keep UNC Bball at the top.Adventuroo:
Please start with 1992 (circa) or whenever Coach Dean Smith visited Kansas and was made aware of the advantages of an AFAM department. That would include all the tenure of AD John Swofford who was the liaison between the Faculty Senate and the ADMIN to establish and staff the UNC AFAM.This to me is the best case outcome in that the NCAA connects all the dots to the “Carolina Way” and gives them an SMU or PSU death penalty. Unfortunately this will not erase the terrible injustice done to NCSU (the institution, alumni, students) or the Valvano family. It would however be a final closure much like the guilty verdict sentencing of someone who killed your loved one. However I am confident we will not get this closure.
I would be happy with slightly more than a slap on the wrist, a judgement of LOIC against UNC-CH, AND a public acknowledgement of willful violation of the NCAA rules and process by UNC-CH leaders including John Swafford. To me the arrogance is still the worst of the many stenchs that emit from that cesspool.
Does anyone know if he can play defense?
If he can I’m sure MG will fix that before he sees the court.Must have missed this one line comment that certainly wasted my time.
“Nothing is going to happen with the academic scandel at UNC. Unless a document falls out of the sky and into the NCAA’s lap that was signed by Roy Williams and states that “I am sending you to this crap class just to get an A and stay eligible” then the NCAA won’t touch this.”
Still wouldn’t happen then. Folt would say that “there is not a smidgen of evidence this was from Roy” and then the document would crash before it could be given to the NCAA. Later it would be chalked up to some overzealous learning assistants that came from Cincinnati.
Standard PR spin control these days seems to “rogue” personnel acting on their own along with “our story is believable because … well … just because it is more believable than a conspiracy”.
Super article. Thanks for posting. I did not know all of that about his background before he came to State. I just remember that I wished we had him for longer.
“Wow. Hate I missed all the compelling conversation around here in the last 24 hours.”
This was a very good, balanced and well detailed season preview. Thanks for sharing.
Regarding the compelling conversation at least there has not been a post, yet, telling us NC State football sucks and that Yow is forcing people against their will to buy season tickets even though she refuses to schedule Alabama, LSU, Oregon, and Oklahoma every year for OOC games.
I was wrong. You are right that was Dooley’s last year at Va Tech. Beamer came in the next year. I had forgotten Dooley was surrounded by allegations and was a lame duck coach at that game.
