xsoldier54

They both are terrible HC's. Career records show they both suck. Gailey sucks a little bit more record wise. Unfortunate that these two guys have been our last two head coaches. Time to blow it up and bring in somebody fresh. These old NFL retreads just don't understand how to win in today's NFL.

This is possibly the most ridiculous idea I have ever seen on this site. Congratulations.

I don't believe that Fitz is the better QB. He can not throw the deep ball and hell, he can't even hit the short ones anymore. Jackson could not possibly be any worse. I believe it has to do with the conditional pick as someone else stated. This team needs all the draft picks they can get and they don't want to give up that higher one when it won't make any difference in making the playoffs this year.

This.

So Jesus was gay. Brilliant. What I was talking about has nothing to do with the separation of Church and State, which by the way has been wildly misinterpreted. The original intent was that the Federal Government should not endorse any single religion and force it upon it's citizens. It was never intended that freedom of religion could not be expressed at public facilities. That is political correctness gone astray. Singing Christmas carols in school or praying in school in no way equates to the Federal government stating that Christianity is the only religion and anyone who violates that principle will be prosecuted. What I was saying is that if you consider yourself to be a Catholic and the Catholic Church teaches that abortion is wrong, then you either agree with that or you don't. If you don't, then maybe you should find a religion that endorses abortion. And if that is your belief, then by all means, vote for a candidate that shares that sentiment. But if you are a practicing Catholic, meaning that you actually practice what your religion teaches, then vote accordingly and not for someone that will push an agenda that is contrary to your religious beliefs.

Not judging anyone, just stating my opinion. Not making any value judgements. Maybe I didn't make myself clear about the Priest thing. What they did is a sin. It goes against what the Church teaches. So does abortion. You can call yourself whatever you want and I am not judging you, I just don't understand why you would want to call yourself Catholic when you don't believe in the Church's teachings. Doesn't make much sense to me, but you are entitled to call yourself whatever you want and that is your right.

This :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Let me take this point by point. First of all, no religion teaches that sin is okay. So Muslim extremists or terrorists are not very good Muslims because they are not practicing what their religion teaches. And Priests that have molested children similarly can not be considered to be very good Catholics because they have not adhered to the teachings of the Catholic church. And each religion teaches moral values. So if you are trying to be a practicing Catholic or a practicing Muslim or a practicing anything, then you PRACTICE what your religion teaches. I have no idea what atheists use as a moral compass, but I would be willing to bet that those with moral values, practice those values. And Atheism is not a religion by the way. So hence my contention that if the church teaches that abortion is wrong and you do not believe in this, then why call yourself a Catholic? Just call yourself something else that says that abortion is okay.

Very funny. Show me that 93% of white voters voted for Romney and I would be happy to agree with you.

Your religious beliefs define your moral values. If you say you are Catholic and the Church says that abortion is wrong, then that is what you must believe or don't call yourself a Catholic. I believe your views on Mormonism are not exactly factual. They are a Christian religion. I don't remember Mitt Romney pushing any agenda that contradicted my religious beliefs. Can you say the same for Obama?

What part of you are not capable of understanding my line of thought did your feeble mind not understand? I stand firmly behind my original statements. You can try and rebut them and call me names from now until eternity and it will not change a thing. I don't find your responses to be of a nature that shows reason and logic and therefore they are worthless to me.

So it really is all Bush's fault.

Obviously you did not watch the RNC because there was a very eloquent black women who was a keynote speaker. There was also a Cuban gentleman that gave a great speech. And I am Catholic as well. How do you separate your politics from your religion? I believe that is very convenient and disingenuous.Your religion is not just going to Church, it is the way you live your life. If Mr. Obama is pro-choice, which he is, and your religion tells you that this approach is morally wrong, how do you justify voting for a leader whose values are different than yours and your Church's and who will push this and other agendas that contradict your religious beliefs? That should be a red flag.

I have already previously acknowledged that Black voters historically vote largely in a block. Your ridiculous remarks about Schwartzenegger and about me being part of the clan have rendered you no longer worthy of my time. You are not capable of comprehending my line of thought. Not your fault, you were born that way.

Did I miss something? When did Schwarzenegger run for President? You don't have to be born in the USA to run for Governor of Cal E Four Knee Ah, but you do have to be born in the U.S. to run for President. And your last statement really makes me feel better about some of the things you said to me earlier. Puts it all in perspective.

That is my interpretation of the numbers. Could be wrong, but that is my assessment. And yes it is an opinion, but it is not based on any bias, just my interpretation of exit poll numbers.

Interesting that you should quote this because it speaks to exactly what I was pointing out in my original post. The fact that 93% of blacks and 78% of Hispanics voted for Obama is what swayed this election. This opinion has garnered me much ridicule, but I'm a big boy and I can take it. I did however find this quote from you to be rather troubling "And I will tell you that for every minority who voted for Obama mostly or even just because he's black, there are two rednecks who never graduated high school, still think he wasn't born here, probably think he's a Muslim, think he's trying to take their guns away, etc., etc. So believe me, it all balances out. Have you ever driven through a really rural part of the country with giant crosses on the side of the highway? People that have never really left the northeast don't realize just how much of this country is full of people I just described." I have lived all over the country as a member of the military as well as overseas and in Canada. All I can say is "Wow!" I hope you don't really believe that. Show me any statement that I made that was biased? I am quoting actual exit poll statistics. These numbers are not my opinion, they are fact.

I won't stoop to your level and call you an idiot even though you disagree. My opinions are far from racist and you do not even know me. I find your opinions to be less than informed, but you are welcome to them. You are also welcome to think that I am a racist and an idiot. It will not change who or what I actually am. I merely looked at some exit poll numbers and provided an analysis. Peace out.

Interesting that because I don't agree that I am a !@#$ing idiot. I was very respectful in stating my opinion and did not question any one else's motives or intelligence, but because my opinion is different than yours, that makes me a !@#$ing idiot. Any race voting in blocks, whether it be 86% or 93% to me indicates a racist slant. And I would love to see your statistics that showed that 86% of blacks have historically voted for "white democrats". I realize that the African American vote has largely been Democratic, but here's a news flash for you. Not all Democrats are white. (Barack Obama) So now I'm stupid and a clan leader. I was waiting for the name calling to begin. Whether a particular group votes either 86% or 93% to me indicates that that group of people is voting based on either their own race or the race of the candidate. Your statistical anaylsyis by the way, makes no sense. I'm very sorry that you don't agree with my opinion, but it is just that. I believe that race played a huge part in this election. I won't call you stupid or imply that you are racist because you disagree. Your opinion is worth just as much as mine, no more, no less. Free country, America has chosen, now let's hope that the country moves in the right direction. I want Mr. Obama to succeed. His race means nothing to me. I was merely quoting actual exit poll statistics and providing my own amateur analysis of them. You are free to agree or disagree. I have no problem with either and won't insult you or your intelligence for doing so.

You are wrong my friend. Although there are more white voters than black, whites did not vote 93% for Romney. Blacks DID vote 93% for Obama which made a huge difference. Sorry that you do not agree that it was based on race, but statistics don't lie. You can call them "whiny" if you want, but they are factual and don't lie. Funny how you call white males racist even though the white male vote was split 60/40, but blacks are not even though their vote was 93/7 %. Again, I am merely quoting actual statistics and pointing out how Obama won the election. I believe it was based on race. Personally, as I have stated, I want him and the country to succeed. I just don't agree with voting a candidate solely on race.

I repeat "Did 93% of any one group vote for Romney? Romney got only 60% of white male voters. 60/40 seems a bit more balanced to me than 93/7." I am not a racist, I am merely stating actual statistics. It is the overwhelming numbers of black and hispanic voters that voted for Obama that swayed this election. You obviously don't like this, but it is a fact. Personally I hope that Obama succeeds in moving the country forward because I want my country to be great. His race is not a factor for me. I don't happen to agree with his policies as I believe that government is not the solution to all problems. I have a different view of how to create jobs among other things. My vote was not based on race and the fact that other voters chose a candidate solely on race is what bothers me. Your bias is showing. There are a number of black Republicans who are currently rising stars in the party. I have no doubt that the Republicans will nominate a candidate of color.

Did 93% of any one group vote for Romney? Romney got only 60% of white male voters. 60/40 seems a bit more balanced to me than 93/7. I believe you already know my answer. I believe that Obama got 93% of the Black vote because he is Black. I don't think policy had one iota to do with it.

93% is my reply again. Find me any other group that voted 93% for any candidate. You can not like it all you want, but it is the one statistic that stands out in this election. Combine that with the 73% of Hispanics that voted for Obama and you have an election that was won solely on race. And that my friend makes me sad. If Obama had won and the vote were more distributed among these groups, it wouldn't bother me a bit. But that is not the case and that is the part that makes me sad.

I believe that either 85% or 93% of any one race voting for a particular party or candidate is racist. I believe that if people voted solely on the issues, then the vote would be more evenly spread and not based on racial profiles.

Let me spell this out for you since you obviously don't understand what I am saying. The fact that 93% of Blacks voted for Obama scares me because it has nothing to do with whether or not he is the best candidate. They voted for him because of his race. That scares me. Again, I never implied that illegal immigrants were the ones voting. However the fact that a huge block of Hispanic voters chose Obama tells me that to a large extent the Hispanic population did not vote for Romney because of his policies on illegal immigration. If this is true, then it indicates that once again, the race of the voter was more important than the candidate and whether or not he was the best person to lead the country. Again, this scares me. And for the record, I believe it was scare tactics on the part of the Democratic party that led Hispanics to believe that Romney does not care about them. I believe he does care about all Americans. And as for the changing nature of America, that does not bother me in the least. What bothers me is people voting in racist blocks and not based on the actual issues of the campaign.