Eleven

Since we're on wings, for whatever reason (I suppose they are gluten free), I'll give a shoutout to Thirsty Buffalo on Elmwood. The wings are pretty great. I have yet to try Bar Bill, mostly because every time I go, it's an hour wait for a table, and possibly longer for a bar spot. But that hour wait must be for a reason, right?

I wouldn't bet against you. I think a few things have changed there.

See the eating/drinking thread. They don't overcook them anymore, for sure.

BWAHAHAHAHAAA Can you imagine if he were in a position where he had to praise Russian players? HC Dynamo Moscow‏Verified account @dynamo_ru FollowFollow @dynamo_ru More Hey, Don Cherry @CoachsCornerDC. We heard that you were fired. It’s not good! Come to Russia, we need an analyst for Dynamo TV who could talk whatever he thinks. We love old soldiers. And we will make a nice suit! We hope you agree. #WeAreDynamo

Yes, but everything reaches its critical mass, and nothing reaches it until it's actually reached. I guess in this case, it was finally too many slipcovers for the sofa.

I don't think it's much of a thing there. I dated an ethnically Ukranian (Russian by birth) gal for quite a while. No one in her family was into hockey at all. Soccer, on the other hand, was huge. This isn't unfair in spirit. They should have gotten rid of him quite a while ago. But I disagree that he's been the same for 40 years. I see a progression--again, starting with French Canadians, then European players, and then into a general rage about everything that isn't the Same As It Was Back In The Day.

Sure sounds like something I would have said. Politics certainly creeps its way into things, especially when people choose to make things about politics. (I didn't, here.) However, this isn't inherently about politics. It's about one person who has turned an in-between period segment from something that used to be sorta funny into a bully pulpit on all sorts of issues, many of which aren't political at all. (Tell me how Don Cherry's outdated views on enforcers (see my link above) are political, for example.) People are sick of Don Cherry's infectious presence in their hockey broadcasts. In my case, and I suspect the cases of others, too, I got sick of his self-aggrandizement (how insecure must one be to wear those suits!) a long time ago. He's gone and HNiC is better for it.

That's understandable. I still think they'll do what's right. SC justices tend not to give a ***** about who appointed them, once they're appointed.

I gave you a list. Not my fault if you (1) can't understand that not every comment will fit his pattern; (2) choose one example that doesn't fit the pattern from the list; and (3) cannot understand basic logic. Just take your lumps and move on, boomer. This isn't about politics unless you make it that way. It's about one person who can't control what comes out of his mouth, so they took his microphone away.

Like I said, "feel free to pick those apart one by one while ignoring that this is hardly the full body of his work." I knew you'd pick and choose. I did not say that ALL of his comments, ever, over history, are rooted in hatred and fear. Another logic flaw, there. You also still haven't explained why Don Cherry's experience is so unique that his views on Veterans' Day should be important to the public at large. Face it... ELEVEN OOOOUUUUUT!

You have a logically flawed syllogism resulting in some claim that I believe that nationalism is rooted in hatred and fear. You are missing something. You are missing the distribution of the middle term of the syllogism. That is, specifically, what you are missing. I gave you an example: His comments about native Canadians. Did you not read that part? He's also said stupid and hateful stuff about alcoholism and drug use, neither of which have anything to do with nationalism. Since you have declined my invitation to google that stuff for yourself, here's a SAMPLING: https://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/don-cherry-s-history-of-controversial-comments-1.4680505 Focus, maybe, on his comments about NHL enforcers. Feel free to pick those apart one by one while ignoring that this is hardly the full body of his work. And, again, why is his opinion so special compared to others who lived in the same time?

1. You're missing the point if you're asking that question. That Don Cherry's comments are rooted in hatred and fear, and that Don Cherry's makes his comments under the guise of pseudo-nationalism, do NOT logically result in the conclusion that nationalism is rooted in hatred and fear. So there's a process flaw. There's also a premise flaw; I will point to his comments about native Canadians as non-nationalistic, yet still rooted in hatred and fear. You can google for them if you'd like. 2. No, that's not what shrader said. What shrader said is that Don Cherry is not entitled to a national broadcast to spout his thoughts. And he's right. Why should he be entitled? What makes him so special, as opposed to any other 85-year-old who lived through World War II? He was a poor to middling hockey player and a mediocre coach, and all of the sudden, his thoughts on Veterans' Day are supposed to be more important to me than the thoughts of an 85-year-old in Mississippi who was the son of a sharecropper? Or an 85-year old in Moscow who lost her father in the war? (And what happened to "stick to sports?" That seemed to be a popular mantra among his demographic not long ago.)

That's a pretty big distortion of what I wrote. Cherry's comments have been rooted in hatred and fear for quite some time. That does not mean that nationalism is rooted in hatred OR fear, nor is Cherry necessarily a nationalist. There's no censorship. He's welcome to say whatever he wants. No one is obligated to give him a platform on which to say it, however.

It works for me.

Guys, I really enjoyed this. @rakish, do you have a youtube channel or somewhere that these are normally found?

It doesn't matter anyway. He wasn't fired for supporting the armed forces, and he's welcome to his opinion on the armed forces regardless of whether he served. Any claim that he was fired for supporting the armed forces is just a distraction from the issue at hand: a pattern of commentary based upon hatred and fear that culminated in a final salvo on Saturday night.

He's also been a xenophobic idiot for nearly 40 years.

I still have Death Throes of the Republic from when it was released. I should give it another listen; it's been a long time. "Society fired Don Cherry ten years ago" is a great observation. I think it might actually be longer, like when it became obvious that "euros" aren't "soft" and people got sick of that line of commentary. Looking back through some of what I've seen here and elsewhere, I am heading towards--I haven't reached it yet--the conclusion that his xenophobia comes from the mental anguish of consistently losing to Guy Lafleur's Habs year after year. That bred his well-known contempt for French Canadian players, and it was just a few steps from there, to hating European players, to where he is now. Save us Guy Lafleur!

Just keep in mind that he's a rental. I don't overvalue Rodrigues, but Toffoli is a rental.

That's so Sikh.

I wish to learn your methods.

It's available on audio. Dan Carlin also had some great Roman history podcasts, but I think he charges to subscribe now? @josie might know; I think she's a Carlin fan.

I listened to the first couple of minutes and I am very much looking forward to the rest tomorrow.

It is excellent. Hush. He's trying to push an agenda. He needs quiet so he can concentrate.

Opium too, but yes, heroin.