OCinBuffalo

it was 34-18 USA in the third quarter. The lead is 31 now. Suddenly Kobe found the range on 3 pointers and between that and the dribble penetration, it's been a blowout since the last shot of the first half.

I used to go to sixers games all the time. I like the NBA, but you said it = things got really crappy, really quick, and I think nothing demonstrated that better than losing the Olympics. That, and you have players not spending any time learning how to play team basketball in college anymore, as you did with the players on the original dream team. This why bringing in a great defensive coach like Coach K was a master stroke, and nobody in the NBA wold dare mess with him. Oh, well, then again, three awesome individual plays in a row and now we are up by 18! Edit: Doh! two more and now its 23

55-43. hmmm. 3 of 13 from the arc and 10 of 20 from the line at the half. Kobe cannot hit a three this game. But we are up by 12. If this was 2004 we'd be losing this game. However, it's not, it's 2008 and our guys are playing good team d, getting the rebounds on both ends, and outworking them. Without our defense, this would be a vastly different game. We aren't getting much help from the refs either. I can't stand these "international rules". Basically means you can bring in a goon and have him hack our star players and goal tend all game. It will be interesting to see what happens after halftime, apparently last time they played these guys came out and ran 13-2 on us. That would not be good.

I agree and I love watching good basketball. I hate watching selfish street ball. To answer your question: Where do the supposed super-hyped, all-time great(but only 23 years old) best players in the NBA come from??? The simple fact is that everything I have seen heard this time is a complete departure from the last eight years. The results are obvious, and happening, again, as I write. It's 14-5. And it's 14-5 because these guys are playing D and attacking the basket as a ....TEAM! Team basketball is the most fun to watch, and I guarantee you will see an improvement in team concepts throughout the NBA from here on out.

I have made my position on the NBA clear. I won't pay attention until the gold returns to the place it should never leave. That said, it doesn't mean I won't watch the game this morning, as I have watched all the games so far. I will watch them work get the gold, and if they do, then I will watch them in the NBA again. Need to see some good defense from this team. No let-downs. This is game 7, one or done. Australia gave them a pretty good game last time they played. But, I expect our guys to wail on them the way they have played so far. I don't care what the score is as long as we don't see sloppiness or showboating that misses the basket. USA!

I have been paying attention to this part of the board for about 3 years now. One thing is clear: there are a whole lot of people who have never taken accounting 1+2, economics (micro and macro), finance, and certainly not statistics. These skill sets allow one to see problems in terms of the disciplines learned, and at the very least the baseline expectations of how different parts of the government and country interact. This is why we see posts, over and over, that are so far and away removed from starting with the real definition of the problem. These basic classes allow one to understand how things work. They represent the instruction manual for America. If all you have is poly-sci degree, or similar social science stuff, you aren't going to understand how things actually work, and you are going to be eternally doomed to falling for whatever partisan crap you get fed from whichever either side of the aisle you pay your attention. Make no mistake, I'm not saying people need to have to get this information from college. I am saying that you need to do the same amount of work/research that would be done in a college class, in order to fully understand these concepts--->as in, there's a reason Accounting and Economics require a year each to get the basics down. You don't have to go to college, but you do have to do the work that gets you the understanding of how business/America works. Otherwise, you will never know what you are talking about(um, the posts here) and you will susceptible to being fooled with in terms of every aspect of life. Question: Do you think Mike Vick is wishing he had taken an accounting class right now? I have a buddy who is a social worker, and I have huge respect for him because literally nobody wants his job. It's much more of a calling. Every time we talk politics, his basic understanding of how things work either doesn't exist or is FUBAR. I spend most of the conversation explaining info from the classes I listed above. What I don't understand is his choice to form such an opinionated position, when he clearly doesn't understand the basics. Make no mistake, this guy has 2 mater's degrees, he is a great guy, and he is a reasonable person. He acknowledges he has no idea how America works. And so I spend time giving him a free education on the basics, and we don't spend much time on high level policy or partisan crap. That would be boring anyway. What's interesting for me is trying to figure out where in the hell these terribly misconstrued concepts that a lot of his thinking is predicated on come from. So far, the answer appears to be: other, partisan-liberal, ignorant, non-educated people, who have even less of an idea how America works. Now for the other side: a-hole VCs and startup programmers/non-technical hacks turned CEOs. They also did not have even the basic grasp of these concepts. Yes, a large part of people running around calling themselves "business people" today, because they started a website or a consulting firm, know very little of business. In the startups I worked for, I was able to shock and amaze them with my profound ability to explain basic accounting. I will never forget the day my supposed "boss"(ex-meat salesman who read one programming book) called me and asked my why Boeing, one of my clients, was so concerned about their AR charges and making sure of their accuracies. Literally: "Why can't just tell them not to worry so much about it and that we'll get to it in Phase II?" <---if you don't know why that is a hysterically stupid question, especially for a company like Boeing, well....you might be in need of an accounting class if you have any interest in starting a company, ever! The other problem is that so many of the real "rich" people in this country think $$$ = knowledge. Just because daddy left you 50 mil doesn't suddenly turn you into Deming or Buffet. This is why I would support a "death tax" break for anyone who inherits $$$ or a business that can clearly prove they have the training to manage those assets responsibly, and a double whack tax if you cannot. Paris Hilton should be taxed to hell and gone when she inherits the family business, because it's obvious she will do nothing to improve it. It's ok to make something from nothing and hand it down to your kids. It's not ok to fail to prepare those kids properly for the responsibility you have handed down as well. If I ever have kids, they will know how to gather requirements, design systems, and manage projects before they hit high school. But I will probably send them to college to learn the arts, literature, etc., because those are important as well.

Anybody else see click on the video link? You see that QB draw play they called? Since when is TE a running QB? I am all for calling non-standard plays in situations, misdirection, and getting mismatches off of motions and shifts, but QB draw? Perhaps they liked what they saw on Tuesday. That's ballsy. Not sure how I feel about that. But, making teams worry about another dimension to the offense can't be a bad thing I guess. Too much to hope that opposing Ds have to spy a LB on Edwards I suppose.

Just heard an update, doesn't sound that bad...as I knock on wood. Lynch and Edwards bumped knees, Lynch is fine, and Edwards walked off the field on his own with a slight limp.

Which goes to show that a trade is about the player individually, not some "this or that always means" mantra. Some trades are good others are not. There is no magic formula other than solid professional scouting and a good football guy in charge of making the decision. I took a cursory look at the Raven's message boards: they are way to wrapped up in their QB issues to even barely notice that Willis isn't playing in the pre-season. I feel sorry for them, they are finally going to get the QB settled only to find out that Willis can't pick up the blitz. There was one post that sounded very familiar: "... Willis doesn't know the system yet, and Rice has looked solid, so...". Keep waiting for him to "get it"... Once they figure out QB, that poor guy is going to get hit, a lot. Last time I checked they didn't fix the holes in their O line either. So now they get to have the fun "is it the O line or is it Willis" debates. Those are always a good time. Whoever that starting QB is, he's got a lot to be worried about. And yes, this is already the biggest steal since Ditka gave away his whole draft class for Ricky Williams = another Dumbass RB. In fact, it might be the biggest steal since Babe Ruth if Trent Edwards makes the pro-bowl a few times, and Stroud gives us 3 Solid years. Baltimore + Philly + Chicago = already suckers, and it can only get worse. Once again, Thanks Marv!

More things for us to laugh/post about? Normally I don't like kicking a team when it's down, but all of this team's trouble is self-inflicted, and they deserve what they get. The only way they are going to learn is from living with the consequences. Especially the "we don't have a real scouting department" thing. What are the chances that their cheap owner actually puts up the cash to start vetting people properly before they are drafted? No real scouting department, and people want to call Ralph cheap?

This idea has been "plaguing" me for the last few days. I can't help but envision some ESPN draft special a few years from now when they ask: "How in the hell did the rest of the league sit by and let the Bills draft 6 pro-bowl level guys in two straight drafts?" (Of course I am going to leave the Whitner, McCargo, Youboty, Ko, Ellison, Butler, Williams draft out of this, although that's looking pretty good now too, isn't it?)Before you even start, I know it's way to early to say any of this. Hence the title of this thread. However, let's take each pick one at a time and look at the details, not the big stuff: 1. Lynch. We know about the run game, and he caught the ball well also, but did you see that blitz pick-up on the first Pitts TD? He hit the blitzing LB, not the other way around, which means he can stay on the field every down(unlike McDumbass), which means more options that include him. He has the potential to be the most complete back since Marshall Faulk. He has the potential to be at the level of Thurman Thomas or Roger Craig = the two guys who invented the concept of "complete back". 2. Poz. From what I saw at camp and on TV, we haven't even begun to see what this guy can do in games. He is so quick, it looks like what he is doing is effortless. He makes MLB look easier than it really is. That's why it's hard to notice him, he's in the pile stopping the run(or making the RB cut again so somebody else gets the easy tackle) and you don't see him make the tackle, as opposed to him making the tackle 3-5 yards after the LOS. I think about the screen play Pittsburgh tried to run. The called a good play and they "had us", but he had their guy after only 3 yards, coming from the middle of the field to the sideline. Big plays will come in time. For now, it's highly entertaining to me just to see him do the small stuff so well. He's going to be a good one, he has the potential to be great. 3. Edwards. We honestly have no idea what we have with Edwards. We know he is at least serviceable. But, is he going to be another practice hero = Chad Pennington? Or is he going to be...I can't even begin to hope, a Montana type player? It's enough to make me nervous with daring expectations every time I think of the Bills or this season. I don't think anybody can doubt his potential. There is much to work on, but I honestly don't see reaching those goals as out of his grasp. In fact, I think most of it depends on Trent himself. If he does well, he faces a whole new level of scrutiny, every milestone he passes, so we'll see. But, somehow based on what we've seen so far, he has the potential to deal with it, and even jokingly revel in it. Joking about the turf and Big Ben is the detail I, and others here, picked up on. He clearly has the confidence to lead, and say the right things at the right time in a meaningful, not contrived, way. 4. McKelvin. We already know without doubt that this guy is a "big-play" guy on ST. I have seen him go about 50/50 on defense so far, which is pretty darn good for a rookie, since most elite CBs only ever get to about 80/20 anyway. It's really exciting to know that we have barely seen this guy play and we already have a lot of positives from him. He is confident, sure, but I don't see cocky, and I want confident CBs. Deion Sanders was the most confident CB ever, and he was also arguably the best cover corner ever, never mind his ability on ST. He gets better every play, and he makes mistakes once, not twice, as evidenced on the return this week vs. last week. 5. Hardy. He is going to be a great utility/situational player at the very least. He has already proved that. We have no idea yet where he "fits" or how complete his game might become. We do know that he is learning quick and his progress from the Skins game to the Pitts game was clear. I didn't see him miss a block(in fact he crushed a CB on a run play and blocked/sealed LBs 3 times on the second drive ), mess up a shift/motion or not run the right rout last game, where he did all of those things at the practices I saw and the Skins game. The simple fact is that Evans/Parrish/Lynch/Jackson torched the Steelers on those two drives, and that is because they couldn't focus only on them. Hardy blocked for/drew coverage away from them, which is what we wanted in the first place. Hardy already = problem solved. He clearly drew enough coverage for Royal to take that second TD into the end zone. I honestly don't care if he catches anything all year if he takes away our opponents' ability to lock down on people. But, does anybody doubt that he will be catching a lot of balls, especially in the end zone, this year? Hell, he was open in the end zone on both drives, and teams that don't cover him will suffer the consequences. 6. Ellis. Perhaps the biggest surprise for me. It's not just his 2 sacks or the forced fumble = clearly demonstrated ability to rush the passer. I saw him(so did the announcers, anybody who watched that game, Holy God) blow up a running play against the Steelers and allow Corto to get an easy tackle for no gain, which is just as, if not more, important. We need DEs that can stop the run(we need any and everything that can stop the run after last year), and as a rookie he clearly demonstrated that ability last game. It's too early to say that he can do it all consistently, but nothing so far shows he can't, and everything so far shows he can. I'm sure I'm going to get accused of rose-coloring here. But, I always color outside the lines anyway. You actually have to be very detail-oriented to do that properly. Therefore that's the thing that I've picked up on that impresses me most about these 6 men: they have clear command of the details and they get them right a lot more often than not. Sure there's room for improvement, but, as we saw with JP, the details are where the devil is, and unfortunately I don't see him ever getting control of some of them. The fact that these guys have so many details under control so quickly is why I see each of them as having the potential to be a pro-bowl level player. How funny would it be if we do see that ESPN special a few years from now? Either one of these draft classes has the potential to make the all-time list.

I remember that. Sorry, but it's not the first, nor will it be the last, time that somebody gets pounced on here for brining info from a non-traditional or non-"accepted" source. I do it on PPP all the time, but that is usually in response to people posting anything MoveOn.org and friends has to say, since any reasonable person can clearly see that they permanently departed from reality about 5 years ago. This is different. This is bringing other fans/writers', who have no reason to lie, perspectives on a player we drafted. So far, Pewter Report, and you, appear to be dead on regarding Ellis. It's cool to see other's perspectives, besides Jerry Sullivan, WGR, etc. all the time. So don't be afraid to post anything else you find out about Ellis or anything else you think is relevant. I had thought the knock on Ellis was: immaturity = more about himself and $ than the team, not realizing that being a great team player = way more money. I also thought that he had a slight problem with taking plays off due to endurance issues/laziness. He did get burned on that naked bootleg, but that's an obvious rookie mistake, and can easily be corrected. What I like, besides the sacks, etc., is this: there was a run play he blew up later in the 2nd quarter. He got off his block a little to the inside, enough to move the running back outside and away from the intended hole, while ignoring his blocker, thus delaying the RB and letting Corto fly up and nail him for no gain. That was a pure talent = (quickness + strength) play against a traditionally good running team, and this guy is only a rookie. We can certainly use run-stuffing help on this defense. Especially in obvious run situations. If Ellis continues to show like this, we may have another steal on our hands. That would make this draft's 1-3 just as good as last years 1-3.

We are leading at 25% as I write this. The list is a joke, and the explanations are laughable. 7 is the best we are gonna do with any Eagle fan, on anything, because of their built-in inferiority complex, which is why Dallas and Philly make the list at all, and why Philly is listed #1. First of all, real Philly fans = the 20% of the people in that stadium that don't work for: 1. A Law Firm 2. A Pharma company 3. A Commodities trading company 4. Comcast 5. Peco Energy 6. or aren't: some tool from Jersey acting like it's retard recess and Philly is the playground(like they do every weekend, year round), trying to get in a fight, hit on somebody's girlfriend, or getting drunk and taking their clothes off before they piss themselves. For 1-5 football games are about work. The only place where you hear them talking football or "being passionate" is in the upper deck or parts of the endzone, which is where the batteries that you get hit with come from. The "waiting list" is mostly comprised of little law firms, etc. waiting on their turn to overspend on boxes and premium seats. None of it has to do with the team or football, all of it has to do with self-aggrandizement, or the aforementioned retard recess. Meanwhile, the rest of the "fans" are sitting in bars bitching up a storm even when they are winning, getting in fights with each other, and showing their team exactly 0 loyalty. Real Eagle fans, that actually know anything about football, are few and far between, and you rarely see them anywhere near the stadium or the sports bars. My picks are based on passion, loyalty and sheer quantity of fans. I have been to a lot of non-Bills games in other cities. 1. Pittsburgh. 2. Buffalo. 3. Kansas City. 4. Green Bay. 5. Cleveland. Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta, New Jersey Jets and Giants, SF, Pats*...all fall into the same category that Philly does. No fans, just business associates occasionally bringing their fat kids who ignore the game and play gameboy. Sad, sorry existence for all of those teams, and they minute they don't win, or the fat kid takes over the company, bye, bye corporate support. This is the biggest reason LA has no team. People out there can't get over themselves for 4 hours and enjoy something together with their family, friends, or even strangers. If it doesn't advance their career or serve in some way to prove how good they are individually, they want no part of it. Nobody in LA talks about how much fun the Lakers game is, they talk about where their seats are, and then they want to know where yours are.

Langston Walker, Left Tackle. Oh, wait, didn't he already.... John McCargo, running back. Why not? If he can't get it done as a DT, then bring him in as our Fridge! Give him his own nickname that has something to do with "cargo". John Wendling, Chuck Norris beater. If Chuck wants to show his face around here, I'd say Wendling could take him. He can already do so many other things besides play safety, why wouldn't he be able to f Chuck up? (Insert lame joke about driving buses/driving instructors and Lynch/Parrish here) Seriously, I think the days of us trying to find new things to do, for the few good players we had, are over. The only reason you are looking for a guy to play more than one position is because he is athletically superior to the starter you have playing there. We had to try out McGee at WR because we didn't have any good ones at the time. Or, there is a very specialized and situational role that you want a guy to play. For example, I'm not sure why Hardy wasn't out there for the inevitable jump ball/Hail Mary at the end of the game against Pittsburgh. Other than: 1. Nobody thought of it or 2. They don't want to get him hurt in preseason or 3. They only want him focused on O right now. However, I don't see how it hurts us having Wendling and Hardy be there and knocking the ball down 2 feet before the other guys even get a chance at it.

USED TO BE. Only used to be. 3-4 years ago, sure, that was true. The problem is: everybody got old on D and O line, at the same time. Now, the exact opposite is true: any nobody the Pats* plug in is an upgrade and they will start because they add a spark better than the washed up somebodies we all know, and not miss a beat. They have sprinkled a very few young players into the mix and rely on them to make the athletic plays they need. Look, I'm not saying that they weren't good, when they were, I am saying that there's no way they are as good as they USED TO BE. Supporting facts from Pats* vs Tampa: 1. Pats* first team defense gashed by Tampa f'ing Bay and Brian Griese? Looking like Peyton Manning? 3rd string Brian Griese 8-8 on the opening drive? 17-3 at halftime. This is Tamp Bay, the NFC 9-7 team last year. 2. Mayo leads Pats* d in tackles with 5 = so there's sprinkle-boy 3. Pat* starting d gives up 42 yards on 7 carries = 6 ypc on the first drive??? When I say gashed, that's what I mean. 4. 170 total rushing yards. Against a SB* team? I have been saying this is a team on the decline since two years ago, especially on D, and I was right. The fact that they went almost perfect last year ignores the # of games that they barely won, instead people seem to focus on the blowouts only. It also ignores the fact that the Chargers had their top 3 O guys hurt in the playoffs and couldn't recover from that, and it ignores the fact that, once again, Brady threw 3 picks in a championship game. Their experience is the only thing they have going for them now, because their bodies aren't there anymore. Again, why was last year the first, and only, year that they made a big effort in FA? Answer: because they knew they had one last shot at the SB. It was a great shot to be sure, but it's over to be sure as well. It was a good run, but it's done. Anybody taking bets on whether this is BB's last year, he "retires" for a few years in the media, and then finds a new team?(49ers or Atlanta? or Jets, again?) Sure, NOW, but no way before. This statement ignores the passage of time. When they won their first SB*, or their second* for that matter, there's no way that's true. Hell, Beldsoe won their toughest playoff game in their first SB* year.

I scoff at Brett Farve and the Jets. They will suck when it counts this year(beating up on 49ers and fish doesn't count). No mitigation here. I am either going to be 100% wrong or 100% right. And I say he will be out by the 12th game of the season, the Jets will only win about 6-7 games and we will sweep them again. Unless we beat ourselves/crazy last-minute ST play, but that will have nothing to do with Favre. However, our division plays a considerably weak schedule this year. That, and the fact that their other off-season acquisitions will show up in some small ways, will serve to deceive a lot of people. Therefore, I am sure we will see a lot of "I told you so" posts regarding the Jets and Brett Favre early on in the season...say, after their first game of the season against the fish. But again, I refer you back to the INT record Favre is about to break, and the reality that is the Jet's lack of ability to stop us(and therefore so many others last year) on so many fronts. Favre isn't going to help them stop the run, cover our receivers, or make the blocks necessary for the running game. So, let's remember my view is based on the season, not after the first game of the season.

I would need 4 pages to confess to all the crap that has come out of my mouth over the years...bellowing down at Bills fans who had left the game, from the top row of the stadium comes to mind(we did come back and win, but still, it was pretty dumb). That, and I used to only get to go to one live game a year...so I am stewing for 4 days/weeks before. But, I have made a solid improvement on my swearing in front of kids/people who are sure to be offended over the last 5 years. Last year I was down to less than one F bomb a game, which I made a point to apologize for. I don't count the Pats* game last year, because I was surrounded by swearing Bills and Pats* fans. I was actually embarrassed for both sides. Not only was what they were saying foul-mouthed, it was quite stupid. Examples:"Brady sucks a fat white d_ck" or "JP can't f'ing run!"(right after he scrambled and made the play to Royal)? People were so angry on both sides, nothing was making any sense. But, there was no doubt that the many of the Pats* fans were there to be vindictive, mainly because they started with the Bills fans in the first minute of the game. The weird part was why they felt the need to keep running their mouths after the game was clearly in hand. Pretty classless. It was strange, because it wasn't like anybody cared either way by that point. I didn't understand it. If that was us, we'd probably start a conversation about something else, or, talk up the good parts of the other team out of not wanting to be perceived as bad winners. Perhaps just a small commentary on different parts of the country and/or how we are raised.

Excellent use of the search feature. Other than that, there's absolutely nothing of value regarding the subject of this thread.

Bull. If you watch the Edwards postgame vid on bb.com, he specifically says they only had a few days to study the game plan. And what about this from the Post Gazette: "We weren't at our peak," said nose tackle Casey Hampton, appearing in his first game since coming off the physically unable to perform list. "They ran the plays we knew were coming. They just were dropping the ball on us." If it were hockey, they would have pulled the goalie."

I was having fun reading those and others last night. I think the main difference between our DoomAndGloomers and their's: their's actually know what they are talking about, and/or know how to use stats properly. From what I saw, Pittsburgh has a whole lot of problems with the fundamentals, especially on D, and those ARE NOT a "pre-season-only" problem. Unless corrected they will carry over into the regular season, because they are about individual effort/skill not teamwork. "Whiffing on tackles..." I think we get to start this season with a clear mismatch in terms of our RBs and WRs vs. everybody else's LBs and DBs. Evans, Parrish, Lynch, Royal, and especially Fred Jackson put on a "yards after catch" clinic last night. The receiving play he had on the second TD drive was nothing short of outstanding. I think the posters here who give some/most of the credit for that to Edwards' accuracy are dead on as well.

For all intents and purposes, only including stats that were when our "ones" were facing their "ones".... Score Bills 14 Steelers 0 Edwards: 9-11 104yds 2TDs, 22 yds rushing Roesthlisberger 6-8 53yds 1 INT Total Rushing Yards BUF 39 = 8 carries 4.9 ypc PIT 16 = 5 carries = 3.2 ypc ...we flat out kicked their sorry asses. They can deny it all they like, blame it on pre-season, whatever. I just watched it again at lunch time here and: They couldn't block us, they couldn't tackle us and they sure as hell couldn't cover us. Trent Ewards ran for more yards than Willie Parker. I know a beating when I see one, and that was a beating. Hell, even the NFL network guys are saying that we "gashed" them. Link here: "Gashed" Love it that Woodson has to say that we gashed the Steelers. They didn't belong on the same field out there with us last night, and this is coming from the statistically BEST D in the league? Wow...either their team decided to take the night off, or, we are pretty darn good after all. Could be either, both, neither, or other causes for it, but there's no doubt it was an ass-kicking.

Somehow I'm not that inclined to care when this happens: Buffalo Receiving REC YDS AVG TD LG(formatting is screwed) L. Evans 3 55 18.3 0 23 R. Royal 2 20 10.0 2 13 because of the very real threat that Hardy represents. Especially when both of these guys only played for 2 friggin series. Can you imagine the #s if they had been in the whole game? That = a very real possibility that Lee has around 150 yards receiving and at least one TD, probably 2. Royal ends up with around 50 yards and spends the rest of the game drawing the d away from everybody else. How could they possibly not cover him after the first 2 series? The intention of drafting James Hardy is to produce the very results you see above. He is not here to be the main guy every game. He is here to represent an extra threat, making it impossible for teams to account for everyone on the field. If he also produces similar #s when teams throw all of their focus on these other guys, then we are in business. The simple fact is, there are going to be teams that focus on whoever they think is the biggest threat and they may take that guy away. Teams used to try and do that to Andre Reed all the time. And, then Beebe or Lofton early on, would start to dominate and catch everything thrown their way for 2 TDs and 100+ yards, and then those teams would try to adjust and then Reed was open on crossing route, and well, you know the rest = that usually ended up doing well for us in terms of RAC and extra TDs.

Great execution. This is how we should finish games. Beat them down with run game...that pitch play was brutal, love seeing O lineman run in space.

Hey if we keep on the "tolerance train" do you really think that's going to really be that far-fetched? As if there isn't an ACLU law team preparing the briefs as we speak? Muslims already have enjoyed a "more equal" position legally for a while now. How come South Park gets to F with Jesus but gets censored if they try to do a simple picture of Mohamed? I am almost certain that sooner or later in my travels I will encounter the very thing you are talking about a some s-hole hotel owned by our friends from the Middle East. We have to stay in the crap joints more often that the good ones in what I do. Hell, I already got in trouble once for bringing my beer into a cab, and the guy couldn't care less about open container or any legal issue, he didn't want the booze in the cab. I'll bet you a penny we see some sort of lunacy like this on a crap show like Geraldo in the next year.

And since I know about all of those things cold = I didn't even take that class, I just took the test(5 times, 5 times 100%, in addition to the necessary blather responses to the essays, I wrote a 17 page paper on the concept of why the question they asked on one of the essays was wholly absurd, and I did it because my a-hole principal was trying to justify the existence of my high school's sorry-ass history department. Edit: Oh yeah, and I was in advanced history at the hardest school to get into in the world, that views history as the most important subject they teach-->you wanna keep talking, pal?), do you mind explaining how the people who supposedly are "experts", as in three years of law school, didn't know about them before they got into office? You have missed the point. Blatantly. The premise they got themselves elected on: We will fix stuff, we will do stuff, you can't afford not to put us into office because WE WILL LEAD. They have done exactly none of that, and they dare to blame "the system". LAME ASS BS Spare me the excuses, you are simply serving to amplify my point every time you try to pretend that somehow they "didn't know" about the very principles and governmental constructs you laid out. IF they honestly didn't know, then what does that say? It's a simple logic trap, and you have blundered into it. Either: 1. You don't know the job, 2. You do know the job and you aren't doing it. Take your pick, both = you suck at your job. Edit: Go check the RCP polls if you want to see whether most people agree with me.