SDS

If I understand you correctly, I don't think I'm suggesting renaming the forums - just the main URL. Maybe I would need to shore up the branding of the forums simultaneously...

Complain to them not us... We aren't in the business of critiquing other fan sites.

For a variety of reasons, I think having the board split off from the Two Bills Drive domain name may not be the best way to handle the situation. I registered stadiumwall.com during the evil Rivals.com years in order save the board from their diabolical clutches. However, now I'm thinking that maybe it would be beneficial to re-unite the board with it's roots and have everyone go to: forums.twobillsdrive.com I would, of course, do some fancy rocket science stuff and have all the stadiumwall.com links go to the right place. Any objections to this?

Just read the stupid clever headlines on the front page. Could these guys give it a rest already? "Edwards has turned longtime-counterfeit Bills into contenders" "Bills overpower Chargers in powerless stadium" "Bills short-circuit Chargers"

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

[This is an automated response] This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. Thank you.

[This is an automated response] As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive subject lines. The topic starter can edit the subject line to make it more appropriate. Thank you.

Is there another kind?

Rich people bad.

Looks like he hit the average to me.

According to Polian - 1/3 of all 1st rounders do not pan out as expected.

Sorry... Apple is releasing new macbooks at 1:00pm.... My life will have to wait until i see the new hardware.

You know - whenever you quote him it ruins my "ignore this member" setting.

Minnesota was the better pick this week.

Looking back, I think Ronald Reagan was a man driven by country/duty and not just a desire to be president.

are you saying that you disagree with the notion that this could have been financed by the private sector or that we shouldn't even bother because it is now considered "infractructure"? Dude, if it is the latter - that is retarded. Use $3M of public funding - that only exists because we finance it with foreign loans - or just have wealthy philanthropists pay for it? Wow, tough decision there. If the place is that worthwhile and that popular - financing it in the private sector is a no-brainer. How that is even arguable is beyond me.

In this instance - it is a waste. There are enough wealthy people connected to the Chicago area that raising $3M - if it were such a good cause - would be nothing. Oprah's rainbow-farting unicorn sleeps on $3M every night, with fresh bills laid out for it the next morning. Between Obama, Oprah, Jordon, all the professional sports teams, and the rest of businesses etc... there is no reason why a city the size of Chicago needs federal money for a science building. It's not a bridge. It's not a highway. It's a planetarium that I have no doubt could have been paid for by the generosity of private citizens.

Whenever someone is asked for a voter ID in Maryland - the screams of "voter intimidation" are deafening...

Many times a whole year's gains can be reduced to gains made over 10 days... Now which 10 days out of 250 should you invest in? That is why you don't buy and sell on your own....

Obama, from Illinois, raised $3 trillion dollars for his campaign. Surely he knows enough people that could fund a planetarium.

Well, I can only assume.... 1. Yes. 2. Good point. My gut says wages wouldn't go up as fast to keep up with the plans. Employers have a tough time doing that now when the baby is in their lap, let alone elsewhere. Of course, there is also the idea being allowed to cross state lines and having increased competition should provide some downward pressure on prices.

It doesn't matter. Congress would never pass anything he proposed, but for purely academic reasons, here is how it would work in theory: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/blog/diagnos...h-care-argument

But why is it nonsense? The implication here is that nothing a person has done in the past has any bearing on their candidacy?

Would you or would you not agree that given the 3rd party verification for some of the claims, that this is something that should have been investigated/known many, many moons ago? Don't you think items like this are just a tad more relevant than Sarah Palin's daughter or if Joe Biden exaggerates his Pakistan trips?