bills_fan

Great parady video by Israel regarding the floatilla incident that happened last week. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_wl2491

You do realize the estate tax is revenue-neutral right?

Just poured myself a Laphroaig, 10 year cask strength. One of the finest single malts under $100 per bottle. Drank with just a small splash of Poland Spring to open it up (it is cask strength after all). Going to enjoy this one.

All they need to do is have one ump in the booth watching replays. If he sees something off, he buzzes down to the plate ump. Plate ump checks the last call, determines right or wrong, and we move on. Whole thing takes less than 2 minutes and the call is right. Not seeing the problem with this...

Thats what Lupica argues for. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...o_jim_joyc.html And it has happened before...see the George Brett pine tar game.

Imagine that...sportsmanship in pro sports. How retro!

Interesting question. There have been 20 PGs in MLB history (21 after today's debacle). Have there been 20 players in baseball history better than Griffey? I don't think so, given he has not had any of the steroid rumors surrounding him.

I really don't care about replay for balls/strikes. But HRs and plays in the field, like the one in question tonite, yes, I want to see replay used. I want to see the call made right. IF you have to double check the monitor to get it right...absolutely, do it.

MLB should immediately allow instant replay. I feel bad for Galarraga...1st 28 out perfect game in history. Here is the call. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_...76&c_id=mlb And here is a link to the first out, an absolutely amazing catch by Austin Jackson, Willie Mays style. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_...76&c_id=mlb Give credit to the ump for being stand-up about it. But he should have been able to watch replay to get it right. “I just cost that kid a perfect game,” Joyce said. “I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay.” “It was the biggest call of my career,” said Joyce, who became a full-time major league umpire in 1989. “I don’t blame them a bit or anything that was said,” Joyce said. “I would’ve said it myself if I had been Galarraga. I would’ve been the first person in my face, and he never said a word to me.”

I think the reasons are far more nefarious. Lets think about this for a second....banks securitized the 1st mortgage and sold it off to pension funds, institutions etc. They act as mortgage servicers (we'll come back to this) on that 1st motgage (who do you pay each month). However, a large percentage of mortgages were done with 1sts and 2nds (90/10/10), not to mention home equity loans or lines of credit. In many (most?) cases, the banks hold the 2nds/home equity line/loan as an asset on their balance sheet, or in certain cases, off-balance sheet. The banks have that asset marked at $0.98 or $0.96 on the dollar. As soon as the 1st mortgage is foreclosed upon, the second becomes instantly worthless. The 2nd is always subordinated in that if there is not enough money to pay off the 1st lender, the second gets bupkus. If enough 2nds go belly-up, say goodbye to the bank. Take a look at how many banks the FDIC closes on a weekly basis and look at the asset haircut (loss) to the FDIC fund....its 40-50% in most cases. That 40-50% if off what the bank is reporting as "good" capital. Now, back to the servicers...a terrible conflict of interest when the banks also own a 2nd. Lets say the homeowner decides to get the free ride, as the article suggests and they have a 2nd/home equity line/loan. The banks have a vested interest in keeping the 1st as a performing loan, so that the 2nd stays a "good" asset. My theory: the banks are paying the 1st to perserve their balance sheet marks. The party ends when the cash flow runs out.

That was funny. I missed it the first times.

Really. I did not know that.

Not trillons on research, but a cap and trade system would cost trillons.

Fair point. And I don't think there has been any dispute that the planet has warmed considerably over the past 130 or so years. I think the question is why. Were we going through an usually cold spell when records were being kept? Perhaps because of major volcanic eruptions like this one or this one. Are humans the cause? I don't know the answer, but spending trillions because well-maybe-we-caused-it doesn't seem like a prudent use of resources.

Otherwise known in corporate-speak as global wage arbitrage. It is also the reason why we have already had rampant inflation in the US in the last 15 years (in the stock market, price of gas, housing etc.) without the killing wage-price spiral that existed in the 70s. Pay no attention to government calculations of CPI, they exclude the "volatile food and energy" as if noone has to drive or eat and make insane adjustments for housing (google "owner's equivalent rent" or just read this article).

Oh Crudele is very good at poking out the government lies over stats. He was one of the first to analyze the birth/death model used by BLS and the goosed employment numbers that are only borne out by the U6 report. His requests under FOIA for telephone conversations had between Treasury and investment banks and minutes of the meeting of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets (aka the Plunge Protection team) are legendary. His columns appear in the Post every Tuesday and Thursday. Bookmark him, its always a great read. He will follow up.

I thought you meant these jobs. Or maybe these. Can't trust anything you're told anymore. And before anyone attacks the source, Crudele is one helluva writer who does his homework.

Lets see TE prove that a California QB can hack it in WNY. Proof is in the pudding and the last 3 Calif QBs have been awful, up until this point.

I was about to amend the poll to include that and Raging Bull/Rocky.

I gotta go with Bull Durham as the best. What say you?

Since birth...Bills, Sabres, Yankees, Duke Basketball

Exactly. And this teenager will have to answer for it every time he is googled or on almost any job interview because the newspaper decided to name him (with the news department voting 7-0 to include his name). Nice guys there.

The stigma, yes, but it would not likely show up on Google search in 20 years when the kid applies for a job. Thats the problem I have. Branding a 15 year old kid with a permanent scarlet letter for one, apprently isolated, act of stupidity.

This article is hysterical. Had me laughing out loud on the train this morning. No easy feat given how hungover I was. Here is the link to the actual site... http://www.textsfromlastnight.com/ And some examples...

I don't think they should have printed his name at all. Yes, he did his act in full public view of many people. But to have this story follow the kid around for oh...the next 30 or so years is wrong. Most jobs run Google searches on you before being hired. I assume many colleges may do likewise in the admissions process. To force this kid to explain this away as a youthful indiscretion for the forseeable future is wrong, IMHO. How many of us would have liked our stupidest decisions made when we were 15-17 years old printed in the local paper and searchable by Google forcing us to explain them to potential employers for years to come? I disagree completely with their secondary reason that he is some type of "role model," just because he is an athlete. That is bupkus.