birdog1960

I do. it's becoming more and more clear to me that we now live in a corporatocracy. much of the media on both sides are deeply involved and or owned by our corporate masters. but the talking heads on the right like limpy and beck seem mostly motivated by their own individual goals. not sure which is worse.

wow. if you believe that, what does that about those angry, white, male conservatives that were led around by them?

the left media outlets didn't enable trump and they barely acknowledged Bernie til late in the game. they almost universally still bow to Clinton and I agree that it's a problem.

if anything good comes of it, it will most likely be the realization of some on the right of the level of shyster they've been listening to on talk radio/tv propaganda shows and the harm they are doing to the country.

so i'm at a dinner meeting with some of my more conservative colleagues (they're surgeons, it's expected) last night and I was surprised to find that none supported trump. one told me that a coworker had predicted months ago that Bernie would do well and he dismissed it out of hand. after talking to his Clemson attending kids who are also ostensibly conservative he was persuaded otherwise and had to apologize. last night he said that if he could pick from the three remaining candidates, fhe'd choose Bernie cuz he'd likely do less harm. amazing times we are living in. perhaps scary is the better word.

you mean frat parties improve social skills? seriously, socially well endowed kids possibly improve their skills some at college but inept ones remain mostly inept. the benefit of a real campus in this regard is the exchange of ideas that happens more freely and generally with civility in this environment. that and the contacts you make. oh yeah, and the sex, drugs and rock and roll.

17k probably doesn't pay for the lacrosse team to travel to maine for a game. wanna save money? do away with college sports.

172 replies and 9 pages in response to the op's "ridiculous" premise critical of the bills draft. methinks y'all eternal optimists protest too much. but then again, anyone critical of anything bills (lord knows there hasn't been much to criticize) is surely a hater and couldn't possibly be a real fan...

yup, "can we do better?" is my world view. hell, it's my life view. more often than not, the answer is "yes, we can". for many years and in many , many areas this has been painfully true for this nfl franchise. why is whaley any different? he's a vestige of one of the worst owner/management groups in the history of modern professional sports. why wouldn't someone better be interested in the job? why are bills fans like you so ready to settle for just ok or even worse?

I think the far too infrequently asked question of whaley and anyone in the bills organization is "can we do better?" I think we can. I think he's mediocre and that there's better potential gm talent to be found. then the question becomes whether the talent is in place above him to find a superior replacement. if not, and it's not only incumbent on the owners, then the same question "can we do better" should be asked and addressed.

which makes them even less relevant or accurate. a talent e v a l that ignores the qb position is a zero. you're the one doubling down on linking such a ridiculous e v a l. 2 times zero is still zero. but hey, let's get back to denigrating the writer that ranked whaley 27th. because...well, just because.

except I didn't say the bills talent exclusive of qb. what would motivate anyone to make such a statement? ooo, ooo, ooo , I know, I know (hand shoots up from the back of the kindergarten class).

i'd say nfl.com (your reference) moved the goal posts. in what idiot universe does someone judge roster talent exclusive of the most important position? and who besides you would take that seriously?

yes, look how prophetic that was! last year is now history and pretty disappointing history at that. rhino's first reference starts with the caveat of "if they had a qb". how can anyone possibly rank a roster exclusive of qb. this is bs designed to calm the masses of frustrated bills fans. and it appears to have at least in some small measure succeeded. if nothing else, we now can discard two sources as accurate talent evaluators.

really? do you notice many impartial expert or nonexpert observers praising the bills' talent level as comparatively excellent or even good? i don't.

thrilling! let's revise it to," let's wait til were widely considered a good team" before congratulating him.

just win...then we can congratulate him. all the rest is window dressing.

I like peter drucker's rec: limit pay ratio to about 30:1. investment income is a different issue as arestock options. start with wages. baby steps.

my point is that swiss are pragmatic generally. not sure why you didn't understand that. yes, I have family in zurich. been there 3 times in the last 5 years. I've met many swiss. not my favorite nationality for sure. anal as hell. concrete thinkers. but pragmatism, that they have in spades. idealism, not dso much. yet many of them are against outrageous discrepancies in pay. form a pragmatic point of view it makes sense. why encourage civil unrest that might well be justified?

yes, just like those crazy, wacky swiss did. and a sizable proportion said, no it makes sense. it's logical. it's immoral to have such a discrepancy. and they are correct.

is it foolish to think that a pay discrepancy ratio of 10,000/1 shouldn't exist? are the swiss foolhardy for voting on a maximal ratio and it being narrowly defeated? may well pass next time. I've not met many impractical, dreamer swiss. unjust is unjust. unfair is unfair. like pornography, you know it when you see it.

they are true statements and they resonate with many voters. the ad speaks to corruption, injustice and the inherent unfairness of our current system. I doubt Bernie's campaign is targeting your demographic, whatever that is.

what a great ad! and typical of sanders, it's absolutely, undeniably true.

slight variation in degrees of deception. As I said, the most deceptive act is posting under multiple screen names. you say you know but won't out those doing that. that's as or more deceptive than posting as connor and later gator.