StevetheClub

no, giving a guy time to develop on the PR and in pre-season is bringing him along slowly... putting a guy who may not be ready into the lineup, is a trial by fire. semantics, I'm sure but bring up someone slowly imo never involves throwing them into the breech. limited reps or emergency fill-in still gives the guy that "omfg its REAL!" feelings im sure that they wouldn't get on the PR or in pre-season reps. IMO anyway. Not to extend this conversation or pick on you, but just to clarify things. Quote #1 =/ quote #2. Perhaps what you meant to type and what you actually did are different in #1.

Too bad for you guys. It's a stat here in Alberta.

Also sounds like he was on psychotropics, which might be one piece of the puzzle (the size of which depends on your bias).

It doesn't "magically" qualify as different. It qualifies as different because it was after the teams had made their way to the line. That's an important difference. As Doug Brown wrote, for years players have taken a knee, particularly after turnovers when the unit that was on the field would have to come right back on. Not after the teams were already on the line. And, as Brown also pointed out, there were at least 3 instances of "cramps".

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think the fake injuries were significant and unsportsmanlike. The Bombers have used the hurry-up to catch teams off-guard and keep momentum going and as others have mentioned two, or even three, scores is not a lot in the CFL, especially for the Bombers. A game can change a lot in a very short amount of time. Almost as bad, if not worse, is the Riders not owning up to it. Why hide it if it's not shady?

You provided your thoughts on news organizations from both sides of the spectrum and made clear statements about how you view the far left and right; I don't think my comments are a stretch. That being said, if I misunderstood you I misunderstood you. No biggie. **edit: Amen to the arrogance of the far left. Preaching to the choir there.

Sorry, I'm not following. I agree with you that the far right seems to be "taking more and more ground from the conservatives". The point I was trying to make is that you seem to be letting the far left off the hook. The far right is "nuts" and "bigoted" whereas the far left is simply something you "can't relate to". I think that the far left is just as destructive and increasingly pervasive as the far right - we only just have to look to our universities in Canada and the US to see evidence of this - and as a social liberal I find this very sad to watch.

I try to spend time reading both Fox and CNN. I think regardless of where you stand if your goal is to be informed and not just entertained then I think you're doing yourself a disservice by only reading what you agree with. And as someone who reads both, I find their respective leanings very clear and think they both have their fair share of contributors who sit on the far ends of the spectrum. It sounds like you're implying that consideration for you we treat each other is a liberal value, which is unfair. As a liberal, I would say that the far left is doing just as much hijacking as the far right and that those closer to the middle on both sides value how we treat each other.

Indeed. I thought maybe the first post was a lapse in judgement and that there'd be some back-tracking after Jacquie responded. Did not expect to see doubling down on the ignorance.

Not sure what the big deal is. He is currently overseeing two offices and it sounds like he and/or his superiors would like him to shift to one, which sounds like is typical.

We flew Calgary to Cancun direct with WestJet Vacations in January and the experience, from booking to touching down, was our typical - i.e., very good - WestJet experience.

There is definitely growing evidence that psychotropics can, and often, do more harm than good.

I'd take The Wire over The Sopranos, but it's definitely up there.

You quoted a response that said he should resign for denying the Holocaust and then called a defence of him not being a Holocaust-denier silly, so I think it's reasonable to think that you thought he was denying the Holocaust. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a pretty massive gaffe (any implications that I was minimizing his choice of words was unintentional), I just don't think it's helpful - in fact it's counterproductive and unneccesary - to go to such extremes when criticizing him.

Calling him an Holocaust denier is an over-reaction. It's clear that's not the case. Calling him out on a very, very poor choice of words. That makes more sense.

I'd be interested in how many of the 50 beds for mental health services added to Victoria hospital are just re-allocated beds. Sad that mental health issues weren't given more attention considering how ill-equipped hospitals, especially ERs, are to treat mental health issues and yet they see so many. I know I'm biased, but I think addressing mental health-related visits would go a long way to improving services overall.

Hear hear!

Probably all very true. The logic of the Trump supporters is mind-boggling, but I have no doubt the writer is bang on.

I think you're absolutely right in why Trump one. I disagree with their logic, but if there's one thing Trump did well is he tapped into that anger.

In some ways I couldn't agree more, the problem I have is that you don't seem to practice what you preach. Apply your own advice to the Alberta NDP and federal Liberals and I may actually want to be a part of this thread more often. I don't want to pile on you, so I'll also say that I think that much of the anti-Trump crowd is also going overboard with their apocalyptic fears (not people here, just reactions I've seen elsewhere). One of of my favourite responses: http://waitbutwhy.com/2016/11/its-going-to-be-okay.html?utm_source=List&utm_campaign=7ddada973f-okay_2016_11_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5b568bad0b-7ddada973f-52034077&mc_cid=7ddada973f&mc_eid=14cb952ac7

Agreed, Nichols as MOP is a bit of a head-scratcher to me. I'm not even convinced he's our MVP.

If, and this is a big if, he's not talking out of his ass and his team is uniquely affected by the mic because they run an exclusively no-huddle offense then perhaps he has a point. But I'm not in a position to know how much of what he says is just excuse and how much is a legitimate, unique concern.

Exactly. If the legality of a substance was based on its harm to individuals and society as a whole (and conversely its ability to help) there would be a lot more psychotropic drugs that would be illegal and a lot more recreational drugs that would be legal.

I was thinking about the other thread regarding our awards nominees and was wondering if Medlock has a place in the MOP discussion. Perhaps he'd have a stronger case if the award was for MVP instead...

Or how after 17 unanswered points Rod Black said it's been back and forth all game.