• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

409 Excellent

About ItsAllOursBoys

  • Rank
    Comets Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

481 profile views
  1. Should've, Could've, Would've..... Calder is chosen based games played, not games that might have been played. Sure, Makar is good, but look at the team he's on. IMHO, Quinn has had a bigger impact on his team than Makar on his. Quinn wins the Calder by a handful of votes!
  2. I think the riots that would ensue would even make ANTIFA & BLM jealous!
  3. 1st bold) Yes, that is the context which many wish to deny 2nd bold) No, he said no such thing.
  4. Your argument is lacking on oh, so many levels, but I digress. a) I started my post with a thinly veiled insult? Virtue signalling about supposed moral deficiencies when this entire thread is inundated with slurs, slander and implicit expletives towards Trump is the height of intellectual hypocrisy. b) your regurgitating the same misquote. Since you won't read it in context, let me quote it hear for you.... "And I really am suggesting because if you look at Minnesota and the great success we had there, and other places, I’m suggesting to some of these governors that are too proud in New York, you see what’s going on there. Don’t be proud, get the job done. You’ll end up looking much better in the end. Call in the national guard, call me. We’ll have so many people, more people than you have to dominate the streets. You can’t let what’s happening happen. It’s called dominate the streets. You can’t let that happen in New York where they’re breaking into stores and all of the things. And by the way, hurting many small businesses, you can’t let it happen. Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement, regardless of race, color, gender or creed, they have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it. We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully George is looking down right now and saying, “This is a great thing that’s happening for our country.” This is a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality. It’s really what our constitution requires and it’s what our country is all about." His comments were about the rights of all individuals under the law and the constitution. In view of how the rule of law and the execution of justice is being played out in regards to Floyd's murder, it's in that context that Trump said "This is a great day for him". c) If it's a "family forum", perhaps all should refrain from ignorantly slandering, defaming, maligning and demeaning the character of a man they only know through the eyes of the MSM and all those, including 4-star generals - who hate him? d) Yes, Americans are allowed to protest, but within the rule of law. Once said "protesters" resort to rioting, looting, burning down businesses they cease to be peaceful protesters and become criminal thugs, vigilantes and domestic terrorists. e) The FBI and federal and state officials say the looting, violence and pillaging is the result of far-left groups like ANTIFA, BLM etc... Even some in the leftist media, like USA Today are reporting that most of the violence and rioting is being caused by far-left extremists and anarchist, specifically saying that "far-right groups have not yet made a significant appearance." I've yet to read any reputable news reporting that singles out "white supremacists". Not saying there isn't any, but the hard facts are that these riots are being driven by anarchists and communists on the left. f) Sarah Connor? Yea, I saw her before she left, but she said "I'll be back"!
  5. If you're going to quote someone in an attempt to refute their position, shouldn't you actually read the post? Regurgitating the original talking point instead of doing the leg work to verify the context says more about you than it does about the President.
  6. Yeah, sorry to rain on your parade. Last time I checked, anyone "showing up" in any discussion can share their opinions. Since when does the majority opinion in a intolerant, bigoted hate-trump discussion on CDC determine the truth? I should be surprised at such statements though as I've seen same oppressive group-think in places celebrate totalitarianism, like communist China and North Korea. Proven countless times? I don't think so....just emotional tirades and straw-man arguments scraped from other radical left groups and websites. It's unfortunate that the basic understanding of ad hominem response alludes you.
  7. Expected such a facts, just ad-hominem attacks and a non-nonsensical emotional temper-tantrum. Those who understand, no explanation is necessary. For those who refuse to understand, no explanation is possible.
  8. How many of you scholars actually took the time to listen to Trump's speech? Or do just jump on every sound-bite that feeds your insatiable bigotry, prejudice and bias? The overall speech was about the US economy, but the context of his George Floyd comments was the constitutional rights of all Americans under the law. Rights that have to be respected by law enforcement. That the officers who murdered George Floyd were not only fired, but now stand trial for murder is proof that the American system of justice is working. Georgy Floyd WOULD be happy about that! Americans also have the right to live in peace, safety and security, even while "protests" are occurring. Trump's comments about the need of the governors to call in the National Guard to stop the radical left communist revolutionaries from hijacking what should be peaceful protests was also mentioned That's the context of his words, but I doubt many of you care. Circle-jerks are just too much dam fun to care about contextual facts. And for what it's worth... Skynet's parent company Comcast (which directly funds Skynet), pushes Anti-American communist propaganda across its airwaves via China Global Television Network America, so it's not surprising that Skynet would distort the President's words to push the leftist-communist narrative. Now, let the flaming begin....
  9. I think it's a little too early to say with any degree of certainty whether this trade was a bad thing. Bit of a risk for sure, but at 28, Toffoli still has some good years left and is a developed scoring talent that makes us an even more dangerous team. Gotta think JB and company have considered all the angles and thought this through....I hope. Can't believe JB would give up young talent like Madden to trade for a guy he was going to let walk after a handful of games. Gotta think other trades or salary dumps are up and coming. JB has something up his sleeve - I think he will end up signing Toffoli to a multi-year contract.
  10. If you misunderstood something I said, I would have been happy to explain my point. Unfortunate that you take offense so easily. For those who understand, no explanation is necessary, but those who refuse to understand, no explanation is possible.
  11. My point wasn't about the legitimacy of any specific code of conduct created/enforced by the Capitals, so I don't disagree with your premise that Leipsic's responsibility was to represent himself within the bounds of such a code. He placed himself under that code and should be held accountable to it. But again, that's not the point I was making. Neither was I attempting to make a case for leniency due to the medium through which the speech crime occurred. With all due respect, that is your assumption only. My point was highlighting the hypocrisy of society's policing of certain speech crimes under the banner of tolerance and inclusiveness and the definition of right/wrong speech being determined solely on the basis of majority consensus, hence totalitarian control of society by consent. Right or wrong, any such code of conduct implemented by every NHL team would then be a natural outflow of such consensus.
  12. I would respectfully disagree with you. Legal code of conducts are to ensure that employees don't "offend" other employees, embarrass the company or tarnish the company image. Legality isn't necessarily a universal guide for proper behavior, but what's proper to those in charge. I could be wrong, but I suspect that the Washington Capitals didn't necessarily cut ties with Leipsic because of the personal moral stance of it's owners. What's more probable is the club's fear of loosing fans and the public backlash and lynching of their their franchise.