OCinBuffalo

Anybody remember the "Line of Death"? Every comic in the world had a ball with that one, because Ghadfi would actually describe the line, get bombed, and then re-draw the line, closer to shore. Rinse and repeat. "Ok, Ok, now THIS! is the line you do not cross...uh, oh, you crossed it. Ok, now THIS is the line of death, and you do not cross it!" in Triumph the Dog's voice

IF this was about 8-10 years ago, but all of this "crying racist" has the remarkable effect of eventually canceling itself out. See, if this was a few years ago, we wouldn't be using the words "bad taste", we'd be hearing the usual tools call everyone a racist, and then move on to call this comedian a super racist. The words have changed, because the tolerance for this nonsense has dissipated. Fundamentally, prior to to the tools trying to use "racist" as a piss poor political argument, calling someone a racist was done to identify honest to God racism, and because they were doing something unfair. And that's the real word here: fair. Is what this comedian doing fair? Is it fair....to call this comedian a racist? Oh sorry, using today's code word for racism...bad taste...is this in bad taste?

Wrong. Although we can go round and around about what % of stuff came via caravan through the Arabian peninsula in the middle ages, the Incense Route is undeniable. And, since you were the one who stated that nobody has ever cared about the Arabian peninsula, operative word = ever, I figure I'd hit you with something that makes you undeniably wrong. Contradicting you? How about I know, and you don't. It's hard to contradict 0.

Bishop Hedd "OUTRAGE"! Is that what you were looking for? I suppose if you had posted, Death threat by transsexual Democrat...you might have gotten hedd's attention.

So the words "double entendre" are probably closer in connotation to cars or food, for you, than literary device, huh? Yes, Gene, I not only reject your lame attempt at creating a wedge, but I also explain why it will fail at the same time, and it does, blatantly...to the point that it becomes mind numbingly obvious to the entire board...but I am the one spouting tired old ****? You are the one trying to make a morally ambiguous set of questions into a political weapon to be wielded...but you suck at it...so you end up trying to beat up Republicans with your lamedick... ...I think that sentence ends right there.

Knew you were going to say that: Google "The Incense Route", and dispel your ignorance.

Holy not what I said at all, batman! Dude, I have coached all kinds of kids, including those with learning troubles. I hardly think you can pretend that you would have them on your team, and I wouldn't, since they have already been on my teams, literally. How many teams of yours have they been on? This is precisely what I am talking about. The fact that you spent time with your kid, and this movie happened to be running in the background, means the movie is awesome, the couch was awesome, everything is awesome. We don't think differently.. The difference here is: I am thinking, objectively = this movie sucked on all levels, especially the contrived BS on the learning challenges, and you are: emoting. Try actually doing = working with learning disabled/ADHD for an extended period, like I did, rather than being trite, and you rapidly(5 mins) learn how difficult it is for them, and you, to make progress on anything. The last thing the kid needs is being told that their problems aren't real and/or aren't that big of a deal. If your kid doesn't have these problems to deal with, thank God. But, when 12 year old baseball comes along, not T-ball, because every t-baller is retarded , but when it's 12 year old time for your kid, go ahead and coach the team, and then get back to me about just how important a constant and consistent message to the kids with challenges is. I will be just as right then as I am now, and you will still be: emoting

Yes, and sometimes quality time spent with your six-year-old is just quality time with your six-year-old. See, I knew it was something like this. The fact that you had a good time with your kid doesn't make this a good movie, it only means you had a good time with your kid. But, now, I am certain, that I don't understand, because I don't have kids. The movie, brutal in its linear thinking, quite literally, says "your learning disability and ADD problems are not problems at all, they are skills". There's nothing to misinterpret, because the movie is so bad, they literally say it word for word. Did you think them saying "we're going to train" and then training, was a good example of foreshadowing? The dialog in this movie makes your average 70s Kung Fu movie look like The Big Lebowski. Look, have a good time with your kid, but don't expect the rest of us to deny reality because of it. And, how much do you want to bet that one or more of the producers, directors, writers(cough) has a kid with with these problems, and this is their "gift" to them?

I should have said "the courage to reasonably defend" or "rationally defend" or "coherently defend".

Yeah, that's precisely what Venice, Genoa, etc. were thinking when their trade with the middle east allowed them to grow massively rich by being the middle men to the rest of Europe. It's the same reason America wasn't discovered, too. Which means we all don't exist. Since the middle east was so unimportant, nobody was willing to risk near certain death to find a way to get around it. Yeah, your history skills are way better than mine. And the importance of oil now, or silk in the 1300s, has nothing to do with geography. So what? Hell, the Eastern Roman empire grew massively rich compared to the Western, but the Western had much more territory. How did this happen, if scope and scale of commodities controlled is more important than geography? The fact is: "location, location, location" was a universal truth before humans even existed. Trying to pretend that a single commodity, and no other, is more important than geography, is either woefully naive, or purposefully ignorant.

Will any of this change the fact that Wisconsin(or any of the other states) are broke, and can't afford the ridiculous contracts they have given their employees? Nope. When you get done talking, these realities will remain: we have too many government employees, getting paid too much, getting ridiculous benefits(who expects not to have to contribute to their own retirement? WTF?), not working nearly as hard as their private sector counterparts, and exerting an undue and/or illegal influence on government. These realities have been accepted by the majority of Americans, and no amount of hackery is going to remove them. Whatever you say/do, nothing is going to change these realities. So, Democrats face a choice: they can either modulate what they stand for, or they can try, and fail, to fight against the overwhelming majority's view that something needs to be done about these realities. No amount of hack hit pieces on Huffington Nonsense, or Youtube, changes the fact that the government employee union gravy train is rapidly approaching its last stop. Democrats could be smart, and pull a Clinton, and get ahead of this issue and say "we are going to do it right", and then say "don't let the Republicans do it wrong". Or, Democrats can be stupid, and and continue to pretend that "it doesn't have to be done", flying in the face of reality, is a good plan. My money, based on the last 11 years of Democrat behavior, is on stupid.

Whoa! You don't really think Gene gets that concept, or, gets it, but doesn't want to miss the chance to phony it up, do you? The problem with trying to create political wedge issues is: they have to be more be more compelling to emotion, rather than reason. Gene's campaign to try to create a wedge on stem cells, and thereby paint conservatives as nuts is FAIL, because nobody is going to get emotional about something that we know is merely a tool. Gene's attempts like this will always fail, because just like stem cells, he is merely a tool as well. Whose tool is Gene? That's the real question.

No. Bad. Words mean things. Like, the difference between the definition of the word "meaning" vs. the definition of the word "grammar". They don't mean the same thing, and having an opinion, and being offended, don't mean the same thing either. You specifically used them as though they are interchangeable, they are not, and I simply pointed that out. If you aren't offended by any of this, and, since the phoniness of "being offended" is central to my post above, then either you have no real issue with my post, or, you are a moron.

I know, I know...just getting that out of my system. I feel much better now. Been carrying that pent-up annoyance around for way too long.

That's not what I said at all. Opinions '= the right to be offended, and therefore, demand that the offender submit a personal apology to you, Little Lord Fauntleroy. The holocaust is exactly as offensive to me as the slaughter of innocent people by Cromwell, or by the Ghengis Khan "hunts" or the Jim Jones mass suicide. All are terrible, heart-wrenching historical facts, but I don't get to walk around pretending like I am victim of any of it, which means I don't get to be offended by any of it, and neither do you.

Jeopardy Question: "Phrase most likely to be heard from the 3rd string defensemen who war-paint their faces with eye black, and go all out in pre-game drills, but don't ever actually get into the game"? "I'll take 'Defense Wins Championships' for $200, please Alex".

C. Although I recognize both crimes as crimes that require justice, I don't recognize my, or anyone other than the people directly affected, right to be personally offended by any of it. Too many people running around thinking they are allowed to be offended by too many things. Did Vick kill your dog? No. Did Ben mess with your sister/daughter? No. Did any of this happen within 50 miles of your house? No. If somebody you don't know, kills 15 people you don't know, 3 states away, are you....offended? Of course you aren't. None of you have the right to be personally offended by any of this, no more so than you were "offended"(read: couldn't care less) by the number of anonymous rapes and murders of humans, never mind dogs, last night alone. However, dog raping may be an exception.... In all cases, please , the rest of us do not exist in a state of perpetual tiptoeing around your precious sensibilities, because we are sooooo worried that we might offend you, or because you have a sister/daughter, or a dog. If the easily "offended" spent .5 of the time they spend "being offended" and babbling about it, on something useful like volunteering, or God forbid, on their kids, we'd all be better for it. Selective "being offended" is driven by one thing: celebrity status. Otherwise known as "phony as hell". If you need DMZ, or Huffington Nonsense, to tell you that you should be offended by something that has exactly 0 to do with you, on any level...it's time to re-evaluate your reason for being. The state of "being offended" is not a substitute for action, for doing something positive to improve your community. Instead, it's a selfish and/or wannabe "see, my opinion does matter" act. The retarded "victimhood" culture is directly responsible for this nonsense. Time to get a grip.

Yep. Exactly what I was thinking when I read the OP. Most QBs were HOFs because they won SBs, not HOFs who lead their teams to the SB. And this is true because the contrapositive is also true: Nobody in his right mind would argue that Aikman was better than Kelly or Marino. Neither Kelly or Marino won a SB, but both are in the Hall, because both lead their teams to the playoffs and SB. As far as the rest of the analysis, who knows? It appears that the #s don't provide any sort of usable correlation, never mind causation. Once again, "teams", not systems, not individual players, and certainly not coaches individually, win games.

Uhhhh....Bruce Smith? How is that not at the top of everybody's list? You knew the Bills were going to take him, and they took him, you knew he was going to be a HOFer, and he was. And, then there's the day I came home from school, went to take a dump, picked up the paper and the headline read "Bills could get Kelly", followed closely by "Bills get Jim Kelly from Defunct USFL". That was a hell of a day too.

Another Cam Newton thread?

Who cares about his mouth, whether he is old, or any other peripheral nonsense. The only question that matters is: is putting Shockey on the team part of getting us the best TEs possible, and a significant improvement in an area we have been weak in for so long? If the answer is yes, nothing else matters. If the answer is no, nothing else matters.

Another example of somebody not looking at a map, or history book, before posting. Funny, we had to deal with the Barbary Pirates in 1800-5 and again in 1810. A full 100 years BEFORE oil! How can this be? If everything in the middle east(the, uh, crossroads of the world, moron) is about oil?

Again, Gene, the board has stayed right where it is. It has been the long-time leftist wingnuts, and even the center-left people who have run away from the board with their asses on fire. When I first came here, it was definitely a left-of-center board. However, through consistent, and purposeful demoralizing posts from those on the righter side of things, and, as Nanker has said, political reality, a fire hose has been directed at the sensibilities of the left-leaning on this board since I have been here. There are many who deserve congratulations, too many to list here, but I would say the top 5 leftard busters were: Alaska Darin, Magox, LaBillz, Nanker, and the surprise pick: Dev/Null. Dev/Null has been consistent in blowing up leftards, not with rightard hackery, but with common sense, since I have been here. As for myself, the only reason I come here is to start trouble and see what happens. If I have started more trouble for the left, that must mean that starting trouble for them is more fun. The net result has either been to chase the leftards away, or, to galvanize them into conner-like "grasp any straw, even it makes me look ridiculous, uh, Sarah Palin!" playthings = pBills, ...lybob, buftex. The fact is that the candidates, Congress, and most importantly, ideas, that they have espoused around here have all schit the bed, except Hillary Clinton(PastaJoe was right, she would have been a much better President than both Obama and McCain). As far as my political beliefs, I couldn't care less about stem cells. If they help people, great! Now, stop talking about that, and start fixing the damn economy Democrats!

These relatively new people don't understand that at one time, there were LEGIONS of far-left people, and even more center-left people here on a daily basis.... ....right up until Obama got elected. But, within 2 months of him being in office, the leftists have quite literally fled this board, and I think the rational Democrats don't want to come here and have their noses rubbed in it on a daily basis. So, while I used to have to reply to 20 people for saying things like "Bush can't be an idiot, and a great liar, at the same time, pick one. And even if that were possible, he beat Democrats twice...which makes them complete buffoons." Now, I pretty much can say that with impunity. It's not only true, there's nobody with the courage to try and defend Democrat bad behavior from 2005 until now.

That movies sucked 8 ways till Sunday. Not only was it boring, but entire sections of the plot went absolutely nowhere. I had to turn it off, as it was either that, or throw something at my TV, thereby breaking it. And, how does one describe "explaining away dyslexia and ADHD" not equal "fantastical make believe storyline"? These are serious, and apparently growing, problems. It does us no good to tell kids "Instead of dealing with the challenges you have, you can always fly away to fanstasyland where those challenges are actually talents!" Were you high when you watched it? Oh yeah ..lybob, why don't you try arguing against a single reply of mine to your sorry-assed posts for the last month. I been blowing you up all over this board. And all you have is lamedick references, as usual.