slothrop

Platforms: 1) Anti-war at any cost, except for those small conflicts wwII and vietnam 2) Anti-business, radical environmentalists, except that Clinton helped shape the global economy through the wto and other agreements that give unprecedented power to corporations which supercede the powers of nations. 3) Tax Increases except for the mountains of corporate welfare handed out in the 1990's 4) Gay Marriages except for Kerry and Edwards who said they opposed them 5) Anti-smoking in bars. except for george pataki 6) Legalize marijuana except for a majority of democrats in congress 7) Anti-law enforcement for the most part. this is simply rediculous 8) Militant vegetarians. except that "militant" vegitarians would not identify themselves as democratic (the two major parties do not take up the entire political spectrum). 9) Last second abortions. again, simply rediculous 10) The newest one..."Let's Pretend that we are Conservative" just like, "compasionate conservatives" pretend to be liberal

AAAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!! i feel better now.

I responded to you prior post on your "Henry to Philly" idea. Regardless of what happened in the Superbowl that post still applies, so I quote it here: "here is why Westbrook is a far better RB than Henry for Philly. Your claim that you "don't think their offensive philosophy will hold up in 2005," is incredible considering that Andy Reid is dedicated to their west-coast hybrid system. They drafted Westbrook with that system in mind because the can stretch the field by lining him up as a wide out, creating serious match up issues. They are also able to use multiple formations using westbrook because he has taken well to the mental agility required by Reid's system. Simply stated, Westbrook is the perfect back for them. The same can not be said for Henry. He is not a credible threat when lined up wide. He also can not handle the mental requirements of the system. Henry barely could handle a scaled back version of the Bills' system. He would CONSTANTLY screw up blitz pickups, run the wrong way on plays, and line up incorrectly. He is a stupid one dimensional back who would comically fail in Reid's system."

I am frickin' speachless. Was this excerpt from a 1939 Nazi rally speech? This thread started as a semi-intelligent discussion and it evaporated into this. Wow.

I have COA's on all the items, except for the Thurman autograph which I got personally when I was 16. I will never sell any of the items, especially that one because it holds great memories for me.

I am not going to sell these items, but nontheless I am interested in their value. I would assume that they may be worth more or less depending on whether they are sold in or out of the Buffalo area. Here is what I got: - Thurman Thomas Autograph on 1992 edition of Beckett's magazine (awesome drawing of thurman running with a hern of stampeding buffalo in the background). Thurman signed this in Watertown, NY in 1992 (I was 16 at the time) while at a golf tourny. - Bills' Mini-helmet signed by Kelly and Hull. - UNiversity of Miami Mini-helmet signed by Willis - autographed picture of willis in a bills uniform - but the uniform as the number 2 (his college number) and not 21. However he signed it using 21. - One non-Bills item: HAll of Fame football signed by Terry Bradshaw. Any memorabilia buffs out there have an opinion on value?

I am making a fine distinction - I am not criticising the messege, the sentiment and messege of the ad was right on. Rather, I am criticising the forum. Alternatively, why not produce an ad without the corporate logo possibly produced with organizations supporting soldier's families? Or something like that. Amheiser Bausch could have donated, or lead, or organized such an effort.

the messege was, of course, classy and admirable. However, I find the capitalistic motivation behind the ad disturbing. To me, it came off as Amheiser-Baush wanting to cash in a profit from the soldiers' sacrifices. Just my opinion.

fair enough, there is a fine line between judicial rulings and legislative action. however, Justice Douglas once wrote that enumerated rights (i.e. speech, assembly, worship, etc) necessarily have cast a penumbra of unstated rights (i.e. privacy). Meaning that the enumerated rights would be rendered meaningless without the existence of unstated rights like privacy. For example, what good is the right to assembly if the government were allowed unfettered access into your home? Given that, and the judiciary's charge of interpreting laws - if there is a broad provision for equal protection, is it not the judiciary's job to interpret what that means? If the legislature does not like the judiciary's interpretation they can pass appropriate legislation within Constitutional limits. What is "activist" about this? This is our system of seperation of powers at work.

it will go to the appellate division then to the Court of Appeals. For those who dislike "activist judges," how would you have courts handle issues of substantive rights? I think the term is deplorable and an invention of right wingers who disliked the outcome of various substantive due process cases. Under their definition, the most "activist" of activist judges must have been our first Chief Justice, John Marshall, for reading into the Constitution the concept of judicial review in the Marbury v. Madison decision!

Bo was a BEAST! Big back with blazing speed. He is one of the top three injury tragedies ever. I felt cheated that I could not see what he would have accomplished. I would not put him in the top ten because it would be speculation at its best. but still he likely would have been in the top ten.

I lived in Watertown for 18years. Why am I not surprised this happened there? LOL! I recently told some colleagues that North Country rednecks may have more "redneck" in them than anywhere in the USA. As you travel north from Syracuse, on average, peoples' eyes are set further apart.

While T.O. playing with the injury is a great story, it is insignificant when compared to the story of DE Jack Youngblood. Peter King just wrote a great story about it this week. I think the story is an example of how the line between stupidity and courage are blurry. Here is the story: Youngblood vs. Owens

this will be the first year I will root for the NFC. McNabb was the QB at Syracuse when I was a student there. I really want him to win it.

Well, that was the first time you agreed with me. I feel all warm and fuzzy.

First, the NFL is not the BCS - "quality wins" is a meaningless term. Philly is in the Superbowl. Full stop. Second, here is why Westbrook is a far better RB than Henry for Philly. Your claim that you "don't think their offensive philosophy will hold up in 2005," is incredible considering that Andy Reid is dedicated to their west-coast hybrid system. They drafted Westbrook with that system in mind because the can stretch the field by lining him up as a wide out, creating serious match up issues. They are also able to use multiple formations using westbrook because he has taken well to the mental agility required by Reid's system. Simply stated, Westbrook is the perfect back for them. The same can not be said for Henry. He is not a credible threat when lined up wide. He also can not handle the mental requirements of the system. Henry barely could handle a scaled back version of the Bills' system. He would CONSTANTLY screw up blitz pickups, run the wrong way on plays, and line up incorrectly. He is a stupid one dimensional back who would comically fail in Reid's system.

still never heard of it - need more info [/sarcasm]

never heard of it - give me a more detailed summary

How many philly games have you watched! T.O. Gets the credit for this year's success, but Westbrook is the KEY reason they are in the super bowl. Henry is one IQ point above retard - it would be comical to see him placed into Andy Reid's system.

again, explain why the Eagles should be disappointed in Westbrook this year! Also, you think Henry could function in a complicated West Coast system? I would take westbrook over henry every time.

explain to me how henry is better than westbrook? Are you kidding? HE is not the problem with that team, rather he is the reason they have been so good!

man, the first two minutes of the second half was intense! To go from 20 pts down to 8 pts down in that short of a time was incredible. I believe in this team this year! This was a classic SU "let-down" game where normally they lose a few of these games per year, but they won it. That in its self is a good sign. Also, at first Edlin looked terrible! He didn't seem to know where to be on the court - his spacing was aweful and he was not moving without the ball. But then in the second half something clicked and he was great! Him penatrating and passing to McNamara on the wing was great to see.

I must be masochistic but I will respond. Your "anal sex" rebuttle (pun intended) was unresponsive. Show me the data that links anal sex with soaring health care costs or any other social costs (and your view of anal sex, homosexuality, and HIV is 20 years outdated). Smoking and the aggregate health toll has been directly linked to soaring health care, medicaid, and other costs. This is a credible argument that you can't simply dismiss with a not-so-clever anal sex analogy. By the way, I also think the "personal choice" argument you site is also powerful, but I do not think the personal freedom of a person to harm themselves outwieghs the aggregate costs. Just my opinion.

While the "personal choice" argument you both cite is powerful, the counter to that argument is that the "personal" choice to smoke, drink, or over-eat becomes a social problem in the aggregate when your and a million others' personal choices cause health care and other costs to go up.

i believe not until 2006. The schedule of the actors was the big issue