Delete This Account

appreciate the chance to have become the hoot and the holler of the left wing leaning crowd, given that research shows the threads i've been involved in have come back with the hottest flames, i'll acknowledge that drunken stuper is a mere privelege and lucidity is a far-fetched notion. so i'll let labillz pretend to have a point and we'll call it a draw as i smoke this last cigarette, and amuse myself at your expense. jw

the obama proposal was flawed and watered down to begin with. what i can't comprehend is how this nation lags in taking care of its own. place the blame where ever you want. the suggestion that the united states of america refuses to go forward in providing universal health care is an abomination to common sense. if anything, obama never went far enough. or is it that the tea party constrained the parameters. last i checked, nixon's proposal still works. jw i'll hold up my middle finger, if you want, too.

so does EJ. jw

jeepers. one week, the Bills put up a season-best 470 yards with an undrafted rookie, the next, a rusty Manuel proves he still has a long way to go in developing, and this somehow falls on Hackett. the media isn't pointing the finger at Hackett, because it's been busy pointing the finger at EJ, because he's got a long way to go to prove himself as a bona fide starter. jw

funny, i've never said i hated rush. grew up on rush. my first concert was rush. the high school band i was the lead singer for played rush. i use rush as an example for several reasons. first, because i moved on from rush. second, because any reference to them in a negative light prompts responses such as these. as for Madonna, she did plenty for popular music in her formative days. i have plenty of respect for what she was able to accomplish. nothing wrong with madonna. now, as to whether she also belongs in the rock and roll hall of fame ahead of many others is very much debatable. was she a "rocker." quite unlikely. thing is, does rush deserve to be in the rock and roll hall of fame ahead of others. again, that's a debatable point. side with jim all you want. but to discount the points i made simply because my use of a band that you treasure makes it difficult doesn't entirely make your case, either. are the replacements more of a rock and roll band than rush? i'd have to say, yes. jw yes, you in some ways have essentially summed up my point as to what rock and roll is about. it's naively snobbish, elitist among its fans, and especially condescending and dismissive in its finger in the air demonstrations. thanks. jw

so how's the whole ted cruz shutdown thing going? can't believe it's nearly a month old. impressive that the "GOP" is sticking to it's guns. this could very much turn the tables. jw

but they should accept this as an honor! good god, sir, how can you be a fan and question this grand distinction! the chance to be walked upon and have cigarette butts discarded upon your star should be regarded as the height of recognition! rush would never turn down such a privilege! i agree. this is pure bs. for a band that contributed to revolutionizing music when it needed a big fat kick in the ass, this is a low point for a group that seems to be willing to stoop to green day status. my sympathies. the only argument i have here is that you hedged your point by referring to this as "a somewhat related note." there's no somewhat to it . this is the point i've been making. jw

wrong again. i've never suggested all rock and roll music is angst-ridden. i've raised numerous examples as to why that's not the case. Devo wasn't angst-ridden. Elvis Presley's songs weren't exactly angst-ridden. but you're right there when suggesting i have a narrower distinction of rock and roll, and for good reason. i don't lump in all "contemporary music" as being rock and roll. it's not. and that's why i take great issue with the shill palace in Cleveland, which is the initial point of this thread and why i would prefer the replacements to not be part of it because it's an empty tribute. jw

This is all silly. This board light's up the moment anyone tweets from practice that someone's not practicing or is practicing, and yet now there's someone who wants all practices closed because something might be revealed. There's not much that happens while we're out there during the open-media period that reveals much of anything. We take a head count to see who's practicing. Occassionally, we notice someone's working with the starters or at a different position. Not entirely sure how this makes it for a competitive advantage unless of course, C.J. Spiller is suddenly working out at linebacker. It's been common knowledge that Aaron Williams will be making the switch back to safety once it's clear that Gilmore and McKelvin are ready to go full-time. In fact, one of the things that really ticked off the Bills back in Gregg's days is something that didn't happen in practice, but when Antoine Winfield, I believe it was, informed The Associated Press that he was likely going to miss a few weeks with some kind of injury. The next weekend, the New England Patriots burned the Bills on a whole series of screen passes, and the media got the blame for the loss because we had somehow spilled the beans on what Winfield had said on the record. The other most useful event that occured during this window, is when Shawne Merriman came up lame 15 minutes into his first practice in Buffalo. Jeepers. Every Fantasy Football owner relies on those 30 minutes to figure out whether to start someone or bench him. And even then it's not clear, particularly when it comes to someone being listed doubtful or questionable on Friday. Yes, close the practices. Why not? Every team is required to open practice for 30 minutes. Oddly enough, come Sunday, half of those teams that do so win. The other half lose. jw

the attitude is not a gimmick. the attitude is a heart-on-the-sleeve desperation for every new rebel-without-a-clue generation that comes forward. whether it's BB King's hopeless sentiment in The Thrill is Gone, to Elvis somehow shaking the foundations with what was an innocent swivel hip, to Johnny Cash taking out a billboard in Nashville, in which he posed with a finger in the air in a sharp indictment of Music Row. this "gimmick" you speak of has been around for quite some time. and it's roots aren't based in London, though the underground scene in Britain did help further the cause. and yet, were all of these "punk" bands posers? c'mon. they rose up with a voice out of the Brixton riots with an anti-Thatcher message. quit trying to put words in my mouth. did Devo have a swagger? not exactly. but their message was as plain as that of the New York Dolls. Cash's version of Hurt was just as devestatingly poignant as Trent Reznor's. Liz Phair's muted "Exile in Guyville" release had just as much ooomph as the raucous Rolling Stones "Exile on Main Street." and quit trying to lump popular and contemporary music in with rock and roll. your argument fails completely in its premise. and let me go further in knocking down your point of rock and roll being unidenfiable today. untrue. it's quite apparent that you only choose that to be the case because it's so difficult to keep up. punk rock sucks? Daltrey was a punk rocker when he sang: "I hope I die before I get old." The Replacements were no more punk than the Clash were. Or the Pixies. Or Elvis Costello for that matter. but it's convenient to throw around labels and lump it all in one neat pile of crap to further your argument, but it's quite clear that your points lack nuance and distinction. rock and roll is a contrarian art form, which gives itself a youthful nobility, naive, sure, but wrenching and valid when it's at its best. jw as for NoSaint's contention that the hall of fame is adding too many artists at too fast a pace, there's a simple answer to it: yes. but this is a for-profit driven, disney-fied tourist trap. what other choice does it have? which leads me back to a point i made earlier in regards to this shill palace. a rock and roll hall of fame's best site should be some garage, or Sun Studio, or CBGBs and/or perhaps some back alley in London.

look at it this way, catching a bouquet >>>>>> catching the clap. get er done. ... jw

Andy Levitre. At first glance, i had questions. By the time he left, Levitre was the O-Line's MVP and MIP, most indespensible player. jw

thanks, for helping me make my case, No Saint. you've helped define a point i've been trying to say. rock and roll is a movement, an art form of swagger and rebellion, expression and angst. it is for the young, and the young at heart. if there's one thing i did respect during my one and likely only visit to the rock and roll hall of fame is the t-shirt i bought, which read: "If it's too loud, you're too old." prog rock is fine. heck, jethro tull is fine. i have no trouble with anyone liking their music. but is it hall of fame worthy? unsure of that. now if ian anderson did more than just play that flute and attempted to pull a few ribald GG Allin stunts, well, then we might well be on to something. but to stomp around on stage for 8 and 12 minutes at a time blowing wind seemed a little too progressive for what rock and roll stands for, which bared to the bone is blues with a gut punch. M.I.A. in my opinion harkened that rock and roll spirit with her indignant display on stage during the super bowl halftime show. Lada Gaga might have something going for her given the stands she's taken. Devo's nerdy contrarian stand in the face of the pretty-boy and girl 80s was rebellious. and they could play. or Steve Earle pissing off St. Pete at the Pearly Gates, is something to behold. four kids, half-drunk on cheep whisky in a garage, jamming on a friday night is my definition of rock and roll, or as close as it comes. but a flautist? it's suggested here that i make my case to define rock and roll. well, define jazz or country. it's like explaining blue. it ain't easy. but you know it when you see it, and especially when you hear it. jw

bahloney, i criticized the rock and roll hall of fame for being the sham that it has become by inducting Rush before Yes, Blondie before the Runaways, ignoring the Pixies and Nick Lowe. and this is why i suggested in the heading of this thread that the hall of fame would be best served to re-induct Rush, given its track record. the fact that some believe Kiss is on the fence and Linda Ronstadt not is yet another example of how that place has become a sinkhole for mediocrity. it's not a matter of who's band is better. i make the case that the Replacements are among the most influential groups to come out of america. jw i've made my case, to you on several occasions. it's not my fault that you don't seem to comprehend. so let me simply it recalling a conversation we've previously had in regards to an easy demarcation line between what stands and doesn't stand for rock and roll. one word: flute. jw

oh, pardon me. i was mistaken, giving you the benefit of the doubt when suggesting you might have missed my point. it's quite evident you simply don't understand rock and roll. my bad on that. jw

you miss my point. i am among several who don't recognize the shill palace in cleveland as a rock and roll hall of fame. it's not. it's an applebees version of a hard rock cafe. jw

my god. not selling out to the mainstream is only cliche if you say it and don't do it. the 'mats built their reputation the hard way, by not selling out, in a variety of ways. their signing to a major label nearly happened by accident because of how they self-imploded on stage in front of numerous record executives. to not sell out is to not sell out, and yet you seem to think that there is something "cliche" about that. there are those who don't sell out, and you can tell that by their actions. what makes that so cliche? jw

love that. too funny. and here's what makes this year's Rock and Roll Hall of fame list of inductees mostly upside-down in how it's being judged and based on talent and influence. Nirvana, influenced by the replacements, is regarded a sure bet, while the replacements are not, and the Pixies haven't been nominated. ll cool j, an actor, is regarded a sure bet by some, when NWA, a far more influential rap outfit, is regarded a longshot. linda ronstadt over Link Wray? the argument i pose here is the rock and roll hall of fame is a skewed pyramid for a mass of great, good and mediocre and continues down the road of the grammy's, gauging greatness as being popularity's near equal. how else can that not be, when they open up the voting to the fans? that's why the replacements don't belong in this shill palace. there's a finger-in-the-air mentality of rock and roll that seems to be missing at the hall of fame and its mostly safe and whelming list of inductees. and it's the f-the-man mentality that is mostly missing with the hall of fame itself, because of what it is: a tourist attraction pretending to be something more. rock and roll hall of fames by their nature are counter-intuitive to the art form they pretend to represent. rather than a fancy building, it would be more apt to put it in a garage somewhere in Minneapolis, or the tiny Sun Studio in Memphis, or remake something out of CBGBs in NYC. but not this, not this clean, sterile, antiseptic structure that stands as a flat-note peon to soft hyperbole. jw

don't be too sure of that. i would be greatly disappointed if that happened. it would go entirely against the grain of everything they stood for and against. Rush reflects the canadian mentality, overjoyed to be recognized. the 'mats have been and remain an entirely contrarian different beast, from pissing off lorne michaels -- another canadian -- to pissing off nearly every record executive during a fall-down-drunk show at CBGBs, to, more recently, Paul wearing a canadiens jersey for the encore in toronto. in the spirit of rock and roll -- and not the spirit of radio, which did more for rush than ever recognizing the 'mats -- a big fat finger in the air is how any potential induction should be greeted. respect? the 'mats have it. they don't need some silly honor in some fancy facade on the shores of lake erie for mere validation. jw

and yet, as you've noted in regards to the Hall of Fame being a sham, some of the previous "inductees" fail to pass the smell vs. sales test. ... i'm agreeing with you. the line has been blurred far too much and far too often to question anything the Hall of Fame does in choosing its inductees. jw

that's the thing. i could have become a 'Mats fan yesterday when they weren't cool. why bestow a semblance of "cool-ness" on them now? the ramones were always "cool." so were the pixies. and good god, radiohead. i've spent far more time explaining the 'mats to people who've never heard of them and probably never gave them a listen after the conversation. and now, this? seems a bit too contrived coming now. jw

yep. i said it. i take no vindication or validation in knowing the replacements are up for induction into the rock and roll hall of fame. after all these years flying under the radar, this is hardly an "honor." they're good. always have been. and i don't need some sellout body on the shores of lake erie that's inducted the likes of genesis to tell me something i don't know. i am, after all, an anti-establishment contrarian who latched on to an anti-establishment contrarian group that went mostly unnoticed. at this point, i'd prefer to keep it that way. why class up a joint that has a dubious history of inducting both greats and sellouts. and to think, the remaining members of the 'mats would have the opportunity to go on stage with nirvana, a band they influenced, and hall and oates, a pop act. a good pop act, but not a rock and roll act. all this smacks of desperation. if inducted, i hope the 'mats decline. heck, i would almost expect no less. jw

Thanks, folks. I think I've got it. Got a buzzing sound this morning when Bills announced the game had sold out. Now I'm trying to figure out how to change that to something louder. I hate change, sometimes. jw

got an iphone. and i'm also an old codger. what does "push notifications" mean? and where do i find them? all i have in "Notifications Settings" is "Team News: ON." this seems to be a silly, overthought, overburdened waste of time that is meant for "fans" to spend time logging on to their site. i could be wrong, but it strikes me as a cash grab and response to the text lawsuit they encountered last year. jw

Here's the question that I can't seem to get answered: Do we no longer get text alerts, or do we have to keep this Bills app running. ... And yes, I keep track of what the Bills announce to fans, because at various times they get that stuff out before the team issues updates to the media. One example: Thad Lewis' promotion. jw