Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

I started a new thread because I did not want this to get lost in the old thread. I just heard that the bottle tested negative for dope so what was in the bottle? I guess because of the circumstance around how this went down and how Vick reacted we thouht he was guilty. Allot of people on this site called him allot of things so its time to start eating a little crow.
I thought I should add link [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2738494]ESPN.com - NFL - Sources: Vick didn't have marijuana, won't face charges[/url]

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

I'm generally a Vick supporter, and I recognize that everyone makes mistakes. I couldn't care less if he was carrying pot, or if he smokes it -- it's his personal right. However, this still sounds fishy to me.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;271460]I'm generally a Vick supporter, and I recognize that everyone makes mistakes. I couldn't care less if he was carrying pot, or if he smokes it -- it's his personal right. However, this still sounds fishy to me.[/quote]

I agree with you 100%. But when you are the QB of an NFL team with a 100+ million dollar contract then you have certain responsibilities that you have to live up to. Vick is not the bad guy that everyone on this site made him out to be.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

Similar thing happened when Sean Taylor got in trouble in Miaimi. He was suddenly thug this and thug that. He comes clean, and every one suddenly shuts up.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

when this happenned they said it would take a couple weeks for the testing,now its done already? now they say it would be a couple of weeks before they decide whether or not to press charges,if he didnt have weed what are they going to charge him with? sounds very fishy

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

This is real fishy. Like htownskinfan said......it was supposed to take weeks to get the results, and all of a sudden he's free of charges? Very fishy indeed.

On another note, this weekend I was thinking about who would trade for Vick? Of course the first team that popped in my head was the Raiders. I go to foxsports.com and I see this....

[QUOTE]"The Oakland Raiders are preparing to make a run at Falcons QB Michael Vick, according to NFL sources. The Raiders package would include receivers Randy Moss and Jerry Porter plus the No.1 overall pick in the 2007 draft for Vick and the Falcons first round pick (10th overall)."[/QUOTE]

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;271460]I'm generally a Vick supporter, and I recognize that everyone makes mistakes. I couldn't care less if he was carrying pot, or if he smokes it -- it's his personal right. However, this still sounds fishy to me.[/quote]

Yea, personally i don't care if someone chooses to smoke or not, however... Vick is and has been the "face" of the franchise and is held in higher regard. I don't think the Falcons would be to keen on the idea of their leader as a "pothead."

IMO, if you are a veteran NFL qb, you probably should put the pipe down. You are getting paid millions of $ to do what you do.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=GhettoDogAllStars;271460]I'm generally a Vick supporter, and I recognize that everyone makes mistakes. I couldn't care less if he was carrying pot, or if he smokes it -- it's his personal right. However, this still sounds fishy to me.[/QUOTE]

It's not his personal right to carry pot, or to smoke it. In almost every situation, it's against the law - although a claim of glaucoma [U]would[/U] explain some passing accuracy questions I have.

The point isn't that the criminalization of marijuana use or possession is wrong. I'm pretty sure there is a consensus on this website that casual users of weed shouldn't be jailed. However, since it is illegal, understand that irresponsible use of marijuana - and carrying a secret compartment that has an odor of pot through the only place in the country where you are guaranteed a pat-down search is wildly irresponsible - is about as foolish as you can get without liquor and a chainsaw.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=Redskins_P;271470]This is real fishy. Like htownskinfan said......it was supposed to take weeks to get the results, and all of a sudden he's free of charges? Very fishy indeed.

On another note, this weekend I was thinking about who would trade for Vick? Of course the first team that popped in my head was the Raiders. I go to foxsports.com and I see this....[/QUOTE]

yeah Vick would just love that. Atlanta finally gets receivers...but they trade Vick for it

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

OJ Simpson is innocent too - - right? That's what the law says so it has to be so.

There is a real difference between what someone does and what a prosecutor can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in court - - particularly if that someone had a boatload of cash and can get expensively lawyered up.

If - I said IF - Michael Vick or any other well known sports star or celebrity has a water bottle with a fake compartment in his/her possession and tries to sneak it onto an aircraft in 2007, then that person is a moron.

Not a thug; not a criminal; not a sociopath. But a M-O-R-O-N.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=BrudLee;271473]It's not his personal right to carry pot, or to smoke it. In almost every situation, it's against the law - although a claim of glaucoma [U]would[/U] explain some passing accuracy questions I have.

The point isn't that the criminalization of marijuana use or possession is wrong. I'm pretty sure there is a consensus on this website that casual users of weed shouldn't be jailed. However, since it is illegal, understand that irresponsible use of marijuana - and carrying a secret compartment that has an odor of pot through the only place in the country where you are guaranteed a pat-down search is wildly irresponsible - is about as foolish as you can get without liquor and a chainsaw.[/QUOTE]

It's certainly irresponsible. It's certainly against the law. However, I don't believe that ANYONE has a right to tell another person what they can or can't do to their own body.

It is irresponsible for many people to have children. If they made a law against it, would that mean it is not their right to have children? I'm talking about human rights -- those that are inalienable. I believe using drugs is an inalienable personal right.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;271524]It's certainly irresponsible. It's certainly against the law. However, I don't believe that ANYONE has a right to tell another person what they can or can't do to their own body.

It is irresponsible for many people to have children. If they made a law against it, would that mean it is not their right to have children? I'm talking about human rights -- those that are inalienable. I believe using drugs is an inalienable personal right.[/quote]
Thats OK with me but then when ones addicted, poor health, no job just don't ask the goverment to support these people with my tax dollars. OK, no more politics. What I don't understand is that you get resdue (spelling) from a pipe which was used for smoking not from a container which is thought to hold the weed before smoking.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;271529]Thats OK with me but then when ones addicted, poor health, no job just don't ask the goverment to support these people with my tax dollars. OK, no more politics. What I don't understand is that you get resdue (spelling) from a pipe which was used for smoking not from a container which is thought to hold the weed before smoking.[/QUOTE]

I totally agree. You might be able to see that I support less gov't -- not more. Hence the stance on personal freedoms. Well, that attitude applies to nearly every facet of gov't -- not just drug use, or the ones that are convenient for me.

BTW, a residue could be a concentrated form of THC -- like hashish.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;271498]OJ Simpson is innocent too - - right? That's what the law says so it has to be so.

There is a real difference between what someone does and what a prosecutor can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in court - - particularly if that someone had a boatload of cash and can get expensively lawyered up.

If - I said IF - Michael Vick or any other well known sports star or celebrity has a water bottle with a fake compartment in his/her possession and tries to sneak it onto an aircraft in 2007, then that person is a moron.

Not a thug; not a criminal; not a sociopath. But a M-O-R-O-N.[/QUOTE]

What's worse? Moron or meathead?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;271498]OJ Simpson is innocent too - - right? That's what the law says so it has to be so.

There is a real difference between what someone does and what a prosecutor can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in court - - particularly if that someone had a boatload of cash and can get expensively lawyered up.

If - I said IF - Michael Vick or any other well known sports star or celebrity has a water bottle with a fake compartment in his/her possession and tries to sneak it onto an aircraft in 2007, then that person is a moron.

Not a thug; not a criminal; not a sociopath. But a M-O-R-O-N.[/quote]I agree it was stupid what he did but how many regular flights has Vick been on over the past couple of years? I'm sure most of his travel is either private planes or flying with the team so he may not have known that a water bottle was a no go. I think that law is fairly new in the past 12 months when that group was caught plotting to make those liquid bombs this year (2006).

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

will this put vick on any type of nfl watch list for drugs?why the hell would he want to do something like take a bottle with a hidden compartment on an airplane anyhow?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=Redskinhog1963;271600]why the hell would he want to do something like take a bottle with a hidden compartment on an airplane anyhow?[/QUOTE]

In my mind, that fact pretty much proves Vick's guilt. There is no reason you'd take that kind of device on a plane, unless you are trying to deceive the security personnel.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;271602]In my mind, that fact pretty much proves Vick's guilt. There is no reason you'd take that kind of device on a plane, unless you are trying to deceive the security personnel.[/quote]


since that part of the bottle did'nt contain anything,he must have been so stoned,he forgot he took/smoked it all then.he would'nt be the first guy to do that,but he may be the richest!

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

I Really could careless..What those player's do in the off season or there offtime.... they aren't true role models... parents, teachers, and Police are...

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

TAFKAS:

Moron means the person being described as such is stupid. And here's The Curmudgeon's Law:


There is NO cure for stupid!


Meathead may involve stupidity in which case it too would be incurable. HOwever, Meathead MIGHT involve being a person with some basic intellect who is currently psychologically incapable of behaving in a socially acceptable way. In THAT case, Meatheadedness MIGHT be curable.

So, if I had to make a distinction here - and it would be a fine one at the very best - I'd say "Meathead" is ever so minimally better than "Moron".

Aren't you glad you asked... ?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

I just feel so fortunate to be involved in the Warpath community where the court of public opinion rules. Who cares about the truth when innuendo and people a few hundred miles away know exactly what happened in an airport in Miami.

By the way, I know that no one in this community would drink before during and after a football game and then drive because that is only a thousand times worse than what Vick was convicted of on this website.

By the way, I hate to bring truth into the forum but on a nationally syndicated radio show (nothing that carries as much credibility as a website where people shoot the sh!t all day long) the host explained what happened with Taylor last year. Essentially he whipped out an AK-47 and emptied the magazine. Now, do I care that Taylor did that? No, there are legal loopholes and he has just as much a right to them as anyone else. As long as he is K.O.ing our opponents than he is alright in my book.

The things that I read about Vick in this thread and the other one are an embarrassment.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;271498]OJ Simpson is innocent too - - right? That's what the law says so it has to be so.

There is a real difference between what someone does and what a prosecutor can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in court - - particularly if that someone had a boatload of cash and can get expensively lawyered up.

If - I said IF - Michael Vick or any other well known sports star or celebrity has a water bottle with a fake compartment in his/her possession and tries to sneak it onto an aircraft in 2007, then that person is a moron.

Not a thug; not a criminal; not a sociopath. But a M-O-R-O-N.[/quote]

Did you really compare Michael Vick to OJ Simpson?

How is the new gunrack coming out? Does it get in the way of the stars and bars?

You calling Vick a moron, now that is funny. Terry Schiavo had more brain activity than you.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

Man he is a Hokie and until he is proven guilty hes innocent and definetly enjoy mike do his thing on the field

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

this was on profootballtalk.com,sounds fishy to them also,and click on the link at the end to the snl skit,pretty frickin funny,wait,that link wont work from here,go to their site to click on link or try this link
[url=http://video.nbc.com/player.html?dlid=57254]Video Player[/url]

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm]ProFootballTalk.com -- The Best Pro Football Scoop on the Internet[/url]
POSTED 7:14 a.m. EST; UPDATED 7:57 a.m. EST, January 22, 2007

SOMETHING SMELLS ABOUT VICK "EXONERATION"

We were shocked, but not surprised, by Chris Mortensen's report that Michael Vick will be exonerated for the incident involving a water bottle with a secret compartment and a pungent smell and a small brown particle that most likely wasn't a booger.

Vick, who did not publicly proclaim his innocence, likely (in our opinion) purchased a high-priced lawyer who pressured the powers-that-be in Miami into dropping the matter. The tactics likely (in our opinion) included a passionate plea regarding the difficulty of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the bottle fished out of a recycling been by a TSA worker was the same bottle Vick had tossed in there, and maybe a thinly-veiled threat or two that the lawyer would start suing people into the Stone Age if the matter didn't go away quickly.

And that's where the report isn't completely clear. Was the contention that the bottle with a secret compartment didn't belong to Vick, or was it that the bottle with the secret compartment was Vick's, but that it didn't have any marijuana in it?

If it's the latter, it hardly means that Vick is clean. Why would he even own a water bottle with a secret compartment if he wasn't going to stick stuff in it that he shouldn't have in the first place?

And if it was Vick's bottle, look for Vick to still be in hot water with the Falcons.

Meanwhile, check out this hilarious segment from Saturday Night Live regarding the Vick ordeal. It's not quite "D--k In A Box" material, but it's funny nonetheless.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;271724]Did you really compare Michael Vick to OJ Simpson?

How is the new gunrack coming out? Does it get in the way of the stars and bars?

You calling Vick a moron, now that is funny. Terry Schiavo had more brain activity than you.[/QUOTE]

Haha. It sounds like you already have your mind made up about people too. I guess you're not too different from the people you describe. You fit right in!

I have some questions for you:

1. How do you justify attempting to take a device used for smuggling onto an airplane -- regardless of what is or isn't inside?

2. Vick insulted his fans in the worst way possible by giving them the finger, and telling them to "f*ck off". He also tried to deceive the airport security. Now, somebody calls him a moron for that, and you say he's wrong in doing so. However, you call him brain-dead for posting an opinion and that is better? What is your reasoning?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;271723]I just feel so fortunate to be involved in the Warpath community where the court of public opinion rules. Who cares about the truth when innuendo and people a few hundred miles away know exactly what happened in an airport in Miami.

By the way, I know that no one in this community would drink before during and after a football game and then drive because that is only a thousand times worse than what Vick was convicted of on this website.

By the way, I hate to bring truth into the forum but on a nationally syndicated radio show (nothing that carries as much credibility as a website where people shoot the sh!t all day long) the host explained what happened with Taylor last year. Essentially he whipped out an AK-47 and emptied the magazine. Now, do I care that Taylor did that? No, there are legal loopholes and he has just as much a right to them as anyone else. As long as he is K.O.ing our opponents than he is alright in my book.

The things that I read about Vick in this thread and the other one are an embarrassment.[/QUOTE]

See what I can't understand is this. Why lambast people here on a message board for having opinions (whether you agree with them or not) and still stay here? How often, as Ghetto pointed out, have you insulted people here that you know nothing about? Yet that's ok?

I'll wait for your "Smarten Up" response

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

what a dummy. It amazes me how having money makes some people even more stupid. He must have been visiting marcus, and got so baked:Smoker: he thought he was going to wal-mart and ended up at the airport.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=TAFKAS;271732]See what I can't understand is this. Why lambast people here on a message board for having opinions (whether you agree with them or not) and still stay here? How often, as Ghetto pointed out, have you insulted people here that you know nothing about? Yet that's ok?

I'll wait for your "Smarten Up" response[/quote]

Comparing O.J. to Vick is not an opinion, it is ignorance. I come here to talk about football not to listen to someone who did nothing wrong get compared to O.J. Simpson (which wasn't the only ignorant comment about Vick in these threads).

Obviously you are in your element here, Tafkas, since I bother you more than insensitive posts do. And, don't try to say that there was any humor in his posts since virtually all of them had a common theme.

To ask someone to Smarten' up would assume that is was an option.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;271728]Haha. It sounds like you already have your mind made up about people too. I guess you're not too different from the people you describe. You fit right in!

I have some questions for you:

1. How do you justify attempting to take a device used for smuggling onto an airplane -- regardless of what is or isn't inside?

2. Vick insulted his fans in the worst way possible by giving them the finger, and telling them to "f*ck off". He also tried to deceive the airport security. Now, somebody calls him a moron for that, and you say he's wrong in doing so. However, you call him brain-dead for posting an opinion and that is better? What is your reasoning?[/quote]

You don't have to make up your mind to see his point of view it is obvious.

1. Maybe he likes novelties, how am I supposed to know what he was thinking at the time. I wasn't there (and neither was anyone on this site).

2. That is your opinion whether it was the worst insult possible. I can think of a lot worse. Also, what if he intended to insult only a small group? I don't think he was giving the entire city of Atlanta the finger with that gesture.

Maybe you are right about him being able to call Vick a moron "birds of a feather...."

Was there a lot of thought in Vick trying to pull one over on them, probably not, but that type of thing happens at Airport security hundreds of times a day. Why is he being mentioned in the same sentence as O.j.?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

Of course he is completely innocent. MV was heard to tell the gate security guard "SEE!!!! the bloody glove is to small to fit me".
Who among us can honestly say they don't have a half case of two sided concealed compartment water bottles for completely upstanding reasons laying around the house?
Get a grip! looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a?????????????

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=Grim21Reaper;271789]Comparing O.J. to Vick is not an opinion, it is ignorance. I come here to talk about football not to listen to someone who did nothing wrong get compared to O.J. Simpson (which wasn't the only ignorant comment about Vick in these threads).[/QUOTE]

Did you forget that OJ was found not guilty, even after he was basically convicted in the court of public opinion? How is that different from Vick in this situation?

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;271789]Comparing O.J. to Vick is not an opinion, it is ignorance. I come here to talk about football not to listen to someone who did nothing wrong get compared to O.J. Simpson (which wasn't the only ignorant comment about Vick in these threads).

[/quote]

Obviously in your mind this forum does not talk about football properly. The main question is why do you keep coming here if it bothers you so much? Go to some other site, I am sure you will not be missed. Basically you just come on this site to find someones opinion that you feel you can bash, and somehow you derive utility out of that. It's not even like you are correcting peoples views in a positive manner.

And you aren't a Mod either so....
[IMG]http://www.outbreakhc.com/merch/enlarged/t-shirt.no.one.cares.white.back.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=BrudLee;271473]It's not his personal right to carry pot, or to smoke it. In almost every situation, it's against the law - although a claim of glaucoma [U]would[/U] explain some passing accuracy questions I have.

The point isn't that the criminalization of marijuana use or possession is wrong. I'm pretty sure there is a consensus on this website that casual users of weed shouldn't be jailed. However, since it is illegal, understand that irresponsible use of marijuana - and carrying a secret compartment that has an odor of pot through the only place in the country where you are guaranteed a pat-down search is wildly irresponsible - is about as foolish as you can get without liquor and a chainsaw.[/quote]

I don't smoke weed anymore. Have not done it since college in 92. Vick is a DUMBASS if he's getting on a plane with weed. But if he does it behind closed doors I don't give a damn. Athletes and the general public do things that are against the law everyday. When is the day going to come when the public stops holding athletes to a higher standard?

It's against the law to run a stop sign. It's against the law to use steriods. Just because it's against the law doesn't mean people are going to obey the law. What's the difference between drinking two vodka and cranberries and taking a few hits off a joint? There is no difference. It's just one is legal and one isn't even though both give you the same effect. Some of the laws in this country are stupid as shit IMO. But laws are laws.

A few years ago I saw Charles Woodson in a bar in DC smoking a cig. I thought, 'How could this guy smoke playing football?' The bottom line is these guys do things in everyday life that we do. The only difference is they are athletes and we are everyday working people.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;271798]Did you forget that OJ was found not guilty, even after he was basically convicted in the court of public opinion? How is that different from Vick in this situation?[/quote]

The difference is the crime. OJ sliced off two peoples heads.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=skinsfan69;271976]A few years ago I saw Charles Woodson in a bar in DC smoking a cig. I thought, 'How could this guy smoke playing football?' The bottom line is these guys do things in everyday life that we do. The only difference is they are athletes and we are everyday working people.[/quote]

When I was a kid and a big Mets fan it used to amaze me that Keith Hernandez would duck into the tunnel and smoke butts. But then again it is baseball we're talking about. We're talking about a "sport" where they pop kegs in the locker room.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=skinsfan69;271977]The difference is the crime. OJ sliced off two peoples heads.[/QUOTE]

My point, and I think sportscurmudgeon's, was that OJ was found not guilty and so was Vick (in a way). Grim was saying that you can't compare the two because OJ probably killed two people whereas Vick [B]didn't[/B] acutally have pot on him, but of course you can. All the evidence seems to imply that they both committed a crime of some sort but they both ended up getting out of it. So Grim seems to think that OJ got away with doing something illegal while Vick never did anything illegal, so he's not contradicting himself.

I'm not trying to compare their crimes in the least, especially since I think pot should be decriminalized. I just have a problem with his arguement.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;271498]OJ Simpson is innocent too - - right? That's what the law says so it has to be so.

There is a real difference between what someone does and what a prosecutor can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in court - - particularly if that someone had a boatload of cash and can get expensively lawyered up.

If - I said IF - Michael Vick or any other well known sports star or celebrity has a water bottle with a fake compartment in his/her possession and tries to sneak it onto an aircraft in 2007, then that person is a moron.

Not a thug; not a criminal; not a sociopath. But a M-O-R-O-N.[/QUOTE]

This is such a great post. I haven't said it yet, so I will now... It's nice to have you back, S.C.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=hooskins;271936]Obviously in your mind this forum does not talk about football properly. The main question is why do you keep coming here if it bothers you so much? Go to some other site, I am sure you will not be missed. Basically you just come on this site to find someones opinion that you feel you can bash, and somehow you derive utility out of that. It's not even like you are correcting peoples views in a positive manner.

And you aren't a Mod either so....

Hooskins, how did you know that my goal was to be a mod on the Warpath?

Which picks up more chicks for you, the "No one likes you" T-shirt or your UVA 3 time NCAA field hockey and cross country champion T-s? Btw soccer players are still biaaaaatches except for that billy goat who played for France.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;272026][quote=hooskins;271936]Obviously in your mind this forum does not talk about football properly. The main question is why do you keep coming here if it bothers you so much? Go to some other site, I am sure you will not be missed. Basically you just come on this site to find someones opinion that you feel you can bash, and somehow you derive utility out of that. It's not even like you are correcting peoples views in a positive manner.

And you aren't a Mod either so....

Hooskins, how did you know that my goal was to be a mod on the Warpath?

Which picks up more chicks for you, the "No one likes you" T-shirt or your UVA 3 time NCAA field hockey and cross country champion T-s? Btw soccer players are still biaaaaatches except for that billy goat who played for France.[/quote]

Ok...
First of all, that isn't me or my shirt. And now you are just bringing up stuff that isnt relevant to the argument.

You still have not answered why you continue to post at this site if it bothers you so much. I personally think it is because you like to berate people and it satisfies you more than actually having a rational debate. Prove me wrong.

EDIT: You can continue with your ignorant insults, but sadly I must go do others things which are more important.

Re: Vick's Bottle Tested Negative
 

[quote=hooskins;272027][quote=Grim21Reaper;272026]

Ok...
First of all, that isn't me or my shirt. And now you are just bringing up stuff that isnt relevant to the argument.

You still have not answered why you continue to post at this site if it bothers you so much. I personally think it is because you like to berate people and it satisfies you more than actually having a rational debate. Prove me wrong.

EDIT: You can continue with your ignorant insults, but sadly I must go do others things which are more important.[/quote]

Lacrosse?

Generally, I enjoy the site. I makes me feel better that so many others are suffering with me every Sunday. However, when I see a thread which feeds off of ignorance and stereotypes, I am going to say something. If you don't believe me take a look at the body of both threads related to this topic.