SarasotaSabre

love the Nordiques logo in your profile - !

that was a great cycling, grinding 4th line goal; check out Deslauriers fending off his man and passing the puck with one arm to Cal - impressive all the way around

"Eichel could not get away"..... no RJ, that's not what happened - at all. His catch all phrases wear me out.

anyone have any inkling as to Gronk's affinity for his hometown? Somehow I have gotten the feeling that Buffalo (the city & area) is not that big of a deal for him....though I could be wrong

should be captain now

don't think it's a database error, as the game score is an isolated piece of data. Whatever it was, it was FUBAR.

and it shows McCabe with an unassisted goal. Nice work ESPN. Too busy pleasuring themselves with the Heisman

ESPN with an epic fail http://espn.go.com/nhl/boxscore?gameId=400815300

great thing ROR won it with that slick move/shot, because I was not at all shocked to see Gionta miss the net by at least 5 feet on a breakaway. He needs to be put out to pasture; I really wish someone had the stones to pull the plug on him. A captain who is hurting the team - not good.

we all love RJ as a homer announcer, but his go-to phrases "can't get away" or "almost got away" is so maddeningly absent of any real context or description. It's even worse while listening to a game on the radio; there is absolutely no descriptive value with these lazy phrases.

according to the current replay rules they got the call right w/ Gio being offsides. But the way this replay rule has been written & implemented is hurting the game. That was a sick pass and great finish, and the offside did not give Buffalo a material advantage on the play. If the NHL wants to keep worrying about decreasing goals per game and fan discontent as a major sport, the NHL needs to revisit and sh*tcan this replay crap in its current format.

RJ just called RR "Risto Ristolainen" ...... :w00t:

I am legitimately curious about your opinion of DB; are his decisions merely of the line combination variety, or are you referring to others ?

thanks - end of a long week of travel, good to be home

thanks Drunkard, good stuff .... I would consider myself a "utilitarian Christian", i.e., live according the Golden Rule. I certainly don't subscribe to every hard-line position the GOP takes akin to incorporating contradictory Christian tenets into their politics & messaging.

I appreciate your well-reasoned and logical response. This is good back and forth stuff w/out any of the personal animus that seems to sometimes come into play on this Board. I do agree there are inconsistencies and contrarian positions put forth by the GOP, and if they do not unite what is currently fractured, they will lose the chance at the WH. They absolutely need to be more incusive and it remains to be seen if they can. I do take exception to your position of "your personal Lord & savior...."; was this directed at me?

you started the partisan phraseology nonsense. It's better now? OK keep smoking whatever it is you have. I am a very happy person. Almost lost my life in Buffalo on 12/28/97 so I am forever grateful and always hopeful and optimistic. But go on and call me miserable. I get it; we're from opposite ends of the political spectrum so we won't agree on much. So I won't waste another minute of my day on this crap with you. Have a great Friday - and I do mean that

OK thanks for the garbage comment. No my memory is very sound, thank you very much. I am well aware of the debt/deficit accrued during Bush's presidency. Funny how you call my armageddon comment "hyperbolic garbage" but you then proceed to use it yourself. Classic liberal knee-jerk response to blame Bush's failures on Obama. More blanket statement accusations. The federal debt has already grown more during Obama’s first six years than under all previous U.S. presidents combined, at least in nominal dollars with no adjustment for inflation. The debt owed to the public stands at about $13 trillion, an increase of 106 percent since Obama first took office. Total debt, counting money the government owes to itself, stands at $18.1 trillion, up 70 percent. http://www.factcheck.org/2015/01/obamas-numbers-january-2015-update/

impending is the word I intended to write; and ignore the economic calamity if you wish. Fair enough, but I equated "denial" to a failure in upholding his duties as President ; i.e., does he "firmly believe" we don't have an illegal immigration problem?

Hoss, I understand you don't know me from Adam and I'm being sincere here....but for you to lump me in with everyone who uses a certain word which you think connotes hatred and invalidates everything in your mind I wrote is just plain unfair. It's another example of blanket generalizations and assumptions made toward me based upon a particular hot button you can't seem to look beyond. Do I disagree with Obama? Yes, frequently. Do I hate him? NO. I could easily say this assertion by you invalidates everything else you wrote, but unlike you, I can look beyond this unfortunate assumption on your part. To even suggest I disagree & hate him b/c I used a certain phrase is almost absurd, with all due respect; and I do respect you as a fellow fan & poster. You seem like a very smart guy and valuable contributor and I am truly disappointed this discussion has gone so sideways over (in my mind) an unintended word. I think he is denying several things: the real threat of our border security & sovereignty, his predilection toward admitting higher risk refugees at a time when ISIS is planning on inflitrating our country by sabotaging the visa/refugee population, refusing to admit the root cause (by name) of extremist savagery done by a medieval interpretation of Islam (...and in so doing, for example, advancing the narrative of gun control as the main thrust of San Bernardino), minimizing our most urgent national concern by claiming the linkage of climate change, claiming mass shootings don't happen in other countries while attending said climate change conference in PARIS, FRANCE ( :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash: , denying the folly of the Iranian nuclear "deal", denying our fiscal insolvency while ignoring our impeding economic armageddon, denying and refusing to enforce & uphold the laws of the land (which is his top job requirement along with protecting the American citizenry, denying we have an illegal immigration problem (which conveniently creates a permanent Democratic voting bloc - what a coincidence)**, denial & abuse of his position as Chief Executive by acting through executive fiat/overreach, often without Congressional approval, & wrongfully exiting the Iraq War to claim a successful end to that war, creating a huge vacuum to be filled by ISIS. What you don't know about me is that I wanted the President to succeed but I can look at these failures pragmatically and not ideologically. I don't throw stones just because Obama is a Democrat. I critique his failures pragmatically (things which have not worked and made our country less safe and worse off. By the same token, I applaud him for trying to get something done with universal healthcare, but as a professional formerly in the healthcare IT space, numerous sectors of the healthcare industry have been decimated (including mine). So, in closing, I don't hate Obama, I'm not a right-wing flamethrower or committed ideologue; at the end of the day I'm just a very concerned citizen.

Rayzor called it. That save had to be made. Wonder if GMTM will explore a goalie if Lehner cannot return to form?

Ok, whatever you like Hoss. Potato, potatoe. My use of "this President" was not meant to be disparaging in any way. If anything I was using the word as a point of distinction, as in "this specific President". IMHO you are a bit hypersensitive, but to each his own. I have noticed on this board that certain feathers get Ruffled when President Obama (there, is that OK?) is not accorded the proper reverence on a team hockey board, for Heaven's sake. I could just as easily take issue with your description of "our current leader". Leader is not a description that comes to my mind when I hear the word used in conjunction with President Obama. You really have to ask what he is denying?

Not sure if this question belongs here or in the Presidential Politics thread - probably both: Why is it that President Obama chooses to visit certain communities where a local tragedy has occurred (i.e. Charleston SC) but not others (i.e. San Bernardino)? Could it be that tricky word - OPTICS ? Also found it amazing that Josh Earnest, when asked if Obama has any plans to visit SB, stated " it is not uncommon for the President to visit these communities touched so directly by an incident of gun violence." The narrative is so carefully crafted and obviously omits what this President is so consumed with denying.

So BOBIS throws out the Trump is President hand grenade and the lunacy begins..(unless this is Drunkard's attempt @ sarcasm, which I doubt) The BOBIS comment is ill-fated on this Board for sure. While Trump has tapped into an "angry American" narrative which throws PC out the window and trashes an incompetent, bloated Federal government, he is not Presidential and will not win the White House. That said, I did think overnight about Drunkard's post and would say it must be easy to compose a blanket stereotype within the confines of a very like-minded supermajority of users on this Board. I mean, really - I admire you for really going out on a limb, leaving your comfort zone, and demonstrating moral courage non pareil. Groupthink is shallow and does nothing to advance reasoned discourse and discussion of opposing viewpoints. I could throw out a blanket statement about everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party, and this administration specifically, but I don't want to - and I won't - because I don't believe in sheer partisanship and ad hominem bomb-throwing from a keyboard. If your post was a humorous attempt at sarcasm, then I stand corrected. Yours sincerely - "in true Republican fashion" BuffaninATL

how about a Jack hattie to spark a W to cap off a great Sunday .....?