Crap Throwing Monkey

That wasn't my fault and you know it.

MARC to Union Station, Red Line to Farragut North would probably be your best bet if you're not driving. If you're driving...well, when I drive it, I take 295 to 50 West into downtown, which may not be the quickest but is most likely the easiest, though there is something to be said for taking 95 to 495 to Connecticut south to downtown...

I'd invite you...but I've got to go out and watch the Nationals dig themselves into an even deeper hole, if they're not rained out. With my luck, they will get rained out, and I'll get home just in time to turn on the TV and catch the teams going into the locker rooms...

Fact is, most of the people that disagree with Iraq only express themselves in ways that are ignorant, stupid, or uninformed. I've seen very, very few people that can state in any remotely coherent form the administration policy that motivated the invasion of Iraq, let alone state coherent reasons for disagreeing with such. It takes too much effort; it's far easier to quote the latest soundbyte off the evening news. Conversely, I don't know a hell of a lot of people who support the invasion of Iraq who can explain the administration policy coherently, either. In fact, I don't even think the administration explains their policies coherently. Most of the argument about Iraq as debated in the public domain basically consists of debating a policy that very few people not only fail to understand but don't even know exists because they haven't bothered to dig any more deeply than CNN or FoxSnooze - or, if they're reasonably curious, the Journal and NY Times. But basically, I fail to see how anyone holding any opinion on Iraq in the absence of even a rudimentary understanding of the administration's global foreign policy agenda is anything but stupid, ignorant, or uninformed.

Funny. I enhance it the same way.

As Thomas Jefferson said: "So let's let 'em run the country!"

Is it okay if I hear them with a narrow paint roller?

Just a guess...but the complete inability of this board to pick up sarcasm the past few days makes me think I'm probably right.

I think "Doug Johnson" was on purpose, as a reference to the two-headed monster of a QB controversy we had at the time.

They didn't "simply" lay down. They were tired and needed some rest after all that running backwards...

Those masks put out pure oxygen too, don't they? Just what you'd want in a fire...

I agree, Favre dressing like that is disturbing. But JP said "It was awesome, man." That's NOT the comment of "just a victim".

No, they want to complain that the flight attendant wasn't nice enough. Anyone else have this image of someone standing there saying "The stewardess was just a great big JERK, and I'm going to dump a beer on her head next time I fly!"

Personally, I've never said anything that can be interruptred...

I don't remember a quarterback in Daisy Dukes, a red hat, and fancy suspenders either. But elf shoes would really complete that outfit.

Right. Blame laziness.

And pointy elf shoes.

So he's gay? So what? Has nothing to do with the fact his throwing technique is questionable...

If the tuck play was by the book, how come that's the only time they've ever called it that way?

Neither was I, but there's a finite number of reasons a plane runs off the runway.

In an emergency. I remember watching Air Force 1 doing touch-and-gos practicing for a presidential visit, Carter or Reagan. According to Cathay Pacific, the A340-300 requires a 9000 foot runway for takeoff an a 6000 foot runway for landing. Buffalo International's runway lengths are 8000 and 7000 feet...you might be able to land one (I don't know how much I trust the Cathay Pacific manual), but I don't think you're flying one out that's not empty.

I WAS being serious on the Losman thread...except to the pinhead that started making fag jokes, he didn't deserve serious consideration. But even if the causes of airliner crashes are complex, the predicate events are often simple (e.g. the November 2001 Airbus crash in NYC, cause by over-aggressive rudder commands). In this case, given the plane was by all appearances on the ground already and ran off the runway, the gross reasons for the event become fairly simple: the plane overshot, was going to fast, didn't brake rapidly enough, or "pilot error" (i.e. the weren't paying attention). Environmental factors might exacerbate any of those (an unexpected headwind might cause the plane to touchdown too late, for example), but that's pretty much all that can cause a plane to run off the end of the runway: too fast, too high, bad brakes, or asleep at the wheel.

Apparently no one else was either...

Holcomb looks good...

Advanced doppler radar will, and is available to pilots. But according to witnesses, the plane was on the ground and ran off the runway...it didn't crash on landing, it effectively crashed after landing. That's probably not a micro-burst, and if it is, it isn't even close to your typical downdraft-induced crash.