GG

No hindsight needed, he's not worth the $9.5 million 5th year option. I think his best comp would be someone like William Gholston who signed for about $5.5 million avg. Maybe Shaq gets something in the $6 mil/yr range.

Yet you have no problems using history as a pretext to paint a false narrative? Then you wonder why people make fun of you?

Back in the hunt

Bolton has been the biggest Iran hawk for decades. His tweet is not out of character at all.

NE has looked like trash last 4 games.

The stores are in a historic building that housed one of the first major department stores in NYC. Anyone who walked by on 6th Ave between 17th & 23rd in the '80s was stupified why these gorgeous spaces weren't utilized at all. The site sat idle for decades until TJX & Bed Bath put stores in there in the early '90s, which spurred a rebound and all the old historic shells were occupied by retailers, drawing more people to the area. Now these morons thank that it's a bad thing.

That clip is Oscar-worthy for the emotional buildup of the first drive, followed by the steady tragicomic downfall of the heavy favorite in their Taj Mahal .

A thought just hit me that this 4th down conversion is evocative of another massive QB run with the game on the line just over 30 yrs ago ...

And the wet blanket comment is that now Bills still only beat one team with a winning record.

Favorite holiday, by far.

Fine, do away with the income tax and replace it with a new consumption tax. It's still a tax.

The argument is zero taxation, not zero income tax. US had taxes and levies before income tax was enacted.

Yeah, honest in a practical application of zero taxation with real life examples of where it has worked. Otherwise it's the polar opposite of the rationale for Communism.

Just for its and giggles, what's the rationale for zero taxation, and where had that ever worked?

At this point, probably not. Eight weeks ago, yes.

He's played the best as a Bill in the last 4 weeks.

Now we can put the video on an endless loop.

Suck it Jerry ...and the referee crew.

This is what needs to be solved, as these are interdependent Energy Generation Energy Distribution Energy Availability/Storage Go!

Def Steelers

Passionate? Yes But can we wait until after the game to post this? Didn't work out too well when the original was shot.

The beauty of the renewable energy promise. Turbines don't spin when wind is under 10mph or so or beyond 50 mph (although I've heard of slower shut down speeds, especially in populated areas)

Never mind putting the turbines in that spot. There's a little thing called "too much wind" that shuts the windmills down. It's free to me dammit. I don't have to pay to see the sun and have a nice breeze wash over my face.

That’s because Canada doesn’t produce things on the same level as the US. It’s not a hard concept. Industrial output produces emissions. Where’s your graph that shows emissions per capital relative to industrial production? You’d learn that US is much more efficient than the rest of the world. The UN admonitions are garbage. If they want to achieve their goal to reduce US emissions to zero, who is going to deal with the famines and wars that would result from throwing the US economy in the tank? You haven’t really though through the real ramifications of all these junk science proposals, have you?

For an alleged teacher, you have a lot to learn. USA SHOULD have the highest emissions per capita because we produce 20% of global output with only 5% of global population. As someone once said, we punch well above our weight. Then look at the slopes of the emissions graphs, and tell me which countries should take serious actions. It's definitely not the US, which has had the steepest decline, even though it's still driving the global economy. Said another way, the US is putting its money where the alarmists' mouths are, is still increasing its output while reducing overall emissions and manages to do it at far lest cost and disruption to the population. But then again, you're seduced by an ignorant 16-yr old from Switzerland because she can navigate a yacht across an ocean. Therefore she must know what she's talking about economics, energy, climate and emissions.