All_Pro_Bills

The party in power can't let the wrong guy win the election because letting the voters choose their President is a threat to democracy. So they annul the results of the 1st round of voting, arrest the guy that won the 1st round on his way to declaring for the second round, and use some procedural ruling presented by the ruling party and heard by a court stacked with ruling party members that voted to exclude the front runner from the second round which he was projected to win. All this in order to stay in power, and of course, save democracy. All with the blessing of EU bureaucrats in Brussels that interfere in more elections than Putin. Yes, it does sound familiar.

Yup, solid logic. Every contender needs a QB. Through the drought years the Bills had some good teams that just needed a QB. Going through some old Bills stuff this weekend I ran across a 2003 season calendar. They had some great players on that team but Bledsoe crapped out as the season progressed and they finished 6-10. 9-7 the next season. No playoffs. On the team: Pat Williams Travis Henry Nate Clements Eric Moulds Ruben Brown Antoine Winfield London Fletcher Brian Moorman Aaron Schobel I'd take every one of those guys today w/Allen or Allen with that 2003 roster and the Bills are pretty good.

So we're even. You morons got played by Biden's crew for 4 years. And I say it with confidence the evidence points to the conclusion he wasn't even a real president because he was mentally impaired from day one and others were making "presidential" decisions. They gave us 20% overall inflation. And maybe, just maybe, the policy of killing 150 million egg laying chickens when they find a couple sick birds among the flocks had an impact. Otherwise, try eggbeaters.

Canadian Liberal party introduces new PM Mark Carney. There's a fresh new face. Former central bank of England and Canada governor with duo British and Irish citizenship who isn't an MP. Is that unusual? I don't know. What I do know is it won't be Canada first up north. Can Mr. Carney be described as a "globalist"? I think so.

Trump has already answered more media questions in a month than Biden did in 4 years and is on the job all day, every day. He's not out playing golf all the time as you claim. Or napping between meetings. Or just not working. He's on the job at the office. I get it. You're not happy with what he's doing. You're not alone here. But you're only experiencing what a lot of us went through with Biden who worked about 10 hours a week. Hang in there. It's only give or take, another 46 months.

I'm not surprised. The Party is in transition and the traditional conservatives that were happy to stick to their ideology, let the Democrats redefine the culture, and be satisfied with playing the role of the Washington Generals of politics have been stripped of power. Bush, Chaney, Romney, McCain, political figures like them. Guys Democrats suddenly loved in 2024 because they shared a common enemy in Trump have lost the battle for party control. Meanwhile, the Democrats far left swing has resulted in many traditional democratic voters going to the populists. Political arrangements are changing. Both parties will never be what they were since around the time of FDR.

While it's painful obvious the Democrats ran the government to make themselves wealthy while creating little of value courtesy of the taxpayers.

What a surprise. Not to me. I posted the day after Assad was ousted these savages would be slaughtering the non-believers. It's as predictable as the Sabres missing the playoffs.

I recall during the COVID outbreak stories of how officials in South Korea did a very good job of contact and traceability while tracking and identifying COVID cases and the spread of the virus. I'm curious if there are any such efforts among American health officials to identify patient zero here and identify contacts with infected persons and how its spreading? Is this standard procedure with these types of outbreaks?

I think it matters because he's unequivocally and publicly set his contract demands at $15M per season. If you make those statements and then end up taking less it makes you look like you "lost" by agreeing to less. Its just a bad practice. I wonder if Cook agrees his social media comments don't mean anything. If so, why post them at all? Talk to your agent, talk to the GM. Sit down and discuss your contract privately. I agree that telling you and me doesn't matter and we can't impact what he gets or doesn't get so why tell us anything?

Interestingly, this deficit also included a huge increase of around $30B in gold bullion imported from Swiss refiners. I think this particular increase is more monetary in nature than an action attributed to tariffs. It could mean many things but exactly what we'll need to wait and see.

I think the conclusion of this comparison is the Bills overpaid in the Knox deal. With Cook the factors are his performance, market price, and replaceability. And negotiating in public isn't going to help James. The way I look at it the only must keep guy under any circumstances is Josh Allen. And for cap purposes his deal needs restructuring.

What new partners are Canada and Mexico going to engage to offload goods and products previously destined for the US market? Some might say mercantilism based economy China but they're not exactly friendly to imports without conditions. And Canada diverting crude oil exports from the U.S. to perhaps Asia? You need pipeline capacity to get the oil to ports on the west coast and shipping capacity to take it across the Pacific. All this takes time, effort, and money. The obvious path is to some reconciliation that will be reached in maybe a week or two. In the meantime there's nothing I can do other than watch the markets panic and nibble at some good companies at better prices that will rebound once the dust settles here.

Wearing what will be the favorite costume for 2025 liberal Halloween parties. Trick or treat!

Which only proves the AI model was "trained" by humans that estimate a 75 to 85 percent likelihood that Trump is a Putin asset.

They don't meet the current definition of a liberal any more than I do. They just hate Trump and anything he's for or does. If for example, Trump came out for illegals and sanctuary cities they'd quickly changes their views and be againt those things.

Do we know exactly what vendors, under what contracts, are getting funds for exactly what work performed? Because if we don't, how can you conclude its a "good use of my taxes"?

They'd have been clapping if the kid with cancer was introduced as a transsexual biological male Ukrainian identifying as a "girl" looking forward to playing women's sports.

I don't think so. Make an outrageous ridiculous demand and then ask for something relatively more reasonable. Like your kid saying I'll be home tonight at 3 AM and you say hell no. And they say how about midnight? It's a negotiating tactic.

These tariffs are merely a negotiating tactic used with the intent of bringing other parties to the table. Most likely, in a week or two the issues both real and perceived will be resolved. And all parties will kiss and make up. If the US wanted to take a "kill shot" at Canada or Mexico they would impose economic sanctions which would make it impossible for those countries to execute financial transactions in US dollars, freeze the assets of the Bank of Canada and the central bank of Mexico in custody at the NY Federal Reserve, and impose penalties and sanctions or fines on US and foreign companies doing business with Canada and Mexico. If you're an investor interested in Canadian stocks like oil producers Suncor and Canadian Natural Resources, or fertilizer producer Nutrien, or uranium producer Cameco to name some names, these tariffs and the obligatory stock market panic (its institutional investors here) should be viewed as a one-time gift. Share prices have taken a hit and anyone with a time horizon greater than 3 days might want to buy small lots of 25 or 50 shares to start in these companies. When the tariffs are removed they'll bounce right back.

Some good points and things to contemplate. While we don't agree I appreciate the civility of our conversation. There are many grey areas and we have different perspectives. For me, this entire conflict never made any sense. I just don't see Ukraine as ever having any strategic value to the U.S. and for the life of me wonder why we ever got involved. Without the U.S. and Western Europe pushing for Ukrainian EU and NATO membership, removing an elected President in 2014 that opposed both, installing a more favorable government in his place, and heavily arming Ukraine this conflict would never have happened. There would not have been a Russian invasion. I don't see any value to our interests to participate in an exercise of isolating Russia which is now NATO's only mission. If Russia was to directly threaten us, our ability to respond is clearly superior to their abilities. But here we are. Its a mess we need to extricate ourselves from at the best possible terms. Given his temper tantrum and belligerent behavior, running off to Europe to curry favor and acquire their condemnations of the Trump administration, I'll be surprised if Zelensky lasts through the end of March. Either he's going to be deposed by a military tired of the conflict or on queue through some clandestine or other action of the US administration. He's an actor that believes the delusional he's actually the character he's playing. He'll soon retire in comfort at an Italian villa paid for by US taxpayer siphoned off our aid monies where he'll write a book or two on the conflict. The new guy will be more receptive to our interests which with a new administration, have changed since 2014. I don't see the European nations or their citizens having the ambition or desire to get directly involved in the conflict and little details like incurring casualties and deaths. After 80 years of pacifism, more or less letting America do all the heavy lifting, I'm guessing this dog won't hunt. British PM Starmer and other leaders talk a good game but that's likely all it is. And in the unlikely event they actually follow through and get their countries into this fight and incur lots of casualties I'm guessing their political careers will come to a screeching halt before long. Simply Zelensky can't survive without Washington's support and Europe can't defend itself without America either. They're both delusional if they think they're going to go it alone or defy Washington.

Its not all that black and white. This isn't some contest between the big bad Russians and Boy Scout Troop Europe. There are plenty of murderous, barbaric regimes Washington work with when the circumstances require that of us. Agencies like MI6 and the CIA are not handing out cookies and tooth brushes to widows and orphans in Africa. Look at all the US corporations set up in China to save a few pennies exploiting cheap and sometimes slave labor with their Chinese partners. What about the Saudi's. They're experts at publicly beheading executions of "criminals" Those ISIS chaps we supported to take over Syria. Islamic terrorists looking to create a Sharia state, watch and wait for it. We dealt with Russia after the break-up of the Soviet Union up until 2014 when Ukraine suddenly became important. When the Maidan coup was performed to remove an elected President that wouldn't play ball with the US and Western Europe over NATO and the EU. This all will be more closely examined by people with intimate knowledge of events. But it really got going after the Clinton campaign, along with FBI, Fusion GPS, and numerous political leaders along with media outlets manufactured and ran with the Russia hoax. Historians should have a field day creating the story of these times.

I couldn't agree with you more on the merits of that approach. But this scenario is all based on an assumption the European States are interested in reaching a peaceful settlement rather than continuing the war, escalating it by sending more weapons and their own troops to join the fighting, all with the express intent shared by Zelensky and European leaders of drawing American forces directly into the conflict though some invocation of NATO Article 5. I would say publicly let them go ahead and "own" the outcome but behind the scenes I would warn them that if their intentions are not genuine and they decide to directly engage in the conflict rather than pursue some negotiated settlement America will stop all monetary and all physical support, things like weapons, intelligence, and logistics, and withdraw from NATO and move our troops out of Europe. I might add, at this point in the process I don't trust Zelensky and the European leaders any more than I trust Putin.

To correct, the US casualty count in Vietnam was over 50,000. As for our money, the intent is to keep it at home and address our problem and issues. What many miss in these discussions that establish principles and objectives is there are two America's. America the Republic. And America the Empire. Much to the dismay of neocon and neoliberal advocates for the Empire, this administration is focused on the Republic. Voters from all kinds if disenfranchised groups tired of being ignored voted out the Empire and the special interests it serves. Like constant war. We spent all that blood and money on those wars because the pro-war forces were in charge. They're not in charge now.

Ironically, for everyone to understand the EO it will need to be printed in 10 different languages.