MattM

HGH is a helluva' drug. Seems to be the Pats* training regimen of choice--just ask good old Rodney Harrison. Only reason he was caught was he was dumb enough to put his real name and address on the order. Methinks that most of his teammates (remember the Cheats* have long been known as a place where formerly washed up vets go to "revive" their careers) were simply smart enough to avoid that mistake.....

I actually feel pretty bad for Chad here--shouldn't have hit her (if he indeed did), but I still feel bad for him....

I agree on the Maybin posts above after watching the first half or so. He was absolutely terrible, always trying to take a wide angle to the QB only to get pushed further off course by the T on him, who each probably had one of the easiest games in their respective careers. I don't think they cut him this week, but unless he vastly improves he may indeed get cut. Also impressed with Coples--they may have hit on that pick....

If history is any guide....

I thought she was from Roch (also home of Abby Wambach, I might add).....

My dad and I have done a road trip for the last ten years or so--Denver, Jacksonville, Oakland (twice), KC, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Green Bay, Dallas--and I've also seen the Bills in Philly, NY and SF (where we're also going this year). Favorites would be Pittsburgh (everyone very friendly and football knowledgeable, down to the old ladies we met at the Warhol Museum) and Green Bay (take the Lambeau tour, it was so awesome I did it twice).....

Look at their recent drafts--other than the two TE's and perhaps Mayo (although I think he's overrated--doesn't make enough big plays), they've been nothing to write home about lately. Look at your own list and how far back it goes. Nearly 10 years or more in many cases, back when Pioli and Dimitroff ran things, neither of whom is there now and their drafts lately have suffered as a consequence. I also have a problem with including guys like McCourty (wretched sophomore season), Vollmer (what has he really done but get injured?) and Merriweather (flat out stinks)--it shows how far you're reaching....

Not "obviously"--you're the Pats* fan, we look to you for answers man!

Is Mankins healthy? Will he start the year? Is Waters coming back for sure? Last I heard he hadn't reported to camp (but that was last week)....

In theory (need to see it in games obviously), our D Line presents similar matchup problems to those described above about the Pats*' receivers/TE's, namely, who do you leave undoubled among Dareus, K Dub, M Dub and even Mark Anderson and Merriman should he return to form? You can only double up on one of them without keeping a TE or RB in to block, thereby taking someone out of the pattern, leaving 7 defenders on 4 receivers....

Maybe not this year, but that day will indeed come and then you can go back to rooting for the 'Boys or the Stillers or whoever the hot team is at that moment. If it's us, then you might out of luck, unless of course you change your user name and create another "fan identity" like so many other frontrunners do....

Divisional rivalries are always like that--Browns fans hate the Stillers, too--but there is no "League-wide" hate for any of those teams like there is for the 'Boys or the Pats*. I think you're giving too much credit to context and success, which admittedly plays a part (there'd be less attention otherwise), but not as big a part as you think, IMHO....

Were those "other guys" the Garrett brothers? All of them were at Princeton (after a Columbia stint before their dad got canned) around that time....

I agree to some extent, but not entirely. For ex., the Stillers Packers and Giants are all very successful franchises yet engender nowhere near the hate. Some of the hate is the fault of the teams you listed. The Yankees buy championships, Duke is for snooty, rich kid front-runners, and the Pats*, well, where does one start....

And with that, gents, I bid you good night--off to pack. Heading "home" tomorrow with the kids to see (among other things) Bills camp (you remember them? The reason for this website--tend to wear red, white and blue and find ways to blow great early season starts?).....

Show me where I "equate" the two? "Idiot"--hey ,guys, at least I admit my mistakes. I thought about simply erasing that quote, but you know what, why not just roll with it....

Are you referring to the Valerie Plame scandal (oh, wait, no, she was a field agent--even worse), which was proven in a court of law to have been tied to the Office of the Vice President of the US? As I've said elsewhere, on the others follow the trail on that one where it leads--it's early days in the investigation. If there's something bad at the end of the trail let the chips fall where they may....

Did I just hear correctly? Did I just hear Mitt claim to have grown up poor??!!! Oh, my What a friggin' joke..... Oops--my bad, he was talking about Rubio (I came into the room late)....

Read the article--apparently it's "not done" in Britain. When traveling abroad, particularly on a "foreign policy trip", it pays to know and understand the local lay of the land, no? And the other papers also mentioned in the article? The Guardian was not the only one attacking him--sounds like it was all of them (Daily Telegraph, Times of London included).....

It's really hysterical that you accuse everyone you come across of having "narrow" views--riddle me this, do you know how I vote? Question for you--have you ever voted for a Democrat? I noted yesterday in that thread that the OECD study you cited as definitive on progressivity stopped measuring at the decile level (as even the article on it you cited noted!), while others have shown that the US system is indeed progressive--that is until you get to the very top (sub-1%). The LA Times article I cited and the Hacker/Pierson quote (found on page 48 of their book, BTW) both discuss that and show how our progressivity doesn't make it to when you hit the heights for reasons Hacker & Pierson go into at length in their book (short version--the rich have bought off both parties to lower their taxes and otherwise tilt the system in their favor--I just saved you 300 pages and $25). All this despite the fact that I was a good sport and played along when you brought up the non-sequitur of progressivity of our tax code in response to my comment on absolute rates for the rich being the lowest in ages. I then asked a simple question--any evidence in that study or anything else you linked to that would prove your implied point that the system is indeed progressive all the way to the top and not merely when breaking our income strata up into 10% increments? (BTW, I don't need a lesson on cap gains vs. ordinary income--I know all about that. A quick comparative review of cap gains rates one can find on Wikipedia or otherwise will show that the US is among the lower rate countries there, too, in the developed world.) I got an answer saying you weren't going to answer after that. Now I get what you wrote above, which again isn't on point, which is why I was laughing at that post last night. Now we're all caught up.....

Not an auspicious start for the Mitt-ster: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/79035.html Or how about my favorite: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/79036.html Wow--not exactly looking like Presidential timber so far.... PS All of you "leak" fans must love that MI6 one!

The connection's part's a given....

There are firms that are more interested in hiring someone because of their school's name and/or class rank than their ability to actually practice law. Ding, ding, ding---"and we have a winner, folks!", particularly big firms. In a bad economy they use school as a proxy for competence.....

Maybe Obama learned from Mitt that diners can be dangerous places--anyone else remember Romney's encounter with a gay Vietnam vet in a NH diner? The one who grilled him on same sex marriage after Mitt thought he was "friendly" because he was an older white vet? The one who told the reporters after the meeting that he'd had a good long look at Mitt up close and his verdict was "that man isn't ready to be President"? In fairness to Mitt, I thought myself that that guy was a Gingrich plant....

To answer your first question--yes, because I pointed out what was wrong in your argument based on those links (which themselves dissembled from my original point that you were seeking to refute, that of it now being the best time in about 60 plus years to be a wealthy American from a tax perspective) and you had no response to that. Simple question--got any data to show that our tax system is progressive all the way at the top and not simply based on deciles? Your link talked in deciles, as the author himself admitted. I linked to two sources for my point. As for point 2 re leaks--believe it or not I can handle thinking about two issues at once (three on good days), but no matter. Let's see where the investigation goes before declaring victory, shall we, after all, it's early days on that. Maybe you'll be right and this WH will turn out to be as devious as the last (remember your good buddy Scooter Libby?)....