Jump to content

Jauronimo

Community Member
  • Posts

    13,890
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jauronimo

  1. I love this quote:

     

    "Everyone's curious about what changes will be made, what's going to be different, and a time and place will come to talk about that. Right now, it's more of sit back, try to catch our breath, evaluate players, evaluate our scheme, and take a look and see where we can improve. It's really not that difficult. We've got a lot of room to improve. We have some good young players, we have some good veteran players"

     

    WHERE WE CAN IMPROVE?????? The patriots just scored 49 unanswered points against us!!! Where the HELL CAN'T WE IMPROVE????? We can't stop the run, can't stop the pass, can't rush the passer.....SIT BACK????? What the hell do you mean SIT FREAKING BACK???? The eleven guys you have on the field just can't win games, or won't win games, or don't care about winning games. Kick some butt, give some people walking papers, get into the draft and free agency and make something happen....SIT BACK???? Someone should tell davey HE has responsibility for the defensive mess and he had better right this ship without delay, because the clock has been ticking since he got here and no one is impressed.

     

    My link

     

    Look at him man, he's just sitting there, laughing at you! If I were you, I wouldn't take that sort of s#$%.

  2. Certainly not a writer (which is normally an indicator of reliability on these topics) but it's possible he knows someone in house. No idea on track record.

     

    By the incredible grammar, sentence structure and web design, this is most likely some guy who knows Pat Moran.

    Dareus, Aaron Williams and Justin Rogers all look like good finds

    Let's not forget Hairston and Sheppard who are also starting. Searcy got some action too.

  3. Yeah that's the big question mark...If the Bills go to a base 4-3 full time, their biggest need will become a rushing DE. Kelsay can play one end, and get a push on the pocket, but they need a true pass rusher to play the other side.

     

    If they go to a 4-3 the LB's are much less important when it comes to the pass rush, but hugely important in coverage and stopping the run. The Bills have NO good options on the roster for 4-3 OLB's IMO. OLB's will be high on the Bills wish list regardless of what scheme they use, but it could make a huge difference in who they select.

    I think the answer is more wildcat, and I'm not just talking offense. Defensive wildcat is cutting edge stuff. Can you imagine the nose tackle and corner switching spots right before the snap? It will confuse the hell out of everyone. We'll see how effective B Marshall and Welker are with KW jamming them at the line. And no way Mangold deals with McKelvins speed, NO WAY!

  4. Yup.

    Don't bother.

     

    WEO will dig up the article published during Mayhem's first training camp which discusses how Maybin is expected to be a situational pass rusher in his rookie season. Nowhere does this or any other article suggest that he was drafted solely to be a situational pass rusher. Common sense suggests that you don't draft a role player 11th overall. WEO's response will be something to effect of how the Bills did exactly that because they're incompetent.

     

    Just trying to save us all some time.

  5. He's 28 years old, hasn't played in a pro-style offense, and won't have Blackmon to throw to.

    People said the same thing when Greg Oden came into the NBA as a 42 year old rookie and he had a few good games. Give Weeden a chance.

  6. I want to invent something totally revolutionary and necessary to all, like a car that gets 1,000 miles per gallon, so I can name it something awful like the Chevy Date Rape or the Honda Late Term Abortion. Something that is universally offensive that mere utterance of the name makes everyone in earshot completely uncomfortable and upset, but they can't live without it.

  7. Given the general lack of thought that goes into most of your posts I could deduce that being able to pour yourself a cup of coffee is one hell of an achievement for you.

    Since we've already established that deductive reasoning really isn't your strong suit, I'm not terribly offended by your latest deduction. Let's be serious, so far you've deduced that you're the smartest man in the room, that everyone but you is unemployed, and that dictionaries and the internet are resources only available to you. All this in just one month. Can't wait to see what you've got in store for us in the new year.

  8. What was happening is that the modified seeds took root in the neighbor's property and Monsanto sued, alleging that the neighbor was using the seeds without a license. The allegation was not that the neighbor just sat still and seeds blew onto his property--but that the neighbor got hold of seeds illegally and used them.

     

    It sucks because if the neighbor did nothing, there's no way he can defend the lawsuit (not enough $$). And I guess that's the DJ case, if that's what the 270,000 are suing Monsanto for.

    Isn't that exactly what I was inferring? That's the problem with Monsanto. Whether the seeds were intentionally stolen and planted or happened to grow through natural means makes no difference in Monsanto's ability to sue a farmer and force them to pay for use of Monsanto's product.

  9. The author lists some of the more egregious examples, yet the vast majority is inefficiency ($120 million paid out in retirement and disability payments to deceased federal workers) and fraud ($1 billion in tax credits for energy-efficient home improvements awarded to individuals who, according to a survey by the Treasury’s secretary general for tax administration, “had no record of owning a home.” Recipients included hundreds of prisoners, and children as young as three).

     

    So let's remove those for a minute. The rest of his examples added together total $30,845,000. Still a substantial sum for sure, but come to find out, of that $30,845,000, $27,800,000 are tied up in two things.

     

    • 17.8 million in aid to China
    • $10 million awarded by the U.S. Agency for International Development to a Pakistani arts organization to create “130 episodes of an indigenously produced Sesame Street.”

     

    Odd that, China and Pakistan. Wonder if they are areas of concern?

     

    In any case, the remaining examples amount to $3,045,000. So, of the 6.5 billion of waste for totally frivolous spending, you want to quibble over quail?

     

     

     

    Way to keep your eye on the ball. :thumbsup:

    Not too familiar with jokes or humor, I see. Thank you for that truly awesome showcase of addition, though.

  10. I don't think anyone needs to shed tears for Monsanto.

     

    As I understand it, Monsanto has been very effective in forcing farmers to use their seeds as these seeds are now considered licensed property. You don't just simply buy Monsanto seeds, you have a service agreement with Monsanto whereby you must purchase new seeds every planting season rather harvesting seeds from last years crop. Doesn't sound like a big deal, but these terms have enabled Monsanto to sue farmers whose land happens to be inhabited by crops grown from Monsanto seeds. So if your neighbor has an agreement with Monsanto, and through the powers of wind, water, animals, etc. his seed takes hold on your land and proliferates, as Monsanto's genetically engineered seeds tend to do, you can now be sued for some kind of seed piracy and forced to pay for their product. How can you decide to switch to another seed provider when your liable for whatever Monsanto plant may thrive on your land.

     

    At least that's what I recall from Food Inc, or some other documentary.

  11. You also mite want to hold off on attaining that other cup of cofy,(especially if it's what's causing you to post this incessant drivel) since by the deffanishuns that you posted posted, you would be obtaining another cup of cofy.

    And yet you still think that was an accidental misuse rather than a parting shot. Fine work.

     

    Sorry for the mix-up, aspiring sociology student. Gave you too much credit there for a moment. Thanks for clearing that up.

  12. um, there's this perception that the media leans to the left. whether or not that's true, at the very least blind foolery isn't part of the equation, no?

     

    jw

    Does the existence of some right leaning media refute the idea that, overall, mainstream media is largely left leaning?

  13. 1.

    a projecting or protruding part.

    2.

    the state or fact of jutting out or protruding.

    3.

    a causing to jut or protrude.

    4.

    the act, process, or result of projecting.

     

    This is from a dictionary. I was speaking of psychological projection. Not to mention you can use the root word in the definition of one of it's sub-categories. I thought that placing the word project in quotation marks might tip you off to this fact.

     

    See my above post. If you had bothered to attain a dictionary yourself and look up the word projection before you posted this you wouldn't look like such an ass. I do have a steady job by the way. considering you guys seem to be able to post all hours of the day I could deduce that you may not.

     

    You can also read a little more about psychological projection here:

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

     

    Now is there any other information you need spoon-fed to you?

    Had you bothered to crack a text book or even copied and pasted the definition from wikipedia then you might not have offered the most worthless definition of psychological projection ever recorded in the English language. Open that DSM and regurgitate something useful aspiring psych student, its not that hard. Or you could just drop that act all together as I, and I'm pretty sure everyone else at PPP, are already very familiar with the term.

     

    You continue to assume that you have a monopoly on everyday words and concepts. If you had any ready comprehension skills whatsoever you'd see that the elementary factoids and opinions you express are already clearly understood. Instead you jump in to the middle of a discussion regarding the causality of job creation to clear up the differences between attain and procure, as if there was any confusion to begin with. Not only do you attempt to condescend to individuals who are clearly more intelligent than yourself, but you can't even do it competently as your "lessons" are rife with typos and demonstrate only the most superficial understanding.

     

    Do yourself a favor and go back to page 2. You totally miss the boat with your first post, sprinkle in a kindergarten explanation of the agg demand model for reasons which are inexplicable given the context of the thread, totally whiff again on my sarcastic reply, admit you know nothing about basic economic theory, again whiff on sarcasm, then you prove that you have no idea what attain and obtain mean*, all in order to demonstrate for a second time that you have no idea what DC Tom was getting at and no clue about causality.

     

    I think I'll go attain another cup of coffee, idiot.

     

    *at·tain/əˈtān/

    Verb:

     

    Succeed in achieving (something that one desires and has worked for): "he attained the rank of admiral".

    Reach (a specified age, size, or amount): "dolphins can attain remarkable speeds in water".

     

    ob·tain/əbˈtān/

    Verb:

     

    Get, acquire, or secure (something): "an opportunity to obtain advanced degrees".

    Be prevalent, customary, or established: "the price of silver fell to that obtaining elsewhere".

  14. In fairness, the article said he spent 7 hours at the golf club, not on the golf course, which is nowhere near as unreasonable as people would make it out to be.

     

    I understand it's bad optics and adds to the narrative of his idiocy, but it's simply a waste of time criticizing him for this.

    Which is why I responded with a joke. I couldn't care less if Obama spent 10 hours on the course and another 8 at the club bar on his vacation. Seems pretty normal to me.

  15. It is so attractive to solve issues by changing the siuation, such as:

     

    "Lower the Cost of the Shoes, and the Kids will have to Rob less to buy them".... but that assumes the facts the the kids will not find some toher consumer products that gives the stature or Rep.... the solution probably lies in early community intervantion and solid home life.

     

    "The Banks are Greedy and Deceiftful, Take their Power away"... until you relize they're banks and the goal is to make as much money as they can, and they own your elected officials... if you don't like the big banks, pull you money out... or find a way to use their money to make youe life better or you richer...

     

    "Ban fast food, people will weigh less"- people can still be fatties if they eat salads all day.... just use exhorbinant amounts of cream dressing and wash it down with soft drinks...the solution is motivating people to get off their fat asses and walk to work, or do any kind of moving...

     

    but rarley do price controls and reglating good and bad acheive the desired result.

     

     

     

    My in-laws are white as clouds, but they make the stupidest purchases that cotinue to leave them broke and depndent and depressed.

    Cracking a few lunch beers?

×
×
  • Create New...