BringBackOrton Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 Untrue. But if they were to make a movie, jmc12290 would be "Dumber." Prove it.
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 and this guy matters more than 10000000 others speaking out against it, obviously don't they all matter...?
boyst Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 don't they all matter...? yes, let's give them all a participation trophy. Hell, no! No, they don't matter one little bit.
Mickey Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 SCOTUS wrote that when it was written it was defined as a must in their belief but could not define the intention of the word only the definition. I was reading on it last week this Winter, America's favorite hot headed defensive end pairs with an everyday guy to have a simple conversation about life. America, get ready, because you're about to laugh as these two go at it in the funniest film in decades "Dumb & Dumber.". Rated NC17 for gratuitous nudity and explicit love making. Forsooth! Linguistic history aside, thou knowest well the law as it this day stands instructs all men to the use of "shall" when one tasks to giveth advice and "will" when one tasks to giveth commands. 'Swounds man, cease this philological pettifoggery and to thy senses be called or failing in this, be called at last to the point. If thou wouldst bow would thy not bow though all the world taketh offense? Woulds thou brook others to instruct thee when to bow and when to stand and when to kneel? As would you, so would these men. As you would not, so would not these men.
boyst Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 Forsooth! Linguistic history aside, thou knowest well the law as it this day stands instructs all men to the use of "shall" when one tasks to giveth advice and "will" when one tasks to giveth commands. 'Swounds man, cease this philological pettifoggery and to thy senses be called or failing in this, be called at last to the point. If thou wouldst bow would thy not bow though all the world taketh offense? Woulds thou brook others to instruct thee when to bow and when to stand and when to kneel? As would you, so would these men. As you would not, so would not these men. i can't even reply to this. That was funny.
hondo in seattle Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 Each side claims to be more patriotic than the other. One side asks, "Don't real patriots stand to honor the ideal of America as well as our veterans?" The other side responds, "Don't real patriots respect the Constitution and the first amendment?" It all sadly reminds me of the forewarnings we've received from some smart folks in the past. Washington in one of his farewell address warned us of the dangers of partisanship and reminded us of the power of unity and common ground. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Peace and friendship with all mankind is our wisest policy." Lincoln warned us about a "house divided." Teddy Roosevelt warned us against "parochial patriotism." He also warned us that "It is of little use for us to pay lip-loyalty to the might men of the past" unless we also endeavor to practice their qualities. In other words, when Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln preach peace, friendship and unity, we should pay attention. It seems to me, the hostility in the debate spits on the faces of the great presidents enshrined on Mount Rushmore who hoped we'd behave differently. If we have to resort to binary thinking, here's how I would break it down: Bad: Hatred, divisiveness, disunity, ad hominem attacks. Good: Love, understanding, unity, expressions of brotherhood and sisterhood.
Gugny Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 As a lawyer with 29 years of experience, I think that I can shed some light on the vast, endless complexities involved in defining, in "legal speak" how the word "should" is defined so let me help: "should" means "should" and does not mean "must". The Supreme Court has held that the word "shall", in a statute means "may". The Federal Register instructs that "must" is the only word that, in a statute, creates a legal obligation. The word "should" is never used in statutes precisely because laws are concerned with mandatory actions or omissions, things you must do or that you must not do. It is important to note that many states have First Amendment protections which extend to and include the workplace. Further, the players have a collective bargaining agreement with the NFL and, along with individual contracts, it is the primary if not the exclusive source of the obligations of players and owners. You're so fine, you blow my mind. Thank you.
RyanC883 Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 I think the team wants to move past the 90s stars being the face of the franchise for that to happen, the team needs to become relevant again and make the playoffs. Perhaps that's your answer, Jerry! Does Brett Favre parade himself on the Packers sidelines or Joe Montana show up every game for the 49ers or Dan Marino in Miami? No, say what you want but Jerry has a legitimate beef. I get Kelly's a team ambassador but to me he's nothing more than a glorified fan and don't think he should be on the sidelines either. The Packers are a relevant team. The 49ers had success post Montana. Same with the Dolphins. That's why the 90's Bills are still relevant.
Mellow1 Posted September 27, 2017 Posted September 27, 2017 I think that's horsesh** myself. Kelly had more success as a football player. He also arguably lost the team 4 straight superbowls with his partying and playing hung over - he pretty much acknowledges that in his book. He sucked as a husband and father until he found God and says he reformed. He has more football accomplishments to date but blanket unqualified "deserves way more respect" than 5 other men combined, as men I think McDermott and Tyrod to date deserve more respect for how they comport themselves. "Has more fame" or "has more football accomplishments" doesn't equate to "deserves more respect" in my book. Your mileage may vary. Well stated!!!! Worth recalling that Jim Kelly's ties to Trump predate his time in Buffalo. He was briefly a NJ General before the USFL failed, and Trump reportedly housed Jim's family when he was in NYC for medical treatment. He was a Houston Gambler because he REFUSED to play for the Bills
YoloinOhio Posted September 28, 2017 Author Posted September 28, 2017 (edited) for that to happen, the team needs to become relevant again and make the playoffs. Perhaps that's your answer, Jerry! The Packers are a relevant team. The 49ers had success post Montana. Same with the Dolphins. That's why the 90's Bills are still relevant. i don't really think that way, from my perspective. To me, the current players are more relevant. Toward myself as a fan, and for marketing. I'm aware of the success those players that hang around had, from the SBs to the HOF. It's a great accomplishment. But the fact is they never brought a championship to Buffalo. None of them are NFL coaches or FO executives. So, I don't really care what they think about the current team. I'm more engaged with the current coaches than what Marv Levy thinks. I think it's just been too long. It's jmo and I'm not a millennial but I was relatively young in the SB years, enough to barely remember a lot of it. The present team and looking to the future is just more exciting to me. I agree with Hughes, Dareus and others that the legends can be helpful in many ways but in others, they should defer to the current players, coaches, FO. The reality is that there is very little within the Bills org of 2017 that connects back to them anymore. From ownership on down. If the current Bills org cared that much about marketing they would have hung into to Watkins at all costs. I don't think that's the priority. Their priority is to finally build the current/future winner that everyone wants so we don't have to trot out retired players from 30 years ago to rep the team. Again I'm sure (I know) others feel differently. Edited September 28, 2017 by YoloinOhio
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 29, 2017 Posted September 29, 2017 He was a Houston Gambler because he REFUSED to play for the Bills I thought he was a Houston Gambler because they backed up a Brinks truck for him and the Bills let them tell him about it while he was sitting at OBD ready to sign My point was, Kelly and Trump go way back, with Kelly signing to play for Trump's team at one point (never did) and more recently Trump providing substantial help to Kelly's family by housing them when they were in NYC for Jim's cancer treatment. So in addition to whatever political views he may hold, Kelly has personal ties and even obligations to Trump.
Scott7975 Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Each side claims to be more patriotic than the other. One side asks, "Don't real patriots stand to honor the ideal of America as well as our veterans?" The other side responds, "Don't real patriots respect the Constitution and the first amendment?" It all sadly reminds me of the forewarnings we've received from some smart folks in the past. Washington in one of his farewell address warned us of the dangers of partisanship and reminded us of the power of unity and common ground. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Peace and friendship with all mankind is our wisest policy." Lincoln warned us about a "house divided." Teddy Roosevelt warned us against "parochial patriotism." He also warned us that "It is of little use for us to pay lip-loyalty to the might men of the past" unless we also endeavor to practice their qualities. In other words, when Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln preach peace, friendship and unity, we should pay attention. It seems to me, the hostility in the debate spits on the faces of the great presidents enshrined on Mount Rushmore who hoped we'd behave differently. If we have to resort to binary thinking, here's how I would break it down: Bad: Hatred, divisiveness, disunity, ad hominem attacks. Good: Love, understanding, unity, expressions of brotherhood and sisterhood. Bad: 01001000 01100001 01110100 01110010 01100101 01100100 00101100 00100000 01100100 01101001 01110110 01101001 01110011 01101001 01110110 01100101 01101110 01100101 01110011 01110011 00101100 00100000 01100100 01101001 01110011 01110101 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01100001 01100100 00100000 01101000 01101111 01101101 01101001 01101110 01100101 01101101 11000010 10100000 00100000 01100001 01110100 01110100 01100001 01100011 01101011 01110011 00101110 Good: 01001100 01101111 01110110 01100101 00101100 00100000 01110101 01101110 01100100 01100101 01110010 01110011 01110100 01100001 01101110 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101100 00100000 01110101 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01110000 01110010 01100101 01110011 01110011 01101001 01101111 01101110 01110011 00100000 01101111 01100110 00100000 01100010 01110010 01101111 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01101000 01101111 01101111 01100100 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01110011 01101001 01110011 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101000 01101111 01101111 01100100 00101110
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Bad: 01001000 01100001 01110100 01110010 01100101 01100100 00101100 00100000 01100100 01101001 01110110 01101001 01110011 01101001 01110110 01100101 01101110 01100101 01110011 01110011 00101100 00100000 01100100 01101001 01110011 01110101 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01100001 01100100 00100000 01101000 01101111 01101101 01101001 01101110 01100101 01101101 11000010 10100000 00100000 01100001 01110100 01110100 01100001 01100011 01101011 01110011 00101110 Good: 01001100 01101111 01110110 01100101 00101100 00100000 01110101 01101110 01100100 01100101 01110010 01110011 01110100 01100001 01101110 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00101100 00100000 01110101 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01110000 01110010 01100101 01110011 01110011 01101001 01101111 01101110 01110011 00100000 01101111 01100110 00100000 01100010 01110010 01101111 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01101000 01101111 01101111 01100100 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01110011 01101001 01110011 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101000 01101111 01101111 01100100 00101110 Isn't that rather a binary way to look at the situation?
boyst Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Any of the SJW's here going to speak on this situation as to the liar Michael Bennett's situation?
Fadingpain Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Oh it's very simple. The "Stand up" crowd are just a bunch of racists. The kneeler crowd is trying to end racism. That's it; not confusing.
boyst Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Oh it's very simple. The "Stand up" crowd are just a bunch of racists. The kneeler crowd is trying to end racism. That's it; not confusing. no, it's not that simple. By the time you factor out how to cook the ribs the best, Orton being on the wall and why Jack can have a wedding at Costco... This world is such a mess
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Why is it that when Tom Tebow took a knee on the sideline to pray no one gave a cheater ?
3rdand12 Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 Forsooth! Linguistic history aside, thou knowest well the law as it this day stands instructs all men to the use of "shall" when one tasks to giveth advice and "will" when one tasks to giveth commands. 'Swounds man, cease this philological pettifoggery and to thy senses be called or failing in this, be called at last to the point. If thou wouldst bow would thy not bow though all the world taketh offense? Woulds thou brook others to instruct thee when to bow and when to stand and when to kneel? As would you, so would these men. As you would not, so would not these men. I had no idea you legal Eagles were allowed a sense of humor and such . quite pleasure to have your company round here. Each side claims to be more patriotic than the other. One side asks, "Don't real patriots stand to honor the ideal of America as well as our veterans?" The other side responds, "Don't real patriots respect the Constitution and the first amendment?" It all sadly reminds me of the forewarnings we've received from some smart folks in the past. Washington in one of his farewell address warned us of the dangers of partisanship and reminded us of the power of unity and common ground. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Peace and friendship with all mankind is our wisest policy." Lincoln warned us about a "house divided." Teddy Roosevelt warned us against "parochial patriotism." He also warned us that "It is of little use for us to pay lip-loyalty to the might men of the past" unless we also endeavor to practice their qualities. In other words, when Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln preach peace, friendship and unity, we should pay attention. It seems to me, the hostility in the debate spits on the faces of the great presidents enshrined on Mount Rushmore who hoped we'd behave differently. If we have to resort to binary thinking, here's how I would break it down: Bad: Hatred, divisiveness, disunity, ad hominem attacks. Good: Love, understanding, unity, expressions of brotherhood and sisterhood. excellent. just excellent You're so fine, you blow my mind. Thank you. Being all the Gugny you can be Hey Mickey !
3rdand12 Posted September 30, 2017 Posted September 30, 2017 no, it's not that simple. By the time you factor out how to cook the ribs the best, Orton being on the wall and why Jack can have a wedding at Costco... This world is such a mess It needs some work admittedly.
timtebow15 Posted October 1, 2017 Posted October 1, 2017 (edited) Here's what I don't get. The flag stands for all that is right with America. I know someone that just left Japan because the government was interfering/spying on their female workforce. The flag represents the idealism that is the United States and doesn't exist elsewhere. If players want to make a statement against anything why don't they just kneel prior to the anthem and then rise together when it begins. The message is sent but you are not disrespecting the flag which represents millions of service men and women who have fought and died for this country and represents all the things you are preaching about such as equality. If you don't think we are there yet as a country don't complain about the symbol for the idealism that says we should be there complain about the people responsible for not getting us there. Not standing for the flag doesn't serve any purpose other than increasing the divisions among people you say shouldn't exist! You want to be understood but don't want to offer understanding. Hasn't anyone thought to say there must be a better way! Then you have people like the Pittsburgh lineman who served our country apologizing for having his own opinion about the flag and now Jim Kelly? if you think the country has work to do then find a way to actually improve it. Doing something that many people perceive as disrespectful to the country seems to me to be very counter-productive. Edited October 1, 2017 by timtebow15
Recommended Posts