Dr. Tyler; Captain America

Health and fumbles. If he does neither, he's a superstar.

Crosby barely plays on Lemieux's line ever, so he'll probably be fine without him. That being said, the Pens played wretched tonight without Lemieux, getting trapped to all fuck by Minnesota and getting blanked in the process of showing just about no effort on home ice. Crosby looked like the only guy with half a jump in his step. It was borderline pathetic.

Basically, it adds SATA connections through the PCI slot. It might not be quite as fast as SATA alone, but it's still better than IDE.

Ah, they'll always be the Bungles to me

Could also be the 512mb ram. That would explain a lot of the choppiness. Most games need about a gig to run smooth these days. The fact that the game runs, though, doesn't mean that it isn't the video card (odd how that works out, then?) causing the bugginess. I had the same problem in regard to Battlefield 2 when it first came out and didn't support my card.

Many discredited them after the loss to Chicago, but their defense is probably enough to take them pretty far. DeShaun Foster also showed people last week that he's good enough to provide a second option other than Steve Smith on offense, so it should be interesting to watch.

Dude, it's definitely your video card. 4000MX is a really old card and I doubt Civ 4 supports it. Even with 128MB, it's not really sufficient to run the game. You'll probably need at least a 6600GTX

I think the consensus that one should feel apathetic at best towards his non-favorite team(s) is correct. I dislike the Ravens and Browns, am apathetic towards the Bungles (who really cares about a team whose fans only come out to play when they have a winning record?), and don't care about any other team in the NFL generally (although, I'm a bit of a closet Carolina Panthers fan, partially because they're my fiance's favorite team and being a new football fan, it's imperative that her favorite team wins to continue my ability to watch football on Sundays).

Ahhh, I've never had problems with it. Of course, my computer is absurd.

I don't think I'd take Reed over Pola, even if I distance myself from homerism as much as possible. Reed's hype happened because in '03, he was a lucky motherfucker. At least half (if not all) of his pick sixes were off of tipped balls, which means he's in the right place at the right time -- perhaps that's an argument that he didn't get beat and that's skill, but on most of those pick sixes, he was playing deep half. Which means, basically, any serviceable safety that knows not to let anyone behind you could've made the picks. Without his "playmaking", he's marginal. He's an decent starter, but he's not nearly as explosive as advertised.

In other news, Ed Reed is completely and utterly overrated.

He's not constantly getting burned. He constantly makes big plays and, while he has lapses (like any third year player does) in his tackling form, he has been improving in coverage every week. He's also explosive in stopping the run and blitzing (less so in blitzing recently, but part of that is scheme). He was a big reason why the Steelers shut down Manning last week -- he's fast enough that he can fake the blitz and drop back into coverage while not getting beat. Most of the criticisms of Troy Pola are invalid due to the fact that LeBeau is trying to do too much with him. For example, some people say that he should've had deep half on the bomb to Harrison to start the game last week, but Pola doesn't choose when to blitz. This week, he helped Taylor shut down Chad Johnson again. The Bengal offense, if you watched the game, wasn't really THAT exceptional; they were given a short field most of the time. Pola didn't have his best game, but then again, he had at least 2 PD's and almost had an interception that would've tied the game at the 2 minute warning. It wasn't a bad throw, either; he simply read and reacted on a ball thrown to Johnson and used his incredible athleticism to actually get in front of Johnson after he had been beat on the underneath curl. He's only going to get better.

Feels like a long time. I consider '02 an abberation. Still, it's kind of pathetic that the O-line is THAT bad. I hope to God someone falls to about 15 in the draft that's worth taking. An offensive lineman of some sort, I mean.

Man, it's been a while since the Steelers haven't had much of a shot at the playoffs.

Ungh. The o-line is going to give me heartburn.

something something chickens something hatch.

Wow, hold on to the fucking ball.

The guys from the WWE folder.

He won't score. They'll give up 10 TDs to Houshbadmanzadadaheh, but they won't give one to Chad.

I'm listening to it.

For my above theory to work, by the way, you'd still have to have a very federal sort of system. The UN would have to show enormous restraint and allow cultural rules and laws to be determined by the individual states, but the UN would HAVE to be the be all and end all of economic and military matters. Otherwise, no one would agree to it. Yeah, and you'd probably need to demilitarize the entire world as a stipulation for joining, now that I think about it. Damn, now that's gonna be fun.

Well, then, I would do exactly that: make it a body that actually does, in fact, bind its members to its resolutions. I'd essentially make all of the world's leaders simply governors, so to speak, and allow the UN to unilaterally enforce environmental and labor factors to even the capitalistic playing field. If the regulations (minimum wage, environmental factors, taxes, etc.) are universal throughout the world, it would dramatically help the economies of, well, all countries. There would have to be a mechanism for resolving disputes either militarily or diplomatically, and it would have to be binding. Are there opportunities for tyranny in a world government? Absolutely, but then again, there are some great possibilities for economic expansion and improving the overall standard of life throughout the world. The thing is, unless the UN becomes something like this, it's useless (like it is now). The thing is, I'm sort of not sold on world government myself. But, in a perfect world, this is what would happen.

Rangers don't have one.

Can't be done unless countries are willing to give up some autonomy. An international body is pointless if it doesn't have power, and most -- if not all -- countries are entirely unwilling to submit to a higher world government-esque body. If countries are willing, a world government could, theoretically, be effective. But, it's not likely that it will happen any time soon, if ever.