deluca67

You tend to blur "dependence" with "being in a time of need." I agree with the Aesop's Fable of "Giving a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, you feed him for a life time." It's seems to be what you are saying. It is that mentality which leads me to believe education should be made available without cost to all that seek it out. I also believe, as Swamp states, there is a greater number of those that hit hard times than those that simply seem to want to live off the system. I am not blind to those that work the system. I simply choose not to base my desire to help the greater number of people because of a few. Consider it compassion coated in common sense. As a individual of a larger society, I know there are basic sacrifices I need to make. Investing in the education, health and welfare of my neighbors only makes the overall society greater. I know it wasn't the point of this post. But, I do. It's in an idealistic way, where education and a living wage become common place in the economic down trodden areas of the county. Invest in people and the need for welfare programs will decrease dramatically.

You seem to forget or insist on ignoring we live in a society. A society where we are indeed "our brothers keepers" to steal a line from the Bible. Our entire system is based upon doing what is right for the greater collective. Offering women basic health servics, which in includes birth control, is part of that. Like offering free education to children up until the college level. I don't have children, and I can certainly argue that none of the money I put into the collective (my taxes) should go towards helping the education of children. If people insist on having children they should be able to afford to pay for their schooling or not have children. Am I right? Is that any different than if the "if you can't afford birth control you shouldn't have sex" argument that was made around the Sandra Fluke testimony. Public school education is a socialist program where many are forced to pay for the few, so let's get rid of it. And let's go down the list. Insurance is a socialist concept. Where the greater group kicks in funds and when an individual is in need of insurance coverage the money comes from the collective. If I am 100% healthy, why am I paying for another's cancer treatment? If I am a good driver, why do I have to pay for someone else's accident? These are all silly examples that cut right to the point. It's not the concept of "being forced to pay for someone else." We all know that's a load of BS, because we all do it. It's those items that allow for those moments of faux-outrage. Like tax dollars being spent so single women can have sex. That's the core of the Sandra Fluke argument. It's a s bogus an argument as the idea that all those who are now covered under the Affordable Healthcare Act or those that would take advantage of free college educations, or those who would be helped by and increase in the minimum wage are people who are lazy and undeserving of any assistance. As I pointed out, the faux-outrage usually comes from the those who gotten to where they are with assistance from others if they care to admit it or not. You had mentioned before about paying for these programs. I think it would be fairly easy, eliminate the entire process of tax deductions for individuals as well as corporations. I would also rescind the tax exempt status for all religion based organizations. May not cover the entire tab, it would be a decent start.

Religion, racism and economic disparity, to answer your question.

You would deny an individual basic healthcare? An education? A wage that they can support themselves and their family with? What is being taken away from you? Is everything you have that you may lose truly something you earned without help or support of others? Not many can answer that question with a yes. Donald Trump tries but forgets his father staked him to a pretty nice start.

He has to up his game to get to the Holzinger/Plante level let alone Briere. I see where this team is heading, and I just don't see a spot for Ennis.

Healthcare, Living Wage and Education are absolute rights. Unemployment and other social programs are necessities. No country can allow citizens to go homeless and hungry. That is basic human decency that would be a greater priority if we truly were a Christian Nation. If we can afford to invade, destroy, rebuild and occupy other lands than we can afford making sure citizens at home have the basic human comforts.

Does it really matter? Is anyone else concerned that here we are in 2016 and this is the best group of presidential candidates we can produce? And I mean from either side. This election is going to be a joke. If they put "none of the above" on the Presidential ballot, my money says it wins.

Are you saying Ennis and Briere are equivalent or do they both just happen to be 5' 9"/5' 10". Why not go with Marty St. Louis? Ennis is neither of those players and does not have the game to makeup for his lack of stature. Like Marchand as mentioned in the other thread. 5' 9" doesn't automatically mean you can't play in the league, you just better be bringing a hell of a lot more game than Ennis does, which Briere, St. Louis and Marchand do/did.

I've watched it over and over, I've seen that same more 100 times, if Lehner doesn't fall face down it's a fairly easy save or the player backhands over the net. I don't think Lehner was focused. IMO, any move Marchand could make was going to work. I wish our 5' 9" players had his game.

Physical agitator type that could play strong D, chip in with offense here and there and drew penalties. Think of Marchand minus Marchand's offensive talent. The pass Marchand ended up stealing was about as weak a pass attempt as you will see. He could have just went off the boards with the puck. It was a tough play on a tough shift for kid.

Lehner's reaction after the goal tells me his mind was on the call not making the save. Tell me what was so "super sick" about Marchand's move? It was about as basic a move as you will see on a penalty shot. He skated in, Lehner began to fall and he went to the backhand. The wan't really anything that impressive about Marchand's move.

Not on a contending team. On a bottom third team, yeah sure. If the Sabres, or any team, is going to contend for a playoff spot it won't be with Ennis at 5' 9" skating in the top six forwards on a regular basis.

Because he is not a "proven NHL 2nd liner?" Is a good, yet small, player on a rebuilding team. On a top tier contending team he is a third liner at best that should see some power play time.He just doesn't have that much talent that makes you forget how small he is. Ennis saw him coming and turned his back to OV. Good clean finishing of a check by OV.

This would be eight straight road games against Divisional foes with at least a point. This is another sign that things are going in the right direction. They are only 2 games under .500 on the road. They have 20 ROWs compared to 15 all of last year. 21 wins already this season, 23 all of last. They have allowed 143 goals in 53 games, and will end the season closer to 200 goals allowed than they will the 274 they allowed in 2014-15. They are going to end up with more than the 161 goals they scored last season, and that is with two key offensive contributors, Moulson & Ennis, giving you nothing. There is a lot to take away from this season no matter where they end up in the standings.

No need to try and excuse the play away as "trying to do too much", it was what it was, which is Ristolainen's worst shift of his young career. He almost gave Marchand a breakaway seconds earlier on the same shift. He looked a bit rattled on the shift. It had nothing to do with Gionta and Larsson, it was all Ristolainen. It was an obvious bad call, which happen. I would have liked to see Lehner make the save there which nullifies the bad call. The graphic above is cute, I would have liked to see Lehner do more than fall on his stomach on the penalty shot. Would have been great to see him pickup his young teammate up with a save after a bad shift. We have seen this from Larsson before. His problem is consistency and sustainability. If Larsson can play a Vaclav Varada roll on this team than he brings great value. He has to put it all together, he is only 23 so he has time and the Sabres can show some patience.

Motive is a big part of defining a crime, is it not? I believe foreign policy does effect oil prices. Say for instance, if the Republicans had their way we would currently be in a war with Iran, causing yet more disruption in a volatile region, disrupting oil production which drives up oil prices. IMO, it's probably the biggest factor in the last two Republican Presidents starting Gulf Wars. Under a cerebral President, diplomacy has won the day and there is Iranian oil about to hit the market. Basic rule of supply and demand.

If you are right they are fools of the highest order. If they want to risk their lives that's one thing. Creating a situation that puts the lives of innocent people in danger is unforgivable.

They are criminals. If they target victims based on a political agenda and just not financial opportunity then yes they would.

As much as people loved to rag on me about that, if you look at the standings today every team that has won at least half of their games is holding a playoff spot. It is a simple truth of the NHL and has been for some time. You need to win half of your games to have a chance at the playoffs. No need.

I would agree if they would have left the weapons at home. The guns make them terrorists. Guns are a representation of violence meant to intimidate.

I've banged the drums for a wins only based system for some time. Get rid of the points system, this ain't NASCAR.

You hit Hateful Eight right on the head. It's a reason to eat some popcorn, not much more. Started watching Jessica Jones on NetFlix. Three episodes in, I'm not sure how I feel at this point.

If there is truly poetic justice in professional sports then the Sabres would end up drafting 5th and win the lottery.

I would only accept the college system if they eliminated the field goal option. TD or bust.