Steely Dan

He's a RB, how could he face Shanahan's offense? Maybe he just meant the best offensive coach his team had to face.

A Rascal? I'm in for the day. I'm stayin away from all of the stores. I don't get the people who get up at 2am to make sure they are there for the opening of the stores at 3am.

Sick, sick, sick. After leaving his child in an unlocked semi the worst part is he was going to get behind the wheel of a semi blind drunk and drive around in a truck that can do serious damage to any car.

If Youboty wasn't hurt so much he'd be great player. Whenever he's been healthy, not much, he's played really well.

He mentions a test in the first link about showing the guy a picture and then showing the facilitator a picture and seeing if she types what he saw or what she saw. I say do this and if she fails she should be prosecuted and spend a minimum of 5 years in jail for what she did to his family.

A pediatric Dr. at Strong was arrested for possessing child porn and I have a friend who worked closely with him. He and everyone else who worked closely with this Dr. were shocked. Criminals often times don't look like criminals. I'm hoping DNA clears this up. If he is innocent the damage has already been done to him.

Partial ownership means, IMO, 1-5% of the team. IIRC teams that are successful at the time of sale are worth more than bottom dwellers. This gives Shanahan added incentive. Timmy's always on top of things. I don't think Shanahan would get the "right of first refusal" It would be a tall order for him to get enough to buy the team anyway.

WGR? Well that means it aint gonna happen.

I don't want no stinkin money!!! I want this Czech!

Just out of curiosity how long has your wife been in a coma? I mean she has to be to stay with you, right?

What he said.

That's a big part of my point. In order to pass that test you have to be an ultra-conservative and Reagan wasn't an ultra-conservative. In the 2006 election I saw a Georgia woman on TV talking about changing her votes to Democratic candidates. She said that the Republicans were talking about things she didn't care about, like gay marriage bans and such. The tighter they make the fist the more Republicans they are squeezing out. I have no problem with that. Keep going guys.

Dude give it up. It's obvious you are a Pets* fan in Bills clothing. Your nose is so far up Belichicks buttocks that you already know what he had for breakfast. "It was a four o'clock game" is just another in a long list of Pats* apologist posts. Why do you think so many people here accuse you of going overboard on your Pets* defense posts?

She'll bail him out of jail and make up with him. I'm pretty sure this isn't the first warning sign he's given her.

I can't believe you don't understand the point but I'll tell you. The Republican Party that has always considered Reagan one of it's best Presidents, is using a litmus test with Reagan's name on it to screen Republican candidates. This is silly because Reagan himself couldn't pass the test. Therefore they are trying to put square pegs into round holes because they are so far removed from the Reagan era principles. Why would a party use a false litmus test with Reagan's name on it? Maybe because Reagan was the most beloved Republican President in the 20th century, IMO. They are lying to make the public believe they are still the party of Reagan. It's just further proof of how far the Republicans are effed up. The Republicans have gone from touting fiscal conservatism to touting social conservatism. Reagan wasn't that much interested in social conservatism. Can you imagine what the Republicans would say if Obama let an openly gay couple sleep at the Whitehouse or supported gun control legislation like the Brady Bill? Personally I hope they apply this litmus test to all of their candidates. It will just keep pushing them away from the moderates. If President Obama did any of those things the Republicans would have a hissy fit. I've said before on this board that Reagan would be a Democrat in this political climate and this proves it.

See Lions, Detroit.

Under the proposed Republican plan Republicans would have to post 8 out of ten on these principles; 1. Smaller government. 2. Oppose Health Care reform 3. Oppose Cap and Trade 4. Oppose card check 5. Oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants 6. Support military recommendations like troop surges. 7. Contain Iran and North Korea. 8. Support defense of marriage act. 9. Oppose healthcare rationing and funds to support abortions. 10. Support gun control. Would he pass? 1. Expanded the deficit and taxes - http://www.redding.com/news/2008/feb/28/in...n-raised-taxes/ Reagan ended up approving a $1 billion tax increase on a $6 billion annual budget, which was, proportionately, the biggest tax increase in (California) state history. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...4_12/005340.php The answer, of course, is that Reagan didn't grow his way out of the deficits caused by his 1981 tax cut. As the chart on the right shows (adapted from this Treasury report), he raised taxes twice in 1982, and then raised them again in 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987. But even with those seven tax increases and several years of strong growth, he still didn't get rid of his deficit. Dick Cheney famously said that "Reagan proved deficits don't matter," and regardless of whether he actually said this or not (he denies it), it represents a fairly hardy piece of folk wisdom. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/...ain592330.shtml So at a meeting with the vice president after the mid-term elections in 2002, Suskind writes that O'Neill argued against a second round of tax cuts. “Cheney, at this moment, shows his hand,” says Suskind. “He says, ‘You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.’ … O'Neill is speechless.” 5. He supported amnesty for illegal immigrants. 6. He ignored the military recommendation to pull out of Beirut. 7. He sold weapons to Iran. 8. He opposed California's anti-gay prop 6 and hosted the first openly gay sleepover at the Whitehouse. 10. He supported gun control legislation in California and supported the Brady Bill. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1786011/posts And nobody was more candid in admitting that he was anything but perfect than my Dad. He knew that like all men, he had his flaws and he spent a lifetime combating them. Had today’s GOP litmus test been seriously applied to him, he could not have passed the test. http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1396 By the time Reagan ran for President, he was clearly in the pro-life camp and I have no reason to think that his belief was anything but genuine. However, in the 1960’s as Govenor of California, Ronald Reagan signed what was essentially a pro abortion bill that resulted in at least a million more abortions than before he signed the legislation. ________________________________________________________ ...would today’s fiscal hawks have stuck with Reagan while the deficit jumped to levels never before seen? Also, in spite of Reagan’s clear distain for the federal beauacracy, the overall size of the federal goverment grew during his time in office. _______________________________________________________ Reagan’s one significant military decision in an actual war was, using today’s parlance, to cut and run in Lebanon after terrorists bombed U.S. military barracks resulting in the deaths of 240 Americans. How would the conservatives view this today? Did we embolden future terrorists by leaving? ________________________________________________________ Finally, the most important issue to many conservatives, after protecting the rights of the unborn, is their strong opposition to any legislation that even hints at amnesty for illegal aliens. In 1986 Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which provided amnesty to over 1 million illegal aliens. http://www.foxpolitics.net/politics.iml?md...;issue_id=30307 It is for this reason that we should heed the words of President Ronald Reagan, who urged, “We should emphasize the things that unite us and make these the only ‘litmus test’ of what constitutes a Republican: our belief in restraining government spending, pro-growth policies, tax reduction, sound national defense, and maximum individual liberty.” He continued, “As to the other issues that draw on the deep springs of morality and emotion, let us decide that we can disagree among ourselves as Republicans and tolerate the disagreement.” http://billingsgazette.com/news/opinion/gu...def421be3d.html We forget sometimes that the GOP was not always like this. Not that long ago, we had pro-choicers like Barry Goldwater. Or Ronald Reagan, Act One. Or George H.W. Bush, who was pro-choice before he was pro-victory. The northeast quadrant of the country was once home turf to pro-choice Republican women from Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger to Barbara Bush. Now we are down to two female Republican senators from Maine who may yet be banned from taking communion with their fellow congressional parishioners.

I agree. I love the mentality of some fans. The Bills aren't winning, their HC isn't fiery, therefore all HC's who aren't fiery are losers. Let's see how that works the other way. Eric Mangini is a fiery coach...

Yes! Don't non a you youngins go out and do dat. Links to it happening in Buffalo and other cities? I don't recall reading any articles about the Pets* or any other team going through this in Buffalo. The only example sited above was on a New Years Eve. It's possible the guy didn't even know they were staying there. He probably did but that's the only one I've heard about.

None of these are safe for work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp7Nxwr5EY0...feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09abF7ZUNnk&NR=1

I'm guessing 17th.

Ummm, I didn't mean it that way and you know it and yet you visualized that yourself. Just sayin.

You should be doused in chicken wing sauce.