starrymessenger

OTOH I hope he misses no game time for this when the dust settles. Fact is this O absolutely cannot afford to do without him if we are to make a run in 2016. He is probably its most accomplished member - and a dumbass. Probation and many hours of community service is what I'd like to see.

Well maybe not 37 but some are.

Great Superbowl. One of the best IMO (top 25% anyway). Thought it funny that the talking heads (Faulk, Michael Irvin etc...) were all wondering whether the expected blowout of the Broncos would be big enuf to raise the Question whether the Panthers were the best team ever. I guess they are now amusing themselves with the question whether the Broncos D ranks with the 85 Bears. Hate to admit it, but this game shows me just how good Brady, Gronk & Co really are. They had that #1 rated D on the ropes.

Very much doubt that the facts here connote the type of premeditation in a course of conduct that exposes an accomplice and conspirator (before the fact) to the same criminal sanctions as the primary perpetrator. And as to your earlier point regarding an insurance claim or settlement facilitating a criminal conviction I'm pretty sure it would not be allowed into evidence as lacking probative value. The opposite is what may be possible i.e. If OJ had been convicted of felony murder 1 it might have been admissible in the subsequent civil trial.

What does insurance have to do with criminal responsibility? And what does insurance coverage (or the lack thereof) as between the insurer and insured have to do with determining even the civil consequences as between the participants in the altercation? What am I missing here? Maybe so, but that "symbiotic relationship" may come under some serious and probably embarassing scrutiny then IMO. Remember the DA in Florida wouldnt even indict Ahern for shooting a guy's face off because he would'nt press charges - even tho he could be forced to give his evidence under oath or be in contempt.

Maybe the fact that two of Philly's finest were involved in the altercation works in McCoy's favour. Unless the evidence shows that the players were the clear aggressors and the cops just defending themselves the fact that the athletes were the better street fighters maybe accounts by itself for the result. If its really a case where both the cops and the players were equally at fault the police and the DA might have to charge everyone involved or face the argument that they were taking sides and using the criminal justice system to selectively punish only the non law enforcement participants. They may not be above doing that in a low profile situation but this one attracts national attention and they may be wary of the spotlight. Or maybe they go ahead and charge everyone with something but with the players having the more onerous charges. Maybe the two cops decide (or are encouraged) to not press charges. Boys will be boys, especially bad boys.

(unfortunately) I must agree. Peyton is done. Brady not so much. Switch QBs yesterday and Denver wins by 21 points.

I assumed sarcasm.

Post coital cigarette

And he'll be serving a four game suspension Beginning of the end (I hope)

Thats a fumble

What?

Crucial series comming up

If the run game starts to click its game over.

Helping hand from a concerned official.

Is there no way to take the corner out on that play?

Ouchhhhhhh....

What a wonderful double move.

I suspect Tom's gonna have a bad day.

I don't think there should be commemorative monuments to the memory of Adolph Hitler. More importantly, the Germans themselves feel even more strongly about that than we do. Interesting that at the Nuremberg trials Goring claimed that in fifty years there would be statues of him all over Germany. There aren't. And of course I agree that slavery is an abomination. I can hardly think of anything more repulsive than the notion of owning another human being.But if Generals Grant and Sherman, you know, the folks who actually won the War for the Union, became the closest of friends with Generals Johnstone and Longstreet, I interpret that as really the highest personal recommendation and I will take it ahead of the opinion of later day mediocrities. General Lee killed Americans but so did General Grant. It was a civil war. They are all Americans. Ultimately all that we can say is that it puts us in the presence of all that is constant and enduring in human suffering and unites us with its secret cause. You are missing the mark in going after men of extraordinary ability and impeccabable character. A more controversial case is that of Lieutenant General Forrest, as superb a horse soldier as ever there was, anywhere, anytime. I don't know what went down at Ft. Pillow but if he did what some say, well then he's Joachim Peiper, the brilliant Nazi tank commander and a war criminal. If he didn't do it, he certainly deserves his monument.

Lanier served in the Confederate Army, but as a 19-year-old buck private, and later as a pilot on ships used to smuggle cotton past federal blockades. He wasn’t a leader, nor was he an apologist for slavery, white supremacy, or even the “Lost Cause,” which he later gently mocked as a case of mass hysteria extending from Virginia through East Texas. Paraphrasing Robert Earl Keen, Sidney Lanier was no kinda rebel, and was not remembered as such in his lifetime or after. Instead he was renowned as a poet and a musician, or in the words of Jim Henley, legendary former Lanier Middle School debate coach and 2006 liberal Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress, Lanier was “a renaissance man,” one who attempted to mesh his words with his tunes, music he created on the flute, banjo, organ, piano, violin, and guitar. (Lanier once pithily described music as “love in search of a word.”) “He’s the kind of example to which we would wish all of our students to aspire,” Henley says. “Though he was a private in the Confederate Army and for four months a prisoner of war, he was not a leader in the Army. Not a general, not a decision-maker. And I’ve been reading his entire body of work, and in no case does he lament the end of slavery, and in some cases he rejoices over the end of slavery.” Here’s the thing. Despite Grady’s justified inclusion on this list of historical damnation, it seems more and more that the only mortal sin is to have sworn allegiance to the Confederacy. So long as you did not bear arms against the Union, your memory is safe, no matter if you engaged supported secession all your life and spearheaded genocidal campaigns against Native Americans (Mirabeau Lamar); owned a dozen or so slaves at the time of his death (Sam Houston); finagled to introduce large-scale slavery into a sovereign nation where it had hitherto been forbidden (Stephen F. Austin); engaged in the capital offense of slave-smuggling (Jim Bowie, James Fannin); expressed disgustingly racist views in print (Davy Crockett); fathered children with a slave woman (Thomas Jefferson); or joked that the best way to contain the AIDS crisis was “to shoot all the queers” (Louie Welch). All of those men have schools still safely named after them in HISD, as does Oran Roberts, who shepherded Texas out of the Union as president of the 1860 Texas Secession convention and later founded and led a regiment of Confederate soldiers. Why Roberts gets a pass is a mystery. - See more at: http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/lanier-middle-school-name-change/#sthash.bo4BGCzT.dpuf It doesn't matter, the liberals in the Houston school district want him out Why Lanier Middle School should lose that Confederate ... www.houstonchronicle.com/.../ General John Bell Hood doubtless turning in his grave. To my mind its a national disgrace when men of stature and accomplishment are pilloried and sacrificed on the alter of contemporary political correctness by entirely secondary men and women. Is it impossible to arrive at a rational understanding of these things and to instruct all of our children accordingly? Manfred Baron Richthofen and Field Marshal Rommel were our enemies, but they were nevertheless respected and admired by the very people whose job it was to kill them. Does that mean that Field Marshal Viscount Montgomery and Winston Churchill were somehow moral imbeciles? Their cause was perhaps bad (certainly Rommel's was) but history seems capable of evaluating them as professional military men and as human beings independently of the accidents of time and place.

Interesting. Looks like the nature and legal implications of the compact between the states and the federal government can be hotly debated. I wonder if, theoretically, they are the only players here. Could a local majority within a state succede from the greater commonwealth or not? Is an original "founding" county, township or municipality merely a creature of the state of which it is a part? Does the answer depend upon its whether its powers are entirely delegated, whether its admission at the outset was consensual and like questions? And did I understand Justice Scalia's exclusion for a (presumably unanimous) consensual withdrawal from the Union and revolution to suggest that "revolution" was somehow "legal", and is that the theoretical underpining of the second amendment? And is there a distinction to be made between revolution and succession? I also found the author's suggestion that the pres be limited to a single term interesting. Foreign Minister Lavrov recently commented on the two term limitation as an operational flaw in the American system of government.

Link? Thanks

I think some of what you are saying makes sense. Bernie Saunders would not turn the US into a communist country. Heck I don't know that communist countries are communist anymore. Even the Ruskies now understand that Bolshevism was a mistake that set them back 70 years. I live in Canada where we have socialized medecin. In a way I dislike it because when I require medical attention I want the best and I want it immediately, but thats only because I can afford to pay for it (or for private medical insurance). Most people couldn't do that given the costs. At the end of the day the medical services available to all here are very good even if at times you have to wait your turn in line. And although we dont have a two tiered system as a practical matter I do have the option of going to the States and simply cracking a cheque. I would rather do that than live in a place where people who need them are denied medical services because of their inability to pay and if that accounts for my relatively high rate of personal tax I'm ok with it. I'm not familiar with every plank in Bernie Saunders platform but what bothers me is that he inspires no confidence as Commander in Chief and appears to be very weak generally in the matter of foreign affairs. I think we live in a crowded world with lots of things going on affecting US and western democratic interests. I find it interesting that for some countries foreign policy has a very prominent place in the national agenda. I'm not sure it does or ever has (Woodrow Wilson and FDR notwithstanding) in the US. Republican candidates have a lot more to say about it than Bernie this time around but what they say (certainly the front runners anyway) makes little or no sense and is clearly just used to activate support amongst certain of their constituents. I'm very disappointed by the parsity of Democratic contenders for the nomination. It reeks of cronyism and moral bankruptcy. I think it could possibly bite HRC in the ass, but if things boil down to a contest between Bernie and The Donald, I really feel Americans are being short changed. I think I have even amongst my acquaintances Americans who are a clear cut above any of these characters.

The Man from Maine is certainly one of your most admirable persons. There were a number of staff officers on both sides of incredible valour and quality.