Buftex

Funny you should mention that...when I got home from work yesterday, I had a message on my machine asking me to sign a petition to recruit Hillary Clinton to challange Obama. She was my choice last time around! But, I am not signnig a petition... Anyways, your argument sounds kind of childish...the guy in office before Obama (the one we aren't allowed to mention) had some pretty historically low approval ratings at one time...nobody from the GOP stepped up to challenge him. So what does THAT say about the Republicans? We can play this game forever... Honestly, I wish the GOP could offer a stronger candidate. Their propensity toward signing pldeges, and making short-sighted promises, to quiet the baby in the corner, appear to be plundering their chance of taking down the president.

They are misfits, because they are candidates that Tea Party element of the GOP does not want as their candidate...both are far more liberal than the Tea Party are comfortable with. I think that could be problematic for the Republicans, come election time. If they just want to vote for "anyone but Obama" he might fare well, but, if they want to stick to their principles, how can they vote for Romney? I guess that is how politics become politics... it almost seems like Romney is the last gasp, desperation candidate..."we tried everyone else, and now we are stuck with you, Mitt" Has there ever been a front-runner candidate, Republican or Democrat, that has been less embraced by the base of their party, than Romney? He has been at the top, or near the top since the GOP election season started. The rest of the candidates have gone up and down in the polls, but Romney just sits there, steady, with his 22-28%. So, it seems like he is neither gaining or losing support...I suppose that could be interprited in different ways, but, to me, it signals that his message (whatever it is) is just not connnecting with the people he wants it to connect with. He will, most likely, utimately win the Republican candidacy, but I don't know how that will translate against Obama. Huntsman is a misfit, becuase he is the GOP candidate that hasn't been afraid to sound rational. Rationality doesn't seem like a valued trait.

Okay, we get it, Newt is the great intellect...and he may be. But, he is also full of ****, so the more he talks, the more the **** oozes out...in that way, he is just like all the other GOP candidates. It seems he has told so many stories, been on so many sides of the same argument over the years, he can't keep his BS straight anymore. I find his most recent whining about Romney and Perry running "negative ads" about him absolutely hilarious. I don't know who is going to win the election in 2012, but a year out, and the GOP has possibly the worst cast of misfit candidates ever assembled. There is PPP, and then there is the real world...

Since the Bills wouldn't be in contention to get a proven GM candidate (and I can't even think of one who is available at this point), Whaley is my next best choice. I like the fact that his backround, coming up, was with the Steelers, an organization that is remarkably stable, consistent and focused. I am keeping my fingers crossed, if he ever is the guy, something from his Steelers years will have rubbed off on him.

Holy ****...I think you are on to something!

I would agree, normally...but I also have to consider, this is the Bills we are talking about. I don't think Ralph particularly enjoys the hiring and firing process, at this point. I figured, no matter how bad the results, he would give Nix and Gailey three years to work their "magic". Buddy Nix is 72 years old, he may just be ready to hang it up. I remember when he first came back to Buffalo, as a scout...he did an interview on WGR, and at that time, he almost sounded like someone who was looking forward to retiring.

Mr Meganck...pack your stuff...wer are tired of losing! Short of the Bills hiring a GM with a good track record (how many of those are there, that don't already have a job?) this is the move that would make me most happy... or Ralph announcing a change in ownership, of course! But, I will be kind of surprised if Nix is fired...maybe he retires? Only reason I say this, I don't get the impression that Mr Wilson hob-knobs a lot with other NFL folks at this point. So, if there are "rumblings" coming out, it would likely be from Nix, himself.

He is that bad, when he is that bad. Then other times, he is not too bad.

Greatest non-trad Christmas recording, ever: Just listned, nice stuff...you are right, mananges a good, sort of holiday feel, without any Christmas cliches!

It wasn't so much the concept of Deb having a crush on Dexter that I had the problem with, it was just the way it was introduced into the storyline...the scenes with Deb and the shrink were just brutal.

Merry Christmas!

That was bound to happen one week...a minor bump in the road for the Packers...it just about every anticapated "battle of NFL titans" this year ends up being either a blow-out by the better offensive team, or a shoot-out...the art of defense is being lost nowadays. When the Bills won their first 4 games, they did it with offense...

Gotta take the Packers offense, easpecially if Aaron Rogers comes included. NFL football, right now, is all about offense...the rules are stacked against great defense. Exactly! An elite offense, with the way the rules are now, will shred the best defenses.

Steve Johnson may not be NFL elite, but he is, for all intents an purposes, the Bills best reciever. This team just can't keep letting guys walk when it comes time for them to get a raise...it just creates, yet another, hole for them to fill. Unless the Bills are going to make a run at somebody in free agency that they deem better than Johnson, they damn well better re-sign him. Of course, I have serious doubts that they will. Johnson says that he begged to get back in the game, but Chan wouldn't allow it. Anyone think that may be telegraphing that they want to find SJ's replacement, amongst the bodies already on the roster? When the Bills were 5-2, they were being praised, and patting themselves on the back for all their "no names"...somehting stinks here, to me. Hate to say it, but, as a big Sabres fan as well, I think both of the Buffalo pro franchises are mired in the excuse game. I am getting so sick of hearing it...Ryan Miller, after a completely dreadful performance on Saturday night says "Givnig up an early goal, after starting back to back games, is just not acceptable...I have to get better" So, he is saying it is his fault, but, at the same time, wants to remind everyone that he did start back to back games... this has been a Sabres thing (excuses) for a while, but I am hearing it more from the Bills as well...

Not strange at all. It is pretty common practice in the NFL (all sports) for player injuries to be kept shrouded in mystery, unless the guy is so injured he is not going to play. If you have a bum shoulder, but are going to play with it, you don't want to give your opponent any incentive to take advantage of your injury. I have no doubt, Fitz, Stevie, etc are all banged up, as most NFL players woud be, this time of the season.

Completely agree...I have already chosen of life of lower expectations from my sports teams, I just can't do it for everything. I know it is common to consider television as "trash", but I think we are living in a sort of "golden age" of tv right now. For as much garbage that is on the tele these days (and no doubt there is plenty) there are so many great tv shows over the last 10-15 years. Things like "Mad Men", "Breaking Bad" and "The Sopranos" are terrific art, and can stand up with some of the greatest movies of all time. It seems to me, there are a lot of great directors, writers and actors who are in television right now, because it gives them the opportunity to make great art...unlike 20 years ago, when most of these people would have bristled at the idea of working on the "small screen". Because there are so many tv outlets now, ratings are not the factor that they used to be, as far as determining the fate (as well as the storyline) of most good tv. So, to me, there is no reason not to be picky, and expect more. Just because it is television, it doesn't have to feel like television, in the more traditional sense.

You may be right, sorry...all I remember about his time in San Diego was a slew of bone-headed dirty plays...if I recall, once cost the Chargers mightily against the Pats in the playoffs one year...but your point is taken, corner is a tough position, especially now. I have been pretty underwhelmed by Florences play most of the time, but he does have a (small) knack for causing turnovers, somehting that can't be discounted.

Excellent point...and maybe that is intentional on some level, but it just doesn't work for me, most of the time. Pretty much any story line involving LaGuerta, Angel or Quinn is just so dumb, and adds little to the show, or the characters. I realize, when this show started, they had no idea how successful it would be, or how long it would be on (looking like 8 years minimum) but if they could do it over again, I think the story arc of the first season, alone, could have made an awesome, long running story...and I also think that Doaks was the best protagonist that Dexter has ever had on the show.

He has a cool, distinctive, name, so I think people are enamored with him more than his play warrents. He was on his way to becoming a "journeymen" before he came to Buffalo, likely for a reason. Five disappointing seasons with the Chargers, and then one very disappointing season with Jacksonville. To the OPs point, it is true, Florence was with the receiver stride for stride, it was just a perfect pass...

You know, that is what is so frustrating about this show, in my opinion...they always touch on interesting things, but never really go beyond the surface. Beyond Dexter, none of the characters have any depth, whatsoever...and the plots, with each season, are full of holes...but, that is just me I suppose...I just think this show could be much better than it is...I think the books are much better. To me, the only episode this season that was really pretty good, was the one with Ronnie Cox, as the geriatric serial killer. I respect your opinion (honestly, I do), but "nuance" is one of the last thing that comes to mind, when I think of "Dexter".

Let me start off by saying, I like "Dexter" a little less, every season...but, because I feel somewhat invested in the story, I feel almost obligated to watch. This season that just concluded, last night, was awful...except the final 30 seconds or so...did anyone else see it? Without giving spoiler, complete game changer...so now, damn it, I will have to tune in for season seven. I wish the show had followed the books a bit more closely...last nights' end kind of goes in a direction I never thought they would, particularly with, at least, two more seasons left.

Does that mean he will get paid the average of the top 5 fans, for one year! Franchise me.....puh-leeezzzzeeee!

I agree. However, as I was talking with a friend of mine a few days ago, defense, in general, is a dying thing in the NFL. This game really seems to be changing a lot...I like a good defensive game...we see very few of them anymore...even stalwart defensive teams like the Steelers and Ravens give up a **** ton of points and yards. I realize, these are great athletes, but the game is just changing for the worse, IMO. Everytime I get down on the Bills defense (and I wholeheartedly agree, they suck!), I see "good" defensive teams play, and I am not too impressed. The rules, more and more, are tilted in favor of the offense. That is in no way meant as an excuse for the defense. Honestly, as a lad, a 38-35 kind of game was a thrill...now it is just a bore. I don't get the notion that I am watching the best offensive play ever, just, en masse, the worst defensive era of football, ever.

And we don't really know what kind of relationship Kelly and Fitzpatrick have, beyond that 9 seconds.