Mickey
-
Posts
6,213 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mickey
-
-
Limbaugh is a public figure and a political partisan, he is not simply an entertainer. I think that on that basis, his private life is fair game when it comes to something like breaking the law. He is a very public critic of the personal lives and choices of others so I see no reason for him to be shielded from the same type of attack that is his bread and butter.
On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh is a human being and to treat him with a complete lack of compassion for his situation is to sink to his level. He should be proesecuted under the law no more vigorously than anyone else who committed the same crime (allegedly). You can deplore whatever hypocrisy there is on his part and still wish him the best in recovering from his addiction.
What is being missed here is an opportunity to have a meaningful discussion of addiction and even legalization of some drugs. As bad or hypocritical as Rush's addiction and law breaking might be, I doubt anyone besides himself was personally hurt by his actions. All this effort spent on an essentially victimless crime seems wasteful enough to at least consider alternatives, even radical ones like legalization.
Having sympathy for people you like is easy. Sympathy for someone like Limbaugh is hard but it is probably a better measure of one's true compassion.
-
The military had him targeted before the war and were ready to go but Bush canceled the plan three times because he allegedly was afraid that if they took him out, they would lose a reason to go to war.
-
I haven't watched them because I figure they want us to see them which is why they keep making them and posting them. Lets not help them. If people didn't watch them, there would be little point in making them.
-
I disagree. Bush's "regular guy" act precludes too much pomposity. I think, rather, it's an army of empty phrases...
Again, I disagree. A rusty ice pick to the ear drum would cause a sharp, searing, immediate pain. Listening to a Bush speech starts as a sort of dull, throbing general ache that progresses to an overall sense of crushing suffocating. It's kind of an Edgar Allen Poe "Cask of Amontillado" experience...
I stand corrected.
Any day that I can quote William Gibbs McAdoo on Warren G. harding is a good day. I am a geek's geek.
-
Listening to Bush speak, I am reminded of what one contemporary said of Warren G. Harding's speeches, another uninspiring Republican President:
"an army of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea."
The "barren landscape" would be Bush's brain in this metaphor. Rather than "moving" across the landscape, I think in Bush's case, "bumbling" would be a more accurate word.
He is a nice enough guy but even for those of you who love the guy, you have to admit that listening to him is like having your ear drums scrambled with a rusty ice pick.
-
-
-
Let me see if I've got this right... Punishing defense? would this be the same punishing defense that gave up an 80 yard winning TD drive to the Jags including 4 4th downs? and the same punishing defense that gave up 24 points at home to the Pats? How many times was Brady sacked?
Mediocre offense? averaging 10 points per game? That's mediocre? that's putrid! The Bills need to avg. about 6 more points /game before I'd call their offense mediocre.
I was being sarcastic on the defense. That was the theory anyway, spend big on a solid defense, go for an offense on the cheap and hope for the best. I must have heard the Ravens cited as the model on this board a million times. Right, to make that work you just have to plan on having the best defense in the history of pro football. Its a snap. Real solid strategy there huh? Until we are willing to invest in the trenches, especially on offense, we are in trouble. I bet JP is glad he is sitting this one out. I hope we get him a line next year.
-
Not entirely fair. Between the RBs and WRs, we now have three #1 and two #2 picks. In addition to Bledsoe (and our #1 QB-of-the-future), they should be our "high-profile" players.......
Them, and the #4 pick in the draft at RT (6 yrs; $38 M SB $7.5 M), and FA pickups Trey Teague (4 yrs; $10M SB $1.5M) and Chris Villarrial (4 yrs. $11.85M. SB $3.6M.)
Other than the bargain-basement TEs and FB, there's more $$$$$ tied up in the offense than you might think. (Although you can't tell it by their production...)
Right but we didn't need to spend a no 1 on a reciever if we had kept Price so it is just a wash at best, worse really since it will take Evans 2-3 years to really produce unless he is a phenom like Bolden or Moss and that does not appear to be the case. We have 3 top picks at DE alone. One of the RB picks is so far a waste since he has been on the bench or hurt and besides, you only need one top back and we had one. As far as Teague and Villarial, I was referring to highly sought after FA acquisitions, not guys we were the only ones interested in signing. Teague was a 7th round pick and Villarial is Ruben Brown without the pro-bowls. We spent some money on offense, just not smart money and we spent most of our capital on the defense.
-
Well...I'll give that an Amen...But there was no way Volek was coming here when DB was still in the fold. He knew he had a great Back-up spot already behind McNair, and he loves it there. Had the Bills waived Drew, or told Volek that was their intention if he Signed, I think Volek would have come. Then the Bills could have still Picked JP for insurance, and this whole deal would be VERY different in my opinion... B)
Yeah, we would all be talking about how much Volek sux.
-
I think, too, KOK, that after watching Brady throw yesterday, he's just a much better quarterback than Bledsoe. His patience in the pocket was freakish, and once in a while the camera angle would show him throwing passes that had ever the least bit of arc on them to get over the defender but directly to the receiver. It's not hard for me to see how they went from 13-21 to 43-12.
Unfortunately, we don't have a Brady. We have a Bledsoe...and after that, the QB talent drops off dramatically on our roster. Which is why to me, changing up the quarterback has no upside to it at all. It also would change up the way the OL has begun to improve because they're still getting used to Bledsoe's cadence's, etc. Tossing Matthews in there when the season isn't over yet won't do anything but end the season a lot sooner.
Its easy to be patient when the nearest rusher is over by the gatorade bucket. I thought the problem with Drew was that he doesn't throw it away soon enough, now he is not patient enough? Which is he, impatient or patient?
-
Okay, so if we sit Bledsoe and start Mathews, we will go 43-12 and win two SB's, is that your argument? Be serious. Matthews right now is our only option besides Drew, if you have an argument that Matthews would have done better against the best team in the league than Drew's 250 plus game hitting on two bombs including a TD yesterday, let's hear it. If not what is the freaking point?
All you Drew haters have made your point ad nauseum. Do you have anything more clever or constructive to say than "Drew sux"???? Is that the height of your football acumen, your keen eye for what all the rest of us miss? Is that the observation you have that just has to be shared because of it's rare insight?
I actually heard one monumental idiot say, in all seriousness, that we should bench Drew and start Matthews, not because Matthews is any better than Drew but because we should start now to see if he is good enough to back up JP. Brilliant. 13 games left and one idiot thinks we should spend them as an extended tryout for a backup for next year. Yeah, that makes perfect senses. Pooch the season to see if Shane Matthews is good enough to supplant Travis Brown as the likely No. 2 next year.
-
A punishing defense with a mediocre offense, just like the Ravens of a few years back. Defense wins championships right?
We put all our cash into the defense with Spikes, Fletcher, Posey, Vincent, Adams, Milloy and how many top draft picks on DE's? The only high profile acquisition for the offense was Williams who is a bust and Bledsoe. That is it. Nobody thought it mattered though because "Defense wins championships". As it turns out, you have to score points to win football games afterall. Think about it, 6 starters on defense were sought after FA's. How many starters on offense were sought after FA's? Drew? Anyone else?
This is the team we wanted and TD delivered. Defense wins championships.
-
We should just replace the other 10 guys on the team. That shouldnt be too hard.
I mean, since we know he isnt 100% of the problem, lets just toss out the entire OLine (who played well for 80% of the game yesterday - and seem to finally be "gelling"), get rid of our entire WR corps. Travis and Willis? Bye bye. And dont forget the tight ends. Hell, thats even more that 10 guys.
So, since alot of people are saying its not all his fault, lets keep him in there, forget about our first round pick Losman, and just trade every other player on offense.
Simple - now TD, get on the phone, and QUICK!
Right now the choice is Mathews or Drew. Mathews is not an unknown. It is well accepted around the league that he stinks. If not for two, count 'em, two, injuries at QB he would not be on ours or anyone elses roster. Don't tell me Drew stinks, tell me why Mathews would do better than Drew because that is the only decision to be made here.
If Mathews was in there, would Smith not have held on 3rd an 1 taking away a frist and ten at the NE 35? Would Reed and Campbell have not followed that penalty by jumping off sides on the next two plays leaving us a 3rd and 21 from our own 43? Would Smith not have tripped Bledsoe on 3rd and 6 from the NE 34 causing a 12 yard loss? With 1:07 left in the first half, would Moulds not have dropped a first down pass at midfield and then followed that with a 15yd penalty for a PF? Would Travis not have tripped over his own feet on 3rd and 2 from the NE 16 with a huge hole in front of him? Would Coy Wire and McGee not have been toasted in the secondary? Would Schobel have had a sack or even a pressure on Brady? Would Fletcher not have taken two PF's?
You know what wouldn't have happened if Mathews had been in there? Evans wouldn't have been hit in the hands on a dead run for a 55 yard gain and Moulds wouldn't have been hit dead on from over 40 out for a TD.
Maybe if we stopped going crazy every time Drew blinks an eye and worked on some other things like, oh, I don't know, cutting the penalties down to less than 20 a game we might win one.
Lindell misses a FG in week one and Villarial holds on a 3rd and 1 first down run that takes out of FG position and it is Drew's fault. Clements blows a coverage on 3rd an 75 and it is Drew's fault.
This team spent it's FA $ on the defense with Adams, Milloy, Fletcher, Spikes and Vincent and nothing of note was spent on the offense. Problem is, the defense doesn't get turnovers to help the offense which needs it given the neglect of its personnel over the years. "Win with defense", "look at how Baltimore won it all, they had no offense". We bought into that and now we have just what we wanted, a good defense and an offense that can barely get out of it's own way. But you're right, its all Drew Bledsoe's fault.
-
I was known to have a couple of drinks there now and again. In fact, I took one of those bartending courses there one semester. Do you remember that they had night courses that you could take for fun? I took bartending. Times have changed. Now, you cannot even have a drink as a college student.
That was the hardest job to get that I ever tried for. It was a work study job and most of those jobs were in dining halls or worse. Every kid on campus with work study applied for that job. I remember once I was in and was on the other side, doing the hiring, we took in over 300 applicants for 2 positions.
It was a great time. Give a girl a free drink and bang, you had her phone number or better every time. $40 bucks in tips a night. If you were in college and had $40 bucks in your pocket in 1982 you were a rich man.
Ever have a PMP (Poor man's pizza) at Johnny's hot truck? Man, I miss those.
-
-
This is completely expected. I'm pretty sure I said something about this before the "debate." Since neither of these parties is interested in Constitutional governance, we are left with scripted garbage. The masses now pick leaders based on all important things like sighing, facial gestures, and whether or not they use cue cards.
Great times for America.
I am going with the guy who made the best choice in terms of a necktie.
What we need is a candidate from a real school like Cornell instead of those idiot factories, Havahd and Yale.
-
I was on the long (depressing) drive home from Buffalo yesterday and I decided to listen to Drudge's radio show. He stated that reports have shown that several counties in Ohio have voter registration levels that are 103% of their population. He did so without mentioning whether dems, repubs or both were registering the "extra" voters.
I wonder what percentage of the overall population is registered to vote (my guess would be about 60%). If some counties have 103%, not only does it not pass the "smell test" but it also shows a lack of understanding of the term "standard deviation" if anyone thinks that anywhere near 100% would be registered anywhere. Is it just me or should this be an importannt story?
Population counts are based on the most recent census which I beleive was in 2000, no? Populations change in 4 years. Especially in rural counties where if one person moves out, the population is cut in half
People missed by the census takers who do register could also make a difference I suppose. I guess we would have to know a little more about the facts than are contained in the report. Which counties, for example?
The interesting registration issue is the sheer amount of new ones. It is incredible. I posted an article not too long ago on absentee voters living abroad registering in unbelievable numbers. Polling data that centers on registered voters or likely voters are based on information from 2000 which usually would be reliable. Not this time around, not with this volume of new registrations. This is one election in which the polls could be wildly off base either way although I will say this development seems to make republicans more nervous than democrats.
-
Kerry pulled out a black pen
According to the New York Post and the Fox News Channel feed, Kerry pulled out a black pen.
This is ridiculous and just another attempt to change the subject.
GWB was horrible in the debate. As Howard Fineman said, he had 30 minutes of material for a 90 minute debate. Moreover, because his people have insulated him from any tough questions, he seemed particularly bothered by having to answer questions and listen to someone say something contrary to his positions.
It was GWB's debate to lose. He could have put Kerry out of his misery with that debate. Instead, he did his best impression of Al Gore and allowed Kerry to get back in the game.
Thanks Peter, for the umpteenth time, a post from Richio turns out to be complete, utter, fabricated crapola. This one goes right along with his countless, "Aha, WMD's found, take that you libs" posts. Add in his revelations about Kerry claiming to be Irish on St. Patricks Day and bogus allegations of having botox surgery and an affair with an "intern" and he has a virtually unbroken string of lying, mudraking, idiot sputum.
Shame on those taken in with this kind of thing. Mich Fan, that would be you. I thought you were too smart to react to anything Richio posts before checking it out. Ooops. Don't sacrifice your cred. by cheering him on.
-
I don't understand how some people don't understand the lesser of two evils argument in this election.
And talk about deception, what is your opinion about the tubes revelations that came out today. Pretty fascinating stuff.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/internat...ast/03tube.html
Your bloody facts are not welcome here and you know it. Move on buddy, move on. Don't you know that the real issues in this campaing are whether Kerry has had botox surgery or claimed that he was Irish on St. Patrick's Day?
-
Keep on making excuses for the guy...I'm sure it was the D's fault that once again the offense only scored 10 points...that's 3 TDs in 3 games...not good. Yeah, that's Wire's fault and its also because of zero pass rush that we can't score.
And blaming dropped balls is just not thinking things through...there will be some drops in EVERY game by EVERY team (the Pats had many more drops than the Bills yesterday)...it's jus what happens, blaming a few drops on the total lack of production is just wrong. Every team and every QB has dropped balls each game, somehow people think these mean a lot more when its the Bills that drop balls. Overall the WRs caught the ball pretty well yesterday.
You kind of ignored the litany of mistakes yesterday that had nothing to do with Bledsoe that I listed so here they are again:
Henry falling on 3rd and 2 with a gaping hole in front of him.
Baker jumping off sides on the FG attempt that gave the Pats a TD.
Moulds dropping one pass and drawing a 15 yard PF.
Henry blowing the 4th down play on the fake handoff.
Wire getting burned repeatedly.
Fletcher's two PF's.
Smith's holding call on a 3rd and one that we had made deep in Pat territory.
Reed dropping what would have been a first down pass on 3rd and whatever.
Coaches calling a naked bootleg for Drew.
Referees who blew several calls, most notably Dillon's second fumble and several late hits by the PATs that didn't draw flags.
Let me add:
zero pass rush
Bledsoe was not the problem yesterday. There were at least two drives that would have netted points if not for screwups by others. Quit shielding the guys goofing up by just blaiming it all on Bledsoe. If you elimenate the few mistakes he did make (overthrows, one to Reed and one to Neufeld) then he would basically have played an error free game. If we need our QB to play a perfect game to win, we aren't going to win.
Look at the time Brady had to throw. He didn't make any plays with his feet so don't give me that "mobility" canard. He didn't have to because he had all day to just stand there and wait for the coverage to break down.
Besides, the carping on Bledsoe is just so old already. The choice is Bledsoe or Mathews and that is an easy one. Mathews is no mystery, he is a known quantity. We all know that he sux to a certainty. If you really think Mathews could do better than that 250+ day Bledsoe had against the SB champions which include two bombs netting 10 points then you have crossed the line from "optimistic" to "delusional". Drew is all we have for the next 13 weeks so give it a rest. Lets complain about things we can actually change like getting more touches for Willis and cutting down on the penalties and other goofy mistakes.
-
He is a failed experiment, not big enough to be a LB, too big and slow to be in the secondary.
Travares Tillman is playing for Carolina, do you know if he starts? He was drafted by us in the second round four years ago to be our safety.
-
It was 4th down anyway. Given how the play was blown (apparently by Henry), he wasn't going to make the first down so what is the difference? The Pats would have had the ball at about the 25 yard line with 2 minutes left and we had only one time out. Best case scenario is we hold them 3 and out and get the ball back with no timeouts, less than a minute to play and needing to go about 75 yards to tie it.
Bledsoe had a mistake or two today but he also made some great passes and was smart with the football. What few mistakes he had pale in comparison to:
Henry falling on 3rd and 2 with a gaping hole in front of him.
Baker jumping off sides on the FG attempt that gave the Pats a TD.
Moulds dropping one pass and drawing a 15 yard PF.
Henry blowing the 4th down play on the fake handoff.
Wire getting burned repeatedly.
Fletcher's two PF's.
Smith's holding call on a 3rd and one that we had made deep in Pat territory.
Reed dropping what would have been a first down pass on 3rd and whatever.
Coaches calling a naked bootleg for Drew.
Referees who blew several calls, most notably Dillon's second fumble and several late hits by the PATs that didn't draw flags.
Drew is not the problem with this team. Stupid mistakes, a safety that might as well be invisible, zero pass rush and continued blown assignments on the O-line are killing us. At least once a game, our best players (Moulds, Fletcher and Henry) do something that hurts bad. Remember Moulds' fumble against the Jags? How many has he dropped this year? Twice yesterday he cut the wrong way, he drops another and pulls a 15 yard penalty. If your leaders are screwing up like that, what do you expect from guys like Baker and Smith?
-
No, but neither did the rest of the team when it counted most. Maybe if Henry handn't fallen down of his own accord we wouldn't be talking about the fumble.
Drew has his issues, but he got absolutely no time today. How many times was Harrison going to come up the middle unblocked before someone did something about it? I thought is was encouraging to see them complete some deep balls. Must better than against the Raiders...
Among all the negativity, I think they'll start winning some games if they can eliminate the stupid mental errors. Killer penalties. Miscommunication between QB and WR. Dropped balls. Are they a playoff team? No... but they're better than they're 0-3 record shows.
Also, for those Shane Matthews fans out there... there's a reason he was playing golf a couple of months ago. You give Bledsoe the time to throw that Brady got from his line... and nobody would be bitching about him today...
Yeah, Drew didn't make a single play on defense or special teams. He sure didn't get it done. Wasn't it him who jumped off sides leading to a TD? Did he go the wrong way on the most critical play of the game? Did he slip and fall over his own feet on 4th and 2 with a gaping hole in front of him? Did he have two personal fouls? Did he blow a coverage on third and thirty? Did he drop a first down pass or was the Moulds and Reed?
Drew had us driving for the tying TD and then Henry went nuts for two plays and we were done. Lets blame Drew though, after all, he didn't get it done.
(of course we knew that was going to happen)
Wow
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Don't you think that watching it is what they want? They want to terrorize us and demonstrate their power right? They can't do either if we do not give them the satisfaction. If nobody watched them, wouldn't there be less of a reason for them to make these films? I understand what these people are and what they do without giving them the opportunity to use my emotional response to such an outrage in any way. For all I know, anger against them is just what they want to inspire with these things.
I also can't think of anything more inappropriate than to use these films ourselves to score a point in a debate over the war either for or against. That is what they do, kill people outrageously, film it and then use the film to generate a response. For any one to use those films for the same general purpose, to generate a response, is despicable and I don't care if some idiot is hoping to get more traffic to his web site or to prove that the war is going badly or to prove that what we are doing is right.
I understand where you are coming from bib and how it can tick you off to hear debate on the board when this kind of thing is happening. Though I acknowledge your point as a valid one, I just think a greater good is served by not watching these things. Call me stubborn, I am not going to watch them for the simple fact that those miscreants want me to. It is my way of flipping them off.