colin

my argument isn't that any of this is legal or not (although walmart's position on this might change the court's mind), but that it is silly to say that if the government doesn't force pharmacies to carry drugs, no one will carry them. the government don't force anyone to carry illegal narcotics, but they are still sold on a regular basis. could this be because of supply and demand? no, no of course not. that's just another weak argument.

yes yes, this is of course what will happen. there is no possibility of freedom of choice for drug vendors. if they are given any say in what they themselves carry then they would never carry drugs that consumers desire. after all, they are only after a profit and wouldn't EVER take advantage of a market segment not covered by their competitors because that would help them make a prof, er, uh. hmmm i was about to type that i might have found a hole in your logic, but your argument is more like tiny logic island floating in a giant see of emotive reactoinary ignorance. do you have the slightest idea of how business is run, or how competition works?

now now i didn't say you advocated state control of all bussiness. you advocate facism when it suits your own personal politics. you've said as much with your dismissive remarks about any stakeholders (the management, the board, by extension shareholders and employees on all levels).

well, another swing and another miss, keep trying you'll grow up someday! "You might want to expand your understanding of fascism a little bit." nonsense. i defined fascism above, it is private ownership of capital/business with government fiat dictating its use. this is EXACTLY what drug stocking laws are. while you might equate the nazi regime with fascism in the muddy soup of all things economic in your brain, they aren't the same thing. you see, the same way that socialism is a concept that exists independently of the former soviet government (or even current sweden), fascism is a concept that exists independant of the little talking points you might think of when the name comes up. your whole tirade about nazis was very elightning, but a total non sequitor. if you really think corporations/business = bad and government intevention "for the little guy" = good, then you'll have no doubt already booked your flight to cuba to live in corporation free government intervention rich paradise. when are you off?

the stones are too damn old to be a rock and roll band.

i don't think that is a fair comparison wrt jp and kelly jp played houston, tampa, new orleans, atlanta, carolina, kc, miami, new england, and san diego kelly played the jets twice, new england, miami (home), a couple minutes of kc (where he was sacked and knocked out) cincy, raiders and snippets of tampa, NO the bottom line is jp was put infront of some tough passrushing teams and while he really sucked at the start, he was scrambling and making plays the whole time afterwards. ben rothless isn't as good as advertised, he can't hold carson palmer's jock

didn't moon go to 8 straight pro bowls? that's just nuts

do you really have this poor of an understanding of business? walmart won't carry items that they think might cause them a negative business impact. they have to consider lobby groups or concerned parent shoppers who might create a problem over an item (some books and CDs for example) against the potential losses in profits or market share to competitors who will carry that item. your statement: "I have no desire to protect the ability of the Wal Mart Board of Directors to serve as a philosophical and moral tribunal deciding which medications are ethically pure enough to be dispensed." just stinks of self importance. laws requiring pharmacies to carry certain (and if pushed to their logical end ANY item) force private business to itmes they might not otherwise want to (for any number of reasons). NOT FORCING walmart to carry an item IS NOT PROTECTING walmart, it is simply not fascism (which is private ownership with government fiat overriding owner's control). and what does your desire have to do with it? I desire ABC to broadcast bills games in prime time every week, should they? your other commets about permiting walmart and their moral concious show that you are more than happy to have fascism if it suits your own politics. not exacly liberal, are you?

it is grey. you have it wrong, pharmacies are not required to carry drugs "people would expect" because people can expect anything. they have to carry drugs that meet some subjective criteria of being needed or "expected". that is in and of itself grey. if the pharmacy does not feel they will sell enough of the drug to warrant holding it, they MIGHT be able to avoid carrying it. if they don't like the drug itself (they feel it is unsafe or that another type of drug is a better alternative), they might stock it, or might not stock much of it. then you have drugs like that contraceptive or viagra. they are drugs that are not required to save anyone's life or to maintain them day to day, they are "lifestyle drugs" which is a very fast growing and profitable sector. so one judge or advocacy group might feel that a certain drug should be required, while another might not. grey

pharmacists being required to carry drugs is a VERY grey area. i don't think they have to stock rubbers so i doubt they'd have to stock the morning after pill. there are TONS more prisoners in the US, as well as the abortions mentioned above. i don't know if i read this in freakenomics or somewhere else, but the aborted fetuses would have been members of demographic groups most likely to be criminals

as a bills fan in toronto, that'd be pretty kewl. a big event and it'd be a home game for the bills

seachickens for sure. i hate pitts and their ghey fans, and i hate fake ass cowher and his fake rants. that douche has never once stood up to a player, he lets them do whatever they want, but pokes his assy chin all over the camera to make himself look tough f the stillers, f cowher, go hawks

posey is as good as gone campbell might get cut mike williams, london fletcher, and eric moulds are all going to have contract adjustments/get cut. we need to replace milloy and vincnet in the next couple years, perhaps ditching milloy and getting a guy in FA who can play at the same level (wow, didn't new england do that before we dropped a ton on milloy?) might be an idea. vincent is too expensive to cut right now, and if we can swap clements for a 1st rounder we might want him at corner

tko had a HUGE role in our coverages. we lost the best coverage front 7 player in the nfl last year, that hurt all of our coverage

your buddy's story leaves the door open for cutler to be kidd or murray, in other words he can be the one superstar or a hanger on. if he is the hanger on, who on vandy is a star? mayock from NFL network (who i think does a good job in ranking guys and showing you why he has them ranked that way) has cutler at number 1, perhaps 2 after a not great senior bowl. i hope he is a very good looking qb on draft day, if 3 qbs, 2 rbs ( memphis guy and bushy), and hawk are the top 6 picks then we get one of williams, fergesun or ngata.

if we are including past bills i think pat williams with his combo of being big and nasty would f up some fools. tko would put out some licks too. sam adams would be my second bill, i think it is possible he could kill a man just lunging and belly splashing him

vince being there might be some sweet trade bait

simms was a late climber and really didn't have what haynesworth or henderson had in terms of experience or ability. i'd love for brick to fall to us, but i don't know that he will. the best thing about this draft is that at our pick and in the second round there will be a DL/OL who will start for us in quick order and really improve our lines. i also like watson in the 2nd, and max jean-gilles in the 3rd as a massive guard

schoble is a good DE. i have a hunch that abraham might come to us as mentioned above. i hope to get a massive DT, bentley, and perhaps abraham in FA this year. saving some cap on moulds and mike williams will help us towards that

getting a guy as good as brick looks to be does a lot for a team like ours. 1. we improve our LT, LG (gandy moves over). 2. we are able to ditch m williams and trey and sign a guy like bently and with very little cap change (a bit more but not so much) we have brick gandy bently villarial/preston peters as our line, that is tackle to tackle better and the best line our team has had since kelly. 3. if we can we can cut and re sign williams with leverage that a stud tackle gives us. 4. while we are not a good team, we have some skill players with a ton of upside, locking in a solid line now (along with a new OC whol can get it done) gives us a chance to really develop an O i think ngata, ferguson, or williams will be there at 8 and any of them will help us

nice, but i don't think it is possible for us to let williams go without getting some OL in FA. also, why no love for crowel? let's draft a safety/OG instead of the OLB.

tko is coming back and he migh just kick your ass when he does

ok first of all the above is right. he is 7th in running, so YES, he runs more than other OCs. 2nd WELL...since we're all creaming ourselves over stats here...here is Fairchild's offensive rankings with the Rams since he became their O-Coordinator. 2003: 3rd in the NFL in Points, 7th in Yards 2004: 19th in the NFL in Points, 6th in Yards 2005: 11th in the NFL in Points, 6th in Yards those are good numbers!! they had a bit of trouble scoring in 04, but fell just out of the top 10 in 05, and lit it up in 03. they are VERY good in yards EVERY year. DJ is a conservative HC, his knock was boring 3 yard out offenses. here is a smart guy, who has been a position coach for this team, who has experience with an exciting unpredictable offensive football team. yin and yang anyone? a more spread out O will let JP run and throw the deep ball more, the things he does well. we have speed at WR and an RB who runs well from a single back set. did some of you goons want a guy who runs more than he passes? there are never more than 1 or 2 teams that do that a year.

you have a point, but i think the top 3 picks are pretty certain. the jets MIGHT take brick, but they might prefer williams to replace abraham or one of the top RBs sf and the raiders almost certainly won't shell out more on a LT with they guys they just got, and GB could use any of the good LBs in the draft, so there is a good chance that brick might be there. either way, i expect one of ngata brick williams to be there, any one of them would make a huge step towards improving one of our lines, and there will be a solid DT and OT in the second and third rounds. this is a good year for the big fellas

do the jets dislike robertson (the DT they got #4 overall) enough to bring in Ngata? i suppose they might let abraham go and get another big body. that would instantly up their run D and let vilma put up pro bowl numbers. i'd LOVE that draft. saw a bunch of tape of ferguson, paticularly in the senior bowl. he is INSANE with the feet, i'd bet he'd get bigger over a couple seasons and if we put gandy at RG next to him we'd still be able to run behind him. d'brick gand bently chris/preston mike williams peters @ te should put us in the top 5 in running the ball. we could even just ditch williams or sign him cheaper and move him to guard and have a potential kansas city quality line. that would be great