dayman

That sounds amazing I will make it a few times to find a good mix. This is what I was looking for.

Stop sucking up to Obama Tasker your love for him is shameless....

LOL...Mark is a talented guy but yes he got real effin' lucky... In any event the comments are true he should pay in nickels

it was jaw dropping...they were absolutely dominating...lob city...highlight reel....slama jama...whatever you want to call it it was insane...but they will be destroyed tomorrow and crash back to earth

I have been wondering about this I want to branch out from making simple plain hot wings and make something better...it doesn't have to be a home made recipe it can just be something from a restaurant but it must be suitable for Bills games not simply a "good" flavor. Do not leave me disappointed Bills nation. You have a reputation to uphold. May not be the reputation you want, but it's the reputation you deserve.

I know a few people born in Canada for the sole reason of securing dual citizenship...these are people who would have been just American...so....everybody just go crap out babies everywhere...

No story on who slipped it in? Right or wrong if it gets people riled up some of those who got it in should speak on it.

Nobody is ever going to tax you for Internet use.

If we take a 2nd round LB it's hard to believe he wouldn't be the guy if there.

Well the general point that you can get very nice cars for reasonable end prices is true...the quality of affordable cars is up...

I don't know how many times i have to say this on this board but here it goes again...ahem..."savings is for asian countries"...thank you

can't really get into looking into this one right now for some reason but it looks like they're battling over what standard will be used in the analysis...which as often is the case in the law....will likely make a huge difference....the short of anti-trust is that it's the unreasonable restraint on trade (read into the law) and as such there is a balancing...a weighing of the procompetitive benefits and anticompetitive effects (this is called "the rule of reason")...but some things are so obviously anticompetitive the court refuses to hear evidence supporting the procompetitive effects (this is called "quick look")...you can see why this argument of which of these approaches to use is so contentious...hugely important for the drug company and also a tough burden for the gov't to meet in showing that this is illegal "per se" edit: looks like after just reading the commentary the court is very interested in thinking about what the inquiry will be on full scale rule of reason analysis and how important the strength of the patent claim is to taht inquiry and how insane the litigation can get...

idk too lazy to look now but here is a link if you want a bunch of the stuff in one shot: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/federal-trade-commission-v-watson-pharmaceuticals-inc/?wpmp_switcher=desktop

I'm fairly certain a google search can produce plenty of results. Hell it happened near me twice, and both times people would talk about how this is apparently more common than known. Young kids can really hurt each other, and often times if the head hits the ground that can result in death. It's easy to say "oh the pussification of America" but live right near where some 4th grade kid was killed in a fight at school near the school bus pickup area...it's a pretty depressing thing to have happen.

Yeah this, at first view anyway, appears to be classic collusion. Just b/c they do so under the guise of settlement...it is still plain and simple 2 separate/independent economic actors making an agreement that unreasonably restricts trade. Absent the lawsuit nobody would even question this. While the public policy reasons for encouraging settlement agreements are important, they're no where near cutting the mustard when bumping up against very basic antitrust law...competition assumes and demands independent decision making this in inherent in our way and not just culturally it's literally the law here...can't do it...

Just saying fairly recently simple punches produced death in my community. It isn't just childs play when kids strike other kids. And it has no place in school

In my community two middle school aged kids have died in a fight at school in the past 5 years. One at bus stop hit the back of his head on ground after 1 punch, i don't recall the other but i know he died. Is this normal? No. But the point stands, the old "let the kids fight it out" attitude isn't flying anymore. The bottom line is hands to yourself and also don't shoot guns at each other either. Yes words can hurt...but they need to learn to deal with words and social stigma without resorting to violence. Period.

Defending yourself from nonphysical violence with violence never is in this day in age. Too many kids hitting heads when falling to ground and dying

As romantic as these "i fought" stories are you can't have it. Large kids kill small kids with punches it happens all the time. Pussify the world? Maybe so...but physical violence is not acceptable.

More reason to be a pcp now than before

If hard caps on damages are imposed malpractice rates probably would adjust accordingly...but in states w/ aggressive tort reform that saving has not made it to the price tag and just as much if not more in some cases medical spending occurs it has had not effect in Texas (for one...being the golden child of tort reform) at all on saving for instance

The Brill article was, IMO, one of the better pieces of actual journalism that highlighted why the whole "responsible for your own health care spending" only goes so far on its own. Also the state lines and tort reform is meaningless won't do a thing to lower costs...

Hehe, I think to look at this story and say it is important for America b/c it delivers the above typed message is a bit overboard...

I still don't get how it is instructive in anyway...

So...you are basically saying that TJ Lane is an important story for bullies to know...while obviously saying it with the disclaimer "I don't approve of murder" you are still basically saying this is an important story b/c it show you can die if you bully? Or in the other direction showing bully victims they can "stand up for themselves?" This makes no sense. This story is about a kid that snapped and did unthinkable evil that is not logically proportionate to anything he may or may not have suffered as an outcast in a high school social environment...the lesson should be that childish BS is just childish BS and kids should knock off the uglyness and to the extent it can't be done the outcasts are just going to have to grit their teeth and get to adulthood...the lesson is not some grand or novel revelation about bullying...