Orton's Arm

Too bad the same thing isn't the case for you.

I think that the (almost) win against the Titans was what they had in mind by saying it "almost paid big dividends." To his credit, Rob Johnson did play quite well in the second half of that playoff game; and was instrumental in the Bills taking the lead with just 16 seconds left. That last kickoff should have been a squib kick.

I vaguely remember that debate. I too was less than pleased with either the Reyes or Fowler signings, though I wasn't as familiar with the players as some.

You asked me, "At what point do you finally stop and say to yourself 'I've achieved the level of brain-damage everyone expects of me, it's time to go out and face the world.'?" I had to think about that one for a little bit . . . . . . I figure I'll have reached that point once I've read enough of your posts. Assuming your posts could shave 10 points off someone's I.Q. each week, then at the end of a five year period you could have me down to a normal level of intelligence. So I need to be careful . . .

It's more tragic than funny. You've yet to acquire the basic foundation for intellectual rigor or critical thinking, and apparently have no interest in acquiring that foundation. The fact those who are planning on awarding you that PhD apparently aren't bothered by this says something very tragic about the state of the American educational system.

Now that's a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

I'll grant you the Bills should win the Giants game. Their combination of offensive line problems, inconsistent QB play, and their brand new offensive coordinator spells doom for that particular team. As long as the Bills are able to pick up the blitz, we should be able to win the mental chess match against the Skins' defensive coordinator as well. But the Eagles and Cowboys will be tougher nuts to crack. Both were playoff teams this past year. Yes the Cowboys are in transition, but Wade Phillips is a fine coach who will ensure the Cowboys put together a solid defensive effort. And while Tony Romo may not be the world's best field goal placeholder, he's still a good quarterback.

I have a chicken and egg question here: does indoctrination in Leftism cause people to adopt distorted thought processes, or do people with distorted thought processes naturally gravitate toward Leftism?

Just as I've fixed yours.

Do you honestly expect him to understand that creating localized damage in some Nevada desert might be less harmful than messing with the entire planet's ecosystem?

I'm sorry, Ramius, but "those with some semblance [sic] of intelligence" is a category that doesn't include you.

A good read.

I read what they wrote, which is why I concluded the article was a thinly veiled Leftist hatchet job.

Not me. The key to building a solid offensive line is continuity. You need to have the same group of guys work together for years. That sort of continuity was instrumental in building the Bills' OL during the Super Bowl era. You don't build continuity on the OL by bringing in a guy with one foot in retirement. The Bills should either a) draft offensive linemen, or b) sign young, high quality offensive linemen. No more rejects like Bennie Anderson or Tuten Reyes, and no faltering old guys like Chris Villarrial.

1. Maintaining Iraq's current government isn't an end in itself; though it's a potential means to an end. Biden's suggested dividing the country up into three largely autonomous regions, with the central government controlling currency, oil, and the military. I don't know that any other plan--including Bush's current one--has the potential to work. 2. I have no objection to allowing Iran to influence the process. It's their region; and the Iranians have a common religious bond with Iraq's Shiite population. If we think Iran has no business influencing Iraq, then what right do we have to do the same? 3. America has done quite a bit to help Israel. They're our largest recipient of foreign aid, and the per-capita numbers are truly astounding. U.S. aid to Israel has generated hatred for us throughout the Middle East. We've given Israel lots of help, and have paid a high price. I can't remember the U.S. having ever received anything in return. 4. The United States should seek to reduce or eliminate its presence in the Middle East. If it wasn't for oil, we could pretend that entire region of the world didn't exist--an arrangement which would be better for us and for them.

Agreed. He seems like another Chris Villarrial.

Yes, I'd forgotten about Gerald Ford. He was on the list because he'd pardoned Nixon. Pelosi was on the list because she didn't try to impeach Bush. Richard Mellon Scaife was on the list because he funded a fact-finding mission to help the Clinton impeachment. I'm a little surprised you're trying to convince people up is down, black is white, and the list isn't a hatchet job. The only types of people on the list were apolitical slime such as O.J., and those who'd failed the Leftist movement in some way. Horowitz was born and raised a communist before turning against communism, earning him the #8 spot on the list. Carville's on the list because he disagreed with Howard Dean, and because he married a woman to the right of Lenin. You say Dean might have been correct, and Carville wrong, about their disagreements. Even if that's true, does that mean Carville deserves to be on the same list as O.J.? No. Carville was put on the list because his loyalty to the Leftist movement is in question, not because he once gave potentially mistaken tactical advice.

I'm disturbed by the article's allegations that legitimate research involving cosmic rays and cloud formation was suppressed. Any scientist should be able to publish rigorous work, regardless of its political implications. Speaking of politics, I'm also displeased with the article's last sentence: Human activity has caused large increases in the Earth's carbon dioxide levels. It's not "arrogant" to believe those increases in carbon dioxide levels have resulted in global warming. Ideas should be accepted or rejected based on their level of correctness, and not whether they appear "arrogant."

Your own posts aren't worth reading, but the same is not true of my posts.

Let's say Congress had done nothing since 2001, beyond the bare minimum to maintain the status quo. There'd be: - No Iraq War - No prescription drug entitlement program - No dramatic surge in federal spending - No Patriot Act - A bunch of other bad stuff would be gone Weigh that against the good Congress has done since 2001: . . . Um, yeah.

I strongly disagree with the first sentence of your post. This society needs moral authorities--or do you feel we're already moral enough already? The fact that someone uses a radio show to attempt to influence politics doesn't make him a bad man, any more than using a discussion board to try to influence politics makes you a bad man. Nancy Pelosi was on the list because she didn't launch impeachment proceedings against Bush. Joe Lieberman was on the list for being too pro-Bush. James Carville was on the list because of his disagreements with Howard Dean, and because he's just a little more . . . flexible . . . than some on the Left would like. Cindy Sheehan's on the list because she's seen as eccentric, and the creators of the list want to distance themselves from her. Admit it: that list of 50 people was a Leftist hatchet job, pure and simple.

Since 2001, free agency has brought the Bills the following OL: Trey Teague, Chris Villarrial, Bennie Anderson, Melvin Fowler, Mike Gandy, Tuten Reyes, and probably one or two other guys I'm forgetting. In other words, nobody. If the Bills have the chance to sign a top tier free agent offensive lineman, they should embrace it. But I don't want this team to sign some reject to a four year, $10 million deal, and pretend he'll be a long-term answer as a starter. Guys like that are cheap for a reason, and it isn't because their former teams still want them. My favorite way to address the offensive line is through the draft.

My first thought on reading this post is, Why on earth would a guy named Cieslak86 want the Bills to draft a TE? Then I remembered that my own username is Holcomb's Arm, and I wanted the Bills to draft Cutler.

Do you honestly think you've done anything (other than your military-related posts) to earn even a small sliver of my respect? Take, for example, your treatment of the test/retest phenomenon (a.k.a. regression toward the mean). When I first described it, you ridiculed both the phenomenon and me. Then you ridiculed the Hyperstats article I used to back my position up. Then when I found articles from Stanford, the University of Chicago, et al, to back myself up, you announced you agreed with the articles. You even admitted the test/retest phenomenon (a.k.a. regression toward the mean) is real. But you still continued making fun of regression toward the mean, in threads which had absolutely nothing to do with it. You were wrong. But you couldn't admit you were wrong, now could you? For crying out loud, you didn't even have the sense to keep your mouth shut once you'd been proven flat-out wrong. You just kept slinging insults, regardless of the evidence right in front of you. Earn my respect? Ha! You've consistently shown that advancing your own viewpoint matters a lot more to you than does the objective truth.

Dobson may not be Mother Teresa, but he is a fundamentally good and decent man. That's more than I can say about whoever created that list.