TrueBlueGED

It...it moved.

Aaron Williams should retire if this is another concussion.

This is the first game I've felt we really miss Dareus. That said, he's running through a lot of arm tackles.

Practice lines: Check out @BuffNewsVogl's Tweet: https://twitter.com/BuffNewsVogl/status/790214498284085252?s=09 Samson just isn't going to get a shot at center :(

Hopefully it's to do more than sit on the bench.

No more than does the occurrence of false accusations justify a presumption of a false accusation. This is painting with waaaaaay too broad of a brush. It's also worth noting that the accuser has no greater rights in these matters than the accused--it's not like the accuser gets a prosecutor and the ability to tee-off as the accused curls into a fetal position in the corner. Not everywhere has the exact same policy, but the colleges I have worked at (and I have no reason to believe other SUNY schools differ meaningfully): -The accused is presumed innocent. -The accused does have the right to call witnesses. --True that there is no cross-examination of the accuser's witnesses, but again, the accuser cannot cross the accused's witnesses either. --However, both sides are allowed to submit questions to the panel they wish to be asked of the other side and other side's witnesses. -The accused is assigned an advocate to assist through the process, and can hire legal counsel if desired. --True, said legal counsel cannot serve as an official representative, but the same is also true for the accuser. -Previous records of sexual relations, accusations and/or "convictions" and/or mental health assessments are not admissible prior to the sanctions stage, and it's not set in stone they will be admissible during the sanctions stage. -Right to present evidence at the hearing. -Right to appeal decision. Given the events Eleven describes, if taken to a college for a formal complaint, there is no objective way to conclude he'd be at "high risk" for "significant" disciplinary action. He'd be at a pretty low risk to even get a warning out of this. Eleven, I'm sorry this happened, truly. It sucks that it ruined your night and could have become something much larger than it should have been. But I'm pretty tired of people pretending there's some general and massive dearth of due process on college campuses.

Even if she wants a bill, there won't be a bill because it won't pass and it's bad politics to introduce it in such a situation. If the Dems take the Senate (which is still very much in question), maybe they introduce one there...but they'll never have a large enough majority to overcome a filibuster on it (especially since they wouldn't be able to count on full party unity for it). Furthermore, the House is almost certainly remaining with the Republicans this cycle, and if the Dems can't take it now, they're sure as hell not taking it in the midterms. Honestly think Paul Ryan is going to bow to President Clinton and even send the measure to committee, to say nothing of bringing it to the floor? There's simply no path for any sort of potent gun control legislation to become law.

It certainly didn't read like you were joking. And your last sentence here raises doubt on that front despite protestations to the contrary. Regardless, seeing as I thought you were serious in your compliment of whoever's post (jsb, maybe?), my point was simply that you don't exactly have much ground to stand on when trying to play the patron saint of forum decorum. Yes, I'm proud of that little rhyme. Should I be? Eeeehhhhhhh :unsure:

I've tried and it falls on deaf ears. So now I just bitch :p

Maybe. Depends if implicit in the comment is like a woman ...since ya know, that's typically the type of thing that gets associated with menstruating or pregnant women. But that's also completely besides the point. Regardless of the true meaning of the phrase, it falls well short of being an incisive observation unless you're using incisive as shorthand for "a point of view that agrees with mine".

The #1 influence that special interests wield is information. A member of Congress who spends 20 years in a committee becomes an expert in that field and is less reliant on he information interest groups provide. You get rid of that, or prevent it from ever developing, and the interests groups are more heavily relieved upon when crafting legislation.

Pretty much. Term limits remain the most popular, yet terrible, political reform. They have a huge set of consequences advocates don't think about, and they actually make special interests more powerful.

From the guy who considered a post calling a whole group of posters "hormonal" to be incisive...

We can beat Miami without McCoy. I don't think we can best Seattle or the Pats without him. Rest him for the week. Seriously, didn't see see this last year with the hamstring? Let him get healthy dammit.

The mere though of this...ahem...excites me. If by "all flop after the first two" you actually mean "late 1sts are a coin flip to make the NHL, and if they do, their likely outcome is a 3rd liner" then yes!

Me too. Down to 1345.

Now who's being hormonal? Though I don't think Murray exactly had a banner offseason, the roster (yes, even with an injured Eichel and Kane) is better than it has shown. The problem is the coach, not the tank.

Be prepared to be shouted down because "it's only four games".

He simply doesn't coach in a way that plays to what the roster does well. Lord help me, but Pi is right in that Risto's strength is his offense...yet how often do you see him actually lead a rush? Once a game? At this point I'm convinced Bylsma would want Erik Karlsson sitting back playing it safe.

Yet another thing Bylsma swore he was going to improve upon...and didn't.

Like I just said, worst 4-0 team I've ever seen.

Yes. Yyyyeeessss. Let the dark "Bylsma sucks" side flow through you!

Vancouver might be the worst 4-0 team I've ever seen if they hold on here.

...what in the blue hell was that.

If they rule this no goal I'm....going to sleep.