Drunkard

That may be but here we at least have guys like Kane, Foligno, Deslauriers, Bogosian, McGinn, and even Weber to jump in an defend him. Maybe I'm just not familiar with the Amerks roster but who do we have in Rochester to protect him? Kaleta when he's not injured or in the penalty box? Maybe the numbers don't back it up or my memory is fuzzy but I remember several of our better prospects getting targeted. I guess I could be wrong though.

Good, I have no desire to see Reinhart go to Rochester where most of our top prospects (including Girgensons and Ristolainen) have suffered concussions.

Not to mention that most people who say "America is the greatest country in the world" haven't even been outside the US to make an actual comparison.

Fair enough, sir. I think the majority of us have disagreements with individual candidates and party platforms, even when it's a candidate we mostly support. I used to have many libertarian leanings and now support 90 or so percent of the Bernie Sanders platform. Even now though, I have some disagreements with him and Democrats. I support things like welfare and unemployment but I think unemployment should be capped at 3-6 months. Jobs are easy to find but good jobs aren't always so easy to find but after 3-6 months of getting a check to look for work you ahould have to swallow your pride and take a lesser job while you look for something better. I also believe in stopping or at least controlling illegal immigration but I've yet to see a candidate who woud go about it in the most efficient way by going after the businesses who employ them rather than the people themselves. Instead of trying to round up millions of undocumented workers they should penalize businesses that hire them on an exponential level for repeat offenses. Get caught employing an illegal worker and you get a $1,000 fine and you have something like 30 days to go through your HR records and ensure nobody else on your payroll is undocumented. Not too steep a fine at first and it shouldn't cripple a business who hires an illegal accidentally and it's not even a huge deterrent in and of itself but that should put you on an audit list and the next time you get caught they should add a zero to the fine. $10,000 for a second offense, $100,000 for a third and so on. If there weren't so many eager businesses out there who were so happy to exploit illegals by hiring them at slave wages in order to boost profits then maybe so many wouldn't want to come here. Plus, it should be much easier to keep tabs on thousnds of businesses than it is to track millions of people. Businesses who can't find enough legal workers to staff their businesses can apply for legal guest workers where the employees are tracked and paid a legal wage.

You gotta go with Little Ceasars because it will trick those Romans into thinking they are eating local. After you get'em hooked you start plastering the restaurant in American flags and tell those Italians to bow to their new master.

I'll admit that if I had to choose I'd listen to their old stuff over their new stuff but that's fairly weak even by the "new punk" standards. It's much more upbeat and happy music geared towards surfers and skateboarders than the original premise of punk rock although they definitely have a ska influence from what little I watched of the video (I made it until the second whiny backup chorus, I just can't standy whiny vocals but the main singer was alright). I'll echo the sentiments of We've though and while I don't begrudge them for trying to make a buck it's not going make me like it, listen to it, support it, or think it wasn't produced for the sole purpose of booking arenas full of teeny boppers. Personally if I'm going to listen to ska punk I'll take the Voodoo Glow Skulls 10 times out of 10.

You may not be a Republican but to rank Lord Bush III (I'd honestly rather see Trump in office than that asshat), Fiorina, Kasich, and Rubio all ahead of Rand Paul would put you more in line with Republicans than Libertarians. I've taken political surveys where they show whether you agree and disagree with different candidates on various issues and I've done some googling and every single Republican candidate that has been in these primary debates is pro-Capital punishment with the exception of Rand Paul who says it should be a states rights issue. You seem to base your vote more on fiscal issues than social ones though so I'll drop my argument there. You may not personally be in favor of widening deficits in theory but the last Republican to run a budget surplus was Nixon (with LBJ's budget) and the last time it happened on their own was Eisenhower. If you ignore the rhetoric and look objectively at the numbers it's the Democrats that have historically been better at the budget (and steering the economy) than Republicans but many people don't realize this because it's the Republicans that never shut up about deficits (except when they are creating them) and cutting taxes. So how is being in favor of lowering deficits theoretically worth anything if the people you support clearly aren't capable of doing it? Or is the whole idea of being fiscally responsible just about having lower taxes? My linking you to Republicans isn't necessarily your low ranking of Paul but your high ranking of Bush. He may not be as dumb as his brother but he's just as Republican as his brother and his Dad. Talks a big game about fiscal responsibility which translates to nothing more than cutting taxes and bigger deficits. Sure some spending will be cut to the types of programs that Jesus would favor (ironically or hypocritically, take your pick) but he'll continue to increase spending overall on things like (taken from the poll on isidewith.com) Military Spending (the lions share goes here and it will far outweigh any spending cuts he even tries to implement) Money to Israel NASA (hey, Lord Bush III and I actually agree on this) Testing welfare recipients for drugs Border Security The Patriot Act The NSA including spying on US citizens and Allies of the United States I'm sure if I dug into it I could find more, but I've busier with actual work today at work so I just listed what I could from the money side of things.

Cognitive dissonance at it's finest right here. How is your side fighting the size and power of the state? Republicans don't shrink the government, they just shift funding from social programs (ie helping the poor) to enlarging the military and filling the coffers of Defense Contractors and based on your candidate rankings you don't seem to have the only guy who comes close to an actual Libertarian (Paul) ranked very high. I think you mean shrinking tax revenues and widening the deficit and not actually shrinking the government whatsoever. If Lord Bush III wins the election we should all buy stock in Halliburton because it would pretty much guarantee that we go to full on war with ISIS, Iran, Syria, and Iraq again for the 3rd time. Also, can you name a single Republican candidate in this race that is against the death penalty? I've looked and Paul is the only one who comes close and he takes the whole states rights stance on it. To lobby people to your side on the basis of being against the state having the power to put people to death is flat out disingenuous.

http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_37,_Mandatory_Labeling_of_Genetically_Engineered_Food_(2012) I just did a quick google search regarding it but I think the numbers are legitimate. It was on the ballot in 2012 during the Presidential vote. California is the largest state by population and is a liberal state and I knew it was a close vote (although I didn't remember it being that close). I just assumed millions voted for it and millions voted against it hence my comment. I'm not going to bother to define many for the rest of the country, but I would assume if more than 6 million people in California were in favor of labeling GMOs that the rest of the country combined would add up to at least that many if it were put on a ballot during a Presidential election when people are already going to the polls to vote and that's just another item they get to vote on. Anyway, as I stated earlier, I don't see GMO's as some boogeyman but when it comes to information and choice as a voter, I err on the side of more information, although the main reason is probably because companies like Monsanto were against it. It may just be liberal bias but those guys seem more like evildoers than the brown people Bush sends troops to kill. I don't like the idea that seeds used to be public domain and could be used by anyone and now private companies are controlling them and suing farmers who save seeds rather than buy more from Monsanto or who plant their fields without Monsanto seeds and they accidently get somehow mixed in through chance, wind, equipment, or however it happens.

Whatever, man. My opinion is iust as valid as yours. You think my post is dumb and I think you listen to whiny chick rock. We can agree to disagree. This is America, you're free to listen to all the crappy music that you like. I'm sure you'd hate the music I listen to as well.

No man should listen to the Goo Goo Dolls. Their market should be teenage girls and teenage girls only.

That's fine. Let them. Hopefully he'll call them out on their chicken hawk war mongering. I wish he'd call them out on their hypocrisy of claiming to be Christ like while doing their best to ignore the main themes of the New Testament of loving your neighbor and helping the poor but unfortunately I don't think he'd do that. Apparently Jesus would prefer them to yell at gay people and worship guns.

Fair enough. I can definitely see your point. The GMO issue just popped into my head. I probably should have used a better example of companies influencing voting issues like union busting or failing to raise the minimum wage. Exactly. That's the main reason I want Biden to enter the fray. Feel the Bern! 2016

It's not for me specifically. I eat predominantly processed junk and value taste over nutrition. Personally, I've never bought into the hype of any of it. I just think that those who want to know should be able to, plus on a selfish note the GMO labeled foods would probably sell for cheaper making my grocery bill lower. I trust science although I would never put anything past a company like Monsanto. I will say that I opt for organic whole milk over the regular whole milk though but that's just because I don't drink a lot of milk other than when I have cereal or really rich desserts and the organic kind lasts for almost a month where the regular stuff usually lasts for a week or so before it goes bad and I have to pour the rest down the sink.

Since when is having more information a bad thing though? It shouldn't matter why they want to know but they should still be able to know. It's wouldn't put the companies under any undue hardship to do it.

Everyone who would prefer not to consume GMO's is harmed by it which is millions of people in California alone along with people in other states who would hope that their state would follow California's lead. Now weigh that against who is harmed by labeling it or who benefits from not labeling it. Thanks to money convincing a bunch of low information voters the desires of a few are outweighing the desires of the many. It's only going to get worse over time as well.

I voted for DJ Kool again and against the 1,000 swords song. I can't even remember that crappy song went up against the 1,000 swords one but I voted for it anyway.

Reinhart doesn't need to go to the AHL where virtually all of our best prospects have suffered concussions. Also, if they are going to pair him with Gionta on the 3rd line they better damn well put some muscle at left wing with them in the form of McGinn, Foligno, or Deslauriers. I don't want to see him run head first into the boards with only the likes of Gionta, Larsson, and someone like Colaiacovo and Donovan on defense.

Send them with Bibles, guns, or both? Remember the alien beings might worship a different invisible man than us so we should bring a carrot and a stick to cover all bases.

I think Bogosian can fit in anywhere without looking out of place. He's decent on the top pair but if you have enough talent on D he's a great option to have on your 2nd pairing. He should be playing top pairing for us until we find a legit top pairing LHD and Ristolainen is ready to supplant him on the right side. Once that happens we'll be in great shape on D, especially if Psysk and McCabe develop.

That's about as positive a spin on money nd politics as I've heard. Once you're done with the world of academia you'll definitely have options available in the lobbyist industry, sir. Personally, I don't see how it benefits anyone but the food industry to avoid labeling GMO's on food labels and people are still free to ignore the information since all that ballot initiative was supposed to do was mke sure i was labeled as containing it. Things aren't quite as doom and gloom as Liger was espousing but the system is still corrupted nonetheless.

It may go completely unnoticed at times but it's still corrupt and there are still a bunch of instances where they put money over people. How else do you explain the fact that fracking policies are completely exempt from the clean water act? Or Californians voting against knowing whether their foods contain GMO's. Deals get made in backrooms in some instances or in subcommittees and the public gets flooded with false information and convinced to vote against their own interests in others. The politicians aren't exactly puppets but they are willing participants in the process. Campaigns are getting more and more expensive with every election cycle to the point where most of them are constantly fundraising. Selling out to the special interests of the highest bidder simplifies the process for them but also puts them even deeper into the pockets of the people who fund their super pacs.

Not necessarily. Many large donors hedge their bets and donate to both sides in order to curry favor no matter who wins the election. Then add in the constant cycle of having lobbyists for certain industries becoming the overseers of those same regulatory industries and vice versa and it's easy to see why many of us feel like money matters more than people when it comes to politics.

Those choices are all terrible. The only one that is even decent is the DJ Kool one. I'd rather keep hearing the RJ playbacks. If they are gonna be bad songs, at least make them funny. Play some boats n hoes or any of the songs from Team America: World Police.

It's not. 6 managers working 40 hours each would definitely cost more since Manager's are exempt from overtime labor laws. It would only be the same if each manager was paid $x per hour and nobody received overtime. Since managers are salaried, the business saves money by paying 4 salaries instead of 6 salaries.