tvc184

Silsbee starts at own 23. About 25 yard pass with late hit. 30 touchdown called back for holding at about Nederland 16. 1 touchdown run. Try for 2 no good. 6-0 Silsbee

Good enough to “post”.

Nederland wins the toss and defers. Silsbee to receive.

I believe they have already lost this fight. Unless the Supreme Court makes a radical shift in previous rulings, this case is over. As soon as someone files an njunction, and I expect Texas to within a few hours, the case will end. it officially will not end obviously until it goes in the system but effectively the federal mandate will stop.

My theme song, Glory Days by Bruce Springsteen.

The article wraps up saying a statement by the prosecutor, “Make no mistake, we recognize that this case will be difficult to prosecute”. Ya’ think? Yes, charging someone with a homicide that they did not commit, definitely makes it difficult

That is one of the great things about speculation. In 3 quarters of play, WOS managed 130 yards of offense and no touchdowns. In that same time Nederland managed almost 300 yards and 2 touchdowns… but WOS was on the way back. WOS very well might have come back. We will never know… But it sure is great speculating isn’t it?

Always love the Nuremberg Code diatribe.

Hopefully Nederland will get a lot tougher test next week against Silsbee. According to the PA News, Austin had 1 yard of offense last night.

Do you have to administer a test? No. It seems rather silly to go through all the steps and then not asked for one.

I have no thoughts on it. All I know of the case is what was in the article.

According to what I read on the UIL website, the determining factor is the district rules committee. If out of conference like this game, it goes by the committee rules of the home team district. There was no automatic UIL rule on how to handle the situation and they turned it over to the local districts. Whether are the teams are 0-0, 1-0/0-1 depends on the 12 5A II committee decision that was in place already. According to the KLVI announcers, if the game was called in the second half, the score stands. I don’t know if that was just their belief or if they had looked up or had knowledge of the district rules.

Does the same team count the eight years that Obama continued the same policy? Were they peanut brains then or only after Trump took office? Obama took office almost 13 years ago. He could have ended it then completely at his discretion. So why out of the last 20 years, Obama could’ve ended it 13 years ago?

I believe the US Supreme Court case of Castle Rock v. Gonzalez has already settled that issue. In a 7-2 decision they said that you cannot sue a city or Police Department for failure to act unless there’s a specific law that requires that action. I believe an example would be under Texas law where almost every legal arrest is voluntary or discretionary by the police. There are almost no mandatory arrests however there are a couple such a violation of a protective order. A protective order which some people mistakenly call a restraining order, is an order by a judge telling someone not to approach somebody, speak with them, make threats, etc.. Usually it is used in situations such as domestic violence. Typically such an order will come after for example a man beats up his girlfriend. If a judge issued such a protective order and a police officer in Texas witness a violation of that order, it is a mandatory arrest. Where this happened the state law just like Texas, is an open carry state for rifles. There is no such thing as a mandatory arrest in that case because the rifle is legal. Even if it was not legal, there would need to be a law that says the police have to arrest everyone they see with a rifle. The lawsuit makes the accusation of a conspiracy. I believe for such a lawsuit to be successful they are going to have to prove that the police made a deal with certain people to carry rifles and go out and take care of certain individuals. I highly doubt that the police made some kind of a back room deal with people on the street. I think this is a deep pockets case. The lawsuit was filed in hopes that the city will simply settle out of court, even if the law exonerate them, to not have to pay for a lengthy court fight.

Amy time you think the world cannot get any crazier……

Who in here has ever said that Trump would be reinstated? We can read silly Internet rumors on all kinds of topics. I do not know a single person that has ever mentioned this in person or on any forum. In fact if I ask any of my friends about Trump being reinstated, to a person they would probably say… Huh?

It looks like the authors and editors are a couple of Asians, maybe a couple of people for the Middle Eastern or other cultures. It looks like some think tank organization 501(c)3 and has the goal of bringing people together and other lofty ideals.

I just read a lengthy and interesting article about cultural appropriation. According to implications of the article, if you like Elvis Presley music, you are guilty of cultural appropriation. In fact Elvis himself is guilty. If you open a pizza restaurant and you are not from Italy or of Italian heritage, you are guilty of the same. Want to make and sell gumbo? Not so fast. Since the etymology of gumbo is believed to come from the African word for okra, unless you are Black you should not cook gumbo to sell or you are guilty of cultural appropriation. Do you like turquoise jewelry? According to the article if you buy from anyone other than a Native American, you’re guilty of cultural appropriation. Like I said, it is interesting…..

And the word Indian not offensive. It is not a racial slur.

I realize it’s a previous chief and said so. Either chief it’s just one man’s opinion. Obviously I’m entitled to my opinion. Otherwise you might as well shut down the forum. I don’t think the PNG people care about the Cleveland Indian‘s or anyone else. If they decide to change, great but that will be their choice, not because of political pressure in my opinion. I obviously cannot speak for the people from Port Neches and Groves but I think they would keep the name Indians merely out of anti political correctness, in your eye type of response. Maybe some people are tired of touchy-feely.

Nothing will improve until the people in charge come to the realization that people from other races or ethnicities or the police are not the problem. Actually I think they have come to that realization but they have convinced the masses otherwise. If a Hispanic guy kills another Hispanic rival gang member in a drive-by shooting, it is because there was slavery in the United States over 150 years ago? It is because there is a white president? It is because of any police officers of any race? The blame game will continue because there is a profit to be made even if that profit is just a political agenda or fame.

Accepted it a little more? A person can keep their mouth shut and accept something. Didn’t the previous chief do something like travel to PNG and present them with an official document? If so that does not sound like acceptance. That sounds more like a blessing. Secondly, I generally don’t like PNG as an arch rival of Nederland. I am not talking about the people from there. I still support 100% the naming of their mascot Indians or at their discretion something else if they wish. Next, the latest chief that overturned what the last chief did has no bearing except one man’s opinion. PNG is not called the Cherokees. They are called the Indians. The current chief of the Cherokee tribe is entitled to his opinion. The people from PNG are entitled to theirs and that includes the naming of their mascot the generic term Indian.

I might have brought this up in this forum before but it is a situation I was involved with in the aftermath of Hurricane/Tropical Storm Harvey. We had an injured prisoner in custody and we were investigating how he was injured. The emergency room doctor was preparing transportation to another hospital because of the prisoner’s medical condition. That was an issue because he was in custody for a felony. All we needed for our record was, why was he being taken from our custody. It did not need to be a detailed breakdown of the prisoner’s medical records, treatment, prognosis, etc., but simply an answer of what was wrong. Did he have a broken bone, did he have a serious illness, etc.? I was a lieutenant and the ranking commander at the time. The emergency room doctor simply refused to tell us what was happening because he thought it was a HIPAA violation. So the supervisor on scene at the hospital who is also a lieutenant, called me while I was at the police station. I already had the answer saved on my desktop at my work computer and printed it off. When I got to the hospital I introduced myself to the doctor and ask if we could talk in private for a moment. He said sure and we went into an unoccupied treatment room. I told him that we needed to know why we were releasing the prisoner and all we needed was a brief description like I discussed before. I told him do not answer until I gave you some information because I know you were concerned about privacy. I then asked him a question something like ….. Is all you know about HIPAA from about a one day class in medical school were all they said was HIPAA HIPAA HIPAA, you’ll be sued and go to jail. I thought it was a funny question but he said, yes that was about it. So I gave him about a 10 second version of the law verbally but then showed him the federal government response on the document I had. You could see that it came from the Health and Human Services website. I told the doctor please read this information and make your own decision. About 30 seconds later he told me the answer…. then he asked if he could keep the document I gave him. Absolutely. The doctor thanked me in a very sincere way. He told me that he was scared about violating the HIPAA law (which he should be) and he had policeman in his face telling him that he had to give the information. The poor guy did not know which way to turn. I walked out from the room and went to the other officers and told them the answer. My whole interaction with the doctor probably lasted less than two minutes. The other Lieutenant was kind of like, what the heck? We were telling him for about half an hour that he had to blah blah blah… I said yeah, that was the problem. I just walked in, smiled and showed him the law and let him make the decision and it was almost immediate. The point is that HIPAA is between doctors and their patients’ privacy but even then there are some exceptions. Talking about a person’s medical condition is not a violation of the law unless it is with a person involved in healthcare. Even then there are certain limited circumstances where you can get medical information without the person’s consent, mostly through law enforcement investigations.

Yep.

Things are not simply illegal. Nothing is illegal unless a law says it is. HIPAA covers doctor and patient relationships. HIPAA does not cover private people or companies. It breaks no law for your employer to ask why you are sick and not coming to work or if you have had the Covid vaccine. It absolutely breaks the law if your employer calls your doctor and your doctor tells him. A healthcare professional cannot disclose (most of the time but even that is not absolute) your medical records with anyone without your consent. If a relative of yours tells me that you had some medical procedure, there is no violation of any HIPAA law. If your relative got it from a healthcare professional or your relative is that healthcare professional, that would be a violation. So this person tells me about your medical history and I get on this forum and make a comment like I hate what happened to you and you got this procedure. I hope it works out OK. Again, that is not a HIPAA violation. If you find out your neighbor has Covid and you go tell your other neighbor, guess what, there is no HIPAA violation. I repeat this over and over in person and on forums, HIPAA must be one of the most misunderstood laws ever. This is directly from the federal government Health and Human Services website. The link to this page is below the quote. “In general, the HIPAA Rules do not apply to employers or employment records. HIPAA only applies to HIPAA covered entities – health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses – and, to some extent, to their business associates. If an employer asks an employee to provide proof that they have been vaccinated, that is not a HIPAA violation, and employees may decide whether to provide that information to their employer.” [Hidden Content]