Goon Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 FYI, goon may actually like him. His a big time suporter of DU and has some great hunting land outside of Dawson. DU hockey, yuck, Dawson is good pheasant hunting land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I think it bars the AG's office from using them in the court case. I think it really depends on the documents. I doubt the state is trying to get these things published in the Hurled or posted on a website before trial. Some docs can be covered by a protective order, such as trade secrets, and used in litigation within certain limits. I doubt they can be entered into the record/transcript, but may be part of the evidence submitted to the jury. Jahnke may split difference and allow some docs to be used in open court w/o restriction, seal some and exclude some. Given the trolling expeditions discovery can start, the state may have to justify its requests more precisely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7>5 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I am on a conference call with congressman John Kline and I am trying to ask a question regarding bill HR 5289's status and how he will vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxforeverbaby Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I am on a conference call with congressman John Kline and I am trying to ask a question regarding bill HR 5289's status and how he will vote. update? if you can say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7>5 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 update? if you can say. It was a town hall meeting over the phone and I was in line to ask my question and I never got on with the Senator. I left him a message on his voice mail so he can get back to me reagrding my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxforeverbaby Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 It was a town hall meeting over the phone and I was in line to ask my question and I never got on with the Senator. I left him a message on his voice mail so he can get back to me reagrding my question. cool, thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Here is a link to the legislation The Bill HR 5289 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roper1313 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 DU hockey, yuck, Dawson is good pheasant hunting land. Sorry Goon I ment Duck's Unlimited. A few years ago he was a national trustee for the group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Good luck now getting that passed with all of the Dems in control. The PC loons have more clout with them. The bill should be presented to a vote. It would be interesting to see how the ND 3 stooges would vote. I'm sure those weenies would vote with the PC asylum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Good luck now getting that passed with all of the Dems in control. The PC loons have more clout with them. The bill should be presented to a vote. It would be interesting to see how the ND 3 stooges would vote. I'm sure those weenies would vote with the PC asylum. North Dakota's congressional delegation will vote against it. That's probably one reason it won't pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7>5 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I got a phone call today from Congressman Kline's office and HR 5289 has been changed to HR 1316. Congressman Kline is on the education committee so we need to let him know how to vote on this issue. The person who called me was Casey and his number is 202-225-2271. Hope this is information you all need. GO SIOUX! SIOUX FOREVER! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Judge Jahnke rules that the NCAA can keep its documents sealed. Bummer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 What a crock of....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommiejo Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 What a crock of....... THAT MAKES TWO OF US ON THIS ONE HOCKEY MOM. GO GATORS. SIOUX FAN SINCE 1973. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Here's the important part that some on this board were wondering about: His order does not restrict the ability of either Stenehjem or the NCAA to use confidential documents during the trial, although it says the two sides would have to work out procedures for handling them.Basically, the AG can use these documents in the litigation. It just can't make them public. While it would have been nice to see them for ourselves, this shouldn't affect the litigation too much. The NCAA was not going to back down even if their request had been denied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7>5 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 What a bunch of crap. I think that this judge is an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Here's the important part that some on this board were wondering about: Basically, the AG can use these documents in the litigation. It just can't make them public. While it would have been nice to see them for ourselves, this shouldn't affect the litigation too much. The NCAA was not going to back down even if their request had been denied. mksioux nailed it: Stenehjem can still get what he needs from them into court. However, my two weeks summer vacation in Bismarck in the AG's office reading what the NCAA Executive Committee orders for lunch during meetings, and other curious details of inner NCAA workings so vital to the privacy of Myles Brand, et al, is off I guess now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 What a bunch of crap. I think that this judge is an idiot. Careful now. I don't think any of us were calling him an idiot when he granted UND's temporary injunction. By all accounts, Judge Jahnke is a very good judge. This ruling is a very minor issue in the grand scheme of the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkster Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 What a bunch of crap. I think that this judge is an idiot. Gee, is that anyway to talk about a UND alum? Actually, I'm not all that pleased about Janke. I have said this before, the name should be changed because it's offensive to some, so it should be offensive to all. I just want this thing put to bed and it's not going to happen until it's changed. Why fight the same battles for the next 20 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stromer Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Gee, is that anyway to talk about a UND alum? Actually, I'm not all that pleased about Janke. I have said this before, the name should be changed because it's offensive to some, so it should be offensive to all. I just want this thing put to bed and it's not going to happen until it's changed. Why fight the same battles for the next 20 years? Because we can! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 it's offensive to some, so it should be offensive to all. In a nutshell, this kind of thinking is what is wrong with contemporary society. I don't even know where to begin with such an ignorant statement. If everyone was obligated to be offended by the same things, there could be no meaningful democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Careful now. I don't think any of us were calling him an idiot when he granted UND's temporary injunction. By all accounts, Judge Jahnke is a very good judge. This ruling is a very minor issue in the grand scheme of the case. I agree that Jahnke is a good judge. While I don't necessarily agree with this particular ruling, that doesn't change my overall opinion of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 In a nutshell, this kind of thinking is what is wrong with contemporary society. I don't even know where to begin with such an ignorant statement. If everyone was obligated to be offended by the same things, there could be no meaningful democracy. Agreed. The reasons we are offended by something are as diverse as there are individuals to be offended. Often the origin of the offense is derived from our own particular life experiences. Example-Pine Bluff, Arkansas has become a subject of much derision among women's basketball fans, and the press which has covered the elite eight tournaments. We don't find a comment like, "man that place is a pit", as offensive, but more of a truth. However, someone born and raised in Pine Bluff may take offense to having their home insulted. Understandable. However, one could also effectively argue that simply being asked to spend such valuable time, like making the elite eight, in a place so objectively blighted (crime rate, qulity of life measures, etc), is in and of itself, offensive. Who is correct? Who shouldn't be offended? In the end, we just have no right to live our lives without being offended by someone or something. Nor do I believe it is a worthwhile pursuit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 In a nutshell, this kind of thinking is what is wrong with contemporary society. I don't even know where to begin with such an ignorant statement. If everyone was obligated to be offended by the same things, there could be no meaningful democracy. Who are you, really? A Stepford wife who lives on 1935 Nazi Germany Blvd?? How can one respond to such blatant ignorance of the fundamentals of the BIll of Rights?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northcountry Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 This lawsuit IS important because somewhere, somehow, someone has to put the brakes on this PC train that is out of control. As a further illustration I offer the University of Manitoba who have a Bridges-like PC group on campus who have convinced the UM administration that restrooms on campus should be "gender-neutral" because (and I am not kidding here) "those transgender students among us are faced with a great degree of discomfort when deciding which restroom is appropriate for their use and they should not be forced into such uncomfortable choices." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.