Booster4324

Then state your case properly moron. 10s of millions is distinctly different than this post. Millions mean nothing in today's economy. Oh, and you are still a moron for countless other posts.

I want Master of Magic.

Tom? Okay !@#$ it, you're an idiot.

In each game, yes. Was that a serious question?

I thought I missed the company picnic, glad it is Saturday, but sucks if it gets hot.

It isn't? Cool, I gained a day.

So that is essentially no. They will not pay for the disaster. They will pay for as little as they can get away with. Corporate responsibility is just a slogan and they have been weaselish from the start. They are still acting this way. In a response to a demand to turn over all information about this disaster BP said this: Seems simple to me, anyone with info takes five minutes of their day to e-mail any documents pertaining to the disaster. They won't do this of course as those documents could be used against them. Only, this disaster is so epically huge and there really are other concerns than British Petroleum's existence as a corporate entity. Sorry, IMO, this screw up is so huge, British Petroleum should have fallen on their sword long ago. This disaster has been delayed, not averted, by good fortune and who knows how many million gallons of a toxic dispersant. When ordered to use a different one, that is available, British Petroleum responds: Mind you, they weren't ordered to use that specific one, but do the British Petroleum guys lack Google or what? Kidding there really, but the arrogance is astounding. British Petroleum is clearly out to pay as little as possible in this whole mess. They have spun this as best as they could, yet they are lying or completely incompetent. In either case, they deserve to go down (at least the upper management, if not the company). Oh, this means Rand Paul is a complete moron if he doesn't realize all of this. Just to stay slightly on topic. Pity, I would like a less crazy version of the dad.

Good God man, that is a mess of a post, even for you. So just tax everybody more? Won't that mean the fags pay the same as everyone else? Didn't you at one point say you would disavow one of your own children if they turned gay?

Whee, who cares if it it is true, go with what you agree with.

Point me to those posts if you would. I see no one is arguing with you on the series stuff. I want to show them to someone as this is seriously the coolest troll I have ever seen. Thanks.

I realize you are !@#$ing with Hedd, but do you genuinely think they will make good on all the damage this will do? It is apparent that more oil has been leaking than they (BP, feds, 3rd party, whoever) said, the question is how much?

No, no, you have the chicken and the egg backwards.

What is your problem with Chef? Not that there is anything wrong with that...

I loved the article and I wish Tim was still here for follow-up conversation. Tim we miss you, ignore the dick weeds.

Have you played this game before? Rfeynman Posts: 14,786

Bills since late 80s. If I ever stop following the Bills, the NFL is dead to me. To me if you are a real fan, you pick a team and follow them. I can see certain exceptions, but it would be more along the lines of A) you moved and B) your team was full of a bunch of cheaters like the *Pats. Just B would be marginally acceptable I suppose. I used to like the NBA a bit, but was never passionate about it. I liked to watch LA when they were good in the 80's and Chicago in the 90's. Can't say I ever considered myself a fan though. I do not watch it anymore. Never followed hockey, but I guess I would root for the Sabres. Is baseball a sport? Well, I guess there is a slight chance of a physical collision, so by my definition of sports it is. I did root for the Braves for a bit. This woman I was dating liked them. Golf? See above for personal definition of sport. I do not follow college sports at all. Two exceptions - A) Sorta rooting for Memphis basketball after that asshat John Calipari screwed them over. B) College football before the draft. To sum up, I could have said Bills.

Okay, that rocked and I am not even a soccer fan.

I would agree with that.

Someone you have met presumably.

So does that mean we won the 1st half of Superbowl 25? Hell, for that matter twenty-eight. Does that mean we actually won one if we add them together?

Pretty sure that it is the truth.

You rich guys stick together. Besides, how can you consider this an objective piece. The guy is clearly ticked off they woke his kid.

The only choice I was offering was Flutie or Johnson. Not tampering with anything else, which one? Nice post. When I heard we signed Flutie (who thought he was going to get a shot at the starter job) I was dismissive. I didn't care who was the Quarterback, I just wanted to have a decent one. I was excited at the signing of Johnson. He looked the part and I wanted a long term Quarterback. What I couldn't stand though was the physical fragileness, combined with the propensity for sacks. I was disappointed in in Flutie. He was a locker room cancer. However, in that game, I would have preferred Flutie.

So knowing what you know now, you would still start Rob Johnson?

Ahh, but see we know what happens when Rob Johnson started. With the pathetic performance he displayed, you really do not think a rested Flutie wouldn't have been marginally better?