ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

Not if you're married to a working woman who robbed the cradle.

He's gonna get his money back (and maybe an X-box, too) thanks to the Interweb tubes: http://www.nydailyne...ksEnabled=false Let's hope his kids are adopted.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/04/26/mlse-goes-as-big-as-possible-with-tim-leiweke/

and g Is there a line on the Bills winning the AFC and getting into the SB - - that would be a better comparison.

If you're convinced the Bills will make the Super Bowl and aren't gambling the rent money, sure. Personally, I don't mind gambling a few bucks just for the pure entertainment value (e.g., playing poker with friends for a small buy-in), but $205 is above my "willing to throw away" threshold. To each his own.

Not me. The cost for 2 SB tix and one hotel room is 5x the dollar figure shown for each team at this link: http://14sb.com/free-super-bowl-hotels/ So total cost for the Bills package is 5 x $41 = $205 But for defending champion SF, the exact same package costs 5 x $355 = $1775. Only teams cheaper than Buffalo are Jax and Oakland.

I did a little googling to find other links about the same story. The link I posted above may have been an over-reaction by the blogger. Here are a few different links to the Draper, Utah "ag gag" story: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2013/05/utah-prosecutors-drop-first-ever-charges-brought-under-ag-gag/ The blogger in the first link I posted apparently was misinformed about whether the Utah law prevented filming while standing in a public place. http://www.abc4.com/content/news/story/Charges-dropped-in-Ag-Gag-case/FU87ge0R-0uw0Jkwh_8uQw.cspx http://fox13now.com/2013/04/30/charges-dropped-against-woman-accused-of-violating-ag-gag-law/

Life ain't a dress rehearsal - - wear what YOU think looks good or is comfortable (depending on what is more important to YOU), and as long as your employer's dress code allows it, if others don't like it - - - screw 'em. Or you can just be a corporate suck-up, wait a couple of weeks to start wearing jeans, watch what your boss wears with jeans, and meekly match it. B-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a. Then again, I may not be the best person to give advice on either sartorial splendor or fitting in to a corporate culture. But do you think most posters on a football message board are?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/ex-lawmakers-search-signs-intelligent-life-washington-d-225559027.html The Truth Embargo "documentary" involves FORMER members of Congress - - so maybe there's some hope for democracy.

I'm no fan of PETA, but it bothers me when those nutjobs, if otherwise law-abiding, can be arrested for filming something while standing in a public space. Don't know and haven't tried to verify if the blogger's take is slanted by cross-checking any other reports of the event, but FWIW: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/utah-woman-prosecuted-for-filming-slaughterhouse-from-public-street't What say ye?

JB, It's always bothered me that NC will pay you for taking part of your land, but won't include an estimate of your lost profits in the payment. Although that seems to clearly be all that NC law allows in a condemnation proceeding, it doesn't seem fair. So now and then I've been trying to think of ways that you might be able to get around that limitation. If you already have a mediation tentatively scheduled, it sounds like you're probably represented by a NC lawyer. If so, you should follow his or her advice, but here's something you might want to run by your lawyer. What you can recover in any court case depends on what type of claim you are making. As you know by now, in NC you can't recover lost profits in a condemnation proceeding - - there is a legal formula for what you can make the state pay you for the land it takes, and in NC that formula doesn't include anything for lost profits. But maybe your lawyer can figure out a way to bring an entirely different type of legal claim that would allow you to recover lost profits anyway. An example might make this easier to follow. Let's say, hypothetically, that the NCDOT is building the new bridge, and some welder carelessly starts a fire on the land the county took for the bridge, and it spreads to the adjoining land you still own and burns down your nearby barn. In that situtation, I think you might be able to bring a negligence suit against the NCDOT for the value of the destroyed barn. That's true even though the value of the barn on land you still own can't be recovered in the condemnation action. In short, it wasn't the mere taking of the land needed for the new bridge that caused the damage to the barn, it was something else (i.e., the welder's carelessness). Likewise, in your real situation, you need to find a way to claim that it isn't the mere taking of your land for the new bridge that will make you lose profits, but something else. The hard part is figuring out what that "something else" could be. Maybe thinking about a different hypothetical situation can help us figure it out. What if the NCDOT had decided to simply repair the existing bridge in a way that did NOT require NCDOT to take any of your existing land. In that situation, there would be no condemnation action, there would just be repair activity on land that the state already owned. Here's the key question - - in such a situation, if the particular way the repair work was done cut off your access to some portion of your land, is there any type of legal claim you could make to recover the profits you lost because of the impaired access? I don't know the answer, but if the answer is yes, then that type of legal claim, whatever it's called, is the "something else" you need. Stated differently, if you could hypothetically recover profits lost because bridge repair crews temporarily cut off your cattle's access to part of your land, why should the state get a better deal in your real situation just because they also needed to permanently take some of your land? This approach may or may not work (because I don't know the answer to what I called the "key question" above), and I don't have any NC case law to support it. But if your lost profits are big enough, you might want to print this post out and ask your lawyer to read it. There's at least some chance that it might help him or her see a way to get you a bigger payment from the state. Either way, good luck!

Wish I had a nickel for every time some announcer stated that one particular aspect of a football game was "all-important."

Recently went car shopping and considered a hybrid - - the sales guy actually said that because of the hybrid's regenerative braking system, I would get the best gas mileage by braking as hard and often as possible.

Towson isn't exactly a football factory, and we drafted 2 safeties ahead of him. Will he get any respect from the coaching staff?

They made Jason Collins come out of an NBA game just because he's gay? That ain't right.

Doesn't Hackett have a degree in neurobiology? Maybe when one speedster gets blown up by a LB or S, he'll be able to use the other for spare parts.

Wait just a minute. When exactly did Buddy say that? If it was less than 30 days before the draft, and he was telling the truth, then he might have lied about it.

Too bad his name isn't Nassip.

So essentially what you want is a slanted system where the schedule allows teams that suck to make the playoffs at the expense of teams that are indisputably better. Sorry, but I'm a fan of the NFL, and what you propose is even worse than giving out participation trophies. Let me throw this one at you - - how about if we improve enough so that we deserve to be in the playoffs?

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Which one?

Sorry. I was going for a twofer on the spur of the foment.

This thread is a real henway

So tell me Luke Skywalker, why would a team that drafts higher than # 8 even waste any time wondering about which player the Bills want to take at # 8? That would matter to a team drafting in slots 1-7 only if that team was planning to trade down below # 8, but would make absolutely no difference whatsoever to a team that was planning to use picks 1-7 to actually take a player without a trade. If you think any NFL GM is going to evaluate a player drafted in slots 1-7 based on public comments of some OTHER NFL team's GM, you haven't been paying attention. Disinformation about what Nix plans to do with pick # 8 might affect the plans of teams that (1) already have a later pick (because they might be induced to believe that they need to trade up to get the player they want), or (2) are thinking that they can trade down from slots 1-7 to below # 8 and still get the player they want because he won't be picked sooner (by the Bills or anyone else). The only teams that could NOT be influenced by disinformation about who the Bills plan to take with pick # 8 are exactly those teams that you mistakenly think are being targeted by the disinformation.