finknottle

It is unclear to me from the report, and we don't have enough information on the actual ruling. I would be surprised (as you are) if their ruling implied that you could not remove your child from anything you objected to. This is different from the interpretation that I assumed, which is that they want a veto over the content. But we really can't tell precisely what right the parents are arguing for from that one line description.

eh - maybe retard rodeo was too strong. But I do think nearly everybody's outrage is missing the real target.

And it's not even about out-smarting the competition; it's become about looking like you are out-smarting them. Because if we just play well without any fancy plays or personnel moves, nobody in the organization gets the genius title.

Sometimes it looks like a retard rodeo around here, with everybody jumping into the ring to grind their favorite axes.... Is the school policy stunningly stupid? Absolutely - I wouldn't argue with that. But this is not a ruling on the content. It is a ruling on whether parents have the exclusive right to control the information given to their children. They said no, and you guys are running around screaming at the federal court! Suppose if I want to raise my kids by only telling them that, say, all catholics are pedophiles. Are you all suggesting that I have the right to prevent the government from exposing them to any information to the contrary? That's the implication of the parents argument. Blast the local schoolboard, not the courts.

Actually, I appreciate his posting: simple references, without editorializing. While I don't place much stock in the San Francisco Chronicle, and know that Wikipedia is only as professional as the volunteers who contribute (and thus generally much better for scientific topics than controversial), I'm comfortable taking the slants into account. So whether or not the claims are true (or have been subsequently credited or discredited), I am at least convinced that they are out there and not entirely in the fringe. That to me is very interesting. Don't know how I missed it...

Seriously, I'm trying to understand what you mean. You say that when we three are down on our luck we'll look to God for help and get it. How does that relate to Robertson saying Dover may be punished for their voting out the ID/creationists? By singleing us out, we who (presumably) are not fans of Robertson's interpretation of God and politics, you are presumably agreeing with us or with Robertson. But your logic seems at odds with his (ie God as vengefull vs God as mercifull). Is that a complicated way of rejecting his views?

Forget the second half conspiracy theory part. Can someone non-partisan tell me if the first half (his being anti-Bush, fan of Chomsky, etc) is generally accepted and known?

Yes, but we're comparing the '81 weapons to the '05. '05 may have a bunch of potential, but it hasn't shown up this season. '81 Butler over '05 Moulds, '81 Lewis over '05 Lee, easy. And yes, I'd take '81 Cribbs over '05 WM in a heartbeat right now. Will WM become better than Cribbs? I hope so and expect so, but right now he's as good a workhorse but not nearly the threat.

I don't understand your anger. Are you agreeing that God may likely smite those who voted out the ID'ers? Your comment seems to suggest God is mercifull, not vengefull. That appears to me to be the opposite of what Robertson is saying. Or are you suggesting that God may zap the town if only to teach them humility when he follows it with help and solice?

I should add I wasn't talking only about MBD's post, but rather the fact that it seemed to be happening all week. There's even one poster who has a 500-word essay in his signature bar about Bruschi...

I was wondering that too. Early in the season the coaches gave JP some long shots down the field. Whatever MM/TD say at press coferences aside, could it be that they weren't calling those plays for KH? Maybe no confidence in his arm and/or the line in those games?

Hey, I couldn't care less about Tom Brady. I was just wondering why you went off in a wierd direction like that.

If he says the right things, play him. But if he doesn't follow through on the field, he's done here for the forseeable future. What, are we worried about screwing up our run defense??

Just wondering why reasonable topics about the Bills degenerate suddenly and abrubtly into childish jabs and diatribes at players. Is it a repressed feelings thing?

Yeah!!!!! Great finish!

Man, I hate the 'skins.

What's up with all the patriot-envy that's erupting suddenly? Why this comment out of the blue? (Especially since I've NEVER heard anyone say that about Brady, even when it was deserved.)

Plus, the pressure is off when you come off the bench. He hasn't spent all week agonizing over why he can't seem to complete a pass longer than 8 yards. So, when he's thrown in there after having had a few weeks of practicing pressure-free, he just plays like he can.

I think whats going on is this: mistakes were made. The application keeps updating based on the previous error. Refresh the browser window and it resets from fresh data.

we need 7. The sooner we get KC out of their running game, the better...

sack!

Am I the only one who feels very nervous about kicking off to KC with 1:53 left?

oh yeah.

Huh... I guess KH is ok?

All right! I forgot that with JP back in Reed will come alive!