GG

Absolutely. The blew the stadium away.

It's more about the promoters' stupidity of sandwiching Journey between Thorogood and the Stones. And Journey reinforced it by sucking on stage. Much unlike The Clash in the following year. PS - May that promoter rot in hell

Again, what has Housley done in the last 2 seasons that inspires confidence that he's a good coach?

Journey was NOT the it band in the early 80's. Everyone had a WTF moment when they were announced as the opening act for that Stones show. They were and still are a chick band from the era, and the nostalgia act is rewriting history about their popularity back in the day. They rank right up with REO Speedwagon

I'd swap him for Kelce

Damages may not be, but choosing who to go after certainly depends on the pocket depth.

Never mind that it's not in dispute that both people were at that specific place at that specific time, as opposed to Kavanaugh ...

The bigger message/sign should be in who Housley sits when he plays Smith

The timing of the penalties (quarter, down) is also crucial. Of course we're biased, but it's crazy not to think that he's not getting more of a benefit of the doubt now that he's in NE

The thread takes its usual turns, but the OP is correct. Gilmore is a very good CB whose coverage is physical. He's getting away with far more contact now than he ever did in Buffalo.

What have you seen in the last month that makes you convinced that this is a fringe playoff team vs a contender for the worst team in the NHL? Said another way, if there were 10 unlucky bounces in December, would you still think this is a playoff contending team?

Keith Ellison and Bob Menendez agree with this message.

Wow, this game had everything. It’s like back to the depths and unwatchable again.

Unpossible. Only conservatives are racist

Do your own homework Sue. But here's a sample.

Who's responsible for the majority of anti-Semitic attacks in NYC in the last 2 years?

Different kind of stimuli. Free money and zero interest rates are a bit different than allowing people to keep more of their stuff and worrying less about the regulator beating them down. The results are indisputable if you're wiling to acknowledge the obvious.

Finally getting around to this. Free trade theories most certainly precede China, and until that episode it has been proven to be successful for everyone involved. It worked to get post war Europe & Japan out of their depths, and worked for much of South East Asia. Now with the China experiment in full swing there's no reason to throw out the baby with the bath water. China has thrown the proverbial monkey wrench into the trade argument, because they've changed the equation from economic trade to a geo-political issue. I'm certain that the initial goal of promoting trade with China was to open up its vast market and by promoting capitalism, the yoke of the repressive Communist hold would loosen. So far, only a part of that wish has come true, because the regime has managed to hold on tighter and use trade to bolster its position. That's why I'm not arguing against Trump's hard line stance against China, because they're not playing by the rules. Because Chinese elevated a trade spat into a new front in this Cold War, I have no problem with Trump pushing their economy into the dumpster. Xi needs to see what a downturn will do to his regime. I'm not certain he'll be as cavalier to send in tanks in the next Tianmen. --------- Your monopoly argument has zero supporting facts, other than the big companies are getting bigger and their owners are getting richer. Boo ho. Where's the consumer harm? True monopolistic behavior exhibits harm very quickly, but you can't point to anything tangible other than worrying about what could theoretically happen. In 40 years of WalMart's rise, there's only been a benefit to the consumers. The theory has to be prove at some point, don't you think? Your only examples are employment cases that have been brought to the courts, and the alleged wrongs have been corrected. You seem to think that if Bezos & company pay their workers a bit more, it will lessen the monopolistic effect. It will not. It will surely dampen profits and workers will be happy, but it will do nothing to how Amazon & WalMart dominate their industries by superior execution and productivity. So you will take a hatchet to equity prices and private wealth, but that won't aid competition at all, because the smaller start ups won't be able to invest or pay at the same rate. That's the biggest part that you are missing about the evils of trying to corral bigness. The more regulations that you place on the market, the greater the moat you place around the incumbents. That in turn begets complacency and the market starts to stagnate. Welcome to Europe. What's more impressive, delivering strong growth and jobs without stimulous in year 10 after a major recession, or subpar growth with major stimulous spending immediately after a major recession?

Putin must have history's biggest pocket to fit all Trump's actions that benefit Russia. I can't believe that this scandal hasn't gotten any traction in the Mueller probe.

You mean, making license plates? No reason to equate him to honest folks who bag groceries.

I'm a member of both, and they each have enough differences for us to shop at each.

Then what was Northrop referring to when he said that the parents and doctors can discuss it after birth. CP occurs during delivery complications, which certainly straddles the line between pre and post birth.

I saw an amazing sight last night. A kid with cerebral palsy wrestled for his middle school team. He wasn't out there for a sympathy display, but was pitted in a real match. He lost, but lasted the entire three rounds, despite the obvious limitation of not being able to fully plant his feet or have full hand strength in both arms. Bravo. Wonder if a kid like this will now exist with NYS & VA laws?

Is that a bottle of bleach in his hand?

Was it a member of Franz Ferdinand?