The Unknown Poster

I wouldnt dump him. He is too talented. But they have to do something other than let his issues lose games. Whether that's competition, a benching, sports shrink, calling him out publicly, I dont know.

He was good. You're misremembering.

What's the word of Jussi? Can he make the NHL? Is he figured in as Moose back up next year when Helle inevitably makes the Jets?

Needs time to adjust before writing him off

Seabrook is better. Buff won't get that much

Burmi has the ability to be a suitable replacement for Frolik. We will see.

The good play of Ehlers and Petan and as Scjeif playing so well take some pressure off Burmi. Because of circumstances he's compared to Frolik. He doesn't have to replace frolik' offense. Just be the best player he can be: puck possession, defensive. He will be fine.

It's not working against the cons lol The problem with political discussions is opposing sides are too entrenched and arguments they'd use to support their positions they ridicule if used to support the other side Usually trend to the lowest common denominator. However there are some good points in this thread.

In your mind it will never be disproved. How about vast majority of Canadians? Is that not reason enough to visit the issue or if the vast majority disagrees with you they are all wrong and you're right?

He was good in that first game and then invisible Very odd

Westwood and lawless ripping into him Did he avoid media or something?? Thy are saying he ran and hid

At this point is there a reason to make changes now? I sort of feel like there should still be consequences. How was Nichols so much better late? MB making adjustments??

Special teams issues? Hmmm

Common sense. Symbol of oppression has no place. The welcoming aspect of this country allows it in almost all circumstances but not when taking the oath. Pretty reasonable. And Canadians agree

Funny how the anti harper crowd says harper is wasting money persuing something important to the vast majority of Canadians The NDP would never waste money. Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Thinking people should sacrifice their religious beliefs because you or even the majority of Canadians disagree with them does conflict with multiculturalism, however. That you think wearing the niqab is a symbol of oppression is irrelevant. Because it's not about your beliefs; it's about her beliefs.And its pretty arrogant to say "common sense should prevail." Again, two levels of the Canadian judicial system have found in favour of the woman in this case. Are you really trying to argue that they don't understand this issue? Once again you're completely missing the point. You want to argue one thing and are trying to fit a stance into that narrow view.

Maybe make a bobble head of someone that doesn't seem to find himself in trouble.

@SportsCentre: UPDATE: @EdmontonOilers place D Nikita Nikitin ($4.5M AAV) on waivers for the purpose of assignment. #TSNHockey http://t.co/0nxBbt3135

That is ludicrous. That has to be malicious. Wow.

I will definitely be following the Moose way more than I did back in the day. And more than than the Caps

Not at all. I'm saying you twisted what you knew to be by meaning into a different argument altogether. Thinking people should embrace values of Canada does not Mean an end to multiculturalism. And if the debate is a mere distraction well tell that to the vast majority of Canadians. As I said before it's silly Common sense should prevail. But the opposition can't argue effectively because they don't want to agree with the government but disagreeing offends most Canadians.

Yup 70% of Canadians are dumb. But only if you're anti Conservative. If that many people agreed on anything NDP they'd be touting it big time. Once again, the right think everyone has an opinion. The left think you're dumb if you disagree. Lol

No, I don't think I am. You just conceded that conforming is an inherent piece of your definition of multiculturalism. I think that's pretty hard to reconcile.As was said, someone gets to "choose" because in this instance, it involves her religious beliefs. Because you don't agree with her beliefs, you don't think she should become a Canadian. I don't think that fits within the scope of multiculturalism. And I think its a fundamental piece of the Charter that, in the face of a majority who disagrees, it protects the rights of an individual. So two people or two million, it's irrelevant to the question at issue. If you can't doscuss an issue with some Common sense don't bother.

Listening to Lawless discuss this. FIrstly, Raffl was a good company man and claimed he didnt know who Bollig was and that he was a fighter by trade so he was cool with Peluso stepping in. But Lawless revealed that according to Raffl's agent, Raffl is also a fighter, has no problem fighting and its a solid part of his game. The agent also told Gary a couple of days ago that we would see Raffl fight this week as it was a part of his game he wanted to show. And Lawless said he doesnt believe for one second that Raffl would be scared or intimidated by anyone in the NHL. I think Peluso knew exactly what he was doing. If Raffl is the type that will defend his team mates and is good at it, then we dont need Peluso because Raffl is a way better hockey player. Im pulling for him. 13th forward. Yes, Peluso is younger but lets be honest, what he brings to the table, if we need to reload on that in two or three years, is it going to be a hard search?

I don't see how I'm misconstruing what you're saying. Here's the definition of assimilate: "to bring into conformity with the customs, attitudes etc., of a group, nation, or the like." You specifically brought up the nations standards in your definition. And my idea of multiculturalism, and the law's, is not to tolerate all other cultural aspects without limit. As I said, all rights freedoms are limited by S.1. of the Canadian Charter. And your argument would likely fail: she is willing to unveil for identification purposes to another woman and you can hear her saying the words during the oath. You're completely twisting what I said. What is Canada's standard? I'd say pretty welcoming to other cultures. If wanting other religions and cultures to conform to our welcoming and embrace of multi culturalism is assimilation, then so be it. Sort of warped though. Why does someone coming to this country get to choose who identifies them? What an odd thing. And such a silly thing to argue about. Two women. Good grief. What a waste of time and effort. Oh you dont want to remove that symbol of oppression to take an oath to THIS country? Okay. No citizenship for you. Oh you changed your mind? Cool beans.