Chilly

No, in this case it means that people have the right not to breathe air thats filled with smoke if they don't want to. It doesn't mean that everyone has to cater to what you think is right.

O rly? Theres that thing in there about Liberty, you know, freedom to decide for yourself how to conduct your own business? You're stretching the right to life: you don't have to go in that restaurant. No one is sitting down and forcing you to inhale second hand smoke. If they were, then yeah that'd fall under that. However, you can choose to leave, can't you? You're making this too complicated. And thus, because there wasn't a huge demand from non-smokers, there was no smoke-free restaurant. People were content with the walls. If you are running a restaurant, and making it smoke free would easily get you many, many more customers, you'd be dumb not to. If the demand is high enough, someone would do it.

Quick, someone ask him about the Slug logo.

It goes both ways. What about a smoker's right to life, libery, and the pursuit of happyness? Each property owner should decide for themselves what policies that they have in place. If *everyone* had smoking, and it was a big demand, then a place would open up that banned it. Economics 101. The workers? They can ask to work in non-smoking only if they are that concerned, or work somewhere else. No one is forced to work in that environment, they choose to. I don't smoke, I don't like 2nd hand smoke, but !@#$ if I'm going to try to prevent you from doing something you like.

.74 points per game. York averaged .69 and got 2.85 mill. Sounds about right for what these freaking arbitrators have been giving out. By the way, here's a good post from a SportingNews blog:

Didn't see this posted anywhere else. http://tsn.ca/nfl/news_story.asp?id=173077 Bennett to Chiefs, undisclosed choice in the 2007 to Saints. Poor Priest, its been fun.

Good ol' Jebby.

El oh el. You're a jackass.

I think it will, just right now is a bad time for me and other people it seems. I'm getting near finals next week, lots of people go on vacation, tis why there are no good TV shows during summer.

Just for you

Yeah, except for the fact that you called the Texas schedule a joke, which I took the time to say it wasn't. You referred to it as a whole, and now you are trying to say you weren't. Pick one please. Oh noes, they scheduled a cream-puff the first game of the season, just like everyone else! Again, the point was a schedule as a whole. You're still posting about it, you care so little about it. rofl. And you've admitted to being biased. Fun!

AD, thats not liberal fear mongering, thats politics, both sides do it bud.

Don't like your RB choices tbh. Who'd you take with your first round pick? I can't find one.

Not sure, got some papers due, depends on how far I get.

You obviously care enough to have posted that last time and this time. Biased? My post was to prove that it wasn't a "joke", and I pointed out both the good and bad opponents they played. All you did was point out the same thing. By the way, of the 3 teams you listed, only Baylor is in the big 12. You were comparing different team's schedules, but all you want to compare is teams that support your point of view. And you call me biased? rofl

Sup competition?

And Mr. Gingrich's Presidential Campaign would be off to a good start with the publicity he could garner for himself after his World War 3 comments seemingly came true.

Oh no you didn't. Texas beat 3 teams that finished the season in the top 10, 4 teams in the top 25. Texas beat opponents in 9 games that were in a bowl game. USC beat 6 teams that were in a bowl game. USC beat 5 top 25 teams, with 1 being in the top 10. That means that Texas only played in 4 games against non bowl opponents, whereas your runners up, USC, played in 7, which is greater then 50% of their schedule. Take your bull sh-- about the National Champs someplace else.

Or, more frankly, when does Israel start to make Syria pay? I know that Syria is trying to be a golden child in all of this, but quite frankly it seems like Israel isn't buying it. And I don't either. They haven't shown at all that they truly want this to end, outside of a few unsubstantial moves of negotiations. They still want to support Hez'bollah, and they still want to play a role in Lebanese politics. It seems that now, Israel is just waiting for Syria to attack themIsrael is just waiting for Syria to attack them, so that they can make this war about what it really is: Syria versus Israel. To be honest, I agree. All Syria is doing at this point is hurting democracy in Lebanon by screwing with their politics, and they need to be driven out of it. I've always said Bush screwed up big time in Iraq for a number of reasons trying to build a democracy, but he's dead on this time. Syria needs to get the !@#$ out of Lebanese politics once and for all and let that country build strong foundations for democracy.

Do I think its news worthy? Not of the front page. Entertainment section? Sure do.

I bet Adam would go on a bombing spree due to the global warming effects by it. lol. That being said, I wouldn't be opposed.

Because MSNBC still does put out credible news. These days judging the source and not the story is a very quick way to eliminate all news sources.

I hate your avatar, and I hate that damn commercial. Hell, isn't Iraq a little bit of everything right now?

Much better. Anyway, I still don't see why a company would want to move to WNY. As you have stated, there are many cities doing that same thing, (including where I live: Austin), whats to set Buffalo apart from all of these other cities? Why would I put my business there when I could move to so many other places?