leh-nerd skin-erd

I don't think it's obvious at all. Plenty of time to drive the field and score. Assuming the d keeps it all underneath, the movement up the field is very doable and it comes down to whether or not the Bills can push it in. I'm also not sure why you would take away the turnover differential as turnovers are part of the game, and the turnovers are often a result of disciplined defense and aggressive tackling. To me, that's like saying if you take away the winning field goal we lose. Or, if you take away the pass rush perhaps Mariotta has a better day. The defense played well. Who knows, maybe they got in William's head in the first 55 minutes of the game and he was concerned about securing the ball if he was hit from a crazy angle.

Buddy of mine is a lifelong resident of San Francisco, lives in Morin county but works in the city. The house he grew up in was on the opening credits of the old "streets of san fran" as the cars drove by. Loves it, and most definitely skews left. He said certain areas are just horrible today, homeless people, drug needles and people literally $#@@ing on the sidewalk. Interestingly, he doesn't see it as a political problem. You're correct, bad things tend to follow when you use the streets as your toilet. I thought we figured that out in the period spanning roughly 1500-1950.

Unfortunately, the SC debacle and the post-election antics against Trump tell us that "taking the high road" simply means that other than publicly jabbing an ice pick in the eye of your enemy, pretty much anything goes. It's sad, but true.

He's the healer in chief, just delivered with a bit of tough love.

But as libs like to point out, a prior liberal President really did the heavy lifting that got the economy rolling. Thank you Woodrow Wilson!

Disagree. He's not just "holding him" as Mariotta is scrambling to keep the play alive, a competitor himself. To boot, they are not the only two guys on the field, and there is organized chaos all around them. On top of that, Hughes can only be 50% sure that there is a 75% chance that continuation of the play would or would not result in a penalty and/or fine (the odds move to 100%/100% certainty of penalty & fine if Brady is in the grasp), not to mention the rule has morphed from where it started to where it is now, allowing a bit more judgement on the part of the official. Absent the official blowing the whistle, Hughes should have finished the play and tackled Mariotta. Imo that was squarely on the official given the logical end to that scenario was the QB suplexed or at a minimum, full weight of Hughes on the ab with QBs arms above Hughes shoulder and injury a realistic outcome. Everyone watching the game feels the Qb rule impacts the outcome of games. We were lucky to have dodged that particular bullet.

The libs had a moment of clarity when they suggested their base "barrack the vote". It was catchy and easy to follow when the progs hit the ballot box. The concern with the new buzz phrase "Swarm Vote" is that many underachieving liberal voters will be looking to cast their ballot for presidential fellatrix and current porn star Swarmy Daniels.

I read about the Murphy Brown reboot, but are you saying there is a movie called Grandmama Mia?

Excellent point. I wonder if the senator, back when she was shiny, new and freshly elected from a land where hard work and self-sufficiency is prized above all, ever thought to herself "Some day, I may get pushed around by the old lady from Driving Miss Daisy.".

This photo reflects such a violation of personal space as to be creepy. I think the appropriate response would be "Listen, you need to back the %$#@ up and cool down, creeper.".

I see Ford as at best, a liberal operative who set this up in 2012, making vague accusations at between 1-4 white men to set the table for that which was to come. This would explain why the recent accusations could morph into whatever she needed later.

Honestly, it amazes me to see people suggest things like that. Decades of experience. Impeccable resume. Scores of people from across the political landscape speak of his demeanor and nature on the court. Not a controversy to discuss until, almost magically, a "controversy" without time, date or place rocks arises. After an unprecedented delay and additional hearings and FBI investigation....demanded by the accuser, her attornies and the opposition party and agreed to by the White House....no credibility to the accusations. Old Alf walks away with the thought that the President was the problem. Might as well just say "Trump should have nominated a liberal that everyone approved of.".

"Calling All Men"??? I think Skolnik can rest comfortably knowing that regardless of whether many or few men show, there will absolutely be no women in attendance.

One of the consistent characteristics of weak-minded people is to throw haymakers, verbally in this case, from the cover of darkness as a person of higher character walks by. One of the consistent qualities of a person of strength is the ability to recognize the weak for what they are and simply get on with her day.

On the contrary, he has been described by those who worked with him as thoughtful, deliberate and even-keeled. He surely must have known the opposition would try to destroy him, there is precedent for that. I think he is now the perfect judge to seek out justice for all Americans who have been tread upon and abused by the powerful.

The problem with declarations that start with "This is the reason that...." is that where human beings are concerned, there are an infinite number of reasons and rationales to explain why people choose to handle things a certain way. You're oversimplifying an incredibly complex issue to the extent that you're arguing against using logic and reason to analyze the veracity of one individuals claims v another. To suggest that your commentary has nothing to do with these hearings, while on a message board specifically discussing this hearing seems a bit shallow. Here's the reason my thoughts on Ford's allegations are not "the problem" ..my thoughts on Ford v Kavanaugh have nothing to do with my thoughts on any other case involving allegations of sexual assault. I do maintain that people unwilling to consider the totality of the information available at the click of a button and defer to "everyone should be believed every time" are a much bigger problem than what I post on a message board. The good news is you are consistent. There are many, many powerful people in government and beyond that are hoping that a large number of people think that health insurance can be boiled down to "we are all one pool of healthy and sick" which then obviously and definitively means lower cost. Seriously, read a book or two about actuarial science, risk management and human behavior.

I don't resent anyone, I simply pointed out the facts as I see them. But I'm not a dimwit, either, and I will tell you that I don't wrap myself in a cloak of emotions when considering the difference between "actual survivors of sexual assault" and a political operative/pawn who resets the narrative du juor. I'd also argue that it's perfectly reasonable to call bull sh6t on a bull sh6t story....and if somehow you or anyone else sees that as a reflection on personsally held beliefs on actual victims of sexual assault, that's really your issue, not mine. Btw, news has leaked that the FBI found no corroboration of the esteemed dr's story, not surprising anyone as there were several versions. Shocking.

With respect, I say to you that the people you described, who have drawn inferences from bits and pieces of testimony carefully culled from the entirety of the testimony, with questions and statements rehearsed and chorepgraphed like a Broadway extravaganza...are part of the problem. In fact, they are a large part of the problem and why this clusterf@!$ was allowed to play out. The basic premise is that anything that Ford did or said, and any conflicts that arise, are all explained away by her status as a victim. Meanwhile, shes retained top political operatives to carry her flag, shes experienced in the field of human psychology and she's operating at a time when victim status is a badge of honor in our society. Trump, for all his bluster is painted as a bully here, defending a guy who until 2 weeks ago was a pretty vanilla dude, all while vultures in the Senate, Congress and media figuratively take turns bashing the nominee in the skull with a brick and get praise from their supporters.

I dont know, I think the book needs to be written on him. He's been out there for 3.5 games straight and only looked good in one of them. I'd scuttle the whole experiment.

So...we have fans who say aggressive play calling is the ticket, and would gladly swap their 1-3 coach for another team's 1-3 coach, though that 1-3 coach has a franchise QB on his roster but took a swing for the fences by betting on both his offense AND his defense and both failed to execute. I would gladly swap Coach McD for any coach that can consistently deliver wins, play off victories and maybe even a championship or two. Until then suggesting someone elses crap sandwich probably tastes better than ours is missing the larger point. That said, I missed the game yesterday so it could just be that I'm in some zen state.

Time. Distance. Trauma. The perfect plan.

I disagree across the board. In fact, it's this sort of centrist, middle of the road, let's get along approach to politics that leads to this sort of debacle. Or, more accurately, it's this sort of approach when your political enemy is willing to scorch the earth and everything in its path while you stand there and calmly state "This is fine". Neither story had "holes" because everything can be explained away. That's the point in this excersize in the freak show that is American politics. Ford's story has nothing that cannot be explained away by time, distance and trauma. That's the beauty of the approach. It's pristine, almost Dexter-like. Kavanaugh's story has nothing that cannot be explained away by time, distance and his trauma that started about 14 days ago. His added wrinkle is to prove or "convince" people on the fence that he didn't do something 30+ years ago, in the context of two weeks ago "I just have to keep it together as these jackals on the Senate panel try to kill me softly and slowly" to "I have been accused of being the main conductor on a rape train" and everything in between. "I've been called a "rapist" by Blumenthal, in public, on record and have to sit and take it". There is no middle ground here anymore than there was after 12.7.41. There is no measured response, there should be no handshakes with feinstein/harris/schumer/Booker etc. And to write it all off as political maneuvering and someone has to be an adult at the table yields the same result as revisiting the end of the war in the Pacific in 1945, and whether or not it was appropriate to end it the way it ended. In a perfect world, the Japanese reflect on the attack, on the loss of life, and decide enough is enough. That did not happen, of course, so in the context of the view of the world in 1945, and the potential loss of countless more American and allied lives, what happened, happened. Lindsay Graham was right. He spoke the truth. Judge Kavanaugh was right he spoke the truth. Both called the other side liars, crooks and cheats. In this case, that is 100% accurate. This was a disgrace. And that, sir, comes from someone who readily acknowledges that I couldn't tell you if Kavanaugh did anything or not in 1982, or whether or not Ford is 100% truthful. Kavanaugh could be the zodiac killer for all I know, but i know political hit jobs when I see them. You find common ground only when your enemy finds it as well. Until then, it is what it is. Oh, and of course that goes both ways. The looney left is the looney right and that's a fact.

Someone always dislikes the choice, and generally it's because they find some rulings (when they exist) laughably stupid. But where the left has decided to take it simply leads to the inevitable, and there are always some crazies willing to step up an claim something, and stooges willing to suspend common sense and the notion of "do unto others as you would have done to you" and gobble it up. Kavanaugh, like Donald Trump, is a hero for our time. He responded directly, forcefully and repeatedly. As far as I can tell, there are only so many ways to say "I didn't do it" when asked 500 times. Republicans could screw up having congress, the senate and the Presidency, so it would not surprise me to see the nomination fall short when some weak-willed politician bails, but he called his opponents and the disgusting dem leadership out for being the trash that they are. Good stuff.

I know, it's why I offered my opinion to be introspective and examine your own insecurities. Now that you've clarified that you were part of a grand social experiment living in your brothers backpack at Yale, we can move forward.

Hey, you might be steady Eddie in real life for all I know, but you seem hyperfocused on classifying those who appear to have a financial leg up on you as undeserving. That makes you appear small-minded and petty. Interestingly, you're doing exactly what people who used to prejudge alleged victims of sexual assault always did...prejudging based on your limited life experiences and grouping people by class. For all you know, Brett K may have been bullied, sexually assaulted by someone close to him, have lost friends to drugs and suicide and been betrayed by friends. He may suffer from ADD, ADHD, and dyslexia, while some other rich boy like your brother cruises through Yale and takes someone elses spot. Heck maybe your brother bullied him at Yale, because when in Rome... It's hard to say, but then again that's the point.