Bill Moos, AD at Nebraska

As I sit and ponder what has happened at Nebraska and how far Husker Nation has slid and why recent movement in personnel within the Athletic Department give me hope for the future.

We still have what Perlman did with his personal distaste for Bo Pelini, a winner but a difficult man to have a long-term relationship. That was the second occurrence during Perlman tenure that Nebraska terminated a winning coach and put Husker Nation in a downward spiral since Dr. Tom Osborne retired from coaching football creating a situation where any decent coach would be a fool to come to Lincoln. Yet, we have enjoyed Mediocrity from Callahan and now Riley in the time after reaching nine-win seasons under Solich and Pelini.

Perlman also hired an athletic director Shawn Eichorst that did not have a long-term record of running a $100M athletic department and based his decision on Barry Alvarez’s recommendation excluding Dr. Tom and others in Husker Nation. It was obvious that Eichorst was told that he had to remove all vampires from the athletic department per Perlman demand.

Husker Nation was doomed to mediocrity by Perlman by his decisions based on what he thought was best for Husker Nation rather than what was best for Husker Nation.

When Dr. Perlman retired and Dr. Hank Bounds and Dr. Ronnie Green arrived on campus it became apparent that the athletic department was at best letting down Husker Nation with the football program stuck with financial support but on field leadership in the form of coaching.

After two years struggling with mediocre defense that was not improving with recruits that are capable of providing the level of talent to live up to the Blackshirt tradition Mike Riley did the right thing and reached out and hired Bob Diaco with solid credentials as a defensive coordinator at Notre Dame and other schools.

There was the belief that the offense was going to be able to compete with Danny Langsdorf would be able to get his offensive scheme to work regardless of his lifelong record of mediocrity with Riley at Oregon State and the NFL.

The last three years have proven once again that no matter how much money you throw at mediocrity, mediocrity will prevail and settle into place once again. At this point in the 2017 Husker football season, I honestly do not see how the Huskers can win another game this season. The only potential is if Diaco can turn the Blackshirts that have been devastated via injury and win with the Blackshirts.

Please note that I have included Randy York’s comments:

Moos Doesn’t Tolerate Mediocrity, Embraces Entire State

By Randy York

 | 10/16/2017

Bill Moos Named Nebraska’s Athletic Director

Moos Introductory Press Conference Transcript

Bill Moos a ‘Perfect Fit’ to Lead the Huskers 

Take this from a former University of Nebraska at Kearney athletics director who also was an assistant football coach at Missouri and an associate athletics director at Washington State – Bill Moos, Nebraska’s new director of athletics, is the real deal.

A ground-breaker for 12 years as athletics director at Oregon, Moos became a pioneer for seven years as A.D. at Washington State and on Sunday, he became a high expectation trendsetter for the University of Nebraska, one of the nation’s top four winning college football programs.

The Huskers, however, have gone almost two decades without winning a conference championship, and that is precisely why new leadership is so vital.

“I knew Bill when we were at Washington State together,” former Kearney A.D. Dick Beechner told me Sunday. “I was an associate athletic director with Bill when we were both under athletic director Sam Jankovich. I’ve known Bill for a long time at WSU and have followed his career not only at Washington State but also at Montana. He did a good job.”

I Know This: Bill Doesn’t Tolerate Mediocrity; He Wants People to Be the Best They Know How

“I’ve always respected Bill, and we’ve always gotten along very well,” Beechner said. “I know this – Bill doesn’t tolerate mediocrity. He wants people to do the best that they know how. He has integrity. He likes people and as I listened to his press conference today on, you can bet Bill will embrace Nebraska and will definitely reach out to the entire state.”

Why does Beechner, who made the Nebraska High School Sports Hall of Fame Foundation a prominent gemstone that features Husker legend Tom Osborne, know what others do not know?

With all that said regarding Bill Moos what do we evaluate to understand Moos. He was at Montana as AD and then Oregon during their climb in the BCS and finally at Washington State (Wazzou) improving each and every athletic department along with building strong football programs at each university.

How does his history relate to what Husker Nation needs at this time?

Nebraska has an athletic department budget that exceeds $100M. Moos has moved upward over his career to where his tenure at Oregon had a budget about $40M where he developed sponsors and built booster groups providing long-term support for the Ducks.

He then retired to his ranch in Washington until he and his wife determined that it was best he move back to his passion and he was hired at Wazzou, where he played football and began his career in the athletic department. The last seven years he improved Wazzou’s athletic programs and has hired coaches that fit into Wazzou’s environment and culture. He made a wise decision for Wazzou hire with Mike Leach as their head coach for football. We all know Mike Leach from Texas Tech and his high-powered offense. Mike Leach is a good football coach but honestly is only a step-up from Mike Riley not having an 80%-win coaching career like Husker Nation demands and needs for success.

As we analyze what Husker Football is and how we can rise to the top of B1G football we have to look at what does best in the league and what has to be done to climb back into a Top-10 football program on an annual basis.

Option football has evolved and become what is known now as a spread formation. It is much like what my father played back in the 40s when he played college football in Nebraska. To be successful there has to be a strong running attack that is complemented by passing the football. The QB must be a solid runner as well as a capable passer.

The offensive line must be strong enough and mean enough to push the opposing defense around like Milt Tenopir’s lines did under Dr. Tom’s teams. At that time there was depth enough so that the third string linemen were nearly as talented as the first string. That was a constant development using the walk-on program that was refined over the years under Dr. Tom to the point where Nebraska talent that started dreaming about playing for the Husker Nation while watching the Huskers walked onto the field and battled daily smashing their way onto the field as often as they could to prove themselves and push the scholarship players forcing them to work to maintain their position on the field.

The Walk-ons went out and played smash mouth football as the game is a game of controlled collisions that cannot be finessed by the current coaching methodologies used in Lincoln.

One of the announcers mentioned during Ohio State’s shellacking of the Huskers last week that Urban Meyer told his defensive backs they were not mean enough earlier this season and they needed to get mean. With the Huskers, all the players need to start getting mean so that there are collisions on the field and the Huskers begin to earn some respect again starting first in the B1G and then in the Nation.

During many discussions with former players, alumni, Nebraskans and Husker fans that are not Nebraskans it is clear that the present team is being coached to play football the Husker Way. They are not mean enough to even be able to be on the same football field as the 1997 Husker Football team.

We have slipped downward and have little to look forward to except letting Mike Riley go back to Oregon State and continue his mediocre career there. We need a head coach that can recruit in Texas and California along with developing the talent of the recruits and walk-ons from the proud state of Nebraska.

With Moos comes the opportunity to get back on track to win conference championships and national championships like the fans and the football program has the resources to do.

What we have been missing is the coaching staff that can get the job done. Everything is in place to be successful with some hard work and strong football coaching.

With Moos we have hope. Thank you Drs. Brands and Green.


Leave a comment

Filed under Blackshirts, Husker Nation, Offensive Signs

Michael Flynn Jr. cryptically tweeted that ‘you’re all going down.’ Um, what?


Notes from the Noosphere:

This is an interesting piece of journalism with guessing at the conclusion based on what CNN wants to have happen. 

The odds at this time is that the Deep State is in trouble. All along, it was believed that General Flynn pled guilty as Mueller was putting pressure on his son just as he has been with Manafort hoping to get at Trump. After eighteen months it is clear that the evidence against Trump does not exist unless in the minds of those that enjoy Trump Derangement Syndrome desiring Trump to be impeached. 

What this article portends is that Flynn, Jr. is expecting the Trump administration is going down. Yet, every Deplorable (aka Trump Supporter) is thinking that this innuendo is pointing fingers at the Deep State actors that colluded against Trump thinking that Hillary was going to win the presidency. Ergo the plan was to support Hillary and gain her good graces. 

What we have is a classic “My Way of Thinking” is what is going to happen. Both sides should gain from this article that does not use journalist principles but neither will. They wil continue to plot and plan their own destructive stories in their own way. It is sad that this downslide of journalism has happened. We cannot blame either side as both have sinned greviously in the last 20 years.  


Analysis by Chris Cillizza , CNN Editor-at-large/May 22, 2018


(CNN) — On Monday afternoon at 4 p.m., Michael Flynn Jr. tweeted this: “You’re all going down. You know who you are. Mark my word….”

Which is, um, intriguing?

Flynn is the son of Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser and now a cooperating witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

You’ll remember that Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to Mueller in December, and in announcing his decision, made clear that “my guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the Special Counsel’s Office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country.”

That guilty plea came just a month after CNN reported that Flynn was growing increasingly concerned about the legal exposure of his son, who served as his de facto aide-de-camp during the campaign and for a portion of the presidential transition.

Even as his father has disappeared from public view since last December’s guilty plea, Michael Flynn Jr. has continued to tweet up a storm. And at times, he has seemed to inadvertently(?), contradict the White House’s official line on the Russia investigation.

Take this tweet from last month:

“American Patriot @GenFlynn did not lie to Pence (or anyone else in the admin) about his perfectly legal and appropriate conversations w Russian AMB Kislyak in Dec 2016. Why would a highly decorated military intel officer lie about something legal? Been a MSM lie from day 1.”

That contention runs directly against the President’s stated reason for firing Flynn: Because Flynn lied to Vice President Mike Pence about the nature and number of his contacts with Russian officials.

Flynn Jr. provided no context or follow up as to what evidence (if any) he had to back up his claim that Trump’s reasoning for firing his father was false.

That’s sort of the way things go for Flynn Jr.’s Twitter feed. There’s a lot of boasting and braggadocio and very little in the way of provable facts. Flynn Jr. has touted the belated “#impeachObama” movement, attacked Starbucks and offered this vague warning about Google — “Google is becoming a dangerous platform…..tread wisely…” — all in the last 24 hours or so.

It’s also worth noting that Flynn Jr. often traffics in debunked conspiracy theories — including “Pizzagate,” the idea that a pizza restaurant in Washington was running a secret pedophile ring that Hillary Clinton was somehow involved in. (Flynn Jr. left the transition team after raising questions about “Pizzagate.”)

Which brings me back to Flynn Jr.’s “You’re all going down” tweet.

The wording creates lots and lots of questions.

The biggest one is who is the “you” Flynn Jr. is referring to? Is it people within the Trump administration who he thinks have sold his dad out? Is it the alleged “deep state” actors like former FBI Director James Comey, former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe and special counsel Mueller? Someone else?

A quick reading of Flynn Jr.’s other tweets sent around the same time — and there are lots — suggests he might be talking about the “deep state” idea. Why? Because, hours later, Flynn Jr. retweeted Sharyl Attkisson’s story detailing something called a “sensitive matter team” within the FBI that, according to Attkisson, was tasked with dealing with the Russia investigation.

Which is, I mean … who knows?

Look. It’s easy to dismiss Flynn Jr. as a son looking out for his dad and/or someone prone to see conspiracy everywhere he looks. Maybe that’s all this “you’re all going down” tweet is — just another empty boast.

But it’s also worth remembering that Flynn Jr. was his father’s closest aide. He was, therefore, intimately involved in the Trump campaign and, for a time, the Trump transition. Which mean he knows things. Which makes totally laughing off his latest warning a mistake.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics from Just Right of Center - I want Balance!

Stopping Robert Mueller to protect us all


Notes from the Noosphere:

Is this the answer? It has become increasely clear that the Deep State went to far along with the Obama Administration influence there were actions taken that appear to be felonious. What is taking so long to circle back around and removing the Deep State influence of the FBI and DOJ? The more we learn the worse it seems. 

The Inspector General report is getting momentum to outline the damage done to the government and who did what. Then who will investigate the crimes committed by the FBI and DOJ. At this point it is not clear that the individuals responsible for investigating are part of the problem. 




Giuliani says Mueller has informed him that Trump cannot be indicted

The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation. With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

At this point, there is little doubt that the highest echelons of the FBI and the Justice Department broke their own rules to end the Hillary Clinton “matter,” but we can expect the inspector general to document what was done or, more pointedly, not done. It is hard to see how a yearlong investigation of this won’t come down hard on former FBI Director James Comey and perhaps even former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who definitely wasn’t playing mahjong in a secret “no aides allowed” meeting with former President Clinton on a Phoenix airport tarmac.

With this report on the way and congressional investigators beginning to zero in on the lack of hard, verified evidence for starting the Trump probe, current and former intelligence and Justice Department officials are dumping everything they can think of to save their reputations.

But it is backfiring. They started by telling the story of Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat, as having remembered a bar conversation with George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. But how did the FBI know they should talk to him? That’s left out of their narrative. Downer’s signature appears on a $25 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation. You don’t need much imagination to figure that he was close with Clinton Foundation operatives who relayed information to the State Department, which then called the FBI to complete the loop. This wasn’t intelligence. It was likely opposition research from the start.

In no way would a fourth-hand report from a Maltese professor justify wholesale targeting of four or five members of the Trump campaign. It took Christopher Steele, with his funding concealed through false campaign filings, to be incredibly successful at creating a vast echo chamber around his unverified, fanciful dossier, bouncing it back and forth between the press and the FBI so it appeared that there were multiple sources all coming to the same conclusion.

Time and time again, investigators came up empty. Even several sting operations with an FBI spy we just learned about failed to produce a DeLorean-like video with cash on the table. But rather than close the probe, the deep state just expanded it. All they had were a few isolated contacts with Russians and absolutely nothing related to Trump himself, yet they pressed forward. Egged on by Steele, they simply believed Trump and his team must be dirty. They just needed to dig deep enough.

Perhaps the murkiest event in the timeline is Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointment of a special counsel after he personally recommended Comey’s firing in blistering terms. With Attorney General Jeff Sessions shoved out of the way, Rosenstein and Mueller then ignored their own conflicts and took charge anyway. Rosenstein is a fact witness, and Mueller is a friend of Comey, disqualifying them both.

Flush with 16 prosecutors, including a former lawyer for the Clinton Foundation, and an undisclosed budget, the Mueller investigation has been a scorched-earth effort to investigate the entirety of the Trump campaign, Trump business dealings, the entire administration and now, if it was not Russia, maybe it’s some other country.

The president’s earlier legal team was naive in believing that, when Mueller found nothing, he would just end it. Instead, the less investigators found, the more determined and expansive they became. This president and his team now are on a better road to put appropriate limits on all this.

This process must now be stopped, preferably long before a vote in the Senate. Rather than a fair, limited and impartial investigation, the Mueller investigation became a partisan, open-ended inquisition that, by its precedent, is a threat to all those who ever want to participate in a national campaign or an administration again.

Its prosecutions have all been principally to pressure witnesses with unrelated charges and threats to family, or just for a public relations effect, like the indictment of Russian internet trolls. Unfortunately, just like the Doomsday Machine in “Dr. Strangelove” that was supposed to save the world but instead destroys it, the Mueller investigation comes with no “off” switch: You can’t fire Mueller. He needs to be defeated, like Ken Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Clinton.

Finding the “off” switch will not be easy. Step one here is for the Justice Department inspector general report to knock Comey out of the witness box. Next, the full origins of the investigation and its lack of any real intelligence needs to come out in the open. The attorney general, himself the target of a secret investigation, needs to take back his Justice Department. Sessions needs to act quickly, along with U.S. Attorney John Huber, appointed to conduct an internal review of the FBI, on the Comey and McCabe matters following the inspector general report, and then announce an expanded probe into other abuses of power.

The president’s lawyers need to extend their new aggressiveness from words to action, filing complaints with the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility on the failure of Mueller and Rosenstein to recuse themselves and going into court to question the tactics of the special counsel, from selective prosecutions on unrelated matters, illegally seizing Government Services Administration emails, covering up the phone texts of FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and operating without a scope approved by the attorney general. (The regulations call for the attorney general to recuse himself from the investigation but appear to still leave him responsible for the scope.)

The final stopper may be the president himself, offering two hours of testimony, perhaps even televised live from the White House. The last time America became obsessed with Russian influence in America was the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s. Those ended only when Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) attacked an associate of the U.S. Army counsel, Joseph Welch, and Welch famously responded: “Sir, have you no decency?” In this case, virtually every associate and family member of the president has been subject to smears conveniently leaked to the press.

Stopping Mueller isn’t about one president or one party. It’s about all presidents and all parties. It’s about cleaning out and reforming the deep state so that our intelligence operations are never used against opposing campaigns without the firmest of evidence. It’s about letting people work for campaigns and administrations without needing legal defense funds. It’s about relying on our elections to decide our differences.

Mark Penn served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during his impeachment. He is chairman of the Harris Polland author of “Microtrends Squared.” Follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.



Leave a comment

Filed under Politics from Just Right of Center - I want Balance!


Notes from the Noosphere:

Under the current state of affairs within our beloved government, it is easy to see that the FBI and DOJ are corrupt and need a drastic house cleaning ridding the organizations of poltical bias as shown the last two years. 

While McCabe was terminated before his retirement could begin thus forcing him to suffer for his crimes by losing his pension there is more that he needs to face: criminal charges is what surfaces. 

Comey is now facing many legal challenges as well once the Deep State and DOJ corruption gets cleaned. Evidence seems to be growing that the people in charge of the Special Proscuter may be an intregal element in the illegal acts the FBI and DOJ have perpetrated in the last two years. 

There has been an effort from before Trump was elected and in office to prevent him from gaining office and then staying in office.

It is slowly becoming clear that the FBI and DOJ are corrupt. This is long after J. Edgar Hoover left office as Director of the FBI. J. Edgar was so corrupt and used blackmail to keep politicans from attacking him fearing that he would release evidence against them. Is that any different now?

When I was in my formative years in the 1960s we were led to not trust the government by people like Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and other liberal people that wanted the USA out of Viet Nam. i still vividly remember how I was told landing at the San Francisco Airport and being told not to wear my Army uniform while taking public transportation across the bay for out processing of the Army. The wonderful people of San Francisco were nasty to GIs accusing each and every one of us of being “Baby Killers.” 

Now they same people have led the gvernment into what may come to be learned once again that we cannot trust our government in WAshington, DC that thinks they know more about how to fix problems at all levels of goevernment when they are corrupt and only seek to cover their collective backs in Washington, DC.

The only element different is that the people claiming that we cannot trust the government recently was the government.   Some of those same people are still actively involved in the government. I still don’t trust them. 

Spinning a Crossfire Hurricane: The Times on the FBI’s Trump Investigation


May 17, 2018 12:22 PM


Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks at a rally at High Point University in High Point, North Carolina, September 20, 2016. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters) The paper buries more than one lede.

If you’re a fading Baby Boomer, you’re faintly amused that the FBI code-named its Trump-Russia investigation “Crossfire Hurricane.” It’s an homage to the Rolling Stones golden oldie “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” — which, come to think of it, might just be a perfect handle for John Brennan, the former Obama CIA director whose specter hovers over each critical juncture of the case.

The young’uns may not believe it, but back before it was known as “classic rock,” you couldn’t just play your crossfire hurricane on Spotify. You had to spin it. Fittingly, that is exactly what the New York Times has done in Wednesday’s blockbuster report on the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.

The quick take on the 4,100-word opus is that the Gray Lady “buried the lede.” Fair enough: You have to dig pretty deep to find that the FBI ran “at least one government informant” against the Trump campaign — and to note that the Times learned this because “current and former officials” leaked to reporters the same classified information about which, just days ago, the Justice Department shrieked “Extortion! when Congress asked about it.

But that’s not even the most important of the buried ledes. What the Times story makes explicit, with studious understatement, is that the Obama administration used its counterintelligence powers to investigate the opposition party’s presidential campaign.

That is, there was no criminal predicate to justify an investigation of any Trump-campaign official. So, the FBI did not open a criminal investigation. Instead, the bureau opened a counterintelligence investigation and hoped that evidence of crimes committed by Trump officials would emerge. But it is an abuse of power to use counterintelligence powers, including spying and electronic surveillance, to conduct what is actually a criminal investigation.

The Times barely mentions the word counterintelligence in its saga. That’s not an accident. The paper is crafting the media-Democrat narrative. Here is how things are to be spun: The FBI was very public about the Clinton-emails investigation, even making disclosures about it on the eve of the election. Yet it kept the Trump-Russia investigation tightly under wraps, despite intelligence showing that the Kremlin was sabotaging the election for Trump’s benefit. This effectively destroyed Clinton’s candidacy and handed the presidency to Trump.

It’s a gas, gas, gas!

It’s also bunk. Just because the two FBI cases are both referred to as “investigations” does not make them the same kind of thing.

The Clinton case was a criminal investigation that was predicated on a mountain of incriminating evidence. Mrs. Clinton does have one legitimate beef against the FBI: Then-director James Comey went public with some (but by no means all) of the proof against her. It is not proper for law-enforcement officials to publicize evidence from a criminal investigation unless formal charges are brought.

In the scheme of things, though, this was a minor infraction. The scandal here is that Mrs. Clinton was not charged. She likes to blame Comey for her defeat; but she had a chance to win only because the Obama Justice Department and the FBI tanked the case against her — in exactly the manner President Obama encouraged them to do in public commentary.

By contast, the Trump case is a counterintelligence investigation. Unlike criminal cases, counterintelligence matters are classified. If agents had made public disclosures about them, they would have been committing crimes and violating solemn agreements with foreign intelligence services — agreements without which those services would not share information that U.S. national-security officials need in order to protect our country.

In the scheme of things, though, the problem is not that the FBI honored its confidentiality obligations in the Trump case while violating them in the Clinton case. The scandal is that the FBI, lacking the incriminating evidence needed to justify opening a criminal investigation of the Trump campaign, decided to open a counterintelligence investigation. With the blessing of the Obama White House, they took the powers that enable our government to spy on foreign adversaries and used them to spy on Americans — Americans who just happened to be their political adversaries.

The Times averts its eyes from this point — although if a Republican administration tried this sort of thing on a Democratic candidate, it would be the only point.

Like the Justice Department and the FBI, the paper is banking on Russia to muddy the waters. Obviously, Russia was trying to meddle in the election, mainly through cyber-espionage — hacking. There would, then, have been nothing inappropriate about the FBI’s opening up a counterintelligence investigation against Russia. Indeed, it would have been irresponsible not to do so. That’s what counterintelligence powers are for.

But opening up a counterintelligence investigation against Russia is not the same thing as opening up a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign.

The media-Democrat complex has tried from the start to conflate these two things. That explains the desperation to convince the public that Putin wanted Trump to win. It explains the stress on contacts, no matter how slight, between Trump campaign figures and Russians. They are trying to fill a gaping void they hope you don’t notice: Even if Putin did want Trump to win, and even if Trump-campaign advisers did have contacts with Kremlin-tied figures, there is no evidence of participation by the Trump campaign in Russia’s espionage.

At the height of the 2016 presidential race, the FBI collaborated with the CIA to probe an American political campaign.

That is the proof that would have been needed to justify investigating Americans. Under federal law, to establish that an American is acting as an agent of a foreign power, the government must show that the American is purposefully engaging in clandestine activities on behalf of a foreign power, and that it is probable that these activities violate federal criminal law. (See FISA, Title 50, U.S. Code, Section 1801(b)(2), further explained in the last six paragraphs of my Dec. 17 column.)

But of course, if the FBI had had that kind of evidence, they would not have had to open a counterintelligence investigation. They would not have had to use the Clinton campaign’s opposition research — the Steele dossier — to get FISA-court warrants. They would instead have opened a criminal investigation, just as they did on Clinton when there was evidence that she committed felonies.

To the contrary, the bureau opened a counterintelligence investigation in the absence of any (a) incriminating evidence, or (b) evidence implicating the Trump campaign in Russian espionage. At the height of the 2016 presidential race, the FBI collaborated with the CIA to probe an American political campaign. They used foreign-intelligence surveillance and informants.

That’s your crossfire hurricane.


Leave a comment

Filed under Politics from Just Right of Center - I want Balance!

Maxine Waters explodes on House floor: I resent ‘making America great again’!

Notes From the Noosphere: 

As often is the case many Congressmen or Congresswomen get elected and then they cannot get un-elected. Maxine Waters has taken her “Trump Derangement Syndrome” to extremes. Yet, her base back in her district love this type of disrangement or she would not have continued to take on Republicans that infringe on her double victim status of being a black female trying to overcome the “White Male Dominance” if it even exists outside Maxine’s mind.

In our simple-minded methods, the political class has taken back-biting and shaming to extreme levels even when the screamer has as much baggage as those they are screaming at in the political arena. My mother would not have allowed me to behave is such a juvenile manner. Perhaps as we look to enjoy Mother’s Day this Sunday we should all realize how both the Libtards and Redubs are behaving like children more and more every day and need to start uniting for the best of United States of America. 

MAY 11, 2018


California Congresswoman Maxine Waters doesn’t want to hear any talk about making America great, especially if it’s coming from a straight white man.

Waters went off the rails at a recent House debate when Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Kelly had the audacity to suggest the country needed to shift focus from what divides to what unites.

Yesterday, on the House floor, RM @RepMaxineWaters had #notonesecond for Republican efforts to undermine anti-discrimination policies. Watch

“We are trying to make sure we are making America great every day in every way and the best way to do that is to stop talking about discrimination and start talking about the nation,” Kelly said Tuesday, directing his comments to Waters. “We’re coming together as a people, in spite of what you say.”

Committee chairman Tom McClintock reminded lawmakers to direct comments to him, rather than each other, before yielding to “the gentlelady from California.” Waters ignored his request and immediately attacked Kelly, pointing to her special double victim status as a black woman.

“Mr. Kelly, please do not leave. Because I want you to know that I am more offended as an African American woman than you will ever be. And this business about making America great again, it is your president that’s dividing this country,” she said.

“And don’t talk to me about the fact that we don’t understand … that’s the attitude that’s been given toward women time and time again.”

Kelly attempted to chime in, but Waters refused to yield for a response. McClintock reminded Waters to direct her remarks to him, and she ignored the request a second time.

“I respect the chair, but don’t stop me in the middle when you didn’t stop him in the middle, and so I shall continue,” Waters said, turning back to Kelly. “Don’t you dare talk to me like that and think that somehow women don’t understand what goes on on the floor of automobile dealers.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics from Just Right of Center - I want Balance!

Reader’s Response to: Bill Moos, AD at Nebraska

Very thoughtful and insightful comments and perspective as always! But, as Lee Corso famously says, Not So Fast! I would respectively disagree with your “pro Frank and Bo” points. I would politely suggest that you are biased and selectively cherry picking a few positives and overlooking their negatives. To wit I would offer my perspective, which is biased by my own cynical nature! Much of what follows includes many points made by you and we would be in agreement. It’s the Pro Bo and Frank perspective that I would depart into a different perspective. The following of course are only my opinions and do not have verified sources! Two major factors in the decline of Husker football:

  1. Tom Osborne should not have retired. He regretted caving into Frank Solich’s pressure to retire because in a weak moment, Tom said he would retire at 60 and Frank would be head coach. And we all know Tom is a man of his word.
    • This became problematic for several reasons;
      • Tom still had many more years of good coaching left
      • Why should Tom get to pick his successor? Not too many employees get to do that. There may have been other, more qualified and deserving candidates.
      • To add to this possible mistake, Tom insisted to Frank that he keep all of his assistants. Again, what employee ever gets to do that. On any coaching staff there are personality conflicts and tension and many of the carryover staff didn’t respect or like Frank or thought they should have been considered and it created a bad culture and chemistry that Frank attempted to correct with arguable success in his last season.
      • I believe there were some personal issues with coaches that caused some distractions and loss of focus in the year they were blitzed by Colorado 62-36. A sign of the decline of the Big Red Machine.
      • Frank was not a big name coach and recruiting suffered under his leadership.
  2. Harvey Perlman. I agree with your comments here. He single-handedly, in addition to the steps by Tom mentioned above, drove the Big  Red football express into the ditch with his series of unilateral, bonehead decisions.
    • Steve Pederson was hired. No input from anyone.
      • Colossal mistake. He had a big ego and was a micro manager that caused considerable tension in the AD.
      • He and Frank Solich had bad blood between them going back to their days when Pederson was a graduate assistant and Frank an assistant coach. I don’t know any other details, I think Frank was superior to Steve and then when the roles were reversed, Steve was inclined to want to get payback.
      • When the personal issues materialized, Steve was determined to fire Frank as he thought the integrity of the Husker brand on and off the field was being tarnished.
      • Frank is fired and Steve has no coach hired.
      • Bill Callahan hired in desperation.
      • Pederson alienated many boosters and fans with his arrogant, do it my way style. He acted like everything was under control and it wasn’t.
    • Pederson fired.  The big bad witch is dead.
    • In comes the white knight, Tom Osborne. Best decision by Perlman.
      • Osborne fires Callahan. Hard to argue, need to right the ship.
      • Tom hires Bo Pelini over his longtime player and friend Turner Gill!
        • I don’t think there was much input here as well. Pelini was not a hot commodity and the pundits gave it a C grade.
        • Okay, he had 9 win seasons but he was fortunate to have some pretty good talent. A Callahan recruit name Suh wasn’t too bad. And Bo continued the blowout loss pattern in big games that began with Solich. He was 50% against teams with winning records. He had some very lucky close wins against average teams. McNeese State would have beat Nebraska if not for Abdullah saving the day. And the hail Mary win over Northwestern was a huge lucky win.
        • Biggest jerk ever to media and fans. Pelini was a real embarrassment to Nebraska.
        • Pelini cooked his own goose. If he was a good coach than be a good person as well. He was a cult like figure that instilled an “Us against the World” mentality in his players. This is a negative style and relies on him brainwashing his players into thinking he’s their only friend, supporter and advocate. Again, classic Demagoguery 101.
    • Eichorst hired. No input from anyone. Questionable hire on many levels.
      • Pelini fired. I don’t think he handled this too well. Should have fired him the year before after the Iowa game but he created stress on Pelini that probably contributed to his meltdowns at times. Hard to do your job with a boss that doesn’t give you encouragement or support. But, shame on Bo, he wasn’t going to be subordinate to anyone and he certainly wasn’t going to fire any coaches that were under performing.
      • Riley hired. No input from anyone. He was the anti-Bo coach and I think Eichorst thought his long tenure and occasional success at a school like Oregon State would translate to great things at a school like Nebraska. I was neutral on the hire. I wouldn’t have hired him but I wanted to give him a chance and liked his style with regard to the media, Husker tradition and even doing some innovative things with technology and trends.
        • I think he has a great staff with the exception of Cavanaugh and I’m not sure about Langsdorf.
        • Riley/Langsdorf have lost several games due to poor clock management and play calling. Excessive penalties and poor execution. Not something I would expect with such a seasoned coach.
        • Back to Bo, Riley inherited a really poor cupboard of talent. The best players on the team are Riley recruits.
        • Still don’t understand the lack of fire and intensity by the Huskers.

So, I hate to say it and it’s blasphemy, but Tom Osborne could arguably be the cause of several decisions that contributed to our current situation.

We all care for our Huskers and are passionate about our team. Unfortunately, coaches matter as we’ve seen in other programs that have turned their downtrend around. We’ve had 3 maybe 4 if you include Frank, of coaches that aren’t in the same level as Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne and other name brand coaches like Nick Saban and Urban Meyer. But, “we all stick together, in all kinds of weather, at dear old Nebraska U!”

Best Regards,


Leave a comment

Filed under Blackshirts, Bo Pelini, Husker Nation, Offensive Signs

Former Nebraska assistant Jim Walden says Bill Moos hire ‘not good’ for Mike Riley

Nebraska coach Mike Riley and new Cornhuskers athletic director Bill Moos have mutual respect, but will that save Riley’s job?
Mike McGinnis/Getty Images

On one hand, the dots are so damn easy to connect. A couple of old war horses. A pair of Pac-12 veterans. Smiles all around. Mike Riley and Bill Moos, Butch and Sundance.

On the other hand …

“It’s not good for Riley,” Jim Walden, the former Washington State football coach/radio analyst and Nebraska Cornhuskers assistant, told Land of 10 this week. “Absolutely not. Nothing’s good for Riley.

“His team got beat 56-14 [by Ohio State]. They were [crushed] at home for another ballgame … In my opinion, nothing Bill Moos is going to do is going to make it nice for Riley.”

Walden, 79, watched from the Pacific Northwest last Saturday night as the Buckeyes handed Nebraska its worst home loss in a conference tilt since 1949. The coach-turned-radio personality has a foot in both Cornhuskers and Cougars camps: Walden was a graduate assistant in Lincoln under Bob Devaney in 1969 and 1970 and an assistant under Devaney in 1971 and 1972. He joined the Washington State staff as an assistant 1977 and coached Wazzu from 1978 to 1986.

“Scott Frost is going to have to make a decision. It’ll be him or Chip Kelly,” Walden continued. “I’m sorry to be the voice of doom for Mike Riley, which I hate, because I happen to think the world of him.”

And he’s been there, several times over. But 3-4 is 3-4. And 11-10 — Riley’s record in the Big Ten — is 11-10.

When Huskers fans are leaving at halftime, as chunks did on Saturday, Big Red fans have already voted with their feet. And hearts.

“Make no bones about it,” Walden said. “[When] the new A.D. gets the job, one of the requirements of the new job is, ‘When you come here, will you fire the coach?’ And the answer better be, ‘Yes,’ or he’s not going there.”

Riley coached at Oregon State when his new boss was the athletic director at Oregon (1995 to 2007) and Washington State (2010-17). There are mutual friends and mutual respect. But Walden, who’s known Moos for more than three decades, says the Huskers’ newest athletic director won’t shy away from making tough decisions — cold decisions — when the bottom line is at stake.

‘Scott Frost is going to have to make a decision. It’ll be him or Chip Kelly … I’m sorry to be the voice of doom for Mike Riley, which I hate, because I happen to think the world of him.’

— Former Nebraska assistant coach and Washington State football coach Jim Walden on the future of Cornhuskers football

“They’ll expect a guy that’s full of back-patting,” said Walden, who was removed from Cougars football broadcasts by Moos in May 2012 after 11 seasons in the booth. “He’s got a good line of gab. He’s personable … he’s a P.R. guy.

“He’s not Tom Osborne, by any stretch of the imagination. There are parts of him that are more Bob Devaney-ish. But nothing about him is Tom Osborne, period.

“Overall, you’ve got to give him credit. It’s hard to separate the A.D. at Oregon versus the Nike guy [Phil Knight]. I’ll give him credit for everything he got done in Oregon, but it’s kind of hard to separate the two. And he came [to Washington State] and he did some nice things. Jim Sterk, the former athletic director, had already started the plans — he doesn’t get enough credit. But Bill Moos needs to get credit for finishing the job. Albeit that we’re 11 million in debt.

There is that. And there’s also an ESPN report at the start of the week intimating feelings of “growing friction” between Moos and new Wazzu president Kirk Schultz, and that the two weren’t always on the same page, let alone the same script.

“I do feel bad [for Huskers fans],” Walden said. “When Bo [Pelini] was doing some good things, I couldn’t understand why he was always so sensitive about the crowd.

“But it does bother me, because some of the best years of my life [were in Lincoln]. I thought, ‘Hell, winning’s easy.’ I really did, because when Warren Powers, Monte Kiffin, me, you look at all of us that were there — it’s an adjustment, when you win as many games as we won. Then you find out it’s harder than you think when you’re with someone else.”

‘Mike Riley is in the exact same situation I was in at Iowa State in 1994. And I would give him the same advice I gave myself: “These people deserve better.” ‘

— Former Nebraska assistant coach and Washington State coach Jim Walden

Walden found that out the hard way as the coach at Iowa State, where he was matched up against the Huskers annually from 1987 to 1994, losing seven of eight meetings with his old pal Osborne.

“Mike Riley is in the exact same situation I was in at Iowa State in 1994,” said Walden, who hosts a weekly radio talk show on KGA-AM (1510) in Spokane, Wash. “And I would give him the same advice I gave myself: ‘These people deserve better.’

“And there is one difference in this whole thing — I’d been there eight years, he’s been there, what, three? In some ways, he hasn’t been given enough time. But again, we’re talking about Nebraska.

“When they’ve turned on you and start leaving the stadium and they start doing things that traditionally they’ve ever done … [You tell Nebraska] ‘I’m sorry, but if we can work out an agreement, I’ll step away four weeks from now.’ …

“And that’s what I can tell him. Because it’s a foregone conclusion. They didn’t fire the A.D. at Nebraska so the coach could stay on. They probably fired him because he wouldn’t fire Riley. It’s not rocket science.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Blackshirts, Husker Nation, Offensive Signs