All_Pro_Bills

Because in general all the other news organizations fly cover for the government. I think that's it.

If I've got it right the Bills organization structure has both the GM and HC reporting into ownership. So, they're sort of co-GM's. I think that's a problem but one that's easily correctable. If I'm Pegula, I would address that by changing the reporting relationships to HC to GM and GM to owner. That's put Beane clearly in charge of the draft and all other personnel decisions. At this point I think its better to concentrate this responsibility with the GM to remove any real or imagined bias towards picking defensive players. I expect there's not much of a chance this happens. I agree they've neglected the offense for one reason or another and not surrounding your QB with protection and more weapons given the way the league favors the offenses and how unique of a talent they've got in Allen is a major blunder. Whether its McDermott's influence or defensive bias on the selections or how the board is set up. I think they still need to go BPA vs. pure need but if there's a close score between an offensive vs. a defensive guy the offense needs to take priority.

I'm operating under the assumption social activists believe anyone can pretend to be anything they desire. But alas, what matters most is not the rules but rather who is entitled to make them.

What about the war in Yemen? Is Biden standing up for what's right there? In a war prosecuted by the Saudi's with assistance and consent from Washington through war and starvation and sanctions of vital food and medicine, 10's of thousands of civilian men, women, and children have died. We've already established that killing civilians is a war crime by charges against Russia for that act. Even our VP made such statements last week. So if our government and the President are "fighting for what's right" and is compelled to seek war crime charges against killers of civilians and our Saudi allies are killing civilians shouldn't the US step in to stop the carnage and charge the Monarchy with war crimes? Why aren't they doing what's right? And if the Saudi's are committing war crimes and Washington is looking the other way while consenting to their actions doesn't that make Biden a war criminal? Using your logic I'd suggest the people running Washington are isolationists that are ignoring injustice. But my conclusion is they don't care who lives or dies as long as their agenda moves forward and challengers to it are neutralized. And that's how the world works. Not like the good vs. bad fairy tale you peddle.

Suppressing evidence hides the truth. Why don't you want the truth to be heard and seen?

Unless anyone can cite some clear, specific, and present danger, the right of the people to know the truth and the legal rights of any defendants to due process of the law outlined by the 6th Amendment takes priority over any theoretical security concerns. Otherwise, such a contention is nothing more than an excuse by the prosecution and the government to hide and suppress exculpatory evidence. Government motion denied.

That question is totally irrelevant to this conversation.

You're just repeating a false narrative. Forensic investigations proved shots were fired from locations different than those where officers implicated by the coup instigators were locating during the event. No officer was arrested, tried, or convicted of killing any protesters during the maiden riots dispute your contention they somehow killed protesters. The event proved a catalyst and convenient excuse to overthrow the elected government. But the US government would never participate in such a nefarious action because we always wear the good guy hats. Even through I could name about 3 dozen times Washington has toppled foreign governments. But you can look it up too if you'd like.

A coup engineered by the US State Department's Victoria Nuland against a democratically elected government because they wouldn't play ball with Washington. Who just so happens to be back in charge of the operation after a 4 year vacation 2017 through 2020. Washington loves democracies but they also love monarchies, dictatorships, and theocracies as long as they go along with the regimes objectives and rules. When they step out of line, then the plot changes. But the fools that think our government hold a special place in its heart exclusively reserved for democracies will believe what they want to believe.

That outcome is an extremist position that isn't going to happen regardless of the circumstances that end the conflict.

So the "plan" is to ignore all potential catastrophic consequences and risks up to and including the extinction of all life on Earth to "show them" you mean business?

That's an objective, not a plan. We agree on the objective but I expect we might disagree on the "plan". The original "plan" was to impose sanctions on Russia and seize and freeze central bank assets and those of key confidants of Putin in order to squeeze them into submission. Win the conflict economically, cause political trouble for Putin at home, and allow Ukrainian forces to prevail on the battlefield. That didn't work. Sanctions had little impact. Russian planners had prepared them for those actions. They can effectively execute trade and commerce outside the dollar based financial system. And are teaching others to do the same. Right now I'm not sure what the plan is other than to continue this dance of increasing escalations between Russia and US/NATO/Ukraine in the belief that both sides think at some point the other side is going to back down. You seem to believe there will be some point where Ukraine will achieve victory on the battlefield or the Russians will conclude the war is not winnable and will retreat back to within their borders. I disagree. I don't see Ukraine achieving a military victory or Russia and Putin backing down. And right now, although there are discussions within NATO countries about the logistics of armaments, I don't see any signs the US side will back down either. Or any mutual recognition that the only path to a solution and outcome is negotiating some settlement between the parties. So for me that escalation path points to the ultimate escalation. Someplace nobody wants to go. But here we are racing down that path. That's my concern. Their "plan" is nothing short of taking the risk of nuclear annihilation and killing every living thing on Earth to achieve "victory" nobody will be around the celebrate. That's not being an isolationist or appeasing Putin. That's a perspective of logic and sanity in the face of the insanity of those in charge taking us all down a dark path.

That's something useful idiots say when they want to shut down free thinking citizens and avoid any reasoned discussion.

That's what people brainwashed by government war propaganda have said about others questioning the merits of every war. Unless you are 100 percent obedient then you're helping the enemy. In a word that's stupid.

That's why I cringe when some official claims the science is settled or claims everyone agrees with the consensus view on one thing or another. Rarely is anything ever settled, as you state science is evolving with new information, discoveries, and ideas. Just this week I read a Op/Ed from a doctor claiming the mRNA vaccines were "completely" safe for young children. And vaccination would prevent them from getting sick and transmitting the virus to adults. That statement is false on both counts. As for safety, how can he know that without long term health data? How can any medical professional be so negligent? Nobody can be certain because there is no data to support that conclusion.

Rather than a few $1 bullets from the planes gun use a $400K missile to take down a $12 mylar balloon. That's likely representative of how efficiently the $800 billion defense budget is spent. Migrating bird flocks and ballooning festivals and events beware. The Biden administration is on the job.

The idea that Washington's support of Ukraine going to facilitate regime change in Moscow by replacing Putin with some compliant leader willing to do the bidding of the US and the West is a neocon fantasy at this point in the conflict. The biggest danger to the world from this point forward will come when it's obviously and unavoidably clear that one side or the other has a clear advantage and path to victory. At that point, the risk is what might the "losing" side do to avoid or delay defeat? In the case of Russia, a potential to deploy and use nuclear weapons and in the case of the US/NATO any decision to directly enter the conflict. Which would then eventually lead to the risk of the nuclear option. Either way I find it amazing how officials and media everywhere are whistling past the graveyard downplaying and dismissing these risks as the propose and commit to escalations. Where else do they think this is going to lead?

There are plenty of examples. But I am 100% certain you have absolutely no intention to agree with any of it or alter your view no matter how many valid examples I cite or how compelling an argument I might make. But for giggles. Failing education of urban children and poverty. I cite test scores in Chicago and Baltimore where most kids can't read or do math at grade level. 60+ years and going. And I'm not making an either/or argument say liberals don't but conservatives do so please don't go there either. Thx.

Willful negligence in service of some undisclosed interest and objective.

The problem with the reform theory is they really do describe the country and employ messaging exactly as I state above.

I agree with you, but your statement sounds eerily similar to what could be expressed by what might be the average conservative populist. Because the liberal democrats of today are employing messaging that America is a white supremacist, racist, hell hole where people are systematically oppressed, police hunt down and kill people of color in the streets, extremist Nazi's plan attacks on the Capitol and roam the countryside looking for somebody to pick on, and the country was established for the purposes of enabling slavery. And demand every issue be addressed by some form of an identity politics driven solution. I can only assume your renouncing those beliefs by your statement.

Liberals don't want to solve social problems because solving problems will make people independent. And once a problem is solved the organizations and activists that exist solely to address a "problem" while making a wonderful living criticizing and pointing out problems will be out of work. Lots of them make a decent living off the taxpayers through government grants and programs while producing nothing of value. Staying on the gravy train is goal number one. Solving the real problems, not so much. And there's nothing wrong with employing people from the neighborhood with the necessary skills and experience at the job but when color becomes the only requirement for the job while skills and experience in the specific craft become unimportant quality will suffer.

If I was one of the students I'd respond to the system imposed by the teacher by bringing a crappy lunch to school every day. There's no incentive to bring anything good because you won't get to eat it. And that's a demonstration of the fatal flaw of communism in practice. The focus on some equitable or equal distribution of production or output while ignoring the actual effort and inputs to produce them. Simply, why should anyone work hard to produce 10 units of output when the "system" imposes rules that grant them only 2 units of consumption? People will learn to dial back their output to 2 units or less which will force a response from the authority to apply coercion, threats, and violence to increase output. That's why people given the choice and opportunity will flee these authoritarian arrangements.

Leftists that at one time distrusted and opposed anything and everything about the establishment until recently when they took over the establishment and they suddenly started to believe and support anything and everything about the establishment. Because the liberal left and the establishment are now the same entity.

In some ways I think it might have been better if the Bills lost that KC game because I can't stop thinking that after that the team started playing like it was "mission accomplished" after an off season spent and focused on making moves to beat KC. As for the learning on the job and getting experience view Dorsey in 2022. If that's what the expectation was at the beginning of the season then he was the wrong guy for the job because the Bills were peaking for a win now season and the team and organization were past the learning on the job point in the "process". The job requirements demanded full competency and experience rather than an OC that was a couple steps behind everyone else in the team lifecycle, The front office took the easy path and accepted a developmental situation.