...

In the near future, we can make sure all subjects of the new king are ideal, we'll do testing to make sure there are no inferior humans born in this kingdom. We have the technology, and we'll lack the moral fortitude to care and the intellectual strength to question it, so long as the state is not burdened with "defective" people.

This "make it on your own" business, freedom and all of that, it's for crazy romantics. Please, someone come and make sure life doesn't hurt...I'll give you samples of my hair and blood, you can read and listen in on all of my communications, and you can make sure I think correctly. I promise not to criticize you and will contribute to your largess. And when I become a burden on the state, I promise to go to my "great reward" quietly with the assurance that my family will be taken care of by you, my king and your state.

Sh*t, while we're at it, why don't we just all coronate a king. Life is scary all out there on our own, ya know. We need to ratify a "social kontrakt" with the new king so we all have a big daddy to look to when things get tough.

Long live the unions!

A "social contract" is hyperbole.

That's what taxes, pre-Obamacare, were for. Blame the government and all of the hands in the piggy bank.

Unbelievable. Well, no. When are we going to start censoring talk radio? Can we start that tomorrow?

Exactly. At one time, employers offered health care benefits as a way of attracting and retaining employees. There was never a "social contract"...whatever that is supposed to mean, really. Who defines this "social contract", anyway? What gobbledygook. Here, under my definition of a social contract, you all are obliged to give me $1 million, so pay up. Holy socialist, comrade!

If you were told you didn't have to pay half of your cable bill, but could keep all of the services you had, would you still pay the entire bill or opt to pay half? A business is not obliged to be charitable. The only option employees have is to try and find a different job with better bennies...at least for the next year or so until the health care playing field is completely leveled (except for government employees, of course). I guess the next step is to lobby your favorite politician to force businesses into being charitable and cover more health care costs. That'll show those greedy SOBs.

And the players on the ice look like they were cut and pasted from an old rod hockey game:

So those girls in The Blacklist earlier this week would have felt their childbirths? Yowzers.

We've already experienced Obamacare fail, so, my sympathies, I guess. For me, the reasoning of those all for it is not really a comfort. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it looks like it's of little comfort to you, too.

Hey weave, I don't know what this means, but I'll just say this. If the sky was to fall and injure someone, wouldn't it be better if them going into bankruptcy to fix themselves was one less worry for them?

Cashews make my bathroom smell fruity.

Prediction: John Scott is signed to $3.5m per for 3 years in August 2014.

Count your blessings, then. You're just proving me correct, here; you can't possibly believe your fortunate anecdote applies broadly to all people everywhere? That's so...13-years-old.

Unmarked grave in a cornfield?

When I try and help my kids by advising them on what to do, or have them perform a task that is in their best interest, yet they resist, or argue, or ignore me, then I am left with two options: 1. use my mean daddy voice 2. tell them that they will have to learn the hard way and they will regret it in the (near, long term) future When it comes to politics, I have found that it's usually more than analogous, and, unfortunately, the only choice is to go with option 2.

Agreed, it's pretty swank. A nice addition to a s-l-o-w-l-y reviving downtown.

We suck.

Yeah, you're right. They don't send checks anymore, they use cards. Totally blows his argument.

Who is available this summer who is worth a lot of money?

The Sabres can pay this guy the maximum allowed. They can wait until the off season. EDIT: goodness, I thought this was the Callahan thread.

I almost agree fully with this, but I disagree with the position from which it is stated (the position that I infer, at least). "Ineffective" is not accurate, because this president HAS been effective at making things worse. Much like trying to say Darcy Regier wasn't effective; on the contrary, he was incredibly effective at making the Sabres an utterly miserable team. In a socio/political/economic structure like ours, the health and welfare of business is incredibly important, because when businesses are healthy and happy, our economy is healthy and happy. And when our economy is healthy and happy, the people, our society and the government are all healthy and happy. No matter the system, no matter what types of controls, there will always be outliers; negatives to oppose the positives. The best a human can do is make it so the positives outweigh the negatives. There is no Utopia, Utopia already exists; perfection is imperfection. We, as a nation and society, have swung too far from the ideal imbalance of positives outweighing negatives to an imbalance of negatives outweighing the positives. The strength of the foundation of our nation and society is such that we are all, as a collective, paralyzed to take action: at once it seems to require only a small number of changes to repair; yet it seems doing so would upset whatever comfortable portions of status quo that remain. Frankly, if only it were so "simple" as an action like the Ukrainian government took against its people, I think more people would be more decisive and less wishy-washy on what to do. The interaction of business and government - commerce - has always been there. And it's always been "ugly" to a degree. I don't find the focusing on CEO's and CFO's without any qualification particularly healthy because it serves to destroy the trust in the system - the same system that has served us very, very well for two-hundred plus years. Are all baseball players on steroids? Are all hockey players goons? Do all chefs use too much pepper? No.