OCinBuffalo

I see your Nicolas Cage fake "regular guy in store" pretentious photobomb(apparently ALL of you attach 2 pair of sunglasses to your person/bags? Is this now cool? Should we expect to see it in every movie going forward?), and raise you Hollywood photobomb with Al Gore lookalike component:

What else you got? And, the Katniss says: "Hello, Hollywood. Goodbye, Leftist Message".

Yeah, when I said: I'm NOT gonna state the obvious/what I am sure has already been covered? That's sorta the opposite of making it my own. Making it my own would be a pedantic lecture, point by point, on the ramifications of the email, and completey ignoring the concept that some other poster may have already made some good points/posted that material. To be sure. I do that. Just not here. No reason to. Not saying I won't do it later, perhaps even in this thread. You'll just have to wait and not see.

Hey, if you're going to make fun of your own guy? Then, I'm real winning, not Charlie Sheen winning. Or should I call that "Hollywood Winning"? How come the biggest grossing movie, and sequel, is about a white country girl that's handy with weapons, and stands up/defeats to the overly-centralized government that exploits her and her neighbors? ....and not about this person or that one being a racist, a slave, or a Holocaust survivor? Who's winning, given those #s, do you think? :D I think "man, all those pots of messages, all that straining to make them relevant to the story, and then Hunger Games comes along and drives its message home, and blows up the 10k pots they threw in over the last 5 years, in one sitting....it must drive them all nuts".

Buftex? I see we've removed the self-ban on PPP? How good for me. Let the Buftex beatings commence! I love it when people say "I'm not going to argue". That's like pretending that there's no difference between the meanings of the words "can't" and "won't". One merely substitutes "won't" for "can't", and expects get over using the false choice they've created. Buftex can't argue with my premise, not won't, because it is fact. Not a likable fact for some. Not a likable fact for some on the right. But, still...fact. Only a fool, regardless of side, denigrates Sarah Palin. They could have used Sarah Palin in 2012. Huge mistake. In fact, the hindsight data says Palin had a strong shot to help turn things Romney's way. Romney lost because not enough white people showed up, especially not enough religious white people. Palin is the Queen of religious white women. N'est-ce pa? I've explained in detail my theory of how the Palin machine, or really, organism, operates in the wild here many times. If we just look at the inputs/outputs: it feeds on negative personal attacks on both Palin and the Tea party, and schits campaign $ for conservative candidates. As the absurdity and # of these attacks increases incrementally, the campaign $ output increases exponentially. And still: liberals can't find the strength to STFU, and stop feeding the organism what it thrives on the most. The hilariously ironic: the key mechanism in the organism, it's mitochondria, is surprisingly of militant leftist/feminist design. It is the left's Manichean construct of the "victimhood" and "plight" of ALL women in this country, that produces an unintended effect. ALL is the key. Since the left loves to speak in absolutes(they've learned nothing from Obi Wan), ALL includes Palin. Thus, Palin's "plight" becomes demonstrable to ALL women in this country, every time the left attacks her. It's as I said above: "easily recognizable", because the left has made it so. Without this key component that the feminazis have worked so diligently to embed in our collective consciousness, Sarah Palin would be a near nobody. When you take the engineered mitochondria of this organism, and feed it near-misogyny in most cases, and very real("Someone should defecate in Palin's mouth") misogyny in others? Well, it's not hard to see how the organism can become much more efficient, learn and adapt to its surroundings, because it has the energy to do so, and become very formidable indeed. It has progressed so well that it has ceased to be prey, and is now a predator.

I can go even simpler:

How about I make this entirely simple for you: we cannot live in a post-anything anything when it comes to human behavior. So let's stop lying/trying, shall we? (EDIT: IF we could live in a post-anything anything, no re-make of a movie would ever work, and most of your town would be screwed, because they'd have to be original all the time) Example: I'd love to be living in a post-idiot America. But, as long as more than a few somebodies thinks Nancy Pelosi is a leader, and is qualified to be a Congressman, never mind the leader of the House Democrats, I am prevented from doing that, through no fault of my own. (Make no mistake, we need a qualified leader of House Democrats) Joe Biden prevents me from living in a post-yammering idiot America. Who can objectively argue that Pelosi is not a blithering idiot, when we have terrabytes of data that confirms it? Biden? See how this works? So, one yammering idiot rancher, or yammering idiot NBA owner prevents us from living in a post-racial America, and that means we fold up the tents? Great. Now what? I guess we just forget about the other (I don't know, let's say 280, because we probably can find 10 million a-holes who were a jerk to somebody of another race, for no good reason today, and I'm doubling it just to be sure)...280 million people who made good choices today? Who weren't racist towards anyone, who didn't make anyone feel bad because of what they look like/how they dress/their name/gender, etc.? So, for the sake of argument, let's say ~94% of our people didn't do anything racist today. If this is 1870s North, never mind the South? That % goes down to 10%, and there's more than enough data to back that up, or, are you telling me you've never heard a Polish joke? 80+ points of positive movement in an entire population, an entire culture, in 150 years....is hardly cause for tears. So, shouldn't we press on, and be happy that we can all(if we are being objective, and don't have NAACP $ to raise/the next Rainbow coalition shakedown to start) see which way the country is going? The fact that practically EVERYBODY instantly agreed with the NBA's decision on this issue should tell you where we stand on racial progress. We cannot have everything go our way all the time, and, we cannot ever expect to live in a 100% post-racial country, and neither can anyone else(ahem, especially people in EU countries, despite all their self-congratulation, they are more racist than we). That is because: we have 300+ million people, and none of them doing/saying anything stupid, ever, being the standard we test for, and that test being pass/fail, with FAIL meaning: we are still a "racist country".... ...is just about the dumbest thing there is. If we are going to prejudiced against something? That sort of dumbness is the best candidate.

Yes. It appears that we need a slavery movie every 4 years, for the same reason we need a Holocaust movie every 1 year: liberals are so afraid of the public eductation system, they tell us is infallible, yet, may FAIL to correctly educate us on the disgusting and horrific reality of both historical occurances, that they need to interrupt our free time with remedial studies programs. EDIT: I should have said Hollywood Liberals, and then blamed GreggyT, since he's around, and, he's from Hollywood.

Why not? She can always hire a political scientist(which it appears is who the Rs currently have) to do the technical stuff. The last thing I heard Palin say "Waterboarding is how we baptise terrorists". That's sheer genius. It's just gold, and so many will never, ever, understand why....which makes it 10x more valuable, because the tactic is re-usable. And, I would argue that the rage and insanity are already present in most libtards, it's just that Palin is very effective in drawing it out in it's most easily recognizable state. And "easily recognizable" is exactly what you want...when we are talking about motivating all women, both low-information and high, to vote. An example of "easily recognizable": just the other day, I heard a guy say "Sarah Palin is a MILF...a Moron I'd Like to F". That was a great laugh for him and his two friends at the airport bar. But, for the 15/18 women I observed scattered around that bar, whose heads turned and eyes burned? November is coming, smart guy!

First, before we even start, let me give some of you a preliminary , because I already know how tightly this will twist your panties. Now, moving on, one ? has come up from time to time here: "What does Sarah Palin do?" Also, some of us have also asked: "What is the obession with Palin?" and "Why does Palin cause so much irrationality on the left?" and "Don't you idiots realize that the more you attack Palin, especially when you attack her personally, the more powerful she becomes?" Well, here we have some answers to our questions: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/01/GA-Karen-Handel-Surges-from-Fifth-to-Virtual-Tie-for-First-in-After-Palin-Endorsement Again: ...largely because this will probably produce even more leftist irrationality, so, of course: thread.start(panties, twist); And, before you bother telling me that this is all because of the dumb comment/Palin's candidate got lucky, and nothing to do with Palin : please stop before you even start. Now, once again, it doesn't matter what I think about Palin. But, more importantly for the leftists? Guess what? It doesn't matter what you think about Palin either. Shocking, I know, for all these serious leftist opinions to be, empircally, deemed: irrelevant. But, that is precisely what the facts indicate. Sarah Palin. The woman who can and has motivated other women to vote her way. Perhaps that is the answer to "why do they hate Palin so much"? She's effective. She may be a lot of other things, and you may be able to prove some of them. However, you cannot disprove her effectiveness. Palin's results makes the entire left's mockery of her: irrelevant. Results: something the left has in very short supply for 2014, and even less for 2016. Thus, that is what Sarah Palin does: political operator and formidable fundraiser. Make fun of her all you want, but, just like Liberace, she's the one doing the real laughing, at you. I'm just happy to be along for the ride, observing Palin, and how easily she exposes the left's true feelings about women = "women can have and believe in whatever they want, as long as it's our thing, that works our way."

/thread /issue Because? Benghazi. It was gonna be because of the Clippers idiot...was. Not anymore.

Hehehe...been away for a bit...working with some interesting folks on a potential solution for another of Obama's giant F ups, Obamacare. Yet another name change for me is a near certainty. Anyhow, I just thought I would drop by and ask: "Hey gatordturd, how funny do you think this is now?" For the rest of you: I'm not gonna state the obvious/what I am sure has already been covered, other than to say: you can forget about Benghazi EVER going away for Hillary Clinton. Here's what probably hasn't been covered: In all cases, the days of the media defending the WH and Hillary on Benghazi are over. This is a one-sided conversation from here on out, whether you like it or not. I think that's hilarious....but....I doubt gatorman does.

My F'ing my. Look what happens when you bring up RVU: you get 2 big posts. The same clowns who brought you RVU...CMS.... who can't get any of these smaller things right, historically, consistently, should have a crack at defining bigger things, or the entire thing? Perhaps I have erred in bringing up Meaningful Use? As in: the devil you know(RVU) vs. the devil neither of these guys knows yet(Meaningful Use)? Boy, these guys are right there with the why/how of RVU, aren't they? (Meaningful Use Aside: "I have one word, just one word I want to say to you:"...Minutes. Somebody take note of the fact that I said "minutes" to birdog and B-large...for later. Why? Because the howling and wailing will be funny as hell...later.) Ok, back to it: 1. I am fully aware of the Rob Peter to Pay Paul approach in health care. It is pervasive in every sector of the vertical. Decades of forcing some business lines to pay for others is why your margins always suck. You are forced into the loser lines for lots of reasons, largely government regulation. Thus you can't ever get ahead of the game/grow via operational budget, and not capital. Which in turn, is the biggest reason why you tend to have awful IT/EMR/whatever the F some clown pretending to be me wants to call the next thing, that only meets 3-40% of your requirements, and only actually records 60% of what you do. You never have the $ on hand to get better, and I'm talking real get better, not paying $20k in maintenance fees and collecting your annual EMR version upgrade. (BTW, we've solved this problem completely.) 2. "Patient outcomes based on effective clinical risk assessment"? Wrong. Assclown wrong. You both know what an EMR is. Therefore, you both also know that bastardizing CMR tactics for health care has failed(many of the same reasons deploying workflow in health care has failed). You don't know why that is true. That is fine. It's my job to know why. You don't care why. You do care about getting the outcomes you want, and you ain't. Clinical risk assessment? What the F are we? Insurance adjusters or line managers? Birdog: you run the shop, AND, you give the care. Who manages 90% of your risk? You? Or the lady who runs the front of the shop? Hint: Not you. Who is responsible for the quality of the care being dispensed? Not front lady. More on this later, but do you see the disconnect between EMR = CRM yet? Do you understand that they base everything they do on CMR, when they aren't basing it on the old paper forms, though? 3. You think this post is long? Start me on "scheduling" some time. "Scheduling" is retarded in health care, as I can prove that 70% of your man/day is unplanned work....so....scheduling the unplanned in the conventional sense is absurd. "Scheduling" is a direct result of failure to understand CRM, and then, failure to adjust CRM for health care, and then apply that adjusted thing properly. People who say the word "workflow" but don't know what it means, has also been an huge contributor to the "Scheduling" debacle. Workflow, first properly understood via practical experience with it, then properly adjusted for health care, is the answer to your 20 min/40 min problem. (Solved the F out of this one) 4. "Patient outcomes based on effective clinical risk assessment" = How about we stop mushing words that don't belong together in an effort to sound smart? 5. How about instead we measure, completely, and therefore be able to manage, completely, our care process? Like....you know, what every other line manager does in every other F'ing industry in the world? But I forgot: Where would we be without $25 million grants, so we can come up with "Patient outcomes based on effective clinical risk assessment" assclownery? 6. Blaming anyone for RVU besides the government is patently retarded. Who created the system? Who keeps F'ing with it? Jesus. That's like saying that we shouldn't blame the government, because the Joing Comission/State Surveyors use private contractors. Idiocy. It's the government's awful mousetrap, and ONLY the government can either build a better one, or GTFO. And before you try to gloss it over birdog: MEDICARE is yet again responsible for this, because they originated it. Just like with 85% of the other stupidity in health care. This is why when I hear "Medicare for all" I either laugh or yell at the speaker, depending on my mood. 7. You spend more time typing and less caring for 1(one) reason: bad data model design. The EMR systems you have all started the same way: replace the paper. The problem? Paper, the vehicle, has its own rules/limitations. Those rules were transferred to electronic systems because: stupid. Instead of looking at your data, in terms of just: your data? Your data was looked at in terms of how it was looked at on paper, and this paradigm was used to create the EMR data model. Uber FAIL. Now, we are doing more to retain the ghost of paper forms past....than we are actually providing a way to track the care process. The data model in place has been about form emulation/chasing CRM rainbows that don't make sense in health care, and not about the data you need, and more importantly, the data you DO NOT need, especially: right now. Hence, yeah, you're going to typing, and typing, because? You need to fill out the form, because dammit, we have to fill out the form. Get it? There's ton more. But this is all u get today.

Dammit. As I said: I knew that there was some reason why the Feds went overboard. Perhaps they had the inside track on this guy, and they were going to "clean up the streets" ? Ask yourself: when isn't this Administration "going after the "bad" guys"? Also, the other thing I didn't know: The BLM boss is a rookie D-bag, who had no experience and was questioned pretty hard by the Senate, because he had no experience, when he was being confirmed. You take an idiot rancher + government turd with something to prove? Not hard to see how we ended up here. Now this is starting to make sense. Well, from an "I'm not either idiot" perspective. Quoted for truth Yeah? And you know what all of this boils down to? "You're doing it wrong." Who the F cares about your nuance here? All of a sudden, you expect people who say things like "the science is settled" to deal in nuance? No. You're doing it wrong too. You're doing it wrong. WTF? GG not only dancing on the edge of OCinBuffalo infringement with "unmitigated"...anything, but he does it again with a "take your pick" close? Come on. Did you write this during a meeting? You're doing it wrong too. Stop copying me. One thing you can always count on PTR to do: run some ridiculous hyperbole, and then run away. Let me add the substance that is lacking.... Question: has dumbass rancher caused anyone to die? Is this guy Timothy McVeigh....because he bunched liberal panties? Since Rancher Dumbass hasn't caused anyone to die, or lose their liberty/pursuit of hapiness? This story has no gold for liberals, and they are best served by being done with it. Keeping it going only damages them, and no one else. By sheer accident, this story is the tactical equivalent of what the left has been doing since 2007. (look up David Ploufe) The strategy has been: make false assertions in the media, such that a "conversation" must occur. In doing so, some of your argument has been planted, subconsciously, and now you've moved the ball forward. I will explain. IF we all stop deluding ourselves for a second: what's really going on here? 1. Conservatives/libertarians are smirking, and "tee hee"ing this, because it represents a punch in the mouth for statists, and one that doesn't cost anybody anything, because this guy is claimed by no one, and speaks for no one. The simple fact is: government was forced to back down. That bunches leftist panties, no matter what, and thus it's hilarious for the right, no matter what, because they had nothing to do with it. They get to laugh at Harry Reid et al...who were defeated totally by what we now know is an obvious tool. 2. As a result of getting punched in the mouth, the left has decided to overreach again. This time? Even bigger hyperbole than normal. This time: "we've finally found 1 guy who matches the caricature ". Yeah. 4 damn years later. But, they don't realize that they are reinforcing the "exception that proves the rule". They are reinforcing one fact: Leftist ideology is collapsing all around us, leaving only identity politics, as the sole plank of the 2014-2016 Democrat platform. Imagine that. An entire political party that has been reduced to a single plank. This is "Known Nothing" status. And, rather than see the threat straight, they are propagating it. The very last thing Democrats want right now is to be the party of race/gender and literally nothing else. However, that is who "dumbass rancher story" is defining them as, and they are assiting it. The irony is palpable. By sheer accident, the left's tactic of "insert the indefensible, because some of it will stick" is being used against them. Yeah...I guess. But, as I said above, there's the other side to that coin: when all Democrats are is the party of identity, and also stupidity? You are dead right. You are right, but you're still dead. Apparently this is copy me thread. Perhaps the single dumbest move in American history, or at least in American politics, is that Sherman's orders regarding this weren't followed. Imagine: most of African America living in Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma, etc. An entirely different history of who fought the Comanche, and perhaps the Apache, and why. That's a hell of thing, but, if you think about it: it's the most likely outcome. Put on your racist 1870s cap for a moment, and realize how dumb they were for not supporting Sherman: why wouldn't you send black homesteaders to fight Natives? Why wouldn't you displace them out of the South, to the same places you were displacing the Indians? Why not have 2 "undesirable" people in a fight? I recall "Everybody wins" being the punchline of that joke. Southern labor issues? As if they couldn't get more Irish. See? If we are really being 1870s racist, you can't do that without the Irish.

Really. Ok Mr. Backpedal, how else shall we "interpret" besides: absurd horsecrap? What chance do we have, beyond 0, to find a racist NFL locker room? Is this 1958? Or 2014? After all, this is what this discussion is about. If I send you a naked pic or two, of a young but legal girl, and you say "nice". Does that make you a dirty old man? Does that justify some reporter, looking for clicks, calling you a dirty old man? Does that justify MDFan running around calling you a dirty old man, because he read it somewhere, and closing the book on that, because: "perception". This is what I am saying: the hyperbole has to stop. I am merely illustrating the hyperbolic idiocy here, using....yeah...self-avowed, but also, perfectly designed: hyperbolic idiocy. I know how to debate you, and I did. Or, do you have no reply at all?

Oh please. This is the best you have? Once again: content vs process. In technicolor. Btw? It's hilarious that this is the thing you chose to post. Of all things.

Yeah? And being unable to win on the content, thus, running to the process, tells me all I need to know about your capabilities: Unable to win on the content. Show me where I justified Incognito's behavior. (You are unable) Show me where I said anything about it at all, other than: the "click-rate" media has made a lot of unsupported charges, and has backed up none. (You are unable) Show me where I said I wanted the guy on the team. (You are unable) Show me where I based my reason for not wanting the guy on the team on anything other than football (You are unable) You can't win on the content. So, all that is left is the process. How typical. EDIT: And rookie? Look up the word "Retatta". Check the entymology. Then get back to me. You don't even know what you don't know about this board. Move on. Or, admit that the only reason you are saying anything at all, is that you don't like it when somebody stands up against the "cry racist" people.

Yeah, I directly quoted you, in order. I read and understood exactly what you said. Let me save you the trouble: I always read exactly what people say, and routinely bust stupidity, as I am doing here. Ask anyone here, I have a long history of doing so. Perhaps it is you who hasn't understood what you wrote? Read it again. How about we start with you explaining exactly WTF a "poster boy for a racist locker room", in today's NFL, is? Explain how that isn't patently retarded. I'll be here all afternoon. Take all the time you need.

They will not. Why? Because that would mean admitting that the RG3 trade was exactly as preposterous as people like us, who point to the DVC, said it was. That would mean admitting that even with the last 15 years of the Redskins being aggressive(read: stupid), they ignorned that history, and told us that the Redskins know what they are doing. That's what this has been about: the draft isn't the draft, and the rules aren't the rules...because that doesn't fit their narrative. They would rather believe in "click-rate" media hype, and when the ass falls out of that hype, will never admit that they were suckered. Look at what is happening with Jaws right now: he is being pressured to adjust his views on Manziel. Why? Because the "click-rate" media says Manziel will be awesome, and not only awesome, he may even end up at the Cowboys! Jim Rome literally said today: "I get on my knees and pray that Manziel goes to the Cowboys". Consider that. Why? Why does Jim Rome want that? Easy. Because of the clicks and calls that will generate. EDIT: Rome is saying it right now, all over again. EDIT2: Direct Quote from Rome: "It's not about whether it makes football sense" See? They aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Big Market-driven NFL in technicolor. Jesus. Now? Rome is saying "we shoud draft guys based on their twitter followers". He is laying it right out for you. Yeah, tell me more about how the media isn't totally corrupt. So, I'll say what I say again: telling a lot of people what they want to hear, is a great way of making $, or getting elected, or driving an agenda, provided those people are unmitigated morons, are too lazy to do their own thinking, or are just as corrupt as the people doing the telling.

I love how we go from "he is a posterboy for racist locker rooms"(as if that has any basis in reality, since, as if there has been such a thing as a racist NFL locker room since the late 50s/early 60s) to "alleged" to "perception is reality". When 80% of the locker room is African American, and has been for 30 years, how the F can it be racist, and how can anyone be a poster boy for one? This is flat out absurd. For the dim, let me explain that: We are going from making a terrible charge about someones character, to guilt by media sensationalism, to "it doesn't matter if I can't back up what I'm saying, because I already said it, because I'm parroting somebody else who said it, and can't back it up either, and thus, that's the perception". F that. We do all of that like it's nothing? What. The. !@#$. When we are talking about racism, real racism, that's not a charge to throw around like it's nothing. That is because real racism is threat to all of us, as it makes this country unable to function as designed. When you throw "racism" around without proof, you desensitize people to real racism. We have fought many kinds of wars to destroy real racism, and the memory of those we have lost in that fight doesn't deserve to be trivialized by assclowns with an ulterior motive/seeking personal gain. It is dishonor. This retarded crap my be OK elsewhere, but it is completely unaccpetable here. This board is known, because we have standards, and running your mouth, based on nothing other than "click-rate media" assclownery, is not up to standard. That is not what we do here. Fix it. Check yourself. STFU. Pick one. I don't want Incognito, because I think we can do better, because of his play on the field. I called out the Dolphins O line as completely inconsistent. Last year. In the preseason: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/160167-dolphinsjags-reportwith-fancy-pics-i-made-myself/ That's what we do here.

I am sorry but I cannot agree. Currently we let people from New Jersey go whereever they want to go, and we've seen the results. The same thing is true regarding suburb people...coming into Buffalo on the 33. Their handicap prevents them from realizing that none of us thinks driving 60 mph, 5 feet from our doors, blaring Nickelback, is cool. Their handicap prevents them from perceiving how uncool they truly are, and in trying to be cool, the danger they represent to themselves and others. It's a matter of public safety. We cannot continue to allow these handicapped people to go whereever they want to go, never mind encouraging more handicapped people to do the same. We need to get them to accept their handicap, and stay where they belong.

Well, if you know this handle, then you know that the lulz are taken whenever they are available, that I will grind whatever grist the mill requires to get them. The extreme was used to illustrate the point. Of course there are literally 10000+ jobs between chemist, or CEO of startup IT...thingy(now there's a job that should be disrespected)...and road whore. So what, not every girl is gonna be a model, and not every girl who could be a model is one. But, most of the girls who can be, are, because of the $, and it's the best job compared to the alternatives available. Most of the people I know who are involved were cheerleaders. It is required? No. What is required is the ability to speak about a product intelligently. Like anything else, that takes practice for most people, not for all. A few can do it out of the box. The point is, the practice that you get as a cheerleader is conducive to product support jobs, and it appears to be, since so many are ex-cheerleaders. I don't do this at all: I've just been around it my whole career. Horsecrap. Not every business works the same, and certainly some businesses, especially those that require rare talent, work the way they do for very good reason. Often it is because there aren't that many people in the business who are willing to teach it, while getting their own work done. Example: I have had interns since I'm 25. Often they've worked for nothing, largely because I had nothing to pay myself, never mind them, or just, albeit stupid, company policy. I make no promises other than I will teach, and they will learn. I treat them like employees, because they are going to be: employees. I couldn't care less whose panties that bunches. They didn't make the promise to teach. I did. They aren't going to stay after work until the kid gets it. I have. My relationship with my "students" is our business, not theirs. Interns, just like cheerleaders, ARE being paid: hopefully by somebody who takes it seriously, and pays them with the knowledge and experience, they require to be successful. Yeah, well I know it's an idiot slope we're on, when we're told supply/demand doesn't apply. Look at the issues of the day. Notice anything? Yes, we're all currently skiing down Mt. Retard. We might want to consider recognizing where denial of supply/demand is taking us. It comes down to: what did you know and when did you know it. If you knew, and you still sue? You're a D-bag, and so is your lawyer. Period. If you didn't know, or there are mitigating circumstances, or other people are benefiting from your work without your consent/paying you? Yeah, none of that is frivolous. Nothing was stopping cheerleaders from collective bargaining. Now, they don't have a right to retroactively sue, as they took the $ they were offered. If they took the $ as it was offered, that's them consenting to the deal. I don't see where they have a leg to stand on, but, I'm sure you can find a D-bag lawyer that does...for a fee. You really think the angle here isn't "let's get this into the media, and force a settlement, because the bad PR is 3x more damaging than the settlement $"? You really think that the lawyer here isn't counting on that as the source of his fee, and instead, is counting on these cheerleaders to pay him out-of-pocket? The rest is emoting. The law is about equity, not emoting. The above IS the angle. It'll be telling to see the response to it, as then we will know how the Bills, and the NFL, sees themselves. Are they too big/bad to care? Do they place any real value on this type of bad PR, or, is the Draft gonna wash this out? Curious: why now for the lawsuit? Could it be because this is down time for the NFL, but not quite, because the draft is coming, and this is a "spoiler"? Smart lawyer, but we'll see if he's as smart as he thinks he is. So what? Trade show ladies have a career path. Or at least most of them. Strippers have at best: porn to look forward to, and then? Something dark, I'd guess. Yes, well there's all sorts of dogs, all sorts of places. However, besides being morally wrong, I see that as weakness. It takes strength to get play the right way: from a woman you don't know, in the bar, through the wall her 3 friends try, and FAIL, to deploy, and past the various...um...blockers. To me, that's a task worth doing, because the losing makes the winning. The other is disgusting weakness, and I detest it. Btw, you may be surprised just how many women in positions of power "take advantage". It's a problem that gets 0 air time, and that's why it's a growing problem.

Wait, I'm confused: do we want more ornery out of 3w, or less?

Well, let's hope we enjoy them fully too. We will be trying to sign OTT back, I think, so, fair warning. Things are going as well as can be expected for both teams thusfar. In the game the other night the Blues did everything but score. And, as much as I truly think, not just hope, Joel Armia(slick skater, you'll see) is going to make a lot of people in Buffalo eat truckloads of crow, I still want more goal-scorers. I want more than we need, and then let them fight it out. Right now our D, and 3rd/4th liners, are already in the pipeline, and are probably the best in the NHL. (EDIT: And check it, a lot of people besides me are saying that) We need scorers to fill out the top 6. We need that pick to convert into a 1st this year, and we need to hit on at least half of our 1s and 2s this year and next, all goal scorers....so that the nightmare can end by 2017. I like our odds, especially considering how many chances we have, but still...who doesn't want more? I meant what I said. Perhaps you passed by the "for a living" part? When you get paid to speak publicly, and regularly, when you hang a shingle as an expert, or, at least somebody who knows WTF is going on, you forgo the right to change your mind privately. That is the price for getting paid. Who cares what you say/think privately. You aren't getting paid for what you say/think privately. No. You are getting paid for what you say publicly, and if that changes, it's on you to acknowledge that publicly. Hell, even here people try to keep themselves accountable(to varying degrees of success, some we have to "help" to be accountable ). And that's the word: accountability. When you get paid, you are accountable for what you've said. Nothing you "reserve the right" to do alters that. I get it. But, you understand that wasn't directed at you, right? That was....how do I say it without being guilty of...nope...better to leave it there.

Which means.....he's a Sullivan surrogate. A Sullivan surrogate, who is not arguing the effectiveness of Sullivan objectively, but rather "sticking up for his friend". Sticking up for your friend is admirable. However, it should be done on twitter/facebook, as it is not appropriate here. This thread is about whether or not we should be pleased with 25 years of Sullivan's work, or, at least that's what it turned into. I don't see how his buddy coming here and telling us crap that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not Sullivan changes his opinions like the wind, such that he is never "wrong", and whether that behavior causes problems for the fan base, in terms of our infecting our "current thinking" with nonsense, has any value. How many wasted threads have been started via the Sullivan "infection"? How many Sullivan memes(Ralph is Cheap) do we need to endure?