obfuscator

Yeah, it's a mental addiction, not a biological one. From personal experience it can still be pretty harmful.

Let's see. I think Van and SJ both take the next games though.

Look of innocence I suppose. Depends how old you are...if you're older than like....18/19, it's weird.

Might well have if it wasn't for that second goal. I expect them to take game 6 at any rate.

I can't believe they're still making FF movies...

Today I am at work. After work I will once again watch playoff hockey.

You just stopped the country progressing into the 21st Century. We are now stuck with our old fashioned broken system. Old fashioned broken system that's worked fine for centuries. But it doesn't work. The basis of what it is intended to do, which is give people the opportunity to have their voice heard for who they want to run the country/their area is not what happens. = broken. We have it in here, and it's never resulting in a government being elected that shouldn't have. Everyone has the ability to vote for whatever candidate they feel best represents them.

You just stopped the country progressing into the 21st Century. We are now stuck with our old fashioned broken system. Old fashioned broken system that's worked fine for centuries.

I'm sure she realises that she has no hope of beating Obama, assuming she even manages to become the Republican Nominee (which I can't see happening). Palin isn't terribly bright, but people don't give her enough credit; she's been milking this whole ordeal for all it's worth, and has made plenty of money in the process. Of course, it probably hasn't been too difficult for her considering how her Tea Party constituents just lap up everything she says. :mellow: I suspect that she was never really interested in the Presidency in the first place, to be honest. It's not quite on-topic, but I doubt that any Republican candidate has a realistic shot at taking on Obama. With the rifts in the GOP and clowns like Trump grabbing all of the attention, they're practically defeating themselves. :unsure: I was just wondering if there was any official announcement. It depends who the republican candidate is. If it's a TP'er, then no, I think they don't stand a chance. They need someone more moderate, but diplomatic enough to bring the TP voters into the fold.

He is libertarian, essentially what that means is agree with the tea party movement on economic issues but with liberals on social issues (I dont follow him personally to see how true this is for him but it should be fairly accurate) Interesting. Everything I've seen from him so far (mostly foreign policy) I thought was pretty good. But me, not american anyway. But do we know why Sarah Palin wasn't participating? Has she decided not to run?

No Sarah Palin? I do like Ron Paul actually, although I'm not too familiar with some of his policies.

Basically agreed. I didn't think Neuvirth was all that bad though, and yeah TB is beasting for sure. I wonder if Semin/Backstrom are on the chopping block though... I've always thought howard was bad, that's why I picked Phx over det first round... Haha yeah I have an account there. You might enjoy this post (about John Tavares' ethnicity): http://hfboards.ca/showpost.php?p=21082266&postcount=23

LOL Washington. Bruce Boudreau firing countdown, anyone?

Alex Jones with a wild conspiracy theory? Forgive me if I'm not surprised, the man is loopy. First thing I thought when I saw that face.

Spice it up a little. Or should I say: Attempt to insert the occasional supplementary pronoun, adverb or adjective in order to possibly increase the word count by a small margin.

Epic fail by Washington. Ovi is working hard but Semin and Backstrom are floating out to sea....

Joke quote but sums it up pretty nicely. I realize my life is freaking perfect compared to 99% of the world and get over myself.

The conservative party does not accurately represent the feelings of Canadians when they got 40% of the vote. I would rather see a NDP/Lib merger than this. Which the liberal party already declared they would not do as they do not share the majority of the NDP's policies. In a perfect world. I can dream. Yes, and you can also dream about a supposed "democratic" two party system.

The conservative party does not accurately represent the feelings of Canadians when they got 40% of the vote. I would rather see a NDP/Lib merger than this. Which the liberal party already declared they would not do as they do not share the majority of the NDP's policies.

And also moderate conservatives voting for the conservatives instead of the NDP. It's stupid to assume that every liberal would vote for the NDP rather then the Conservatives; if this had in fact been the case the conservatives would still have a minority. People aren't going to switch from one party to one that is quite different than the other (NDP/Lib -> Con instead of NDP/Lib). Why don't we just get a two party system if we aren't going to have voter reform? Pretty clear that the cons shouldn't have a majority If you honestly think that the liberals are closer to the NDP then they are the Conservatives then you clearly need to study their policies much more. Why don't we just get a two party system? Great idea, I wonder why it hasn't happened yet? Because two parties don't accurately represent the feelings of Canadians. That's the reason the NDP exists. It's not like the moderate liberal vote is split between two parties. The two parties are completely different and have largely different followers. Once again, it's worked against the cons in the past (when the conservative vote was between the reform and the canadian alliance) I don't remember hearing these complaints then. EDIT: I also like the fact that we aren't restricted to two parties as it gives the fringe the opportunity to actually make some noise. If I want to start a party and run I can at basically the drop of a hat. No such luck in a two party system.

And also moderate conservatives voting for the conservatives instead of the NDP. It's stupid to assume that every liberal would vote for the NDP rather then the Conservatives; if this had in fact been the case the conservatives would still have a minority.

That stuff always makes me laugh. If people voted for one liberal party, the conservatives wouldn't have won. They were completely free to, but their values were specific enough that it merits having two liberal parties. I don't recall many complaints about unfair voting when the Conservative vote was split between the reform and the Canadian alliance... Something that wasn't mentioned is that part of the reason for the conservative success in ontario was a large number of liberals voting conservative in order to prevent an NDP government. I also find it odd that those "chilling words" are from 2005.

People assume that these two parties could viably be one party and they'd get all the votes. In fact, they're two different policies for a reason. The conservative and liberal parties are actually much closer from a policy perspective than the liberals and the NDP. Of course he's spending money. Every government has to spend money at some point, but he's got a much more reasonable fiscal long term policy that will keep the defecit minimal and eliminate it completely within a few years, all without raising taxes. No such luck from the liberals or NDP. I don't agree with a lot of what harper does, but I remain unconvinced that there is any party better.

Yes, the fact that quebec elected a non-french speaking woman who spent the campaign in vegas proves that, as well as the scores of people who voted for the NDP. It's one thing to think the NDP have some good policies, another completely to think they can actually form a government with the knowledge and experience it takes to run a country. Healthcare is practically untouchable. If serious cuts are made in any form, the backlash will be enormous. Judges can't be appointed until the positions become available, just like the senate. Harper tried to change both things(to make them elected) but guess who blocked him? That's right, the liberals and NDP. The liberals even had the audacity to claim he'd broken a campaign promise by appointing senate members when it was their party forcing him to do so. Harper isn't functionally above the law at all. You forget that in order for any laws to pass, he must have the majority of the vote. Sure, he can compel his party to vote with him, under threat of being kicked from caucus....but wait: that wouldn't help him much seeing as he barely has a majority at all.

Uhh good luck with that.