Buftex

The "promise breaking" conitnues... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/23/tea-party-group-plans-pro_n_839874.html

Yeah, I remember last year, the day of the draft some guy on the corner of the thruway was selling "knock-off" official Buffalo Bills draft hats!

Thank you for recognizing the distinction. Her company, btw, is the state of Texas. Perhaps I did a poor job of explaining, they had already announced that there would be layoffs at the end of May. They offered those laid off a 3 month severenc package. I think my subject was more than aware that she would have been a likely candidate for a lay-off. But what they did, and it is very transparent to me (remember I was management in this place) was come up with a list of people that they wanted to get rid of (all older, most, as it happens black or hisanic). Why pay my subject $13 an hour to man a cash register, when you can get a few work studies for a fraction of the cost? I get it. While I was still there, replacing people who left, with work-studies and volunteers was all the rage. Save money. I understand that. It sucks, but that is the way it goes. But why treat someone who has been a good, faithful employee that way, just to save a couple of thousand dollars? The severance packages weren't for the people who could least afford to be out of work, it was for the tenured, over-age sorority sisters who likely got hired in the first place, because the knew someone. By the way, I don't take any offense to being called a liberal, so no offense is taken. And I wasn't condemning the capitalist system, or crying "union". I believe that most companies, and even the state, would treat their employees well, if they can. But that is no excuse for just marginalizing people either. You don't want the "great companies" that treat their employees well to be ignored, but, you, and others, are more than willing to ignore examples when people aren't treated so well.

I can't believe you are in the Hall of Fame!

Yeah, but I wasn't referring to myself as a victim. I was referring to someone else being victimized. It seems like you can't see anything from anyone else's point of view. I am sure there is some snappy phrase for that too...not sure what it is. I understand what you are saying, and I don't deny that it is likely a healthy attitude to have, to a degree. But there are times, when people really do get screwed over. Your a big, tough guy (I assume), you can handle yourself. Great! You likely wouldn't find youreslf in the situation. The person I am referring to has adopted a fairly positive attitude about finding another place to work. But, in case you hadn't heard, finding a new job right now isn't as easy as it used to be.

So, with your enlghtened way of thinking, the word "victim" is never valid?

And an arrogant priok spends just enough time, saying little, but just enough to flex his superiority over most everyone...and make himself feel all great in the process... Man you never fail... Yes, I am very familiar with her employee file. I maintened it for 8 years, as her boss. I read the reprimands that she received from her current boss. I may be subpoenaed at a hearing, on her behalf. There is a difference between being laid off, and fired. A big one. The result is the same, but the difference is it would be very difficult to use her job of the last 12 years as a reference. Don't you, or didn't you, at one time do hiring? Wouldn't it send a red flag to you, if someone can't use their most current boss as a reference? You are so busy turning every turd into sunshine and lollipops that you can't see the difference? It would be a much better world, I agree, if everyone had an ego the size of yours... Oh well, no matter...

First, let me apologize for getting pissed, for some reason, you are the only poster here who consistantly gets under my skin. I am not proud of it. What the term "trumped up" means, is a bit open for interpritation, so I am sure you will take the opposite view of whatever mine is, as you are a bit of a contrarian. But let me throw one at you, just for fun: There was an employee,female, age 51, working for 12 years as a cashier. In the 8 years that I worked with this person, they never once had a cash shortage. One day, this person turns in her money to be deposited to her supervisor. She turns in a slip that says she should have $875, but she only has $870 in cash. After re-checking the original cash drawer that she used, it is discovered that she left $105 in her til, rather than the $100 it is supposed to have. So, in effect, $5 (we are talking about five friggin' dollars)was not missing, but left in the wrong place. The error was figured out in all of about five minutes. Next day, that employee receives a reprimand, where a code is sighted, about "mishandling" cash. Now, I would bet, this is not the first time that such an error was made...and the money wasn't even missing. A few weeks later, the same person (dealing in a large volume, very hectic pharmacy) somehow manages to lose a credit card slip. It is likely the customer took it, by mistake, or, it was thrown out. Again, hardly the first time anything like this has ever happened. It is an easy fix. The money was captured, the customers electronic signature, associated with the transaction, is captured. All you need to do is look up the transaction, and reprint the receipt. Sure it is inconvenient, a fair amount of what is done in a medical work place is checking, and correcting errors. As far as that goes, this was a pretty minor one. But again, this cashier was given a reprimand, citing this code. She was fired, reason given: mishandling of cash. Keep in mind, not one penny was unaccounted for. Nothing was missing, other than a credit card slip, which was reprinted. The employers, in my estimation (and I am sure you will disagree) had targeted a handful of people who didn't fit in the bigger scheme of things (with their budget concerns and all) just waiting for them to make any mistake, and then pouring over the codes to find some violation to cite, so they could fire them, and not have to give them any severance. The grounds for dismisal disqualified this person from receiving any unemployment benefits. It is complete bs. I worked there for 8 years, in management, and I am very aware of how they operate. I could tell stories about some of the management there, that would not make them look good in anyone's eyes. I saw this stuff coming, and chose to leave the job, rather than be part of it. And, I am fairly certain, had I stayed, I would have been one of the people left out of work, either by the dubious methods illustrated above, or, a legit lay-off. Now, maybe I am just some bleeding heart, kitty, liberal, as I am sure you are thinking...and a Victicrat since you like the word so much...but this situation was just so despicably handled. The employees all knew that budget cuts were coming, and that some positions would be eliminated...they were prepared for that. They were told, should there job be eliminated, they would get 3 months severence. None were prepared to all of the sudden be cast as villans and kicked in the ass on their way out the door. Contrary to popular opinion here, not all state workers are useless slobs. But now, this person has not found a job, has little savings, and has been denied unemployment, becaue she was let go for "suspicious activity". So, after 12 years, this person, who was so reliable, so proud to be employed where she was, appreciated by customers and her immediate co-workers, can't even get a good reference from her employer. And I really don't think that losing a credit card slip, or miscounting a stack of $5 bills really had anything to do with why she isn't there anymore. They want younger, faster, more computer literate employees, so they will make that happen any way they can. To me this whole situation was trumped up...and the word victim, in this instance, was more than appropriate.

And, as usuual, you are acting like...nevermind...go back to being the most interesting man in the world... Glad to see you are expanding your vocabulary, by the way....you honestly, as usual, don't have any idea what you are talking about, or any of the circumstances that I was referring to. But, as usual, you always have some smug, superior than any/everyone comment...!@#$s aren't as easy to spot as Victicrats, I guess, just being bludgeoned by their drivel day after day, you start to recognize them.

I thought the main impetus behind the 18 week season was Goodell being embarassed by the quality of "pre-season exhibitions", which received negative feedback from fans and media. The NFL, of course, would never think about making the games cheaper than regular season games for fans, as it would be a decrease in revenue. To increase revenue, the soloution for the owners is to have the players suit up for 2 more regular season games, and add two more full weeks of 4 or 5 network advertising for regualr season games. I just think shortening the exhibition season to two games, starting the season a week earlier, and adding a second bye week to each teams schedule is the most logical way to go.

So, how would you feel, say, if the Bills are 8-6, battling it out for a playoff spot, but with 4 games left in the season, they have to go to their backup QB for 2 of the last 4 games? That would suck. I don't like your solution at all...it sounds like a loser to me...it is the same proposal that Tom Brady's agent made. It is silly...if you think that 18 games is too much for one guy to play, all year, than you just don't go to 18 games. Players don't want it, and it seems like fans are kind of ambivilant about it. The only ones who really benefit are the owners. If the owners want to make more money by extending the season, they can cut two pre-season games, start the season a week earlier, add another bye week into the season for each team (giving them 2 byes)...that way, owners get their precious advertising dollars for two more weeks. As a fan, I honeslty could live with the Bills having 2 bye weeks during the season. I am going to tune in whenever they are playing...

Why did you bring it up?

You may not be a victicrat...but why do you assume everyone else is? I wouldn't wish the worst for you, or anyone...that isn't my domain. There are plenty here to carry that slack...

Jeez...you are such an arrogant prick, I hope nothing bad ever happens to you, that is out of your control. Your lack of ego won't be able to handle it...

Much the same going on here in Texas. The state is 26 billion in the hole, so state workers are getting laid off/fired left and right. At my old state job, 8 people, all with lots of time put on, all on the wrong side of 40, have been fired...since Janauary. And the employer is fighting all unemployment claims. Most were the victims of trumped up charges for the most part. They dug hard into obscure codes, so they could site people for the most minor of things.

Picture #20 looks like the iconic photo used the "Walking Dead", minus the horse...pic #13 is Dahli...

I guess you figured out that I meant "Decadent decay in Detroit", not even sure what "devay" would mean..

I wasn't thrilled with the Nix/Gailey at first, but I have really come to like Gailey a lot, for the reasons you mention. However, it remains to be seen if the Bills are "finally getting it right", or if there is going to be more of the same. They didn't improve in the win column, which is the utltimate way they will, and should, be judged. I think they are on to something, but the Bills haven't earned completely earned my trust yet...for me, the jury is still very much out on Nix as GM. He says lots of funny things and all, but lets see some results.

Wow...these pictures are just amazing...almost like "Beneath The Planet of the Apes", excpet its' Detroint and not NYC...and there are no apes! Just kind sad and tragic...but kind of beautiful at the same time... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/23/detroit-decline_n_813696.html#218521

I take it back...Ryan Miller is great!!! Big win in Montreal!

Actually, I guess I am just grateful to get to see the Sabres in HD, I don't think all the Versus guys are that bad...would rather hear Jeanerette, but they aren't as bad as the Boston or Philly guys, by a long shot, IMO. Here is the quandry I find myself in, from time to time. I just purchased Center Ice at the end of February, at the reduced price. On Time Warner, they normally give you the choice of watching the home or away broadcast. So, of course I always choose the Buffalo crew. However, on TW, you only get 2 to 4 games in HD every night. When they do show the Sabres game in HD, it is always the opposing teams' broadcast. Anyone else faced with this decision? Do you go for the hometown broadcast, or the better picture quality? And don't say, "just turn down the sound and get your audio from the GR55 streaming", as they always suggest on GR. The picture and audio are normally about a minute off. I usually sacrifice the picture for the sound...but damn, hockey looks so much better in HD.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2011-03-21/reports-dolphins-interested-in-palmer-bengals-not-budging

Yes, I recall that. But, I also recall him giving up numerous goals in the final minute or two of games...he had so many near-shutouts...I realize, bigger picture, shut-outs don't mean all that much, as long as you win...but I swear, I feel like he turns into a different goaltender in those situations...when the pressure is on, and the opposing team is scrambling to get the puck on the net...like he just loses his vision...reminds me of my girlfriends' daughter, when she drives on I-35...she told me she "just changes lanes, and hopes there are no accidents" Its' interesting what you say about the team being flawed for most of it's existence. I started watching around 73-74, but didn't always understand the game, until the late 70's early 80's during the Bowman era. I missed the bulk of the 90's, as it was impossible to live out of town, in those days, and follow the Sabres. And, you are right. It seems, more often than not, we have a defensively sound team, that struggles to score goals when they need them...I kind of like the offensive part of our game, the last month or so...starting to get a little of that 2006 mojo, it seems...I am not expecting big things from this team, but I won't be shocked, either, if they make a good run.

NICE! I won't really pretend to know jack about how any of these guys will translate from college to pro ball, but I have liked what I have seen of this kid.

Not so sure about that. In the past, under the previous owner, the Sabres wouldn't have picked up a player like Boyce, as he has another year on his contract...and his salary is substantial, in the bigger scheme of things. Darcy might have thought about it, but I am not sure that they would have been able to pull it off, with the financial constraints of the Golisano ownership.