birdog1960

yes, indeed. easy money!

fumble was bad enough. a wasted time out in the 2 minute drill? has anyone ever directly spoken with this moron? is he as dumb as it appears?

So u think that throw makes his draft position and cost justified? Don't get wrong. I'd be overjoyed to see them win this...and then somebody, anybody but Manuel take over as qb

i fail to see how money is involved unless you are referring to all that money whaley wasted on Manuel

If I said people that support trump are intellectual light weights, would you interpret that as inclusive of all trump supporters? Cuz that's what would have bee intended.

It would take a desperate team to even sign Manuel at this point. Oh wait.

Yet you found time to add that profound post...

. Same her. I just don't understand the love for Whaley just like the love for Manuel. It makes no sense. Many bills fans are loyal to a fault.

I suppose if the spider was the designer of a leaky, drafty, pos house then yes, your analogy is apt

no, it won't.. whaley needs to be held accountable for this fiasco. it's bad enough he wasted ann 8th pick but then to deal away a backup that would have to been a better option right now for essentially a bag of crisps...

it's pretty curious really. i guess duke didn't require an undergrad degree but that was about the time i was applying. everywhere i applied sure as hell did. and a damn good gpa. kinda makes me wonder…. oh, and learn to think about just about everything. question standard beliefs. learn how to analyze data. learn how to reason. learn how to test hypotheses. learn how to research scholarly journals. stuff like that.

me too. sorry, doesn't carry much weight around here. but i graduated undergrad. rand didn't. and that's where many actually learn to think. med school is a very difficult trade school. nonetheless, he's clearly bright albeit misguided.

i like bernie. i think he's real. i think he's smart. i think he;s honest. unfortunately, he hasn't a chance of winning. so yes, i get your point.

because we have seen so many effective solutions from cons. even the great reagan. i suspect he's read "everyman". you?

here we go again with the all inclusive terms. guess i'm not everyone (everyman http://www.cummingsstudyguides.net/Guides3/Everyman.html - it's a classic!)?. i think he's quite bright. he had the credentials to get in to and graduate from univ of chicago. i don't think he grabbed any coat tails to do that. i'm trying to think of a repug candidate that is brighter. Jeb? Trump? nope and nope. also rans? nope,nope,nope…. oh and i'm wondering where the word bloviating might source to in your post…but not wondering hard.

you keep using this inclusive word "people". I submit that there are plenty of specific people that are very well informed on these issues.

almost nothing done here actually matters save perhaps discussions on the pope which occasionally illustrate what moral leadership is. everything else is a game. and it could actually be a decent game since a few cons here are marginally smarter than rocks. but it's a bad game because the rules of decent conduct and discussion are completely ignored and ridiculed by one neanderthal (http://www.nature.com/news/early-european-may-have-had-neanderthal-great-great-grandparent-1.17534 - chef do you chew your steak tartare with dentures?)side in the argument. too bad...

dumbassery? you mean pointing out cheap and pathetic tactics used to skirt real debate. you are right. it only works when you are dealing with someone that possesses a conscience and sense of fairness.

I feel sorry for you repeatedly berating and arguing things you're clearly incorrect about. it's a clear character flaw. wait for it...next will being some obfuscation or some other form of dirty pool.

uh huh. that's what I thought. if you can't win, you cheat. I you can't cheat, you quit.

lets try this again although i'm confident it will be futile. premises:1) I am among the people ("ones") that support sanders) 2) the people that support sanders is inclusive of all supporters including me 3) I know what democratic socialism is. therefore, the statement: the people that don't know what democratic socialism is are the ones supporting sanders is untrue. if you disagree, construct a logical diagram that disproves this. but you won't because it's not about debate to you. that would require honesty.

i am among the ones supporting him, but you knew that. the logical diagram remains. keep it up with the intellectual dishonesty. it's true to form and defining.

since you have great difficulty with inference i'll explain. I support him. I am "one". I know what is meant by democratic socialism. therefore, unbill's statement is incorrect.

incorrect.

thanks. i sort of understand that…although it's f'ing nuts.