huskertim

I would like to take a moment to apoligize on behalf of the Rams organization and fans to Mr and Mrs. Bradford for the impending demise of their promising young son. The lack of protection and despairation of the front office will inevitabily place this brave lad in tremendous peril. He will be missed. On the other hand, with the first pick of the 2011 NFL Draft the St Louis Rams pick.......GO RAMS GO!

Hey, welcome aboard, but you might not want to offer a good time without negotiating specifics in advance. Hahaha! When I typed that, I knew someone was going to say something like that, but I didn't really know what else to change it to without sounding weird. Sorry, I couldn't resist. Seriously though, I hope you find us to be good hosts too.

Strike a nerve did I? Was I referring to you exactly? Typical response from a Beck worshiper, don't make an intelligent rebuttal about the facts I've stated. Just start with the name calling and making yourself look like a dumbass. Congrats! You did it! For the record Timmy, I didn't vote for Obama. But I guess that somebody such as yourself who thinks anybody who doesn't agree with you, that would make them a liberal. So let the grown ups debate, you just go back to pleasuring yourself with your Micheal Savage poster. Not so much a nerve, I kind of felt like sparing a bit at 2Am and thought that I might demonstrate the silliness of the whole name calling thing (tea baggers) and sweeping generalizations (no consevatives ever criticized Bush) in your post. I've certainly found many of your other posts far more enlightening. I was hopeing to bait you, but alas, you are far too mature to fall for that one (as demonstraated by your reply), and I didn't actually hang around till 6 AM to get the reply. I do apoligize for the junvenile tone of my post, tongue-in-creek doesn't always translate well in my posts, and a few brews probably doesn't help. As to looking like a dumbass, well, I've been accused of far worse than that. Bottom line though, I only engage in these debtes as entertainment, I don't actually think postings here are going to change anything, but the Tea Party people, agree with them or not, are actually out on the street engageing in the process and I think that's good for this country even if a large percentage of them are a little nuts.

Wrong call douce bag, I've been baggin on W as spending like a druken sailor since he was elected and as a drunken sailor, I ought to know. Sorry if yo boys campaign of I will make it worse, and you can take it to the bank isn't resonateing with mr. everyman. As to Palin, she was vilified by your beloved press not be cause she's an airhead, but because she's a conservative airhead, while Hill was portrayed as a sympathetic figure. So, if you really wanna bang brain pans, bring your A game chump.

Hey, welcome aboard, but you might not want to offer a good time without negotiating specifics in advance.

MMMMMMM, fresh meat.

Holy crap for a minute there I could have sworn I was listening to Glen Beck himself!!! Someone should give you paranoid f'ers a show on FOXnews, but only if you have the ability to cry on command........ Remember huzkerbob, it's only paranoia if they aren't out to get you.

Big difference when you have just a simple majority as compared to a super majority. Bush got bit in the backside big time when he tried to reform SSI so he wasn't going to risk another political nightmare to tackle healthcare. The Democrats, with the help of the press effectively put together a smear and fear campaign against being able to invest 2-3% of your SSI into the market effectively killing the proposal. Any bill passed by the Republican controlled House would have been effectively watered down or rendered garbage in the Senate. Other than 2003 when Republicans had 55 votes in the Senate, from 2001 to 2007 they had never had more than 51 votes. The Dems would have filibustered to death any kind of tort reform---big law firms constitute much of their political contributions. I am so happy someone remembers the SSI insolvancy debacle. Truth is though the Bush administration didn't see a health care crisis because there wasn''t one. At no time has there been a public outcry for universal healthcare. I don't remember the millions of protesters marching on DC to secure health coverage. But then again, I don't remember hugh swaths of the 1980s either. Universal Healthcare has always been a pipedream for the "progressives" and they saw this last election as a mandate for their political ideoligy (even though they ran it as a condemnation of the previous administration). With a complicite press, they created a crisis and, to quote Mrs Pelosi " never let a good crisis go to waste".

I think the Democrats hurt the Democrats the most. They're inept. They've had a majority forever and they've done nothing with it. They're stagnant and people are just disgusted with it. Kind of depends if your looking at an a## wuppin in the mid terms as political armageddon for the party. I think the DNC is banking on the long term effect. More entitlement programs and more government control has always served the perposes of the "progressive" agenda. I really think they belive that once their foot is in the door, so to speak, it will be impossible to undo this mess before the public is distracted by whatever issue du jour comes along. Ultimately, the more entrenched the program becomes, the more impossible it is to remove it (IE imagine trying to do away with Social Security or Medicare, both programs that did not exist 80 years ago).

I don't know about that cf, the SC seems to be all over the place on CC empowerment they struck down an act of Congress seeking to create federal gun-free zones in 1995 and another allowing federal civil lawsuits under the Violence Against Women Act in 2000 saying the commerce clause is limited to economic activities that substantially affect interstate trade in goods and services but in 2005, the Supreme Court also handed down a decision that commerce clause powers are broad enough to support federal regulation of home-grown medical marijuana in California. Kind of seems like they make it up as they go along but I can't see how mandateing me to have a specific insurance policy fits these critia least the regulation creats an unfair competitive advantage to one states' commercial interests over another which I think gets us into a whole nuther constitutional issue altogether. But hey, what do I know?

Well, sounds like we got us a deal. This whole GM thing sure isn't as hard as everyone makes it out to be.

Dude, what about NO MORE PUBLIC INPUT don't you get. Stop inputting already. Do you really think the administration gives a s*#t what you think. If the prez wants you to have an opion, he will give it to you dammit.

Geez, I would love to see my Rams pick up a couple of good OLBs or a solid corner in free agency but the pickings seem very scarce. 7 draft picks, 1 aj freely and 1 Fred Robbins isn't enough to fix this mess.

I think this would be a good trade for all parties, the Lambs just can't seem to use Adam to what would seem to be his potential, and Carter is no fan of the skins (Haynesworth doesn't seem to happy there either). Carriker would probably do very well in the 3-4.

IMO the problem isn't one of sending aid overseas of spending it on our own indigent. To me the old adage "feed a man a fish and he eats today, teach a man to fish and he eats forever" applies. We as a nation can best help our poor by incentivizeing domestic industry. On this topic people like to talk about education, like everyone needs to be an engineer, lawyer, or doctor. The truth is, we still need ditch diggers and shoe makers and most of the homeless in this country are a lot better qualified for a prodution/service job than for a corporate management position. Problem is, if we subsidize industries to offset a high cost of living in the US, then are our global markets close up to us as they would do the same. No simple solution presents itself, but I think we could make a good start by changing our tax structure (perhaps a VAT), controlling life needs costs (health care, food, houseing) and directing a cultural shift away from the worship of wealth and back to pride in hard work that was so common just 1-2 generations ago. Oh, and shoot all the politicians and lawyers (J/k ..... kind of).

Hard to say. Both are at the point in their careers that thier best years are behind them, but they still command big money. Tough situation for the player and the team he goes to (see Ahman Green to Houston). That said, I think alot of teams could benefit from verern leardership and change of pace guys, I know my rams could certainly use more healthly backs to spell Jackson, but do you really pay top dollar for that and would these guys' egos allow them to play second fiddle. Frankly, I'm more interested in what becomes of a guy like Sproles, who's versatilty allows a team to use him in so many more ways.

Actually, early talk was that Tampa would give picks from 1-2-3 and josh johnson. That seemed a litte crazy but it was certain they wanted to trade at least 2 out of 3

I suspect the numbers will be hard to pin down this year, obviouly the staff feels it needs OL and the RB and WR positions need to add quality depth, but I'm seeing alot of bodies at every position on the D that could contribute this year and beyond. I would be suprised if the Brothers Pelini don't hold out for guys that very specifically fit their philosiphy regardless of positional need.

I can only speak for myself, I give to the combined fed agency fund every paycheck and devide it between the Open door mission in Omaha and the Christian Childrens Fund (international aid). I like the idea of helping locally but I also understand that that Ndugu didn't ask to be born into s##t either. Also, my money probably goes alot further overseas given that $50 is like a fortune in sub saharan Africa.

SUH IS MINE. STAY AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Think of the cubs and the poor widow.

LA/ St Louis Rams, loved them since the Farigamo and Heavan Can Wait days. I have suffered bitterly as a result.

look Bill Devaney, you'd better not screw this up, or else!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 So far as QB, there's no sure thing in this draft, fix it in the 2nd or 3rd ( Lefever comes to mind) or trade for a vetern, but do not screw up this #1 pick with anything but the surest bet.

If I had to pickk from the above, I would go with center right conservative. Truth be told, I'm a classic federalist. Really, I'm very much into decentralization. I firmly believe that the closer power is to the people, the more accountable those in power must be. IE, I can walk down the street and knock on the door of my city councilman or even state senators house. Try that with your congressman. It's a whole lot harder to dodge your constituants when you eat at the same restaurants, your kids attend the same schools, and you live on the same block. Therefore, I assert that to solve a great many problems with government we simply need to make more decisions at the local level rather than at the federal level. (Gosh, if only the founding fathers had thought of this).

Dude, you are a genius.