RLflutie7

You are having a field day!

Sorry for the mixup there kid. The media reported things and maybe people became objective. But there is no reason to believe that there was a reason for it. Example. The media reported that police had found their man when the Olympic Park Bombings happened in Atlanta in 1996. It turned out to be false and Richard Jewell (or whatever) sued and won money from media organizations. You could see they were dancing around the issue here. Fact: They didn't declare AH to be a prime suspect but the media camped out at his house from day one and never left. Figure it out! This is what I'm talking about. This is nuts. This makes no sense NoSaint.

I should have said I felt like I was reading some pollyannaish posts. The guy was guilty and to sit here and type in some lame excuses about how he could possibly be in the wrong place at the wrong time or something like that or the gun could have fired by accident is somehow just stupid to me. I guess I wanted more about how he was guilty rather than how he could be innocent. \ Come on man, it was clear he was the prime suspect. Just like OJ.

I haven't been on TSW in awhile, but I did come here to read some of the responses on the AH crime situation. Not to bash anyone, but I'm surprised about the lack of clarity on this subject. This case is so simple, it's mind blowing to read some of the comments that I've read. I've read the entire thread and it took me awhile to read, but I'm stunned with what I've read. I don't know if it's because some of the posters are young, but the lack of critical thinking is alarming. I have access to ESPN at work in the hallways and I was getting updates as I was walking by the TVs. Here's what I thought as the case progressed: It was clear from the beginning that AH was guilty. It was clear that the police focused on him from the beginning and it was clear that he was the prime suspect. In the early going, published reports said he wasn't a suspect, but it's clear from the actions of the police department, that he was the prime suspect from the very beginning. In fact, they knew he was guilty the first time they talked to him. They just had to finish the case and get all the facts lined up for the DA. I think some of the things that I've read about him being suspended for the year from the NFL, or that this could go to training camp were unbelievable I also think the Pats knew they were going to release him long before they did. Most NFL security people have law enforcement backgrounds, so they were on this the whole time. I know it's easy to post with hindsight being 20/20, but this guy had a history and from police action, it's crystal clear they had their guy.

I haven't been around very often, but this thread did catch my attention. I didn't know who this kid was until I watched the video. After reading the first four pages of this thread and watching the video, I think Matt Scott will go in the late second or late third round and I think the original poster is right about the arm strength. The ball sizzles out of his hand. It's smoking. However, he does need alot of work and he did make some bad throws and at least three balls were tipped at the line of scrimmage. I see a second rounder if the right team is looking for a player like him. Philadelphia is the perfect place for him. Let's not kid each other, arm strength weighs the most with draft scouts and NFL teams. They won't say it, but it's true. Matt Scott needs works and lots of it. He didn't get that many starts in the NCAA, but he has the physical talent to play in the NFL at a high level. But, like Cam Newton, you can have all the physical skill and not be a great NFL QB. Newton was a big disappointment in his second year. Jaws pointed out what Newton didn't do, like make routine plays. And his reading of a defense was horrible. He's going to have to learn how to play the pro game or he's going to be like Vince Young.

I didn't say they didn't have a right to hoard it. I said it's counter-productive. An addiction to low wages is what got us in this mess. This constitution says the gov't's job is to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare. It doesn't say protect multi-national corp. at all cost. PS: What did Ronald Regan hate more than anything (other than communism) ? Answer: Big Corporations. Regan was a champion of the small businessman, not large corporations.

The rich guys are hoarding money. No two ways about it. You have to let the little guy make a buck, because if he can't make it, then you have the welfare state that GOPers complain so much about. You can't have it both ways. The rich guys have to make less money for this thing to function right. I was self employed for 10 years and I never thought this thing (low wages) was going to work. You can't make money when the average guy is broke and busted.

No I don't. Explain this to me. You sound like T. Boone Pickens. He said the same thing. It didn't work out with wind power. What kind of energy are you talking about. Coal? I'm thinking it's not true. I'm thinking we should have listened to Jimmy Carter, who was ahead of his time by putting solar panels on the white house. Then RR comes in and removes them.

I would tend to agree with creating new industries. it's out of his realm. Especially in new energy. But Romney said the same thing. He wanted to get us energy independent in 10 years. That's not going to happen, because our beloved multi-national oil companies are not going to let it happent. Nice way to run for the president, though. I think enough has been done with the president's track record for creating any kind of new jobs or industries. All presidents. Especially another beloved slob, Bill Clinton - who was one of the greatest job destroyers known to man.

How are you right? Things have gotten better. In my area, unemployment has dropped by half. It was 15%, now it's 7-8%. I think that's improvement. It's gotten better not worse. Food prices are up. Gas prices are coming down. The stock market went back up. By all accounts things are better. Much better. Jobs are not really better. But our beloved multi-nationals would rather choke themselves rather than create jobs. No one is making excuses for Obama. He's too slow and he hasn't done enough too help the economy. Some of his ideas take too long to,work. New industries don't happen overnight.

1. No one says this? Are you crazy? I hear it everyday. What planet do you live on? I keep hearing that business is better without gov't interference. Layoffs and downsizing will spur economic growth. And yet, just the opposite has happened. We, my friend, are at the point of no return. Unless we turn around the business culture in this country, we will destroy this country. The problem is not gov't. It's your employer. It's Wall Street. 2. It's the message of the Romney types. 47% are takers. And Romney believes that all employees are takers too. It's his mentality. It's the way he thinks. He thinks he should be able to go out and pick dollar bills off trees. Money doesn't grow on trees. It's worked for. Romney doesn't do that. He's a hatchet man. Face facts. What kind of jobs did he create withStaples. Answer: People that will never have a middle class life. Something to be real proud of. 3. Choosing not to demonize Apple is a mistake. And it is by definition "kissing the ass of". I would not have taken that bull **** from Steve Jobs. Yes, he would have gotten a Bobby Knight cussing out from me. I would have just kicked the living **** out of that guy. How long are you going to kiss Steve Jobs' ass? You just don't get it and you never will. The blacks, women, Asians can see the economic unfairness. You choose to ignore it.

Hello it's been awhile for me. I've been away for a while. I don't think most of what the poster said will work. It's really the economic issues that have screwed the GOP. It has nothing to do with blacks, women, mexicans, gays or religion. It's not demographics. Or at least, it is, but it isn't. It's the economic issues that the GOP have screwed up. 1. Stop telling people that less wages and benefits is actually good for them.---- This is the main thrust of right wing bull ****. It's the repeated drumbeat of "you'll be better off if you lose your job and health insurance" because "lean companines" will create more jobs in the future. Just stop with the BS already. It helps Romney types and everyone else loses. 2. Stop telling people that work their whole life, that they're lazy. ----- You know the whole "your a no good bumb, loser etc etc." A mooch, a freeloader, etc., etc. 3. Stop kissing the ass of multi-national corporations. ---- They're leading you astray. If I was Obama and Steve Jobs told me "the jobs are never coming back" I would have gotten one of my secret service agents to beat his F---ing ass! Or I would have punched him in the face myself. Bomb his house. Who in the blank does Steve think buys those smartphones?

I think you made a better comparison. Davis had more speed than Marcus Allen. But comparing him to either one is comparing him to two Hall of Famers and that's saying alot. Fans only do that when a player is playing great. Yes, Jackson doesn't have "draft status" and he's 30, but what difference does it make? The first time I saw Jackson play, I wasn't impressed. Now he's been playing great and I see him move through holes like the great ones.

I'm starting to think that Fred Jackson is looking more and more like Terrell Davis. I haven't watched much of the Bills in recent years but I'm starting to believe that Jackson is that kind of player. What little I've seen of Jackson, he's a great downhill runner with plenty of power. I remember writing on these pages that Lynch stunk and the Bills needed to get rid of him and the Bills didn't have a decent running back on the roster. I rememeber saying that Jackson wasn't a NFL quality player and the Bills needed to draft several running backs in the draft. I'm starting to think, Jackson is the real deal and I didn't see the player that he was. I've probably never been so wrong about a player, as I have been with Fred Jackson. So tell me Bills fans, is this guy Terrell Davis in the making? I'll read your stuff on Friday.

I voted Flutie, Fitz, Edwards. But QBs have different types of balls that they throw. It's always ticked me off when people say Flutie had a weak arm. He didn't. He may not have been able to throw for great distance, but he had a "live" arm. He put very little effort in short and medium range throws. He couldn't throw for raw distance, but he could put zip on the ball. Fitz probably has better raw distance but a little less zip in the ball than Flutie. Edwards had no arm strength at all. No distance, power or speed. As far as other QBs, Bledsoe had the strongest arm, plus he threw a very catchable ball. Kelly had a great arm and could really throw the ball. He got great rotation on the ball and he had a great deep ball. Kelly was, and still is, the best QB the Bills ever had.