slothrop

I think it is great because it will better open the TE's up. This will only happen if we take at least two legitimate deep shots in the first half.

Just got a daily fantasy football update from the folks at footballguys.com. They note that Evans will start over Reed this sunday. A possible indication that the Bills will go more verticle or work the TE's and RB's more underneath.

are you sure it is Dr. Z who is stevestojaning all over the bills and not the Bills themselves. It seems to me that the stevestojan that is covering the Bills originated from their own a$$.

I will side with you (only a little though). Westbrook is a huge upgrade in fantasy over Henry. You are right to point out that Henry is not scoring and our offense is struggling. Westbrook, on the otherhand, is in one of the top offenses and he will score. Plus he racks upn receiving yards, which is a bonus if you get points for receptions. Hasselbeck is one of the top 5 QB's so you did not lose too much there. BUT, and this is a huge "BUT," your draft was so pathetically awful that you are screwed anyway.

The "unusual rules" are the product of the Commission on Presidential Debates, an "independent" organization formed to run the debates. This is a relatively new organization and there is a growing grassroots movement to abolish it as a perversion of our democracy. Bill Moyers had the auther of a new book (sorry can not remember the title) exposing the commission and the drastic effect it has upon presidential campaigns. The origin of the commission was the '88 election. The two sides negotiated an "agreement" as to how the debate would take place, what questions could be asked, how they were asked, who could ask them, audience make-up. This was the first comprehensive agreement. However, in the past, organizations sponsored and ran the debates. One of them was the non-partisan League of Women Voters. The candidates tried to tell the "league" that the debate they were hosting was subject to the "agreement." The "League" did not back down and siad that it would ask the questions and run the debate they way they always have, not as some pre-conceived media event. The candidates did not show up. It was after that event and the Bush Sr. meltdown to the question "how has the defecit effected YOU personally and if it has not how can you relate to the economic needs of ordinary Americans?" that the Commission was formed. Now, third-party candidates are banned from the debates as Nader and buchanan were last time. Where the slime really lies is the fact that the Commission is funded by large multi-national corporatations, thus corporate power has yet another stranglehold over the political process and shapes the very terms and subject of political discourse. That is simply the death of any democracy, if it ever existed.

For or against abortion mischaracterizes the debate - That is not the question. There are many issues involved here - but very few would say "hey, I am FOR abortion."

I have to laugh at this. I am not laughing at you, but yoru post brings to mind the countless complaints that WGR does not talk about the Bills enough! When the afternoon crew talks about baseball and the interesting wildcard races, I can be sure to come back here to see "who cares" topics. Now, they are talking about the Bills ad naseum and the opposite complaint is raised that the rest of the sports world is being ignored. This ebing said, I hate the morning show but like teh rest of WGR. I can not STAND Puff - I hated him when he was on 97 ROck for the Bills broadcast and I hate him now. They couple him with Gaughn who I hate. Sylvester is the only saving grace to the morning show. The afternoon show with shope and Bulldog is good, and I really like Jeremy White and Brad Riter. They make some very astute points and are overlooked (while talking about the food they could eat every day for a week without throwing up).

And that differs from this board in what manner - seriously. The same oversimplified arguments are re-hashed over and over: 1) Bledsoe Sucks/He has not been that bad 2) OL sucks 3) MW is a bust Really, what is the difference? When people try to post serious analysis - it always reverts back to one of the above arguments.

Yeah, any pink floyd is a necessity - early Barrett era is great! And "Wish you were Here" is their best CD, IMO. But that changes from month to month. Last month I could not put down Animals, and before that it was "Soundtrack from the Film More." Also, a new band I am starting to really like is The Polyphonic Spree. They are a great alternative to the stevestojan that is out now. Their web site is very cool, check it out at polyphonic spree

actually, I used to play QB and experienced that effect. Often, after getting hit after releasing the ball my head would "whip" back and the back of my helmet would slam into the turf. On a few occasions I would see "yellow." You feel as though you are about to pass-out, like a sleepy feeling for a few seconds.

The case is Casey v. Planned Parenthood, et al., 505 U.S. 833, 112 S.Ct. 2791 (1992).

Yeah me too! Especially the night of graduation after we made our "special" brownies, and . . . oh, wrong board.

like "flip-flop" for instance?

There is an opinion authored by O'Conner that states that any legal requirment that a woman must obtain the consent of the father/husband before getting an abortion, constitutes an "undue burden" on the woman's constitutional rights. (the "undue burden" test is the test created by the S.C. for abortion cases). O'Conner argued that such a ruling could be catastophic in an abusive relationship and in other situations. I have forgotten the name of the case, but if I have time today I will look it up.

here is an interesting question: If holmes does not play who is going to play more, Balylock or Johnson? Publically the Chief's are saying Blaylock. However, some are speculating that Vermeil came out with the whole "diaper" rant to psyche up the more talented Johnson with the intent of using him on Sunday.

i guess the press conference did not happen?

I had a friend who was into motorcycles and he told me that after a certain amount of speed the rider and the bike start to "lift-up." He said that when he was racing he would have to bend over so much that he could hardly see out of his helmet. This story is simply not true.

Well, I guess this is why they call fantasy football gambling! Both Heap and McCallister went down with ankle injuries

The Jury is made up of a cross-section of the public - you are a member of the public - have you ever been BSed by "channeling?" If you knew how much work, preperation, time, skill, and money went into advocating for someone's rights at a trial you would not say such stupid stevestojan.

yeah, the trade was not as good as my previous post - but I am happy with it.

As a trial lawyer I can say that the debates will be easy for Edwards. Trial lawyers, at one level, "perform" for a jury. Their job is to convince an undecided body to believe them by utilizing various skills. Edwards was not a good trial lawyer - he was one of the best in the country! lawyers used to attend his trials just to watch him. He was like the Jordan of the legal world. Those skills will shine during the debates. Where Cheney comes off as the old, wise, but very mean boss/father figure. If you contrast the two it will be a very stark difference.

OK, here is the deal I agreed to: I gave him Chad Johnson, Clinton Portis, and Dallas Clark for Torry Holt, McCallister, and Heap. What do you think?

He had Steve SMith and he is still in a panic. He wants owens or chad johnson because he sees both as an upgrade over Holt. He feel he will be making his WR's better in this deal.

Hear is a question if you htink I am gaining too much value - would you make teh deal if I traded Portis and Owens for Holt, McCallister, and Heap?

I am a lawyer!