CAS4127

I'll be surprise if there are suspensions (Note this is in reply to some other, similar posts). Bohl/Taylor have known for a long time that these guilty pleas were coming, as has NDSU Prez. B. Given that, they have had time to prepare for whatever Bohl is going to tell the media today. Hopefully NDSU's media relations people are good (maybe they are UND grads). For me, the bottom line is this. As a former NDSU FB player, I am clearly and admittedly pro-NDSU. That said, I am not anti-UND. Do I stick up for NDSU?! You bet. Do I routinely trash UND? No, and I have a pretty good relationship with most that come over to Bisonville. Also, in the recent documentary, I said as much as I typed above. Frankly, I think this jump to suspensions and what not is a result of an over zealous and oftentimes biased media, and I just can not get myself to subscribe to that kind of BS--and my feelings are not limited to just the UND hockey issues or the NDSU FB issues. It is generally applicable these days. So, with this post, I will likely bail. Don't blame those of you have hammered (or at least tried to ) on me for coming over hear. I would do the same on BV. We will see where the chips fall later today for the dirty-10!!

Some of this is accurate, some not, specifically, but not limited to, the suggestion implied by the last sentence/question!! Bohl suspending for lessor sentences: More to story-->trust me. Immediate action/RMU suspension: McFooley and the rest of media would have still been all over it, but maybe would have lessened to an extent negative public perception. The problem with suspending now is that doing so will only embolden the anti-NDSU media types, who will then think they can somehow dictate what Bohl/Taylor do. Given that, I hope there are no suspensions, just inter-athletic discipline of some sort.

I do!!! Wasn't right then, and isn't right now!! Next question . . .

OMG-->where's the facepalm emoticon on this place?!?!? (Insert several here please!!!!)

Ever heard of double standards or being blinded by the kelly-green (or is it pink or black) kool-aid?!? Once UND/Grand Spoons PD/Grand Spoons State's Attorney's office starts uniformily and without hesitation reporting, punishing and prosecuting Who athletes, then you may have a point. Right now-->not so much!!

Someone is backpeddling a bit I see! HMMMMM?!??!

I agree, suspension would not have effected the outcome of the RMU game, so it would have been veiwed by Who fans and the pro-UND media in Nodak as BS, and the same shaaat would have been thrown at NDSU as it is now anyway. I don't believe for a second that UND actually punished the drunks or the team-->Alaska effing Anchorage!! REALLY?!?!?

Well big-effing surprise there. Krisco (or is it Kristo, IDK?!) was never charged either even though everyone in Grand Spoons new he was underage and passed out drunk in a snowbank.

Are you braindead? The FDIC can give consent prior to employment and the person can be employed. Srsly, are you that unable to read and understand?!?! Section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1829) prohibits, without the prior written consent of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), a person convicted of any criminal offense involving dishonesty or breach of trust or money laundering (covered offenses), or who has agreed to enter into a pretrial diversion or similar program in connection with a prosecution for such offensIf the

It is, and that's how you win National Championships without having to rely on a fluke play at the end of the NC game to win just one!!

Ya, and suspending the drunk and drunk-causing butthockey players for the Alaska School of Mimes game is really gonna effect tey UND butthockey team-->got it!!

Not true, we have been saying for weeks that they admitted to their wrongdoing early on--nice try tho!!

Have those young butthockey players sobered up yet?! Also, when does frozen toes (Sioux Indian name for Kristo) go to court for almost killing them with forced over-consumption of alcohol?!

Read the effing Rule-->prior written consent opens the door for them. But I shouldn't expect a who fan to understand the English language that well I guess!!

I get what you are getting at . . . and I am not sure!! If you think about it, even the repeal law will likely be unconstitutional if Carlson's law is found to be, given that the repeal law is telling UND it has to wait 3 years. If the legislature can't tell you to keep the nickname, it can't tell you to wait 3 years before adopting another one. Bottomline-->I need to see the filings. Peace out ss.com!!!

I'm gonna need to read the complete filing--assuming it is complete. It may have just layed the issues out there and asked for the Court to grant original jurisdiction (which means, FYI, it goes directly to the ND Supreme Court rather than first going through the district court level).

Darrell: From what I am reading, they are still challenging the constitutionality of Carlson's law. I don't think there is a "contracts clause" arguement that is applicable to this case. As for you second point, and without trying to be post repetitive, the Repeal Law has substance beyond the repeal-->namely, the 3-year waiting period. Time will shake all this out for us I guess . . .

They aren't trying to repeal Carlson's law, they are seeking to repeal the Repeal law, and that has the has the 3-year waiting period in it, so it is substantive beyond just repealing Carlson's law.

Hmmmm . . . this is getting interesting. I am gonna have to read the basis for enjoining the vote. That's an angle not yet discussed by anyone that I recall.

That could be what the Forum and or even the AG is thinking-->meaning if Carlson's Folly is ruled uncontitutional, the repeal of the repeal won't do anything; BUT, my friend, then they have forgotten about the "3 year waiting period" provision contained in the repeal law. I brought this up a few days ago. If Carlson's Folly is shot down AND the repeal law is voted out (yes vote carries) then UND is free to do what it wants in terms of adopting a new name--eff Carlson and his buddies!! If the repeal vote fails (no votes carry the day) then you still have the 3 year deal in place. Comprehendo???!! Isn't all of this just fun???!!!!

I very much doub that-->there is not currently a justiciable controversy as the petitions on that issue have yet to be filed. Things don't work that way!!

But this has to be wrong, Sic-->No??!! There was never a mention of stopping the vote. The entire discussion was about challenging the constitutionality of Carlson's law. Now, whether an "unconstitutional" ruling stops the vote, that's a different question. The ruling would have to come out long enough before ballots are printed, or the question is either going to be on the ballot or ballots will have to be reprinted (great more time and money spent on the issue). If the ballots go to voters with the question on them, and the ruling is "unconstitutional" then the arguement will be over whether the votes should be counted regardless . . . just to see ya know!! Whatever the results, each side will question whether people actually voted the way they did but for the court ruling, whether everyone who would have voted ya or nay actually bothered to vote, etc. It's gonna take a while for all this to be officially "over"!! .

Lawsuit has been filed: http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/351219/ But this has to be wrong: "The lawsuit seeks to stop a public vote on a state law that requires the University of North Dakota to use its Fighting Sioux nickname. Nickname supporters have filed referendum petitions asking for a vote." I have never seen that angle before. Must be a misprint by . . . gasp . . . the Forum!!

We pay for our season tickets well in advance of the season--they are due in February. I just paid mine. Consequently, it would be pretty difficult to jack up the price for a certain game, and non-season ticket purchasers would be PO'd if they paid more the season ticket holders one would think.

In case this hasn't been posted yet, here is what you guys are dealing with in the outlying areas of Nodak:http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/229591/ Fetch's mom??!!