Doublehalf

This is from a post on the wrestling sub-Reddit this morning and is very scary and I hope to god not true.... "My son is an Askren Academy wrestler and they were told that Ben is in a bad situation. His infection has been unresponsive to anti-biotics and has attacked his lungs. He will need a lung transplant and for that to happen a lot of things need to line up and they may not. The situation is grim. This is what the team was told."

I didn't mean that as a knock to Iowa, I just think they have a very specific archetype of who they are and what they want in a head coach. Gable being the last coach that didn't wrestle there and with Spencer in the wings I feel like he may already be targeted as a likely successor if he chooses to go that route. JB just seems to be more of a forward thinker in terms of program building and wrestling curriculum which I don't really think of when I think of Iowa. Again, not saying Iowa hasn't and won't continue to have success the way they are doing it, just doesn't seem like JB or Iowa are each others style.... never say never tho!

Debating you guys is like being on a airdyne nonstop.... if you read my post I literally said except in rare cases and you went on to list the rare case... Absolutely hilarious... In the U.S., cities do not typically control education directly — that’s a common misconception. Here’s how it typically works: Most Public Schools Are Run by Independent School Districts Public schools are usually governed by local school boards. These boards are separate from city government. School districts are legally created by the state. Example: In most places, the mayor or city council has no direct authority over schools. The Role of Cities Cities might provide supporting services (school resource officers, after-school programs, crossing guards). Cities influence education indirectly through: Housing policies (affecting school demographics) Tax policy (local funding for schools in some cases) Political pressure (mayor/council may campaign on education issues) But day-to-day decisions — hiring teachers, running schools, choosing curriculum — are not controlled by the city. Exceptions — Mayoral Control In some large cities, the city government has been given more direct authority by the state — this is called mayoral control. Examples: New York City — Mayor controls NYC Department of Education. Boston — Mayor appoints school board members. Chicago (as of 2024-2027, moving from mayor-appointed to elected board). This model is relatively rare — maybe 15–20 major cities use some form of mayoral control out of thousands of districts nationwide.

This is the problem with trying to debate with right wing people and it's right out of the literal playbook Karl Rove developed as a guide to arguing with those on the left wing.. The entire premise of the question is incorrect/ non-sensical. Why? Because states are the ones with the substantial legal authority over education except in some rare cases. States education departments set the rules and standards and cities do not run schools directly... States set graduation requirements, testing requirements, teacher certifications, curriculums and school funding standards. You might as well ask questions like "why aren't more squares triangles??" We could all try to give the explanation but the point is your question in its premise is completely ignorant. You aren't even trying to ask the right questions, just throw out *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* and drag everyone down to a level that doesn't have any real thought before speaking and then trying to insinuate the person you're debating is saying something they never were in the first place. It is either a masterful job at executing the Rove playbook or realtime example of why knowledge and education challenging ones held beliefs are of vital importance. This is a most prime example of "don't wrestle with a pig because you'll both get dirty and the pig likes it."

This wasn't at all the path I was going down and no where in my post did I say I was. It was a response to your moronic comment about democrats being in charge and kids not all having the same opportunities. To which I responded to that idiotic question with a list of the best and worst states in the US for testing scores and by far the democratically lead states crushed the GOP. I would 100% agree the US is falling behind the rest of the worlds top countries when it comes to education that's no surprise with the GOPs war on education/knowledge.

Really bad move by you even treading down this path... Example of Current (Recent) Results (These rankings can shift slightly year to year; here’s a rough consistent pattern based on recent composite data:) Most Educated / Top Performing (Children) Least Educated / Poor Performing (Children) Massachusetts New Mexico New Jersey Louisiana Connecticut Mississippi Vermont West Virginia New Hampshire Alabama Minnesota Nevada Virginia Oklahoma Sources of Rankings Several organizations already produce rankings of “best” and “worst” states for education, often using a composite of the above: WalletHub — annual Best & Worst School Systems report. US News & World Report — Best States for Education rankings. Education Week — publishes Quality Counts report. NAEP Data Explorer — allows you to pull raw test score data directly. I may be a little fuzzy but tell me which parties typically have control of the governorships and state legislatures in those states??? In our language I would say as far as your argument goes, you just got teched...

The utopia you just described of all kids being educated the same from the start doesn't exist and just exacerbates how little you know about the world... I never had to take a class to learn to have an open mind and gain perspectives that weren't solely my own. My guess is you live within an hour of where you grew up and the slim chance you have ever been out of the country was on a trip to an all inclusive resort in Mexico. You probably live far enough from a major metro area you have little exposure to people that have a different way of thinking than you. You crave your safe spaces that you deride others for wanting you just don't realize your safe spaces are in a wrestling room or weightlifting gym or talking about 'woke leftists' with other non-evolved acquaintances that think just like you do. If you were physically capable of having a nuanced conversation I would say it's worth engaging with you to hear why you actually believe the things you do and get to a root cause of those beliefs but clearly that's not possible so I think my time spent conversing with you ends here.

Bro... you are coming off as absolutely insane with this post to think there is a moral equivalency to what Bernard said vs what you are saying. For chrissakes man, why do you people have such a hard on for the world to be all white, allow for less opportunities for those that aren't and to make those that are different feel alienated and unsafe.... I just really can't understand this complete lack of empathy for humanity and how that has somehow been twisted to being some kind of weakness. Your brain is operating on an evolutionary level of a caveman... Your kind of people can only empathize with a group until a specific circumstance happens directly to you or someone close to you that you care about. A society where there are people with diverse beliefs (assuming those beliefs aren't causing widespread pain and suffering) have equal opportunities and places to 'be' is not a bad thing.... If you have a problem with DEI being used in some capacity you don't agree with that's fine, show some data/examples but it's just coming off like you are a bigot... I swear if we went back in history your way of thinking aligns with those that wanted separate water fountains for blacks, schools (which you still agree with it sounds like only not based on race) and women to freely choose what they want to do. The world has a way of humbling all of us and opening our eyes to things we can't see and I just hope when it happens to you it doesn't negatively impact the health of you or anyone you love.

The question is, what are the jobs he would entertain? Obviously he understands the need for a large financial backing so I feel that alone eliminates a lot of programs. Would he go for Nebraska if manning stepped down? Does Rutgers have the financial support he would be looking for? Rutgers is in a hotbed area for wrestling and he could funnel kids all the way up like he mentioned DT is with his club.... Im not sure how many others he would even consider... Don't think his mentality would be a fit for Iowa... Ohio st seems to have their future head coaching bench built. Would be fun to ultimately have guys like Burroughs, DT, Dake, Spencer and even Yianni all as head coaches at the same time.

Sounds like he hit a nerve… Bernard is right and your only retort is “you’re not as smart as you come off!”

This may have been the case at trump university or your local community college but I can assure you there are plenty of schools with varying subject matter that are geared toward critical thinking.

He literally said he escalated these issues to people in an authority capacity... Reading comprehension is certainly not a pre requisite here I see.

I always find it funny when people on the right chastise colleges for being left leaning like it's some kind of cult that drinks kool aid. Sure, there are some professors that want to push agendas just like there are evangelicals that push theirs but for the majority it is not a tool for indoctrination. Using some minor critical thinking skills will get you to the simplest answer of why colleges tend to have more people that lean left and it's because it is a place where people are educated and exposed to diverse groups of people. When this happens there is generally greater acceptance for those that are different and understanding that most topics are nuanced. Being a person pointing their finger at educational institutions as bad because they lean left is really just a self own that you think knowledge, new experiences and diversity are not cool because people become free thinkers... Also, focusing on that part is completely missing the point of the article.

this was something I was unaware of when it comes to staph/mrsa infections.... really hope they can get this moving in a positive direct ASAP... — MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) can lead to pneumonia. Here’s how it works: 1. MRSA as a cause of pneumonia MRSA is a type of Staph aureus bacteria that is resistant to many antibiotics. It can infect the lungs and cause MRSA pneumonia, which tends to be more severe and harder to treat than pneumonia caused by typical bacteria. 2. When does this happen? Hospital-acquired (healthcare-associated) MRSA pneumonia: Often occurs in people who are already hospitalized, especially those on ventilators (ventilator-associated pneumonia). Community-acquired MRSA (CA-MRSA) pneumonia: Can occur in otherwise healthy people, sometimes after a viral infection (such as influenza), which weakens lung defenses and allows MRSA to invade. 3. Symptoms of MRSA pneumonia Fever Cough (sometimes with bloody sputum) Shortness of breath Chest pain Fatigue Rapid worsening, particularly in vulnerable patients 4. Risks and outcomes MRSA pneumonia can progress rapidly. It can cause complications like lung abscesses, sepsis, or respiratory failure. Treatment requires targeted antibiotics, often intravenously.

This is a very interesting Article that I think clearly lays out what a lot of people are feeling right now but have trouble putting words to. Obviously this post will be met with some vitriol and proclamations of how there was already a 'deep state' but this seems much more well thought out and illustrated than vague platitudes. Even if you disagree with the sentiment of the article I would be interested in some civilized discourse from those that may disagree. I've bolded a passage at the end I find to be the most concise in explaining the meaning of the article. The point is not to compare people to Nazis to invoke images of genocide but rather how they were able to set up a dual system. On September 20, 1938, a man who had witnessed the rise of fascism packed his suitcases and fled his home in Berlin. He arranged to have smuggled separately a manuscript that he had drafted in secret over the previous two years. This book was a remarkable one. It clarified what was unfolding in Berlin at the time, the catalyst for its author’s flight. The man fleeing that day was a Jewish labor lawyer named Ernst Fraenkel. He completed his manuscript two years later at the University of Chicago (where I teach), publishing it as The Dual State, with the modest subtitle A Contribution to the Theory of Dictatorship. The book explains how the Nazi regime managed to keep on track a capitalist economy governed by stable laws—and maintain a day-to-day normalcy for many of its citizens—while at the same time establishing a domain of lawlessness and state violence in order to realize its terrible vision of ethno-nationalism. Fraenkel offered a simple, yet powerful, picture of how the constitutional and legal foundations of the Weimar Republic eroded, and were replaced by strongman-style rule in which the commands of the Nazi Party and its leader became paramount. His perspective was not grounded in abstract political theory; it grew instead from his experience as a Jewish lawyer in Nazi Berlin representing dissidents and other disfavored clients. Academic in tone, The Dual State sketches a template of emerging tyranny distilled from bloody and horrifying experience. It was a mistake to think that even the Nazis would entirely dispense with normal laws. As Fraenkel explained it, a lawless dictatorship does not arise simply by snuffing out the ordinary legal system of rules, procedures, and precedents. To the contrary, that system—which he called the “normative state”—remains in place while dictatorial power spreads across society. What happens, Fraenkel explained, is insidious. Rather than completely eliminating the normative state, the Nazi regime slowly created a parallel zone in which “unlimited arbitrariness and violence unchecked by any legal guarantees” reigned freely. In this domain, which Fraenkel called the “prerogative state,” ordinary law didn’t apply. (A prerogative power is one that allows a person such as a monarch to act without regard to the laws on the books; theorists from John Locke onward have offered various formulations of the idea.) In this prerogative state, judges and other legal actors deferred to the racist hierarchies and ruthless expediencies of the Nazi regime. The key here is that this prerogative state does not immediately and completely overrun the normative state. Rather, Fraenkel argued, dictatorships create a lawless zone that runs alongside the normative state. The two states cohabit uneasily and unstably. On any given day, people or cases could be jerked out of the normative state and into the prerogative one. In July 1936, for example, Fraenkel won a case for employees of an association taken over by the Nazis. A few days later, he learned that the Gestapo had seized the money owed to his clients and deposited it in the government’s coffers. Over time, the prerogative state would distort and slowly unravel the legal procedures of the normative state, leaving a smaller and smaller domain for ordinary law." "Yet, Fraenkel insisted, it was a mistake to think that even the Nazis would entirely dispense with normal laws. After all, they had a complex, broadly capitalist economy to maintain. “A nation of 80 million people,” he noted, needs stable rules. The trick was to find a way to keep the law going for Christian Germans who supported or at least tolerated the Nazis, while ruthlessly executing the führer’s directives against the state’s enemies, real and perceived. Capitalism could jog nicely alongside the brutal suppression of democracy, and even genocide. Fraenkel was born in Cologne in December 1898 in the comfortable home of Georg Fraenkel, a merchant, and Therese Epstein. After his parents died, Ernst and his sister were taken in by their uncle in Frankfurt, where Ernst became interested in trade-union activism. Despite his socialist leanings, he joined the German army and was sent to Poland in April 1917, then on to the Western Front that July. He later wrote that he’d hoped “the war would mean the end of antisemitism.” Fraenkel survived the trenches, and after his discharge in 1919, he earned a law degree, eventually securing work in Berlin as a labor lawyer. The war did not, of course, end anti-Semitism, but his military service did save his livelihood, at least for a time. On May 9, 1933—only a few months after the Reichstag burned—Fraenkel and other Jewish lawyers received an official notice prohibiting them from appearing in German courts. But Nazi law made an exception for Jewish lawyers who had served in World War I. And so, while many fled, Fraenkel remained in Berlin, representing litigants such as members of the German Freethinkers Alliance, a leader of the Young Socialist Workers, and a man arrested for insulting a National Socialist newspaper as “old cheese.” Often, he had to resort to unorthodox strategies. In the last of those three cases, Fraenkel persuaded his client to plead guilty, limiting his arguments to the sentence’s severity. This gambit worked: The man was duly convicted, and received a light sentence, avoiding the fate of others acquitted under similar circumstances. In at least one case, a Gestapo agent appeared as soon as the judge declared a not-guilty verdict, took the defendant into custody, and said, “Kommt nach Dachau” (“Come to Dachau”). Eventually, Fraenkel’s name made it onto a Gestapo list. He and his wife fled first to London, then to Chicago. Today, we are witnessing the birth of a new dual state. The U.S. has long had a normative state. That system was always imperfect. Our criminal-justice system, for example, sweeps in far too many people, for far too little security in exchange. Even so, it is recognizably part of the normative state. What the Trump administration and its allies are trying to build now, however, is not. The list of measures purpose-built to cleave off a domain in which the law does not apply grows by the day: the pardons that bless and invite insurrectionary violence; the purges of career lawyers at the Justice Department and in the Southern District of New York, inspectors general across the government, and senior FBI agents; the attorney general’s command that lawyers obey the president over their own understanding of the Constitution; the appointment of people such as Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, who seem to view their loyalty to the president as more compelling than their constitutional oath; the president’s declaration that he and the attorney general are the sole authoritative interpreters of federal law for the executive branch; the transformation of ordinary spending responsibilities into discretionary tools to punish partisan foes; the stripping of security clearances from perceived enemies and opponents; the threat of criminal prosecutions for speech deemed unfavorable by the president; and the verbal attacks on judges for enforcing the law. The peril of the dual state lies in its capacity for targeted suppression. The singular aim of these tactics is to construct a prerogative state where cruel caprice, not law, rules. By no measure does the extent of federal law displaced in the first few months of the Trump administration compare with the huge tracts of the Weimar’s legal system eviscerated by the Nazis. But it is striking how Donald Trump’s executive orders reject some basic tenets of American constitutionalism—such as Congress’s power to impose binding rules on how spending and regulation unfold—without which the normative state cannot persist. The CEOs who paid for and attended Trump’s second inauguration can look forward to the courts being open for the ordinary business of capitalism. So, too, can many citizens who pay little attention to politics expect to be unscarred by the prerogative state. The normal criminal-justice system, if only in nonpolitical cases, will crank on. Outside the American prerogative state, much will remain as it was. The normative state is too valuable to wholly dismantle. For that reason, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Trump’s lawyers—despite running roughshod over Congress, the states, the press, and the civil service—were somewhat slower to defy the federal courts, and have fast-tracked cases to the Supreme Court, seeking a judicial imprimatur for novel presidential powers. The courts, unlike the legislature, remain useful to an autocrat in a dual state. Building a dual state need not end in genocide: Vladimir Putin’s Russia and Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore have followed the same model of the dual state that Fraenkel described, though neither has undertaken a mass-killing operation as the Nazis did. Their deepest similarity, rather, is that both are intolerant of political dissent and leave the overwhelming majority of citizens alone. The peril of the dual state lies precisely in this capacity for targeted suppression. Most people can ignore the construction of the prerogative state simply because it does not touch their lives. They can turn away while dissidents and scapegoats lose their political liberty. But once the prerogative state is built, as Fraenkel’s writing and experience suggest, it can swallow anyone."

100% agree... this is such a non issue that's being blown up to create manufactured outrage... The amount of news coverage this gets by certain outlets in proportion to the amount of athletes this applies to is asinine. If those news outlets talked about school shootings or even rare diseases affecting people in proportion to this topic it would flood the airways 24/7. Transgender fuss is only happening with a certain subset of people intent on getting 'news' from a few specific outlets...

I hate to speculate but the thing I saw was a car accident

This may have been answered previously but why hasn't Ryder been in any of the team trials?

This is my best guess at who our team will be and I'm assuming Snyder finds a way to wrestle... Does anyone think a high schooler is going to punch their ticket onto the team? 57- Lee / Lilledahl = Lee in 2 although lilledahl gives him a run on his feet and they are somewhat close but Spencer's top game wins him the matches 61- Vito / Forrest = Vito in 3 and im going to say Forrest sneaks one out because of his funkiness and the Vito wins aren't close 65- McKenna / Woods = McKenna in 3 but Woods' recent improvement continues the upward trajectory 70- Yianni / Duke = Yianni in 2 fun matches because all of Yianni's matches are fun plus I think Duke might have a little emotion in this one given he grew up wrestling probably idolizing Yianni a bit as a fellow NY'er 74- MM / Carr = MM in 2 blow outs 79- Wick / Haines = Haines in 2 just because of his offense 86- Valencia / Dake = Dake in 3 although I could see Valencia nabbing the first one and just not having the gas tank to go 3 bouts in the day with Dake but who knows... this could be a toss up 92- Hidlay / Barr = Hidlay in 2 since it seems like his time and he's going to be the savvy vet but wouldn't be shocked by the opposite result 97- Snyder / Zilmer = Snyder in 3, he drops one due to recent distractions... 125- Hendrickson / Hillger = Hendrickson in 2 and continues his heater without being in a whole lot of danger of losing either match

NY may not have the depth of a PA, Oh, NJ but their top tier guys that come out every 5-10 years they some of the best the US has to offer. If Duke wins 4 titles, NY would have 3 of the 8 wrestlers to claim that (2 of which were at Cornell) which is pretty crazy when you take into account what Ohio/NJ/PA produces amongst other top wrestling states. Really exciting stuff for NY and will be excited to see how this goes.

That singlet pull also changed the trajectories of all these big time recruits that are going to OK St too... and if any of them end up being 4 timers or Oly gold medalists, it would not have happened if not for that singlet pull on that fateful day...

Yeah but you seemed to be taking the same stance that there are all these problems aside from having something like 9 surgeries in the past 7-8 years... weight cuts are difficult on everyone but I wouldn't pin any of Yianni's losses on a weight cut so again, I'm just curious other than injuries and weight cut issues that haven't seemed to be an issue what all these problems are that you mention? I genuinely don't know what you're referring too so just seeking to understand what else the issue has been that has only netted him 4 national titles US Open titles and a world silver medal at 65kg that hadn't been done in over a decade?

Who other than Dake/Burroughs/Snyder- would you consider not hot or cold on the Senior Circuit the last 5 years?

Definitely don't think it would be quite as bad publicly if it weren't for religion/god/bible always being so in your face like it has been with a lot of these guys... I can't even begin to imagine athletes in another sport wearing all this 100% Jesus trained apparel which I find very odd but also not saying it doesn't happen. This reminds me a bit of people like Tiger Woods/Lance Armstrong etc... that put out a squeaky clean image only to be found out to be much different in their personal life. I also don't think this was a one off mistake... One thing is certain for me however and that is I will never be able to look at him the same way again without thinking of this first whether that's fair or not... He may make a comeback eventually but the damage is certainly done to his reputation on a broader scale regardless how you feel about prostitution and cheating on your wife all while proclaiming to follow in the lords footsteps...

I have a screenshot of the post but don't think it would be appropriate to post