EasternOHBillsFan

He was not joking, as evident by the second interview standing by his remarks, which cements his utter stupidity. I'm still defending Americans right to free speech after 14 years, but comparing the Commander in Chief to Adolf Hitler is a slap in the face to the memory of the men who died fighting that evil maniac.

No, actually it is not. Comparing the Commander In Chief of the United States to Hitler and STANDING BY IT after our men died on the beaches of Normandy and beyond in WWII compared to a couple of women apologizing about the ACTIONS of America on foreign soil doesn't even compare. I cannot believe you'd equate the two...!!!

IT WAS A CATCH!!!!!!!!!!!!! Without Stevie Johnson, we're not even in that game. He did what he had to do, and the refs screwed him out of the catch.

The Patriots were stung by a pass interference call in the end zone that Fitz just threw up for grabs. Does this mean now that New England is not a great team? I'm not buying it.... one or two bad calls in one game isn't an indictment on how good or great a team is.

Of course, it is all about just supporting breast cancer!!!! God forbid we find a CURE for cancer, or another marketing avenue is shut forever... how sick can people be?

The conservative attack dogs are always equal to the task of looking like buffoons, and by Fascist News putting Hank on their show like that they now have to spin, spin, spin!!!

Walt "Swizzle Stick" Corey What's your point? bend but don't break worked in 1991... we just got hosed on a couple of calls and our offense failed to score more points.

If the Colts get Luck, I'll never hear the end of it in my house.

JETS. They are by far the worse of the two teams.-

Comparing the President to Hitler is ALWAYS a killer, liberal or conservative. If he's stupid enough to say it on national TV, he's going to get the hammer regardless. I have freedom of speech, but if I compared a company manager to Hitler in public would I still have a job? HECK no...

The evidence is as plain as day... there is very few mens apparel in pink for a reason. The numbers are evident at every single large department store out there, clear as day. http://www.oldnavy.com/products/mens-clothing.jsp http://www.sears.com/shc/s/c_10153_12605_Clothing_Men%27s?i_cntr=1317729098316 http://www1.macys.com/shop/mens?id=1&edge=hybrid&cm_re=2.4.12-_-HOMEPAGE_INCLUDE_1-_-CATEGORY%20--%205125%20--%201:men&LinkType=Homepage Good luck in finding the overabundance of PINK choices for colors. It just doesn't sell for men hardly at all, and yet we are still having this argument? If it were more popular, it would be more available for men, but it isn't...

He's not below average if you really watched him play in college and in the regular season so far. He, like Cam Newton, looks very comfortable so far. If our defense gave up 500 yards and we won by 3, or 7, or 10, I'd be thrilled because we WON THE GAME. You probably don't remember 'bend but don't break'

I don't know because I am not you, and you are not me. I would never wear pink, as most men would never wear pink, hence why the NFL and clothiers don't make much mens clothing in pink. I would notice light purple towels mixed with NFL gear even with the Vikings or the Ravens... radioactive pink hurts my eyes. YOU make that assumption.... read my response to Beerball. You are really pushing this 'hidden agenda' with pink hard, and to me it is lunacy.

What PREJUDICES and BIASES??? Pink is a WOMANS color, and that's why it is used for WOMENS apparel! You are the one coming up with this inane prejudices and biases argument...

Maybe next year everyone should wear lime green apparel to REALLY make everything look hideous. There is raising awareness, and then there is going to an extreme with the visuals. Purple is much easier on the eyes than bright radioactive pink.

Why then do they make pink NFL gear for WOMEN and not for all fans? Hmmmm, let me think about it.... maybe it is the fact that pink is a color that WOMEN WEAR???? I don't need a wayback machine for that thought process.

What about lupus? Muscular Distrophy? Autism? You can say that about any form of disease, really... I'm more angry at the fact that decades after discovering more and more about cancer, we seem to be handcuffed by it even today despite the billions of dollars being spent on finding a cure...

There has been a J.D. Williams reference made here! Takes me back...

READING COMPREHENSION The call was a bad call, and contributed greatly to our loss- not the ONLY factor, but it stopped our drive and changed the momentum of the game. Not my fault you can't comprehend.

Scorched our defense to the tune of 23 points... MAN, that was horrible!!! Come on now... you act as if he dropped TD bombs on us like Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers... hyperbole.

That is NOT the point and you know it- you made the statement that the bad call did not affect the outcome when it did. This is not a question of how good the Bills are, but an indictment of the crew that did that game. When the game is decided on a bad call such as that, it taints the result. To deny it didn't affect the game is just insane.

Video evidence proved that the call was bad... sorry, your comments are invalid in this case.

You make too much sense... it is much easier to let people post their 'ALARMING STATISTICS' in a vacuum and tell us all the sky is falling for our defense...

When a referee who was farther away from the play than the referee who was there overturns the call on the field, and then the call is upheld despite video evidence to the contrary, shielding of his vision is moot.

He came up from 10 yards downfield to overrule the man in front of the play... and then reviews the play and holds up his own ruling. SHOCKER!