murra

I knew this thread would get hijacked.

link?

The Onion makes videos now? Man, I feel like an idiot for taking that out of my bookmarks a few years ago...

Actual, a simple working definition is almost useless in this regard. In my military civil relations class we've already had 4 guest speakers on the matter, all outside experts who have come to different conclusions on defining the term. Those who had a more loose definition seemed less tolerant on terrorist relations, and those who defined it with tighter restrictions tended to favor negotiations. Regardless of their conclusions, most experts agree that a terrorist falls under the category of being raised under a "lethal cocktail". I don't want to do this explanation injustice, but if you look up the term you can see some similarities between the qualifications and Hasan's resume.

Buying weed in Chicago? Wait...what are you talking about?

I want to agree with everything you say, because I think Starks is awesome. But show me the history of running backs who have not played the year they've entered the draft and their status. Now show me the history of running backs who didn't play their senior year and were drafted and came from a MAC school.

For the record, One of his touchdowns last night was a beautiful fly route with a decent pump fake/move. Starks wont get drafted. End of story. He was "projected" to go 2nd round before the injury. As in, if he put in the same season he had the possibility of being a top 5 back in the draft. Now he looks injury prone. I'm sure he'll be able to fight for a spot in a camp, but he's probably too risky to get picked.

He's pretty impressive. He's contributed well against teams like Pitt and Missouri, so teams wont be able to toss in the old, look who he plays against garbage. He keeps getting projected to the 4th round, and he'll walk into the draft statistically like the 3rd or 4th best receiver (career wise), but I'm sure he'll slip significantly as teams will be reluctant on a MAC WR who shows signs of being a little weak for the pro level.

Clearly Ft. Hood is George Bush's fault.

For the record, I just observe.

Oh. You went with Jingoistic on that one.

Alright.

total times thrown for over 300 yards in the NFL: zero. total times thrown for over 300 yards in the NCAA: zero.

So in your opinion the majority of the people are in favor of nationalized health care/abolishing health insurance?

Yeah, soon to be 2010. What does that have to do with passing judgment on terrorists?

That's the message I'm hoping gets relayed. Essentially, when I asked how this bill could be taken away if passed, the answer is that it pretty much can't, at least not until its effects are so clear, and our country is in shambles years and years down the road. And honestly, we still have social security so I don't even think there is hope. Folks, this is the end, my only friend, the end.

Right, and if we actually wanted Big Ben, we should've traded up, and made that our goal the entire draft, instead of settling for trading up late to get Losman. You guys rooting for the Bills to lose can't justify anything, you're all morons.

That's a lot of typing you did without actually saying anything.

I think WECK 1230 has a Brad Riter show on at the same time. However, it's actually a worse alternative, unless he's doing an interview.

Why would you idiots root for the Bills to fail if you admittedly realize they can only move up 3 slots. Absolute morons. You know there is another way to move up in a draft right?

What is there to be misinformed about? In the end it's just another thing that you want the government to take over.

That man is pretty legit.

With the Health Bill one step closer to actual passage, I have a few questions. I'm not sure Obama has actually polarized our nation enough to lose a re-election, but assuming the republicans get their act together, and toss in a solid candidate, I'm curious to know if our country can be "saved". Recalling the health bill will be something that might get tossed around in the campaign process, but I want to know if it can actually be done. If the Republicans can regain a few seats, and take the Presidency, what can be done about the Health Bill? Assuming it is set to be enacted around the time of the election, you'd have to think that it would be on the forefront to attempt to make sure this thing never takes effect. I'm just not sure anything can be done. Because of the apparent success of the New Deal, an effort was never really made to remove it. The Obama administration loves power, so they never considered repealing the PATRIOT Act, and so I'm left wondering if there are historic examples where a controversial bill was later dismissed after passage. It's probably never going to be deemed unconstitutional by the courts, so I can't think of how the right intends on getting rid of this nonsense.

I think this needs to be said... The whole "you didn't read it" nonsense needs to stop. No one here has read it. They have read several important excerpts, but no one here has taken the time to actually attempt to comprehend such rough legislation. It's not an easy read. And I don't mean, its not an easy read because the Harvard educated liberals who penned it are beyond us, I just mean that bills getting by the House tend to be framed with a bit of nonsensical meandering, and leave little up to implications. I stand by the claim that if Conner didn't read it, I don't think any less of him. I'm against the bill and I've haven't read 1% of the 1,990 pages. I stand against the ideals of it. I'm going to leave it up to the judgment of others who have no life/are getting paid to break this thing down for the mean time. Once a little more of the pork gets taken out, and the Bill becomes a more readable length, I'll take a gander at expert analysis, but right now, it is perfectly fine to have not read any of it.

Why is that guy posting on an ESPN message board? That was genuinely funny/witty.