buddha

And its George Washington's birthday too! it was destiny.

the real reason we scored was dylan larkin distracting everyone, pulling the defense away from a wide open jack hughes. 🙂

watching that replay, makar with a terrible pinch attempt led to the breakaway.

so she paid $0? cool! and she didnt even have to give half her money to the government to do it. enough. good hockey result even if the team you hate the most won.

dont worry, you wont. i sliced off a chunk of of finger the other day, went to urgent care. it cost me $20.

my wife made me take her to tim hortons when we went to windsor. i told her "its canadian seven eleven!" but she had to have ketchup chips. always with the ketchup chips.

nyah bro, i'm not paying 50% of my income to the government so i can wait 12 months for an mri. canadian healthcare is mythologized by the american left (not to say us healthcare system works well, it doesnt, but life is about tradeoffs, my communist friend). hopefully we get tim hortons in the deal.

jack hughes almost cost them the game with his stupid tripping penalty at the end, and then wins it in ot. usa baby! sorry canada, you are now the 51st state.

US has been completely dominated. only reason theyre in the game is hellebuyck and luck.

canada should be winning by 2 or 3 goals.

i used to get up at 5 or 6 most weekends to watch United play. back when there were no soccer games on regular tv. trudge over to the bar with a few englishmen. now every game is on tv and its a bunch of milennials and gen z "man city and chelsea fans" there. vibe totally sucks now. i remember being there one morning and there were a ton of people in the backroom all drunk at 8 am. it was six nations pay per view. packed crowd that day for ireland. the big rugby games still get crowds at the bars here if its ireland or england (but especially ireland). being the only francophile there gets lonely. speaking of which, allez les bleus.

terrible strategy.

maybe. the way things are going, he might need another surgery. he may retire.

he had knee surgery, then cole anthony broke his leg, and then he had another knee surgery. unless he's going to make himself into a dead eye shooter, his career might be over.

awwww...you hate to see it....

Bulls have lost 8 straight and 11 of their last 12 but are definitely not tanking...

Danielson hurt again.

congress cedes power within the laws that it writes creating and funding those agencies. and then it procedes to cede more power when it does nothing when the executive overreaches that power. the democrats do nothing when biden tried to do it, and the republicans certainly do nothing when trump does. and its nice to see you and justice gorsuch on the same page, even though you'll be oblivious that youre reading from the same book.

the executive branch via the administrative state has had power ceded to it by congress for decades. part of that is via necessity as government has grown so much larger and entered every corner of american life (the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy), and part of it is from political necessity as members of congress figure it is much easier to let the executive take the blame for anything that goes wrong, and they can glom on to anything that goes right.

"insulated from executive branch politics". when has that ever been the case? the administrative agencies are a part of the executive branch and have been beholden to that branch since time immemorial. again, the difference is now you have an extremely bad actor as the executive for the first time since nixon. since congress has ceded its power to the executive, it takes one bad actor to bring down the house of cards.

go america. no O-ffense to my canadian brothers and sisters. i actually have a canadian who works for me now and she is - predictably - the sweetest, most polite person. that being said, i have yet to see her after a couple of labatts at the curling rink.

They might.

so he paid for that case but not this one? i know trump is dumb with money, but it seems like a poor and limited investment. maybe roberts wanted to shake him down for more payments? like its an NIL thing? more cash or i'm transferring to the second district appellate court.

in citizens united the court built on a previous ruling that money = speech in the context of political contributions, so congress (or the states) couldnt regulate citizens' political speech by telling them what amounts they could contribute to their favored political candidate. in the same way that congress cant pass a law that says G2 cant stand outside and tell everyone how much he loves president trump. not that it would ever need to pass such a law. i dislike citizens united very much, but i dont think this ruling has anything to do with it. but as usual, i could be wrong. this is a major questions doctrine/ieepa/taxing power/statutory interpretation question. the early commentary is interesting in that it talks about the roberts court's take on restricting congress' ability to delegate its powers to the executive, which would be a wonderful thing if congress would actually go back to doing its job. sarah isgur has a comment on it in the times from back in december that people are pointing to as prescient, if youre interested.

I guess we'll have to switch the narrative on the whole "supreme court is in the bag for trump" thing now...