OGTEleven

Things this proves: 1. You can't spell Jonas. 2. You're a negative Nancy 3. Refer to items 1 and 2.

Maybe, but have you seen this? cool game

I've tried to watch a few NBA games. I can't do it. There is one player that I think is worth the price of admission: Iverson. That's it. That's all I've seen. I agree with your assessment of hockey.

I guess the answer to that would have to be...."it depends". If the modifications were overly restrictive or took inordinately long then it could have created a problem. If time was of the essence, then the new problem could have led to bigger problems (ie. not catching the bad guy). I have two conclusions: 1. It is impossible to determine whether the administration is "right" or "wrong". 2. The FISA route that you had claimed was a slam dunk, was not viewed as such by the administration. They may be correct or incorrect in their interpretation.

Other than saying it was no longer as easy as had been claimed in a previous thread, I offered no comment. My lack of comment should not have been interpreted as an indictment of the court. It should have been interpreted as a lack of comment. I am fully aware of the statistical factors that come into play with the approval/rejection rate. The other thread has been closed so I opened a new one. Thanks anyway for the condescending logic lesson guys. Hey RI, if I'm in the "Talking Points Crowd" I think it is unfair tha I have been excluded from the meetings. How do I get on the mailing list? Is the food any good?

To expand on an earlier closed thread..... Perhaps FISA wasn't so easy anymore.... My Webpage

I get that (although I am out of town). You're probably right in that TD will be fired. I was just saying that if the goal was to win it in the short term, TD/MM may be the best option. From a realistic point of view, he probably goes, but I will say that if anyone could market his way out of his own current mess and retain a bunch of season tickets, it is TD. He is very good at that side of the biz. Sign at stud OL, at solid DT and have a good draft.....voila.

He prefaced the whole thing by saying he had the same opinion before yesterday. I agree with Doc (note this is not the politics board). Why? There are two reasons. 1. To hire a new GM will mean dismantling everything again. This will mean keeping some talented players but mostly starting from scratch. It would be 100% certain that the next couple of years would be difficult. I can wait longer than that even though I don't want to do it. Ralph can't wait that long. 2. If Donahoe has not gotten religion about what is wrong with this team from watching them this year, he never will. Next year will be pivotal. Everyone in the organization will know it. Desperation at least has the potential to produce great things. A new management team buys everyone else time and excuses. I'm not really a big fan of Donahoe or Mularkey, but they may be our best alternative.

Do you want my opinion of your post?

What on Earth makes you think that if Ralph is inclined to clean house, that a win over Cincy will change anything? Why should it? If he is inclined to stand pat, a loss wouldn't change anything either. How about this for a theory? Moulds is basically holding Mularkey hostage by refusing to play if Losman plays because of deeply rooted personal problems. Mularkey knows that another circus would absolutely cost him his job and is letting the inmate run the asylum is a desperate grasp to keep his job. FYI....I have no idea if this is true but I can make stuff up to.

I always thought that a "head" was a burnout that was a also overweight. Don't ask me why because I have no idea.

It doesn't take too much work to read between the lines of Mort's replies. He certainly thinks TD is gone. It's also interesting that he completely blew off the part of the question concerning the OL. Clearly he is tight with TD.

I'm with you on that. It's our job as citizens to be wary of the government. That said, I think it is strange that this topic has generated so much of an issue (especialy publicly aired and heavily run in the media). We know the intent of the enemy and we know their method of communication. We have the technology to stop it (or at least try). If the government catches a drug dealer in the process (by accident) and the case gets thrown out then terrific. They can't have carte blanhce but we also have to be realistic. Does anyone suspect that the phone taps are being used for anything other than the presumed intent? Is anyone really suggesting we lay off the terrorists until congress can pass a special law and the courts can hear all the appeals?

For the content; I think the content will have an audience. Personally I will not be part of it (that's ok). Your main character looks down upon everything in "our" time and presupposes it to be slavish in nature. He seems to make a leap from our time, where a tiny percentage of people can live by pursuing their true calling, to his time where an overwhelming percentage can. Assuming the rest of the work explains how this happens (which seems like a tough bridge to cross), he is at the very least underinformed about our time. Not everyone works at Wal-Mart or is an astrophysicist. Some people that work at Wal-Mart are genuinely happy. Some astrophysicists are leading lost lives. People in our time and all times that have preceeded us are not really all that complex. They always pursue their desires (or hobbies, as you call them). They do not always achieve their desires, but they always pursue them. What the character misses IMO, is that there are many desires. Ease is one of the strongest. People all up and down the social ladder pursue it. If you could design a society/species you would make it such that ease might not be high on the species list of desires. We can't do that, nor will he be likely to have that ability (unless you write it in). Things like family, love, safety and entertainment also come into play. Many people do achieve their life's goals without ever becoming rich or having a fancy title. He thinks this is sheep-like, but in reality it is simply not his place to decide. At best the charachter has a lack of understanding of our time and no desire to learn. At worst he is a cynical jealous self absorbed loser. Neither is a desirable set of traits for someone from a superior society. His observations about today's politics and society have some basis in fact but are limited to the US, at least in this snippet. In what seems to be a future global society, he does nothing to deride the societies clearly inferior to our warted one. As for the future, I'm assuming you'll explain how we arrived there. If you do, you should probably also explain how such a superior society evolved without truly understanding its predecessor(s) and while continuing to make snap judgements about it. The inability to take all facets of human nature into account seems to me incompatible with the ability to build a utopian future.

....and Robert Downey Jr. thinks he has very few substance abuse issues.

To the Bills fans that responded to this trash: If you capitalized the word miami or dolphins in your reply, you need to re-examine your priorities. To the original poster (Pubes): If the Pats win 15 more Super Bowls in a row, all via bad officiating, Tom Brady is still their QB while serving as President of the United States of Earth and still has the same cheesy grin, BB is still their coach and his vanity expands ten fold each year, and they play the fish for the division in week 17, I'll wear a Pats hat.

I wasn't trolling or trying to be obnoxious. I guess it came off that way. It was an honest question. I like the way it is written (style). It's fairly unique yet easy to follow. I'll comment on the content when I have more time.

Do you want a review/critique of A - Style B - Content C - Both D - Neither?

If you think Lee Evans = Peerless Price, you're not paying enough attention.

George is "Willing" them to do it. It might not be a Red/Blue state issue, but to me he nails it when he calls it collectivist vs. ??????. I'd like to fil the question marks with the word capitalist but sadly I think that's a bit of a stretch for Republicans and Oil Cos. I will say that in this case ????? > collectivists.

If the go 19-0 you will never have to hear from the fat old idiots in miami again. Ever. That, my friend, is a platinum lining.

I found this to be interesting. I thought the last 4-5 paragraphs were more interesting than the first 75% of the article. Will

That's ok. They'll get you with the Patriot act.

I consider some of your posts torture.

At this moment, I am glad I'm not Daniel Graham's dry cleaner.