OCinBuffalo

Or, we can see this for what it is: A last ditch attempt, by a self-described "Obama Republican", to try and divide and/or minimize the tidal wave that is coming to wash the far left(see, I didn't say socialist, happy?) agenda, and the president this guy supported, out of DC. Or, this is a way for a political professional who has gotten burned by Obama to try and justify his poor choices and even worse analysis of a presidential candidate. There are analysts who are making plausible cases for an 60-90 seat blowout in the house. Again, this is not me talking, click on the link and see that this is data and historical trends talking. This has the potential to be even bigger than 94, Obama is too addled to pull a Clinton, and this Obama Republican knows it. Given the lack of options, and the lack of time, the average Obama supporter has veerrry little to work with before November. Articles/positions/arguments like this is only the beginning. Between then and now we are sure to see every canard, straw man, phony moral superiority argument and every other tactic in the book. Hint: all of that is only going to make things worse for Democrats. Their positions aren't based on reality or common sense, and everybody knows it. They are based, and I'm being nice here, on an over-reliance on failed ideology. This is why we keep seeing all these unforced errors. Articles in Reason magazine aren't going to stop what's coming. The best thing for Democrats(or Obama Republicans) right now is introspection, but I doubt they even know what the word means. How much do you want to bet I get yelled at by Simon...when the failures of his far left heroes have nothing to do with me?

Yes, and the 750+(we can't seem to get an exact #) billion stimulus bill? Nah, that doesn't completely back up what I am saying at all. The fact is that both parties have wasted money, and therefore, we need to remove those in power and get some new people in. Defending the current government is like defending Dick Jauron. You keep thinking he's learned his lesson, and then he does something even worse.

I dunno....but I do smell crayonz.

Couldn't find a look-alike that I liked, so I will just do a caption instead. Coach Toadstool-->Look what's growing at the 25 yard line.

I think if you move Wood to C, which they have consistently practiced, and Urbik to Wood's old guard spot.... ...he was brought in to compete with Hangartner.

Hey! That's what my family reunion is called, even though all our parents are too old to play football anymore. You can't have it, it's ours.

How about a non-conner like argument? This is a thinly veiled attempt at either: 1a. Getting NC State Democrats on record as voting to make this executive order a law...so the Republicans can tear them a new ass with it in the coming elections. 1b. If they can't get a vote, nailing Democrats for blocking the measure, and not at least allowing a vote, will be just as devastating. So, the Democrats are now damned if they do, and damned if they don't. 2. Landing a punch on a Democratic governor who is not up for re-election this time. The thinking being that people will remember this when she is, because it is tied to a hurricane scare. Or, some combination of all 3. Common sense says you don't restrict gun rights in situations that have the highest propensity for looting and home invasion. In all cases, this costs the Republicans nothing, and, if played properly, can be significantly useful. It's an unforced error, and these keep happening due to Democrat's reliance on retarded ideology. This is another example of Democrat's self-inflicted wounds. Again, they continue to be their own worst enemies. Clearly, current Democrats are not "smarter" than anybody, and they keep reinforcing that conclusion almost on a daily basis.

It's hysterical how on one hand: the rich are all idiots who started on 3rd base and thought they hit a triple... but on the other, the rich are all intelligent and their word should be taken without question. More confirmation that the only "ideas" these hacks have is the how to gain power by relying on arguments on convenience. That unintentional water vapor link that refutes pretty much the entire anthropogenic argument? Also hysterical.

Moronic. And, another example that these hacks are uneducated. Yes, the Southern Democrats, you know, where tobacco is mostly grown? Yes in the 60s and 70s when this "conspiracy" started, they were all for taxing and labeling tobacco.

I remember quite a few posters had this guy in their mock drafts a few years ago. The problem with these kind of TEs is: they tip off the other team that a pass is coming when they sub in.

Balls....busted.

Well, there goes your "trade for his contract idea" He just got released. My guess is somebody will make him an offer, and it won't be us.

There is no evidence that the WRs we have can't catch 70 balls a game, especially given this coaching staff, and what we have seen this preseason. There is no evidence that they will. The point is we don't know. We do know that Housh is being shopped for a reason. And I don't remember Seattle as being flush with WRs. IF he is somebody they need, then they keep him. Again, whatever intangibles the young guys need to learn they can get from Evans. And, they can't learn how to play the position physically from the sidelines. The WR position is about doing it.

Awesome. I wish it was more.

Yep. The only way Hardy makes the team is if Jackson gets cut, or, they keep 6 and cut both Jones and Roosevelt.

My mistake on that measurables. I was looking at the wrong guy. Regardless, what on earth makes you think we are in "get it done now" mode with this team? Your entire argument is based on the premise that somehow we have a playoff team that's missing a final piece. I assure you, all preseason optimism aside, we don't--> and that's coming from an intolerable optimist. EDIT: Oh, and now that we have Nelson? I would MUCH rather see him run routs in the middle...because he can also run routs anywhere on the field, and, he's going to act like the TE we don't have for at least a little while.

They are coming in quick now on Rotoworld.

1. Historically, the definition of a possession receiver is a larger guy who can put his body between the man and the ball, regardless of rout. TO went over the middle a whole lot last year, so WTF are you talking about? Why do we want a little, 32 year old guy going over the middle again? In a division that all plays the 3-4? We already have a slot receiver who can do the crossing pattern thing. As has been said: injury waiting to happen. 2. How do young receivers develop by sitting on the bench, or not even dressing? They don't. So far I have only seen 4 WR sets in situations. And again, my 4 WRs for that are Evans, Parrish, Johnson, and Jackson/Nelson...but I'd rather see a RB motion out into one of the spots. TJ puts Johnson /Jackson/Nelson on the bench. That's not developing them. 3. Apparently you don't know what the word "develop" means. Mental reps only go so far, and they are practically worthless for a WR. Timing and rout running is a learn by doing, not by watching, activity. 4. Again, why do I want to sign a FA right before the season starts, so he can be #2-3? Do you want to sit Steve Johnson/Roscoe Parrish? I can see if we were signing a HOFer. But, he ain't. He won't know the playbook, and therefore he will be a liability for the first 3 games, while again, keeping people on the bench. Meanwhile, you will be telling us not to expect too much from our big FA singing. So basically our expectations of TJ, and our young guys would be exactly the same. Where's the benefit? 5. I am saying that if you keep recycling old FA WRs, you never know what your young guys can do in a real game. This is fairly easy concept to understand. For all we know, Steve Johnson/Chad Jackson is better than TJ...but we can't know one way or the other if they are on the bench. TJ detracts by keeping people out of the game. We cannot keep guys on the roster who can't play in the big game. The only way we know if they can, is if we play them, in the big game. We have seen a lot of potential from our young WRs, but we need to see if they can do it, consistently, for real. TJ only interferes with that process.

1. For anybody that doubts that ESPN, etc. has a big market bias I have 2 words: Teddy Bruschi. The above is not whining, crying or anything else. It's simply stating the facts as they are. ...or did you think EPSN Boston(as if anybody cares nationally) is a coincidence? Why is it that we keep getting told the Texans, Redskins, and 49ers are always "on the rise". Look at the big TV markets, and you will see a clear pattern. 2. With that being said, the only way a small market team will ever get any respect is by winning. Period. As far as this division is concerned? The Jets are in big trouble offensively, IMHO. Their O line is anything but solid, lord knows they should have kept Faneca(=hubris). Their QB is starting to look more like another Matt Lienart rather than another Carson Palmer. I am sure they will be good on D, even without Revis. But, in this division, you have to score points, especially in December. Therefore, the playoffs, never mind the SB, is a ? The Dolphins will run the football. But their offense is looking weak in general. I have caught a few games online, and it wasn't pretty. Defense is is decent, but it's the same defense we have seen, and if we can ever get a passing game going our WRs are better than their DBs = they traded away their #2 WR for a DB. Frankly I am unimpressed with Brandon Marshall + rookie to be named later against our DBs. It's back to stopping the run, again, if we can. The Patriots are still in decline, and I haven't seen anything that changes that. Amazingly, they gave up more rushing yards this preseason than we did. Never thought I'd see that from a Belechick team. This team used to win on coaching and defense. That's how they won the SBs. I don't know if Brady can win big scoring/track meet games. He usually throws a pick at the end of them, especially in the big games/playoffs. So who knows? Certainly anybody running around telling us that this is a "tough division" simply isn't paying attention. There are far too many ? on every team. But consider: all 3 other teams are in major TV markets...so it's the same old thing.

1. If we wanted a possession WR, why didn't we just keep TO? 2. The reason we didn't keep TO is: we need to let our young receivers develop, something having TO kept from happening last year. At the very least we need to see who can do what. We can't spend another year keeping the same people on the roster because they may have potential. For most of them, it's been three years. Time to fish or get cut. Especially when you consider we have a #4 draft pick who is already on the "3 year delay" plan due to already being IRed this year. 3. I don't think another 32 year old WR is going to help us re-build. 32 year old WRs are for teams missing a piece or 2, and therefore, not for us. 4. The guy just got done "not meeting expectations" in Seattle. So what? Are we going to lower expectations for him and let him come here? Hint: lowering expectations for players has been killing this team, and its fans, for the last 10 years. Enough of this horseschit. Upstate has been steadily lowering expectations for itself, which breeds and rewards incompetence and buffoonery, for far too long. The NFL is the NFL and its standards are universal, therefore, not subject to this jackass, lowering expectation game. 5. We need to think in terms of spending our resources(FA $$$ and draft picks) finding our Andre Reed, since we already have a James Lofton(Lee Evans) on the team. I want a new, young, hall of fame potential WR, or I want to be giving somebody a chance at being that guy, instead of getting a journeyman to go through the motions = Housh. 6. Based on how things have gone with this coaching staff, we want our young offense to be together, learn together, and grow together. Because if they can do that, there's little doubt they are going to be very good. TJ is on his way out, and we don't need anymore "veteran leadership". We have a veteran leader: Lee Evans. Done. Enough reasons? I am sure if I spent another 5 minutes, I could think of more

As was said here These are my top 6(and yes I do think they keep 6 because of spread sets and ST) WRs #1 Evans #2 Johnson(but this may be Jackson sooner or later) #3 Parrish(the slot is his) #4 Nelson(as I said in the last thread, he has outplayed everybody but Evans and Parrish, but he's a rookie so #4) #5 Jackson #6 Roosevelt(Hometown kid has looked NFL-able both on offense and special teams) -- PS Jones CUT Hardy (sorry to say it but he's the odd man out here) Nelson does everything Hardy does, but he seems to be able to get through injuries(2 in this camp) he doesn't drop balls, and he clearly knows how to run routs. Keep in mind Hardy is a family acquaintance, and while I have done my best to root for him, he ain't my acquaintance . In my book it's team first, family member's dopey acquaintances 2nd . I will be absolutely shocked if they try to keep Hardy and sneak Nelson onto the practice squad. I will be absolutely shocked if they decide to pay Hardy his money, when they can pay Nelson his instead.

You still looking for my attention, child? Add value to this thread or piss off. Nobody needs wants to see this crap, and I STILL don't care that you were a bartender, or whatever is the cause of your pissant crusade.

I believe the correct answer is: most of the Iraq money went to US companies/military and yes, that did provide some demand. However, the government spending did increase the deficit and made money in general cost more, which hurts business as well. IMHO, you have to pay for wars if you are going to fight them. On the other side, though, you don't want to tax the economy if a recession is looming. Bush's decision to go to war without raising taxes was fine for a year or 2, but he should have found a way to pay for these wars IMHO. Also, there has been some documented waste in terms of giving money directly to the Iraqi government, and letting them spend it. However, when you are talking $800 billion, that fraud amounts to less than 5%. And, when you compare that loss with how much the US taxpayer has been defrauded by the UN, it's peanuts. Ultimately, there can be no doubt that the war in Iraq stimulated the economy. However, because it took money away from liberal programs it could have been wasted on, it has been characterized by them as "wasted".

So even though I was kidding, I was right, you do live 14 blocks away from people. The problem is somehow the word "uncomfortable" has been replaced by "fear". They don't mean the same things, but somehow somebody has decided that they do. If girls who tell me that they want to teabag me outside a punk bar in South Philly make me uncomfortable, that doesn't mean I fear them. If guys who decide to grab my junk in a bar in Downtown Pittsburgh make me angry and I squish them, clearly, I don't I fear them, I merely have self-respect. If Jets fans won't STFU when I watch a Bills away game, and I decide to change seats, so as to avoid squishing them and ending up in jail, that's because I fear jail, not the squishy Jets fans. Fearing any of these people would be irrational, and yes, might even point to me having psychological problems. The problem for the people who think "uncomfortable" = "fear" is, I don't fear any of these people, and in most cases they amuse me, except for the junk-grabbing guy. They all simply make me uncomfortable, and are keeping me from what I am trying to do: drinking and watching a band, drinking and hitting on women, drinking and watching an away Bills game. I do fear people who try to get in the way of my drinking, however. They ARE scary Hardly anybody "fears" these Muslims or their Mosque, so calling people "Islamaphobes" is ridiculous. Instead, people are trying to get on with their lives, and they don't need a constant reminder of what happened on 9/11, keeping them from what they are trying to do.

But the point continues to be: Christians bothered you, and you have been in your own words, "wary of Christians" since. I don't have a problem with that either. For the record, F those little Cartman tools who bothered you. I had a similar childhood experience, but this was directly due to f-tard liberal policies....so I have been "wary of liberals" ever since I thought you said you live in New Mexico...so...aren't people living 14 blocks away from you anyway?