TH3

Google

Really? It's kinda a big deal and has been noted in several places....

It's so hoaxy that 2014 was the warmest in our lifetimes and That Co2 has - what doubled- directly attributable to humans.

Re above: I thought GW was a hoax so what is this author talking about?

How is WNY? I have lived in Boston, NYC, overseas, Pittsburgh, LA. i have no commuting time, golf is accessaible and 40 bucks a round where in any of those other places it would be $100. I can easily go boating, fishing, skiing, biking. My kids walked to a good school. The people and my neighbors are friendly. I live in a great house in a great neighborhood at a fraction of the cost of other more "better places to live". The City is finally in the right direction. WNY will never have great economic metrics as it is a mature city but from my standpoint in the metrics that matter....

Polian works for Espn. No denials on espn website

Talk about a bunch of negative Nancy's....people here siding with Brandon? (who has presided over the longest drought in our playoff history). Super Bowls, NFC Championship game, probably one of the best talent evaluators and GM's in the history of the league. We would be lucky to have him back.

9 hours without porn will show Kim!

As a non religious person I see Pope Francis as a shining example of what organized religion can do.

@26cb. Post a pic of ur wife....?

@gator. Dont you see everything is a choice? By banning fracking in NYS all that the opponents have done is redirect energy sourcing to more coal - winning!

I can't believe the HC didn't come on and criticize his OC - in the middle of the season before a huge game - and let on that he was going to fire him after the season was over.

I have traveled quite a bit through PA over the last decade and the one bummer is fracking involves ALOT of heavy trucking - and it is a real bummer - but on the other hand - we ALL need the energy and it s the cheapest cleanest option we have

@ gator - Alt energy would take off if it were feasible - and what about the communities in NY who would want fracking....now they can't.....

@gator - That is THE DEFINITION of nimby - I don't want it here but I will be glad to enjoy the benefits

“ Yes, NG really is great, no doubt. But there was no way the governor was going to rule against the local communities that didn't want this” @Gator….That is the hypocrisy – everyone in NY benefits right now from fracking – every community – every person – and now Cuomo and the nimby’s claim a “victory” in environmental causes – all the while using the products of fracking – I have been through PA every month for the last ten years – I ask all the time about any anecdotal evidence of fracking problems – nothing. I would respect Cuomo and all these communities if the stopped using fracked NG – put your money where your mouth is.

Cuomo and all the celebrants this morning wake up in their heated homes, take a hot shower, and turn on the lights - all powered by fracked NG that has replaced dirtier coal....if people really want to make a stand build a house off the grid and show us all an alternative to what provides their current lifestyle

This issue is what I find exemplary of today's politics - what is conservative and what is liberal? in many ways the language will allow banks to be more liberal in their actions which are guaranteed by you and me. Warren argues for a more conservative stance by defintion - but gets blasted by the right. We have the most liberal gun laws in the industrialized world defended by conservatives, we have the most liberal congregation, speech, press, religious freedoms - our nation is the center of the most - by definition - liberal structure in the world...yet conservatives claim liberals are ruining everything while they stake claim in reclassifying our country as conservative. We are the most liberal country in the world and have been doing nothing but becoming more liberal - by defintion -since our inception.

I don’t understand the “conservative” stance on this issue – are conservatives for or against following the law and following the rules of reporting to your superiors? If you are for the rule of law and following reporting – how can you be “for” the torture outlined in this report? Or are conservative’s ideals not strong enough to be seen with Democrats? The one conservative who is strong enough is John McCain – who was on the receiving end of torture and probably knows it is something below our country and as well doesn’t work.

How do you propose eliminating gerrymandering? Good question – Doesn’t some state already do it with an algorithm? I just think it would change much of the political atmosphere we have today which rewards far left/right stances coupled with uncompromising positions. When one thinks about it – gerrymandering is about as anti-representative as you can get and its completely legal…of all the subjects discussed that seem to threaten the republic – I really believe this is having the biggest long term effect – and it has the good possibility to not change – or get worse for decades to to come.

Eliminate Gerrymandering and most of the issues above would be greatly diminished

It is irrelevant to me with respect to the topic of the gas tax funding infrastructure. If one wants to discuss the merits of the stimulus spending – that to me is another topic – I think what I am trying to say – we seem to be at a point in the governance of our country where every topic ends up getting extrapolated by one party in order to make a point on a separate issue or to leverage it into some action on a different topic. You seem to want to make the subject of funding our infrastructure via the gas tax – as has been done for decades – into a requiem on the Obama stimulus package. As long as we do this to every bill/topic/subject we will not – and have not – gotten anything done.

“What many people object to (and I believe they're justified in this) is that all that money from the 'Stimulus' spending was supposed to be used for (quoting the President) 'infrastructure - you know, roads and bridges'. Can everyone now just admit that was a lie?” Maybe my problem is that I am on a PPP board where people have found a place to voice. Do we have wrestle every issue a lib/cons Obama/whoever Fox/Rachel soapbox? I have no idea where the stimulus money went to…but I do know that if $$ goes into infrastructure it may very well be our best use of taxpayer funds. Rather than evaporative funding like welfare etc…at least highways roads etc. are something that have returns for decades and as well the money spent on them does have actual ripple effects. Whether “stimulus” was a lie is irrelevant to me – what is important is that we properly fund our infrastructure moving forward.

“You don't think we should amend our Constitution in order to ensure an enduring and dedicated source of funding in order to guarantee our vital infrastructure never falls into disrepair as it now has?” No I don’t. I think that positions like this are a telltale sign of the state of our government. If you want an amendment for this – what else would warrant an amendment? So we have – what a super majority vote in the Senate and then vote affirmative for 36 states? This would take almost a decade. I think our legislators should do their job instead of hiding behind rhetoric like demanding “only ifs”. Funding our highway system is an investment in our economy – yes it may be inefficient – yes it may be fraught with cronyism – but maybe our elected officials should man up and just do their job with the citizens in mind. This is not a liberal or conservative issue – you have to pay for stuff – you have to pay for the roads, bridges and ports we use. We have not been doing that because it would involve a “tax hike” – and all tax hikes come with an “only if” or actually “a tax hike will never be approved in this congress” Federal receipts are pretty much at an historical low as a function of GDP, federal receipts that come from the business sector are at an all-time low – and pretty much about half of what they should be. The gas tax has not been adjusted for the size of the economy or inflation for decades. The republic will not fail if the gas tax is raised – in fact it will be better off. We have to stop treating EVERY issue of governance like it is life or death – it isn’t – most of it is just doing what needs to be done and doing it as efficiently as possible.

When our government tells us it needs more of our money in order to address a very narrowly defined and specific concern, do you find it unreasonable that the High Law binds the use of those tax dollars to that purpose exclusively? Well - a Constitutional Amendment though?