Drunkard

It doesn't have to mean with tobacco. A spliff can also just be a well rolled joint.

You should hit up a weed shop roll up a giant spliff while you are at it since you live where it's legal too.

Ok, so giving poor people a phone that has all the functions of the modern age is money poorly spent but we should give public tax dollars to Catholic charities? The Catholic Church is a HORRIBLE place to send money if you want it to go to people in need, unless you count spending money on legal defense for pedophiles as being charitable. Until they fire and excommunicate every kid diddling priest and every enabling bishop that moved them to a different parish and the pope moves out of his castle and takes a real vow a poverty they shouldn't even be considered a charity. ###### the Catholic Church (and every other church while we're at it).

Happy to entertain. Ha ha! I appreciate the sentiment but I believe the government is needed to do things. Without government spending we'd be getting bent over a barrel even more by the private sector. The horror! I for one don't trust anyone who doesn't worship at the altar of our slave owning misogynist founding fathers!

Whether or not they pay income taxes depends on your income level. If you're paycheck is small enough (due to a low hourly rate or a low number of hours or a combination) sometimes income taxes are just not taken out based on the payroll tax tables while ssi and medicare is taken out regardless. I used to work part time in a cigar shop and depending on the number of hours I worked that week sometimes they took income taxes out and sometimes they didn't. Your paycheck could be for $1 and ssi and medicare will still take their 8 cents but if you're paycheck is for $1 they will not take out income taxes. The bigger the paycheck the more likely they are to take income taxes out.

The facts are still the facts though. Charity is not enough to help all the people in need in this country and cutting taxes so you can give more to charity XYZ wouldn't be enough to change that. And what happens if none of your charities want to contribute to helping some single mother of 3 in Michigan pay her heating bill? You need the government to provide a safety net for society's most vulnerable. Planned Parenthood does so much more than providing abortions yet because they offer them in some locations you want to throw the baby out with the bath water. If we're going to cut your taxes because you don't want any of your conservative tax dollars going to Planned Parenthood than we also need to cut my liberal tax dollars so they don't go to building bombs, paying for bibles in courthouses to take your oath on (if that's even still a thing), paying to lock non violent drug offenders up for decades, or paying for border patrol agents to chase down people sneaking over the border when they should be arresting the business owners who hire them left and right.

What's more warped is the pro Republican business owners who claim they want to stop illegal immigration and then give those same people jobs because the low wages they can get away with paying them improves their financial statements.

Bernie doesn't want Trump to win any more than any other liberal I would think. He didn't want to risk handing Trump the Whitehouse by splitting the liberal vote when the majority of Republicans still ended up backing Trump (even now). The Hillary camp also conceded a large part of the Democratic platform to Bernie with the $15 per hour minimum wage (although that was hijacked by Hillary way before she had it locked up), reinstating Glass-Steagall, and being against the TPP. His popularity allowed him to drag the Democratic party further to the left despite having such a centrist at the top of the ticket.

I'm going off the party platforms. The GOP is pro-life as a party and the GOP is anti-welfare as a party. Voting for people who try to ban abortions also simultaneously casts a ballot to people who want to cut services to the poor single mothers who did the "right" thing is choosing to have their babies. The charitable angle is a nice sentiment but charity is not enough (in dollars) to help out the impoverished women. How they can applaud (or downright force in some instances) the decision to have the baby and then turn their backs on them when it comes to providing food, shelter, and healthcare is an oxymoron in my opinion.

I think the illegals paying taxes are having payroll taxes (SSI, medicare, and income tax) deducted from their paychecks using fake ssn's so they are paying into the system while not getting the benefits later on. If you really want to stop illegal immigration though, you should support going after the businesses who hire them. It would be much more cost effective and efficient.

I can sympathize and even agree with this point of view/thought process to a large extent, even as an atheist. I don't think anyone (for the most part) is pro-abortion. Even those in favor of giving women the right to choose want it to be safe, legal, and RARE. The circle that I can't square is how the majority of the pro-life crowd are also the same people who want to cut public services to single women in poverty, which makes up the majority of women who get abortions. The whole bleeding heart for the unborn fetus coupled with the apparent disdain for poor single mothers (the ones who did the "right" thing and kept their babies) is what I have a problem with.

The stuff that happened in NC happens in red states all over the country. Like it or not the Republican party is mostly the party of old white people in a country that is getting less white every decade. Rather than trying to appeal to the changing demographics their go to approach is to try to energize their base with rhetoric that is off putting to others and to disenfranchise entire groups of people in order to hold onto power as much as they possibly can. To be honest it has worked remarkably well too, but a lot of that has to do with fortunate circumstances. Republican lucked out in 2000 because even though the census/redistricting occurred during a President election cycle which typically favors Democrats because of the higher voter turnout, the Democrats were content from having had 8 years of Bill Clinton's fairly successful Presidency. Coupling that with Al Gore having the personality of a wooden cigar store Indian and the GOP was able to take over the White House and maintain a narrow lead in Congress. They also were fortunate that the last census/redistricting was taken in 2010 so it was during a mid term election and lower turnout tends to favor the GOP. Also because angry voters are more likely to vote and while the Democrats were fat and happy because they controlled the White House and Congress the GOP was in full on Tea Party craze so they benefitted from a double bump (mid term election plus extra motivation from being the party out of power). The next census/redistricting cycle takes place in an election year (2020) when traditionally Democratic voters would be much more likely to participate. Of course that also likely means Hillary running for re-election and since she has all of the glamor and appeal of a root canal the GOP may just luck out again for another 10 years and of course the census/redistricting after next will be in 2030 which will be another mid term election which favors the GOP. One of these decades though (probably in 2040) it's going to catch up with them but by then we'll have some uber liberal kale eating transgender President that will lock people up for micro aggressions and the war on Jesus/Christmas/Guns and will already be complete so there will be a whole new crop of GOP voters clamoring to get their AR-15's and fishing dynamite back. Kind of depressing to think about no matter which side of the aisle you sit on, ha ha!

Down to 1695. I need to stop betting on the Sabres to win.

He should just use his old avatar as his symbol the way Prince changed his name to that symbol after he had legal issues with his record label.

If you have Sunday Ticket with Directv they have a program called short cuts that shows you every single play of every football game along with some replays and a few key ref calls in 30 minutes. They even posting the stat graphics at the end of each quarter for 30 seconds or so as well so the sad thing is that 20% is probably accurate is you count the huddles and pre-snap reads as game action.

I'm at 1795 and I'll put one unit on Buffalo.

I should now be at 1795 after Buffalo lost to Calgary last night.

I'm sure it's a mix of both and that's fine by me. Since we're paying him anyway I'm just happy to see him being productive.

One unit on the Sabres to win for me.

That's fine too. There's still no chance in hell we protect 5 dmen. That would mean protecting O'Reilly, Okposo, and only 1 other forward/goalie. Everyone says defense is the team's weakness yet we are going to forego protecting 7 forwards to protect 5 of these guys? Yeah right.

No chance we protect 5 defensemen. I doubt even teams with strong defenses (Winnipeg, Nashville, Minnesota) would protect a 5th defenseman over their 4th best forward. If we do somehow trade for a guy like Fowler or Lindholm Murray will let Kulikov reach UFA status to avoid having to protect him and then try to sign him as a UFA.

Worst as in poorly done or in poor taste? Bad in general, etc? My girlfriend googled most f'd up movies of all time and I think we watched the worst one (even though it was only ranked #4 or #6 or something on the list. It's called a Serbian film and I don't recommend it unless you really just get your rocks off with messed up stuff. Complete snuff film but we watched it until the end. The movie itself was actually pretty well done, it's the plot/content that will make you want to scrub your own brain with bleach after you watch it.

Check out the Hitcher, Eden Lake, Devil's Rejects, Funny Games, I spit on your grave (remake from 2010), P2, Kalifornia, and Strangeland. All good slasher/torture type flicks without any supernatural nonsense.

I always assumed he adopted them after he married their Mom but I don't think they ever said anything about it.

If Fowler could be had for Girgensons and picks he would already be in a Sabres uniform.