Mickey

We led the league in takeaways, yeeeha. Did we make the playoffs? Over his tenure, his entire tenure, how did we do on turnovers? Maybe your goal is to lead the league in various statistical categories, mine is to win. So far, we have not made the playoff and in fact, were so bad they fired the coach. Four years, no playoffs. That is the bottom line. I am not suggesting that TD be fired. I just think that today's release of Bledsoe, a guy we spent a first round pick to get after 3 years of him as the starter is an admission that it was a mistake. I wouldn't think that would be such a hot button issue for people beyond those devoted to the notion that TD is a genius.

Fair enough but you have to go one step further: The first that we got for PP may have got us WM but we ultimately had to spend a first to get a second reciever anyway that could have been spent on someone else. We didn't gain anything and actually spent over a season without a decent second receiver. We didn't get anything extra.

Lots of GM's would have done the same, no doubt. That is why a lot of them are home on SB Sunday. The ones that aren't are the ones that made the right call in those situations either becuase they were smarter or just luckier.

Nice analysis and I agree with much of it. I don't however think we "had room" to take WM. It is not as if we didn't need help at other positions, we did and do. Having to spend a second rounder and a first rounder to get one starter is not something a team as mediocre as this one can afford. Reed isn't getting it done on the field and that is the bottom line. Again, we spent two high picks to get one starter. Sure, lots of GM's might have done the same thing but that is my point, so far TD has been just average. We traded up to get Denney and if the coaches themselves thought he was as good as you say, there wouldn't have been much of a need for the Kelsay pick. In that case, you have 3 picks spent to fill a position that arguably, still isn't adequately filled. The trade for DB simply didn't work out and sure, lots of GM's would have made the same move in his shoes but again, I was hoping for better than that from TD. The point here isn't to try and blame TD for everything or to start a fire TD movement. I think the fact is that he has had only mediocre results so far and frankly, the team'srecord and on the field preformance practically screams mediocrity. Many of his biggest decisions have not panned out from G.Williams to M.Williams. So far. My hope is that we are "on the verge" and that the decison to drop Drew won't be a step back but I have run out of patience. It is time to see it on the field, now, this year.

End results? Okay, how is zero playoff games, two coaches and three OC's for results? Mediocre at best. His job is to produce a team that has a legit shot at a SB, so far, so bad. His tenure here as been a failure, not an abject, complete, glaring failure but so far a failure. I have hope that it will all come together at some point and will sing his praises when it does. For now though, he has prodcued more hope than wins.

Ummm, this is going to embarass you but since you are so busy drooling insults, you kind of deserve it: We used a first round pick to get JP in addition to the 2nd and 5th pick last year or did you forget that we picked him in the first round? I never said we gave up two first round picks for JP alone, I said we have spent two first round picks to try and fill the QB spot. Let me say it slow: We swapped first rounders with Dallas, our 2005 for their 2004 pick, we then used that first round pick to get JP. We also used a first round pick to get Drew, remember? That means in 3 years we have used two first round picks, a second and a fifth to try and get a QB that can get us into the playoffs. The result is that we are left with a young, unproven kid at the most important position on the field. One position, two picks, zero playoff games. Hurrah, what a bleeding genius.

I can't be the only one missing the fact that the release of Bledsoe is yet another admission of error by TD. His trade for Drew was so good we had to spend a first rounder, a second and a fifth to get his replacement. That means we have spent two first round picks, a second and a fifth to try and get a QB and the result has been missing the playoffs for 3 years (under Drew) and a clueless kid starting at the most important position on the field next year. Hmmmmm......does that sound like a success? We traded up to get Denney and that worked out so well we had to take Kelsay the following year. We took Travis in the second and that worked out so well, we had to take a flyer on McGahee. Mike Williams has not played near to what was spent to get him. Reed worked out so well we had to use a first rounder to replace him. Yeah, McGahee ended up working out but he was only necessary because TD's other pick, Travis, wasn't working out. Lee Evans was a good pick but we only needed him because Josh Reed was not a good pick. I sure hope he is right on this move.

Well, okay, but only if you agree to come in a few weeks early and listen to Wyche talk about how good Boomer Esiason was.

Yeah, he is getting the edge on the competition which, with Drew gone is....is.....uh...er..um.....right, nobody. That's okay because there is not going to be a competition. Earning a job means beating out the competition on the field, not showing up for class on time with your homework done. I think the millions they are paying him, starter or not, ought to be enough to get him to hit the play book.

No they aren't, you see, Eli was good enough to beat out the starter and didn't miss a practice due to injury. JP spent the better part of the year in a track suit carrying gatorade and when he came back was not good enough to warrant a look as the starter by the coaches. So yeah, they are different. I have hopes for JP just as high as the next guy, I just don't like the idea of him "winning" the position in the boardroom rather than on the field.

The question is, should JP have to win the job on the field or have it handed to him?

Call me old school if you like but I believe that a player should win his position on the field, not in the GM's office after a meeting. I think players should earn their spot as opposed to being handed it for free. That's just me.

Jester, I had this last year. Microsoft has a utility program that lets a network administrator shut down a computer remotely. When IBM fires a guy in the Singapore office, they can shut down his computer so he can't screw up thier system on his way out the door. Of course, pranksters figured out the protocol and figured out how to put it in a virus. What internet connection do you have? I think if you disconnect and reboot the protocol doesn't run. In any event, booting into safemode and running the fix from MS would do the trick but you might have to get the fix using another computer. I was able to fire up my browser and download the fix just before the thing shut me down and then I started up after disconnecting and ran the fix. I think it is called the MSblast worm, here is a site with some fix instructions: MSblast worm

...and the conservative wacko's get to stay? I guess that means we get Sponge Bob and you get Limbaugh. I'll take that trade.

I don't have a subscription but the language quoted refers to only "some" law schools which narrows it down to between 2 and several thousand. It also doesn't mention what discrimination is the problem, I assume it is homosexuals. I don't recall arguing that there were no law schools, private institutions mostly, who have decided not to let recruiters on campus from any group, military or otherwise, who discriminate against homosexuals. Maybe you could show me where it was that I made that argument to which this article is a counterpoint?

Unsupported? Why don't you list how many sources and links you provided in this thread with the ones I provided. Maybe you consider declaring your own opinion to be irrefutable to be a proper sourcing but the rest of the world does not. As for you point about per capita stats, I haven't denied them, I have just asked for you to provide sources besides you own opinions and you still haven't done so. What I have said over and over is that such stats do not justify labeling an entire state as elitist and cowardly which is what you did. Especially since plenty have died from NY in the war on terrorism. Your point apparently is that not enough have died to boost the per capita stats enough for you to withdraw your blanket accusation of cowardice. I have asked you how many have to die from NY for you to stop calling the whole state a bunch of cowards and I am still waiting for a response. Of course, I have asked for sources and you still haven't provided those either. You also haven't been willing to acknowledge that New York state and the NYC area have suffered approx. 60% of all the casualties in the war on terrorism. I would also ask you to demonstrate that there are no other factors explaining variations in per capita recruitment besides cowardice which you have assumed must be the only factor. Without that assumption, your entire argument that diffences in per capita stats justifies a blanket accusation of cowardice leveled at around 19 million people falls apart. But then again, there is no need to let the truth get in the way of your real goal, spewing hate.

That is the next county over AD. Believe me, they are grasping at every dime they can as they plummett to insolvency. We hate trying cases there, the juries give away money like tootsie rolls on Halloween. It is like trying a case downstate. Broken leg in Onondaga County = 15,000, a broken leg in NYC = 75,000, in Utica (Oneida County)=60,000. I got a "no cause" (dismissal) there last summer and the carrier still thinks I bribed someone but they are sending me plenty of cases. I'm not sure if I should be insulted or not. They lived off on an Air Base in Rome NY which is pretty much down to nothing. There were lots of engineers there doing research for defense contractors at the base, mostly radar. They are all gone now. The base problem set off a chain reaction of business closings all over the county. They have never recovered. The only going concern of note there is Turning Stone Hotel and Casino. Its an Indian run operation so although it provides lots of low paying jobs it doesn't generate tax revenue directly. They are totally screwed.

As you know, I supported this war. They haven't given me the cold shoulder... yet. The fact that I acutally get along with you though is bound to catch up with me sooner or later.

Are we only allowed to have or express an opinion as to what our government does on a given issue if we are an expert on that particular issue? If that is the criteria, I would expect to see far fewer posters here share with us their oh-so brilliant-take on issues of constitutional law from abortion to gun rights. Next time they do, I eagerly anticipate a quick response from you telling them to shut up and listen to the lawyers. Unfortunately, in a constitutional democracy, civilians control the military, not the other way around so yeah, I get to have an opinion on wars too.

Lets try again Mr. Hatemonger: Check you numbers, you are excluding the deaths of thousands of New York and New Jersey residents in the war against terrorism. Don't they count? By the way, the population of New York State is 19.1 million and the population of the US is 290.8 which means NY has 6.5% of the population. As stated earlier, they have suffered roughly 60% of the casualties on the war on terror. Is that good enough for you to withdraw the charge that New York is just a bunch of elitist liberal cowards?

Please point out where I have bad mouthed military service at anytime in any post. Otherwise, withdraw the accusation. Please point out where I have protested the war as opposed to being critical of its execution. Otherwise, withdraw the accusation. Why do you assign me positions I have never taken? Its like you have this cartoon in your head as to what a liberal is and it doesn't matter what my positions are, you have already imagined them to fit the cartoon Rush Limbaugh or god knows what other idiot has drawn in your head.

If you will provide military service statistics as I have asked you to do repeatedly, sure, until then, no, I am not going to defer to your opinion as irrefutable. The more salient question, and the one you have dodged, and dodged and dodged, is: do you think it proper to refer to NY and other "elitist population centers" as elitist liberal cowards as you have done many times now, given that plenty of NY'ers have died in this war? Which is the more important measure of courage and sacrifice, enlisting after graduation from HS or dying in combat? Since you seem to think that per capita statistics are so important, try these on for size: The war on terror began on 9/11/01 when 2,992 Americans were murdered by terrorists. Since then, 1,438 have died in Iraq and 154 have died in Afghanistan. The depressing total for Americans lost in the war on terrorism is 4,430. Of those, 11 New Yorkers have died in Afghanistan, 67 in Iraq and 2,602 in the two towers, which, as you have pointed out so often, is really of no concern to anyone outside of NYC, one of those elitist liberal cowardly population centers you have slandered over and over. That means that 60.5% of all those who have died in the war on terrorism were New Yorkers, cowardly liberals all. The bottom line here my mean sprited friend, is that your post was vomited up for one reason and one reason only, to attack people you hate. You thought and thought and then thought some more and from some dark place you came up with a twisted set of logic that in your limited mind justified attacking an entire state as a bunch of cowards and worse, you used the sacrifice of soldiers as your ammo. I doubt any of the dead, be they from Kansas or New Jersey, Florida or California, Montana or Massachusetts would have anything but utter contempt for your attack against fellow Americans, arming yourself with their sacrifice for emotional appeal. We are all Americans. The soil of New York is American soil, belonging to South Dakotans just as much as New Yorkers. Those bastards didn't attack New York, they attacked America. I would think that would mean as much to Nevadans as to Yankee fans. The one good thing to come out of that darkest of days was that we were united. It wasn't the holy and courageous country mouse versus the cowardly liberal city mouse then. Well, it wasn't that for most of us. For some, like you, it was just more evidence of how rotten liberals are and how wonderful you are. Thanks for the vitriol, it was very instructive as to your character. At least that much was learned in this exchange. Keep telling me how per capita stats justify your hate. Just don't tell me that it isn't hate.

I see no insult in the language you quoted, let me present some of the quotes from my posts that you ignore right along side quotes from your posts and will see who is bent on dividing people and hurling insults: AKC: "...liberal elitists in the major population centers..." Mickey: "I'll leave it to you to argue the numerical values of per capita sacrifices. Me, I just see them as Americans, all of them." AKC: " ...yet elite New York City sends the nationwide lowest percentage of Americans to the fight, instead allowing the kids from Bonesteel and other small towns to die protecting their elite centers." Mickey: "These are people, not statistics. To all of them and to all our soldiers, wherever they come from and whatever their politics are, thank you and God keep you safe." AKC: "...the disgusting cowardice of the loud-mouthed elite." Mickey: "I think the fact that 67 New Yorkers have died all on its own refutes the idea that New Yorkers let others die for them. At the same time, I value just as highly the 8 soldiers from South Dakota who have died. Then again, I am not the one counting numbers or insulting an entire state. AKC: "...communities that breed contempt for our military..."; "...liberal elitist establishments..."; "... the elitists in those major cities produce environments that discourage the same level of patriotism..." Finally, after I don't know how many rounds of posts, you finally exempted those who have served from NY from you general slanders of the entired state, whereas complimenting all who served, regardless of zip code was something I did in my very first post in the thread. A little late but you finally did say: "God Bless every one of the war casualites from every state, none more so than those forced to overcome the cowardly influences of liberal metropolises." What you still haven't done is answer any of my questions so I will ask them again: Please offer a single quote from any of my posts in this entire thread which insult those in uniform. [still waiting] Please offer a link to evidence that there are scads and scads of elitist cowards convincing other people in New York or California or whatever other states you insist on labeling as cowards, into not serving in the military. [where is the irrefutable proof you claim?] Please offer an argument that service statistics can be explained only by levels of courage. [all you have offered so far is your opinion which you apparently think is "irrefutable", if it is so irrefutable, why no links? Why haven't you provided any proof at all that liberals are conspiring to convince others not to serve who would otherwise do so?] Please explain why the 67 New Yorkers who have died in this war are not enough for the state of New York to avoid your charge of cowardice. Please let me know how many would be enough. Can we count those who died on 9/11 as New Yorkers or at least "liberal elitists" from "elitist population centers" who have died in the war on terrorism? If so, what would that do to your precious per capita stats on what constitutes courage and cowardice?

Actually there is an alternative: The WMD situation in 1990 might not have been exactly the same as the WMD situation in 2003. Further, none of those people were present during the briefing in late 2002 where Bush was presented all the evidence they had on WMD's and himself judged it to be inadequate. That is the same meeting where Tenet reacted to the President's incredulity by pronouncing that it was "a slam dunk". Bush accepted this declaration despite the proof being, in his own judgment, insufficient. Whether Clinton, Kerry, Kennedy or Albright would have accepted Tenet's claim or believed their own eyes is something we will never know so I won't speculate. To this day I don't understand why Bush accepted Tenet's word when his own mind told him the evidence was not very solid. "The president, unimpressed by the presentation of satellite photographs and intercepts, pressed Tenet and McLaughlin, saying their information would not "convince Joe Public" and asking Tenet, "This is the best we've got?" Woodward reports." (see, Plan of Attack, Inside Politics). Keep in mind that the administration hasn't called into question Woodward's report in his book regarding this meeting which took place on December 21, 2002. In fact, the RNC made excerpts available from the book on its web site througout the election. He was smart enough to see that the evidence wasn't very solid but not strong enough to believe in his own judgment rather than that of someone else. That is the take if you give him the benefit of the doubt. For those who don't, they might instead conclude that he was going to invade Iraq regardless of the WMD's. I think a very persuasive argument could be made that such a decision was justified and I wish the administration would just make that argument rather than to blame the CIA and/or Tenet. There were very substantial reasons for invading Iraq regardless of whether there was a single WMD anywhere in that tortured land.

Please offer a single quote from any of my posts in this entire thread which insult those in uniform. Please offer a link to evidence that there are scads and scads of elitist cowards convincing other people in New York or California or whatever other states you insist on labeling as cowards, into not serving in the military. Please offer an argument that service statistics can be explained only by levels of courage. Please explain why the 67 New Yorkers who have died in this war are not enough for the state of New York to avoid your charge of cowardice. Please let me know how many would be enough.