TrueBlueGED

Not according to the anti-PC brigade. Just sayin'.

I don't care about the Hamilton thing one way or another (and frankly, I think it's just a distraction from real stories)...but neither Trump, nor Pence, nor any of his supporters really have any ground to stand on at all with respect to political correctness. Just sayin'.

I agree with this, but being realistic: there is no way Bylsma is putting Kane anywhere but with O'Reilly or Eichel. Just isn't happening.

Abylsmal?

Obviously being without Eichel for the whole year, and O'Reilly/Kulikov/Bogo/Kane for stretches, is not conducive to achieving an especially great record. But I reject the premise that the injuries prevent us from evaluating anything. I feel like those who are fighting back against the bitching (some of which is hysteria, sure, but much of it is in fact thought-out and reasoned) are, rather than being level-headed about what we can expect from a half-AHL roster, are at the opposite end of the extreme and throwing up their hands while saying we neither know, nor can know, anything. In my view, the underlying problems with the team do not vanish with a healthy roster, even if a healthy roster squeezes out more wins.

Ditto for me.

I can't even...

Well, I don't think there are many in government on either side of the aisle actually dedicated to the Constitution. That comes and goes with political expedience. But beyond that, I suspect that most people who see "authoritarianism" think "totalitarianism," but they are not the same thing. The latter I don't think is possible, at least not within the time frame of one presidency. The former, however, can definitely take root.

My "panic" (which I'm not panicked) comes from talking to experts who study authoritarianism internationally. But thanks.

If I had stupid money, I'd still buy one.

BYYYYLLLSSSMMMMAAAAAAAAAAA!

What's going on right now is not politics as usual. To your healthcare example, ineptitude in predicting unintended consequences of legislation is not the same thing as abjectly lying about what a company was doing, to say nothing of claiming credit for preventing the thing that was happening that wasn't actually going to happen. I know you desperately want this all to be normal, so you can flip it as just another example of liberal and media overreaction. But it's not. Bannon. Flynn. Sessions. None of this is normal. Ivanka, set to run Trump's businesses, being in the meeting between Trump and Japan's (one of our largest trading partners) PM. Not normal. Requesting security clearances for family. Not normal. Not a racial group, but Putin has done it with homosexuals. Edit: Further on the Ford thing, let's say it was true...a president strong arming a company to shift its business plans would be the exact sort of thing the right should freak out over. The fact he thinks being able to do this (regardless of what actually happened) is a good thing should be setting off alarm sirens for those who believe in free markets and small government.

I think it's the sort of thing that will require the league/owners to eat losses for awhile while it estabilshes itself. Doesn't look like that's in the cards, unfortunately.

If we're only allowed to bitch about things that have happened: Trump took to twitter to claim credit for convincing Ford to keep a factory open in Kentucky, rather than move it to Mexico. Great! Problem? This was an issue in the campaign when Trump lied, saying Ford was moving it to Mexico. Ford made clear the plant was not closing, just that small car production was being moved to a facility in Mexico--the Lincoln plant was to remain open making other things. He lied then, he lied now. If you want to play off the campaign thing as typical campaign rhetoric, fine...but he's now president elect, doing the exact same thing. This is how authoritarians behave. Edit: On that note, I think comparisons to WWII-era Germany and Italy misses the mark. We're much more likely to see modern authoritarianism than that. Think Putin and Berlusconi, not Hitler and Mussolini.

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but Stamkos out 4-6 months with the meniscus surgery. Parise had the same thing, and came back in 5.

Maybe they can't (sort of like when Obama asked then-Senator Judd Gregg to run Commerce), but when the president-elect asks, you have to at least consider it. I also think it's possible Romney may have a sense of duty to do what he can to help, in spite of everything that happened. Well played. Pretty sure JJ was just making a play on words.

That says it all, to me. We can talk about the injuries all we want, but this team is still better than those teams. There's simply no good reason to be scoring at that low of a rate.

Yea. I'm not mad he made the deal--I want my GM taking that swing. But it'd take a pretty significant turnaround from both Kane and Bogosian to make it anything other than a bust.

Don't see it coming. Murray's interview on WGR today struck me as some bunker mentality creeping in, not "something may change" creeping in.

I'm paying so little attention to this game I legitimately didn't even notice Tampa got a 4th.

Maybe, but I just don't see how we can get multiple pieces in return for Kane right now. Only 35 points last year, 1 point in 6 games this year, the injuries, the off-ice stuff...it all adds up. Fun (see: depressing) fact: Since the start of last season, Brian Gionta has more points than Evander Kane.

My point was he's handling the transition like any other normal transition (as he should), even though I think we can all agree this was an abnormal campaign. Upholding the norms of a peaceful transition of power. Willingness to spend more time than usual with his successor, not joining in the criticism of Trump's staffing choices, and so on. Many on the left are mad at him for doing so, for whatever it's worth. I figure this will make you think he's doing something right :p

Naturally I'd prefer a Laine-like winger or an Ekblad-like Dman...but the thought of the center spine we could run with another top-6 caliber center isn't exactly displeasing.

Neither here nor there, but KellyAnne Conway should have been named his chief strategist. As to the bold: of course they don't care. The more opposition they get for the campaign they ran, the more obfuscated current (and very legitimate) criticism about the transition is. They can also use it as a means to group together all criticism as unfair, sort of like PR armor. Did you listen to his news conference following the election?

Yea, that's looking like a really disappointing class for us. But two things I think contributed: 1) was a pretty weak draft overall, and 2) that was Murray's first draft with the team, and trying to install his evaluation system mid-stream probably led to some issues with identifying the right players. Though I'm fairly unhappy with Murray at the moment, I'm willing to give him a pass on that, especially since our mid-round picks look pretty good the last two drafts.