OCinBuffalo

The difference is: nobody believes the Colts. Speaking of the Colts, I believe we have an elite DE on our team that we got for a JAG MLB. But yeah, let's use the Colts as an example...of something...not sure what.... Like I said elsewhere: apparently it's free association day at TSW! EDIT: While we're at it, let's use the RG3-->Rams Draft Picks-->Tavon Austin/JAG Safety-->The Bills get EJ, Kiko, Goodwin, and Gragg....as an example of why Whaley is a bad GM. I mean, if we just keep throwing out random, irrelevant arguments, sooner or later something's got to stick, right? Yeah..the Austin move had the same outcome as the Watkins move, because Austin = Watkins because...both are WRs!.

As will I, with my merry band of ne'redowells. It's Over 9,000!

Oh crap, is that what I'm drinking? It doesn't smell like coffee. Nah, I'm merely a little agitated because our Detroit Exodus isn't going to begin for hours, I can't sleep, and WTF else am I going to do right now? So many options. I could: 1. Start a thread about trading CJ! 2. Talk some more about how positive I am that a yet-to-be-named, 2nd round rookie G would have fared better than the Gs we have this season. Yes, Mr. Random Guard and Odell Beckham are better than Sammy...because...um...anaylitics! WGR! Bulldog! Shomer Shabbas! Oprah Over 9000! Somehow Thailand and Belgium both punch above their weight, for reasons passing understanding! Walmart! Come on down! It's free association day at Two Bills Drive! Whatever pops into your head? Post it! Damn the torpedos! No unreasonable argument will be refused! 3. Speaking of analytics....I could write some more about that. (And yeah, I did actually bother to make up OCinBuffalo Analytics Certifiactions for anyone who reads and demonstrates comprehension of my posts on the subject!) But...clearly this was the better option. Down the page...there's a thread.

And you've just earned respect here. Too bad so many unfortunate posters seem to require a whipping before they can be objective and/or admit that their "thought process" isn't theirs at all, as it comes directly from Bulldog. Hey, I started a thread on this topic weeks ago, and there was all sorts of "why do you have to be so sardonic" posts? (Btw, haven't heard a peep from WGR since = results). This thread is precisely why. Eradication of this Bulldog canard is the goal. Of course. However, we've already seen enough from Sammy to fully understand why the move was made. That is unless "we" includes unmitigated morons/people who attempt to resolve their unhappiness with their life by transferring their problems onto the Bills. These folks are the fan equivalent of abusive husbands. Again, the Bills are not their problem. Oh, don't you worry, I have tons of dismiss. I will never run out. I own a factory. Some of it is sitting right next to the three bottles of Sapphire I'm bringing for the Detroit Exodus(F no, I ain't driving), and the 4 extra original tickets I have collected, which I will expend on those I deem worthy to accompany us.(The current thinking is to engage hipster chicks = die their hair Bills colors, wear what we give them, bring our inappropriate signs and display them on demand = ticket. We'll see. We don't want to exchange 3 hours of hell for 10 minutes of hilarious.) I may have to use some of my dismiss on the still butthurt, "Jim Schwartz was carried off your field", Lions fans....but I am going to do everything I can to avoid that. After all, dismiss is valuable, especially on this board lately. Hey, if you want to argue against Watkins solely on the merits of Watkins...even though you probably want to wait until after next year at least? No one's stopping you. But...keep in mind, barring something bizzarre, I'll be here, 3 years from now, with my axe. The good news is: I keep it sharp, so, it'll be over before you feel a thing. Let's just keep the "could've drafted a QB" canard where it belongs: in the same dumpster fire where Mike Schopp's understanding of analytics(example: Sabres team shot % is an...individul stat ) resides.

1. Who Pinto Ron is? 2. That we were never going to draft a franchise QB, who is better than EJ, with our #1 2015 pick? Never, not with this D, even without Kiko. (Lay it the F down already) 3. That those of who actually know today's game, know "a" Sammy Watkins when we see one, and what he means to the .5 seconds from the snap game(which is now, the game). In other words, how many sacks do we have this year? Do you really think that's solely due to our D line? Do you think that having 2, #1 picks at CB, and a #2 pick at S(who was drafted as a CB with intentional S upside), is merely coincidental? Yeah, that has nothing to do with leading the league in sacks, 2 years in a row, in different defensive systems. Thus, do you really think that in today's game, a WR who can beat elite CBs, consistently, isn't the most important player on the entire team behind only QB? If you can't come to grips with #3, then, seriously, WTF are you even doing? I'll real world it for you: what the F did happen when Randy Moss started playing for the Pats? Real World Round 2: WTF would happen if Demaryius Thomas started playing for the Pats? Answer: nothing...other than what he is already doing, right now. Round 3: Megatron on the Packers. Ronnd 4: Put Orton back as QB for the Bears. AhHa! Nothing changes does it? (This is here just to see if you are paying attention) Now put Drew Brees on that team. Potential best offense of all time. Perhaps this is an understanding/ignorance problem. Thus, perhaps I need to devote more time to the football board? And yeah, even I shudder to think what that entails.

Clear my ass. How many games have you personally watched Sammy play in? I've been to 3, 2 in Buffalo, and 1 in NYC(well, I was in NYC...and had to go to Jersey, etc.). Oh yeah, and I'lll be in Detroit. I will be damned if I'm not going. I have the resources, thus, my entire crew is coming. All will cheer for us on principle. But, some of them hate the Bills. NONE of them question the move to draft Sammy. ALL of them wish he was on their team. I forward threads like this to them, for their personal entertainment. The reply: "I thought Bills fans were the most knowledgeable in the league/2 Bills Drive was the smartest board in the NFL". Great job disproving that. But, no one can say I'm not objective. At some point, you're going to have to lay down this Bulldog nonsense. When...is your choice, not mine. But here's reality: Our D alone was never going to make it possible to draft a franchise QB in 2015, even without Kiko. We knew this BEFORE the draft. Enough with the fact-free analysis given by a guy who has demonstrated an inferior understanding of football compared to 80% of our posters, and who routinely uses our threads for his show prep(this I can prove if necessary, but expect a very long post). Make no mistake, I can also show that there have been times when I've credited/drawn attention to Bulldog. This is not one of those times. Enough is enough.

Dude, the planet hasn't warmed for 18 years, as was predicted by alarmists. If we aren't delving deep? That's as simple as it gets. The "models" upon which the entire theory is based have performed so badly, that they've had to come up with 2 speculations(1. the warming is hiding at the bottom of the ocean, 2. Chinese pollution is both causing and preventing Global Warming, at the same time). If neither of those speculations pans? The entire theory blows up. That is the reality, delving as shallowly as possible. Ha! Like this wasn't headed here! Too bad. You're in our domain now, like it or not. For the rest of you: the bolded is basically all that's left of the Global Warming argument. It's funny how I keep hearing "I believe in Global Warming" now. It's become about faith. Faith, from the very people who decry religious faith every chance they get, and talk about science as if they know it well? Hilarious Irony. That's what Global Warming is now: a continued source of humor for those of us who posses at least an above-average intellect, as I'm sure the rest of this thread shows. Speaking of hilarity I have a question: it is possible to respond to a point you don't like, without adding the tired, old "Fox News" thing as the mutually eclusive alternative? Btw, if you've been keeping score on the media lately? Fox News has been dragging the rest of the media into real stories, they should have been on like stink on schit from day 1, for about 2 years now. In fact, it is the rest of the media, not Fox, that has lost objectivity and therefore, credibility, over the entire Obama "experience". The media is currently contorting like a Twister game now trying to distance themselves from the Gruberish, and what they've said about him/it. I mean: dude, that's what is actually happening, right now, in reality. Fox isn't our problem. We know them, and they are honest about who they are. Real media corruption, from people pretending/lying about being objective, and who they are, from everybody else? That is our problem. OMG! Net Neutrality? See? What did I tell you guys? This is the Rasputin of issues. As long as Google and Amazon exist, are led by liberals who remain politically active, this issue will never die. It's hilarious that you are talking about other people not knowing this issue. You don't know this issue. I love how you brush by the central agument here to make a political point, and accuse others of doing so at the same time! This is about Google and Amazon getting bandwidth cheaper because they use more of it, and the ISPs saying "no, you pay for what you use, just like everybody else". I don't care what the latest spin is, this is the central argument. Google wants a volume deal = buy huge chunks of bandwidth for cheaper, and then wants to crowd out other content providers, by buying so much at the package deal rate, that their competitors(and btw, the rest of us) become noticeably slower. And, as long as D pols will take Google's $, we will see "HR - Infinity: A bill to implement Net Neutrality", be brought up and voted down. The Democrats are on the side of Big Google, and it's the rest of us that will suffer if Net Neutrality ever passes, because the remaining bandwith Google doesn't buy, will be smaller, and therefore will cost us more. You have it exactly backwards: it is Google and Amazon et al who have been, and will continue, using whatever means available to them, including turning this into a partisan liberal/conservative thing, when all it really is corporate power move to the hoop, that keeps getting blocked by those of us who do, in fact, know better.

I honestly think that destroying the insurance industry was the "best case scenario", or the best target of opportunity beyond the primary mission. In other words, regardless of success or failure of Obamacare, the door to single payer would be jammed open and still be an option. So, you're both right, in a way. The Democrats knew that they had to keep Single Payer alive if they still wanted $ from the people who demand it. This was done because remember: single payer couldn't get passed by a D Senate with super majority. Single Payer was going to die, never mind remain an option that might have still been available in 2017. IF the Democrats had been able to coerce more Republican governors into setting up state exchanges, or else, which is how the political trap was supposed to operate...given the D's ongoing delusion that demographics means they will always win, and if the R govs didn't follow along they'd be out of a job? Then, the single payer approach would be the backup/reform in the assumed Hillary presidency. Unfortunately for Ds, not only did the Rs govs call their bluff, they left them with the now impossible to prove SCOTUS case they are facing. Worst of all, the Ds/Feds proved yet again that they are playing with fire, which they don't even know is hot(Orwell), and the website and the entire system was created by people who know nothing about health care, or heath insurance, or enterprise/IT/management. As GG is fond of saying, why is there no Chief Economics Officer at any corporation? Answer: Because Boards and CEOs have little desire for Gruberish. So, what we have here is a confluence of delusion, incompetence, and horrible political calculations...in the vain attempt to keep Single Payer a viable option. The final result? Single Payer Is Dead. Forever. It's more dead now than if they had done nothing. There's no way in hell anyone would dare build a campaign on it, other than Elizabeth Warren. And I hope she does. I'd like to see a 50-state GOP win in my lifetime.

No, not like you said at all. You suggested Greg could win on facts. He cannot. I stripped him of all his "facts" with regard to risk and costs, 3 posts ago. Which, is ostensibly why he boiled it down to "benefits". Now, I have answered his question with real facts. So, in fact, you are the opposite of right.

But, in fact, it is I that has put forward the facts, and debunked Greg's nonsense arguments. Which, is why he abandoned all his nonsense, FUD, and inconsequential consequences, and in his very next post, boiled it down to: "What are the benefits?" Why did he do that? Especially after posting the longest post in this thread? We went form a book to a single question. How? The answer is simple: you're running your mouth again, with no clue what is happening again, and contributing nothing, again.

First, let's ensure that you've conceded the following arguments: 1. Americans "have their price", but nobody else does 2. The pipeline is dangerous....compared to the other ways the oil will be transported without it 3. US corporations are bad because they are doing something every other corporation in the world wouldn't do 4. No other people in the world would choose to do this, only Americans as patently retarded. We cannot proceed with nonsense like that clouding this discussion. The fact is that the exact opposite is true for 1-4, as I said above. Now, as far as the benefits go: 1. Corporations, plural, are making a business decision here. If there was no significant benefit to them, the risk of you and your pals crying for months/years over an accident, would ensure they didn't go forward. The lawsuits and PR damage alone is daunting, because there would be no shortage of people/lawyers looking for unearned $, and no shortage of people looking to trade/gain influence off the accident(5 months of MSNBC minute-by-minute coverage...just like with the Christie story). However, there are legions of people who work for these corporations who have weighed the benefit/risk, and have decided to proceed. I haven't seen the projections, nor have I seen the plans....but I do know the process. And if they have decided to go forward(and haven't changed their minds in the YEARS that this has been delayed), you can bet there's compelling evidence. 2. The oil market....is a market. We are currently overpaying for gas(directly due to intentional tampering with the market by this administration's EPA. If they were traders, they'd all be in jail.). In fact, despite the best efforts of this administration to screw us all on oil, which would have made this economy about 2x worse than it is, natural gas has saved Obama's ass. It has provided the cheaper energy that has allowed our entire economy to tread water. Without it, we'd be looking at another recession, starting 2 years ago. The pipeline(and getting rid of this version EPA), will drive oil prices down further by adding supply to the oil market. That's because: that's how a market works. 3. Directly due to #2, there are all sorts of not-Keynesian mutlipliers that have the potential to take effect. In the simplest way it can be said: Lower gas prices--> lower energy prices in general(there's that competition word again)-->more opportunity for expansion/growth of existing business-->100% of the time means more jobs. How many depends on multiple factors, but it never means less jobs, or 0 jobs. Energy cost is a key metric upon which most business is based. Thus, there are benefits, beyond merely the pipeline lowering the price of gas, that must be taken into account. PRIVATE BUSINESS, not government, WILL make choices to expand if energy prices drop, hence, not-Keynesian multiplier. 4. Directly due to #3, limiting our estimate of jobs created to: only those created directly by the pipeline itself? Um, that goes against the last 80 years of Democratic Party Doctrine, which clearly states: "Government Investment in infrastructure ALWAYS creates the primary jobs of the project itself, which in turn create "multiplier" jobs because of the new income-->consumer spending that results". Apparently this 80 years of doctrine somehow applies to every new road, bridge, tunnel, airport terminal, and even sports stadium... ....but does not apply to a massive pipeline? Oh it must be that ONLY government investment in infrastructure applies, but corprate does not? Once again, Democrats need to get their story straight. Once again, either you have been lying for 80 years, or you are lying about this pipeline. These things are mutually exclusive. Thus, pick one. Once again, as I said above: Get some F'ing perspective, but before you can do that, get in touch with reality.

Oh, and now that this sham "vote" failed to pass the Pipeline? Mary Landrieu is the last Senator to be damned by Harry Reid. She's the leader of the energy committee, and she can't get her own bill passed in a Senate controlled by her own party, that helps LA? Say bye bye. That makes 9.

The funniest thing I've read about this: a new word has been created = guberish. See here: http://springeraz.bl...-grubering.html I wonder if it will stick?

Keystone Pipeline reality: 1. The vote is yet another attempt by Harry Reid to protect a Democrat. It's the same thing he's been doing for 4 years. The #1 Obstructor in the world is Harry Reid. Now, when it suits him to actually have a vote on something? It's only becaue he hopes that vote will help a doomed Democrat not get completely wiped out. I do not want to hear any complaining from the left, about the Republcan Senate, given Harry Reid's "politics over all" approach the last 8 years, and his refusal to allow the Senate to vote on anything for the last 4. (Btw, his approach got Ds asses kicked, so Ds should be pissed at him, not complaining about Rs to us.) 2a. The environmental concerns do not conform with reality or common sense. The evil oil is coming out of Canada one way or the other. Canadians "have their price"...for the F'ing oil in the first place...as much as anybody else in the world. I fail to see how "having one's price" is unique to Americans. Therefore, it is a specious comment/conclusion. Reality: everyone has a price for almost anything. What price do the young Muslims currently murdering, raping, and beheading people, place on their souls, never mind their oil? Russian soldiers are invading a foreign country with 0 pretext. What price is every single European willing to place on their personal honor, since they collectively(of course) swore to protect Ukraine? And we are talking about Americans having a price...over a pipeline? Get some F'ing perspective. However, first get in touch with reality, because you can't get perspective without doing that first. Besides, reality misses you. 2b. Because the oil is coming out no matter what: the safest way to do it IS the pipeline. Rail transport is the other way, and that is far and away more likely to cause accidents/crush the water table(the "water table" is rapidly becoming a "war on women" cliche) than a pipeline. Again, perspective. Again, reality. Again: common sense. Again: the environtologist shows up as equally willing to lie/distort as the corporate interests he accuses of the same things. They never tell the truth: given the oil no matter what, a pipeline is the best way. 3. I love how corporations, which do all sorts of things, and employ all sorts of people, which require energy to do them, end up being the "bad guy" in this story. And again, apparently only America has corporations. (Ahem, one of my past clients, St. Gobain, founded in 1665 in France, might disagree) Reality: given the chance and circumstances EVERY country in the world, and their corporations, would take advantage of the economic opportunities, and take on the risks, of the Keystone Pipeline. But somehow, apparently only the US, and only US corporations, need to be castigated whenever a new pipeline is created. I mean, since we are the only place in the world that has corporations, it follows that we are the only place in the world that has pipelines, right, environtologists? Hence we deserve to be shamed for daring to do what.....everybody the F else would do. Again, reality is required for proper perspective.

Ah....Keystone Pipeline. Government Shutdown. War on Women. Global Warming. Affordable health care for all. Remember the days when these issues were taken seriously by some/many voters? It's fun to be nostalgic. Remember the Greek columns in Denver? But, that's all this is. Nostalgia. It doesn't work, and the Democrats are out of "new", "progressive" ideas. Largely because, other than Global Warming, all their ideas were/are at least 50 years old. Now that Global Warming is done. There's nothing left. Again: you don't win elections on nothing, and Harry Reid saw to it that neither the president or Congress has done/voted on anything since 2010. The Great Distraction is over. Now, the actual Big Issues: Foreign Policy, National Debt, Entitlement Reform, Tax Reform, and the newly added Fix the Obamacare ClusterF, Government Accountability-->Reduction, will dominate, and Democrats will inevitably lose on all of those issues. This is why the Great Distraction was necessary. It is also why: Immigration Reform is being raised, yet again, as an attempt to stave off the Big Issues. The fact that playing with millions of lives for political cover is beyond cynical? Whatever. This administration is the most cynical I've ever seen. You have to go back to Woodrow Wilson to find this kind of cynicism, and blatant disregard for the Constitution and the will of the American people. Democrats can't sell it, but not because we weren't in the market. No. They used slimy, used car saleman tactics, and got caught. Now, nobody trusts them, and they shouldn't.

Hmmm. I suppose we should archive this thread. (Oh don't worry, you know I will) This way, when and if we elect a president with balls, and said president does something ballsy, we can have it on standby. Why? Because IIRC, we have been lectured by many in Canada(I have been personally lectured largely at many, inappropriate times, even at work, by Canadians), and Europe, and anyone else who seeks to aggrandize themselves by randomly including us/our president in monologues/debates in their own country, about our reckless, "unenlightended" ways, (otherwise known as being "ballsy", in the very context of this thread). This has been going on my entire life. We'll remember the standard: It's Ok to say "I'll shake your hand only to say get out of Ukraine"....but it's not OK to say "We want OBL dead or alive". The first thing is "ballsy". The second is: "cowboy". The question that the rest of the world needs to ask itself is: "Why don't you like this American foreign policy approach? After all, Obama and his approach is precisely what you've been calling for for all of YOUR lives. Well, the rest of the world...minus Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq(ahem, the Axis of Evil...how's that look now? More evil? Or more "grey"?), etc. OMG! The bad governments America has been fighting/opposing for decades at a significant cost in lives/$...do bad things when the American President implements Canada/Europe's "plan"(the French have a word for this: retreat) instead of carrying on the fight? Shocker! And then? When the "American Imperium" has finally been abridged per the "plan", and it's time for Europe to start expending their lives/$ due to a problem that is happening a day's train ride away from them? Europe pussies out. We are left with Canada's and Austrailia's PMs doing their best Reagan impressions, as the only real, public resistance to evil, not grey, evil. Pussying out. That is the reality. That is the "plan". That is who these people are. Americans aren't these people, and never will be, that's precisely what makes us Americans, and by definition, exceptional. Well, normally. When we get rid of the Clown-in-Chief and his circus? Expect us. More reality: What are Canada and Austrailia going to do besides be "ballsy"? Best case? They will do what they can: send at most a brigade, slight chance of a division, of light infantry, and some medical supplies, food, etc. And while that is noble, WTF is that going to do against the 10 Russian divisions currently in theatre, that include armor, air and artillery support? Nothing, other than get them killed, which is why they won't be sent. And, btw, how will they get there? I know: Air Canada! It's not like the Russians haven't already shot down civlian transport or anything. Hey, sorry dudes, but don't look to America to do anything. After all, we're too busy deferring to the UN, gutting our military, and "building support amongst the nations of the world". We've been at it for 6 years, we'll let you know when we are done. Don't forget: we already reset the relations with Russia, and that was a quite an accomplishment for Hillary Clinton...see we have this button, and how it works is...well, it's just good old American ingenuity. The truth is: We're too stupid to know how it works. The Smarter People(the left) in Canada and Europe understand it perfectly however. Look: the European/Canadian/Austrailian left aren't the biggest fools here. That title goes to the Ukranians themselves. They listened to the "plan", and relinquished their nukes. Those nukes would have kept them safe. Instead, everybody in the world promised to keep them safe from Russia. Turns out we all lied. How about some bumper sticker logic? "Clinton/Obama lied. Ukranians died." Or, how about a T-shirt? "Europe: Losing the battle for freedom since 1938" As I said: remember this thread. Because I assure you all, I won't forget it.

....to my godson. Do you see what happens, posters? This is what happens when you say Sammy Watkins to my godson. This is what happens, posters. This is what happens when you say Sammy Watkins to my godson.

I'm praying for those troops, because I'm sincerely worried that Obama is going to try and follow the Bill Clinton/Somalia gameplan(which was right out of the JFK/LBJ Viet Nam gameplan). Explained: Send the Ranger regiment, SF teams(green berets/delta force)/and an "allied" Pakistani mechanized infantry battalion, which comprises at most 3k men.....to fight against 50k psychotic combatants, and jusitfy that with "air power". The Air Force is practically worthless in this theatre, because you know damn well the 50k psychotics are going to hide behind the civilian population, just like they did in Somalia, and the supposed civilian population will change from combatants to "innocents" whenever it suits them. So then we send out "patrols" which are likely to get ambushed by overwhelming firepower, when the "civilians" turn combatant again. To make matters worse, at least in Somalia they didn't have real artillery. These clowns in Iraq have now captured artillery we left behind for the ridiculous Iraqi not-army. Artilllery means: no "advising" from the Green zone. Artillery means they can shell our soldiers from long range, and put children right next to the guns, which makes even our helicopters useless. IF we had stayed in Iraq, at least we'd still have some semblence of a defensible position. Now? We're going to have to fight to get those positions back, that we retreated from, against our own weapons, all because of a purely jackass leftist political "win". I hope I am wrong on this one, but Democrats have a long history of sending too few soldiers to win wars....with their reasoning being "the less soldiers I send, the less that can get killed"

Has it ever occurred to you that the state wouldn't have to be forking over money to create jobs today(not that I subscribe to this notiion), if they state hadn't spent the last 60 years destroying those jobs in the first place, whith higher taxes and regulations?

See? I knew you could do it.

They've either run away, never to return to PPP, directly due to their intelligence = they could see the writing on the wall during the Obamacare debate and didn't want to hang around here and get lamb basted for it every day, OR, they hide out on the football board/shoutbox and take the occasional sniper shot. I drew them out however with the Bulldog/fracking thread. They're still here: they're just too cowardly to face the music for what they posted from 2005-2009. Imagine what we'd do to them now that Obama is sending 1500 troops back into Iraq? The Obama Iraq Surge? That may be coming. The height of ironic hilarity. After all their bluster...their champion( ) is now forced into doing exactly what they argued against? With the certitude that retreating from Iraq was the "smart" thing, and that we were all less than them in every way? What happens with the first soldier dies....retaking ground we retreated from? That's why they've run. That's why they will only take shots from the shoutbox, or go after me in a funny thread about the Cheifs message board. For all their intelligence: they are despicable cowards. So do I. I was making fun of her one time, and out of nowhere this PPP newb, told me all about her ability to raise $ and motivate the Ds in the House. I hope this delusion lasts, and I hope Ds keep putting "getting money" at the top of their priority list, rather than creating yet another web of lies and "things that have to be done immediately, which is why we need a Democratic House immediately". Remember that? "Immediacy", especially on energy policy, was the 2006 reason to vote D.....and we still don't have a coherent energy policy. They got in, and promptly blamed Bush for their lack of ability to do anything. Then Obama got elected....and they did stuff....stuff which has now gotten them un-elected. They outspent Rs, in general, 3-1 in this election....and still got whipped. I pray every day that "Nancy Pelosi knows where the $ is" remains their "agenda".

This is getting to the point that only 1 of 2 things can be true: 1. Winston is a horrible person 2. Ther are a whole bunch of horrible other people, who are doing whatever they can to bring this kid down. (I suppose SEC boosters would be the prime suspect here. But as I've said many times: I intentionally have nothing to do with college football, other than watching the Championship game. That's why, when draft time comes around, I retain objectivity.) What is the next Winston story going to be? Stealing the Navy's goat? (Any West Point plebe(s) that can steal that goat sucessfully is instantly recognized(no more hazing), but any plebe getting caught doing it gets 3 months restriction(essentially prison). It was quite tempting.)

No look post: You are a horrible person only if you think: 1. Driving in the left lane at/below the speed limit is OK 2. Your job entitles you to special treatment at the airport. You have no clue that most of us around you fly more than you do. Get in line, and STFU, like every other newb, unless you show us the gold cards we have. We're going to get the upgrade before you do, anyway, and there probably isn't one, so don't bother. You're merely a visitor at our office today. Control yourself. 3. Speaking of airport, for those of you who are on vacation, that's where you are going today, and you've probably known that for months. Are you telling me that in those months, you didn't think to check your baggage/yourself and make sure you don't have any metal/banned items? Did you really think bringing 20 little plastic bags was a good plan? Did you think at all? No. And your refusal to think is disrespectful to the rest of us, who are at work, not on vacation. 4. life starts and stops at your convenience. 5. it's OK to be rude/obnoxious to anyone in the service industry, airlines, Fed Ex, etc., and/or not tip appropriately. Not only are you horrible, you are stupid: remember that these people are there to help your make your life go, and they can make it stop any time they want. 6. You would rather board the plane earlier than allowed, to get the overhead bin space, and screw the elderly/mothers with kids out of it, rather than losing 10-50 pounds necessary-->so that you never have to worry about having 10 minutes to make your connecting flight, because you can power through it and get it done. 7. You transfer your anger at your own failings onto the Bills, or others, rather than being accountable for them, and making the choices necessary to overcome those failings and thereby earn more happiness. 8. Listen, think, then talk, is an approach to life that you should avoid. 9. Anybody owes you anything. Even if you are able to weasel something, via entitlement, inheritance, or whatever, you're never going to be truly happy, because you'll always know, deep down, that what you got, isn't yours. It may take years, but you'll always end up there. Earning what you have, and being happy with that, is where true happiness lies. 10. It's OK that you've stopped learning.

I started this thread because I knew the vast majority of Bills fans would enjoy it. That what I try to do, bring enjoyment to my fellow Bills fans. Sometimes, bringing joy necessitates calling out/exposing the D-bags who will never enjoy anything, and help them to recognize that their problem(s) lies not with the Bills, but with themselves. In other words: what are you doing in this thread?

You: blah, blah, blah, I refuse to admit I am wrong, silly, and the real nonsense broker here. Me: Scoreboard! If what I said was so untrue? The scoreboard wouldn't be looking like it does. In case you're still having trouble accepting reality? I'm batting ~.900 on being right. Tuesday confirmed a boatload of what I've been saying, for years. And, ask yourself: why haven't we heard about fracking, or the "1st round QB we gave away for Watkins" or any of the other crap that I've set out to destroy, here or on WGR since? Yet another lesson for you and "your man": results matter. You can B word and whine all you want, but you can't argue with results.