ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

From the 2011 CBA, at page 51, found here: https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/General/2011_Final_CBA_Searchable_Bookmarked.pdf

The Washington Redskins team (technically, "Pro-Football, Inc.") has filed an amicus brief in the the trademark appeal by "The Slants." That appeal to the Federal Circuit sitting en banc is scheduled to be orally argued on October 2, 2015. Here's the NFL team's amicus brief: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2108054/profootball-fedcircuit-20150618.pdf I still think that the older, archived thread about the Redskins trademark should be re-opened and merged with this one. Anybody listening?

He and Billie Joe McAllister only made honorable mention.

10. Billy Shaw 9. Bill Nye 8. Bill Paxton 7. William the Conqueror 6. Bill Walton 5. Bill Russell 4. Billy Dee Williams 3. Bill Maher 2. Bill Walsh 1. Bill Murray

Sasheem: Be mindful of this, my son. Many years ago, one of our Stojan-head ancestors foolishly discussed Arabic numerals with an infidel. That is why the Americans can now rain fire upon us from the sky. We must closely guard such knowledge in the future, by avoiding the appearance of wisdom when we post messages for each other at Modern Goat-Herder Monthly. Little Sasheemi: You are wise, Father. But how can I best avoid the appearance of wisdom? Sasheem: Read what my cousin ******** posts at Two Bills Drive. No American suspects him of having a useful thought.

p// end// but I did not shoot the deputy.

After you get plum s**t-faced, take the leftover plums, smear them on your face, find out where your favorite supermodel or starlet is working, and give her this: Then post pics of her back in this thread. It's a win/win.

Sure Doc, just like people who talk on a hands-free cell phone connection can drive just as safely as those whose brains are fully engaged with the act of driving: http://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiatives/Pages/distracted-driving-how-cell-phone-distracted-driving-affects-the-brain.aspx You have to either convince me that the national safety council position on increased driving risks when using a hands-free cell phone connection is wrong, or explain to me how practicing anesthesiology with an unconscious patient requires less concentration than driving. Or does your "doctor" brain work differently than everybody else's?

Seems to me like the judge did not correctly apply Virginia's one party consent rule. That rule would allow the patient to secretly record any conversation that the patient participated in. So if the patient had a post-op consultation with his doctor in which both parties were speaking, the patient could clearly secretly record that. And I suppose even if the patient said nothing, the patient could also secretly record any post-op instructions that the doctor spoke to the patient, because the words spoken were directed to the conscious patient, so the patient was still, in some sense, a "party" to what was said. But even if it was recorded on a different part of the same tape, if the insulting comments were made during a conversation between the medical staff personnel while the patient was unconscious, I don't see how the patient can claim to be a participant in the conversation where the insults were made. The intentional falsification of the medical records would still be a problem for the medical staff involved, but it seems to me like the jury should not have heard the secretly recorded insults. Can't say that I'll be shedding any tears for the anesthesiologist, though. Karma's a b**ch.

"Nefarious anesthesiologists" would be a pretty good band name. Outlaw music that gives you an escape from life's pain and troubles.

Then check this out: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323297504578579753126719938

Wonder if his last name was "Cooper?"

Vanguard High School in Ocala, Florida is behind the times. Check out what one of 72 (yeah, 72 !!!) valedictorians from Dublin Jerome High School in Ohio recently wrote about being chosen to give a 2014 graduation speech: http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/06/10/heres-how-my-graduating-class-ended-up-with-72-valedictorians/ The delusional, brain-washed twerp actually wrote: "At first glance?" Seriously? And this kid was "valedictorian?" If you are so dumb or brainwashed that you can't even acknowledge that giving an award to 72 students rather than 1 waters the award down, then there isn't much hope for your real life future. If you are so divorced from reality that you think having the best grade-point average in high school is more important than having the most rigorous academic training there (regardless of grades achieved), you are a shallow, short-sighted dumb-ass. There's winners and losers in real life, twerp. The sooner you realize that, the better off you'll be.

Maybe Wake gets a little more respect from some fellow players because they know that he doesn't get as much help from his fellow D-line team mates. I would not be surprised if Wake was constantly double teamed because teams knew that the other Phish D-line guys weren't as likely to hurt them. Not saying that makes the ranking order correct, but it probably does impact Wake's stats. Will be interesting to see if Wake's own sack numbers go up now that he will be playing with Suh.

The Real Ramadi Joe: "I should never have made pita bread at the mosque with that woman. Her weak-minded brother always tags along on the patrols, and spoils everything. Every time we shoot up an unarmed refugee column, and start yelling "Allahu Akbar," he runs for cover because he thinks it's a trap."

Darryl's subscription to Ladies' Home Journal expired.

1. Four pages in, and nobody has suggested that you blame the breach on the hated Patriots****** ? If the Patriot*********** Act comes up, it could be the perfect Segway to transport Belicheat under the bus, and put the Patriots******** long history of cheating into the Congressional record. 2. Blame it on the aliens in the underwater UFO.

To the mods: There have been some developments that in my view would make it appropriate to re-open the archived thread found at the link below. Would you please re-open the archived original thread, and merge it with the one I just started? Thanks. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/168485-us-patent-office-cancels-redskins-trademark/page-19?hl=redskins%20trademark _______________________________________________________ There is a case, not directly involving the NFL, that is now on appeal in the Federal Circuit that may ultimately impact whether or not the "Redskins" trademark remains canceled or gets re-instated by the courts: http://www.ipintelligencereport.com/2015/06/16/in-re-tam-federal-circuit-orders-en-banc-review-of-trademark-acts-ban-against-registration-of-disparaging-marks/#more-2186 Here's an update (now a few months old) about the court case that directly involves the "Redskins" trademark: http://www.richmond.com/redskins-xtra/article_221cd139-ae84-5ffc-8018-6e1fdd878dc2.html

http://fortune.com/2015/04/15/nfl-players-bankrupt/

That's generally a good question, but not the first one I'd like OC to answer.

If you ignore privacy concerns, there are many types of data that could potentially be useful to analyze to establish patterns or correlations that would enable the analyzer to identify "bad guys," whether those "bad guys" are overseas or hiding in the US. Serious question, OC: Are there ANY types of data collection about US citizens that you would be willing to put off limits, because of how intrusive the collected information would be? From reading your posts, my guess is that your answer will be "no," because the "bad guy" hunters shouldn't simply assume that they know what types of data will be important to the process of identifying the "bad guys." It's entirely possible that the most intrusive information imaginable just happens to be the key variable that allows the analyzer to find a pattern that allows the hunters to identify the "bad guys" with a high degree of confidence. You have to let the data tell you what's important to the analysis, rather than making assumptions up-front about what data will help the hunters. I get that. So stated a different way, my question for you is - - is absolutely every type of data imaginable about US citizens fair game to be collected by the hunters because that makes for a better hunt? If your answer is yes, that's not irrational from the perspective of empowering the hunters. I think most people would put some types of data collection off-limits to the hunters, though, even if they understood (most probably don't) that doing so might make the hunt less efficient/successful. I'm in that camp. Check back with me, though, when somebody sneaks a shielded backpack nuke past the radiation detectors that I assume are secretly in use at our borders, and the first mushroom cloud goes up.

Yeah, but Hugh Laurie could spell. Go with "antidates?"

Ayman: "I just don't get it, Salih. If I told Osama once I must have told him a thousand times. Target the Eiffel Tower, Osama, not the Twin Towers. The French would have simply surrendered, and their women would not care how we smell."

Worth a look: http://io9.com/rare-color-film-and-photos-cast-d-day-in-a-completely-n-1586726901