Ray77

No, not at the lake.

I believe it's Springfield (AHL) and Stockton (ECHL). If he ends up in Stockton, Tim O'Connell would be his coach!

I would agree with you.

The player in question signed a 2 way AHL/ECHL deal.

He won't be at the lake this weekend (unless he goes on Sunday). I'll do some investigating and see what I can find.

...and L.A. is going to love Greener!

Bob, Your son is definitely in my thoughts and prayers. I don't know how I would handle this if either of my kids were diagnosed...I hope you all take this head on and fight through it - and come out on the other side better, tougher, and healthy! If you're not going to accept the satellite, I think that we (Sioux fans) need to get you to the Ralph this year and those with some pull make sure that Will gets to meet the team. Not sure I can be much help, but there are those out here that can...let's get this done.

Oh really? I'm missing the point? I am for the smoking ban and the bars that I like to go to allow smoking. Actually, how many non-smoking bars in Fargo can you name (bars, not restaurants)? I'm sure there may be 1 or 2, but I haven't heard of any. So to tell me that I can go somewhere that is non-smoking - isn't that like having it all your way? Great...I can choose between 2 places!!! Also, this isn't all or nothing - you can still smoke, just do it outside.

I guess I disagree with this logic. I look at it this way - take smoking out of the equation - we both have the same "right" to go into any restaurant, bar, workplace, business, etc. Now, you have 2 people...one that wants to ban smoking and one that wants smoking to be allowed. Who is more "right"? Smoking is harmful to non-smokers. I guess I feel that the "right" to breathe clean air and not be affected by smoke is greater than someone's "right" to be able to smoke in that establishment when it affects others. If you want to smoke, you still can, you just have to go outside to do it. It's not about a non-smoker wanting to take away a smoker's "right" to smoke...it's about not allowing them to do it indoors where it affects others.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but because the Home Rule Charter measure passed, doesn't that just mean that Fargo city commissioners will be prevented from changing ordinances that voters put on the books. Why would this mean that it will appear on every ballot until this is repealed?

Measure 1 - Home rule charter - YES (I'm pretty sure) Measure 2 - Total smoking ban - YES Measure 3 - Keep existing partial ban - NO

Question for you Dave...saying smoking is a filthy habit if you do it daily and in your home, in your car etc., however it's a different thing if you only do it on rare occations - is that like saying how much you hate fighting and goons in hockey yet you're an Ulf Samuellson fan?

Haven't you heard...buzz driving is drunk driving!

Dave...this post may have topped any other post I've ever read from you. You don't like smoking, you don't like the way you smell when you get home, you support no smoking policies everywhere else...but this makes you mad? I know people who were against the ban and their point of view was that this takes away rights of people (to smoke and bar owners to make this choice for their business). I guess I look at it as my right to breathe clean air trumps a person's right to smoke when it affects others around them. On top of that, nobody is saying a person can't smoke...they just have to go outside to do it. The rebuttal that I'm always told is that I can choose to go elsewhere. The reality is that I'm not aware of any non-smoking bars in Fargo - there may be 1 or 2 - (and I mean bars, not restaurants) and the only one in GF that I'm aware of is Dagwoods/Overtime (and I've heard that may be going to a smoking bar). So what that says is that I being a non-smoker have to cater to smokers and avoid places if I want to avoid smoke. Why is it OK to tell me that I can choose to go elsewhere if I want to avoid smoke, but there's something "wrong" with telling smokers they have to go outside to smoke and can't smoke in the establishment? Which one is more right? I guess I refer back to a person's right to breathe clean air trumps the right to smoke. Now with this ban, everyone can go to the bar (even smokers) and enjoy it...the smokers just have to go outside to smoke.

Where does Grand Forks stand on this? Is this going to be up for a vote in GF soon or is it nowhere on the radar there?

To be honest, I think a few years down the road we'll all (or most of us) look back and think - "Wow, it really took us that long to pass this?". Anyone remember when you could smoke on an airplane? Now how crazy does that sound?

I thought this would already have a thread out here (and maybe it's being talked about in another thread) but I was surprised that there wasn't a separate thread already on this in the Community section. Fargo supports total smoking ban

Also (and I don't know if this happened or not) but couldn't Wheeler have wanted more bonuses or something along that line that Phoenix declined to give him? True there is a "max contract" that he could get, but if I'm not mistaken there can be other bonuses or incentives, correct? I'm not saying this was the case...just saying there could be more to the story that what we all know.

Maybe Garth Snow was on to something!

Where were those girls when I was in high school?!

Deep Purple, anyone? Highway Star

Ahh...back from my vacation and catching back up with this. Norman Greenbaum would like to tell you about the Spirit In The Sky.

What a great thread! I hope nobody minds if I jump in here, but I just couldn't Help(less) myself. Neil Young

I don't think it's out of the realm of possiblity that they monitored this thread and your work and once you got your schedule updated they printed it!

Let us know if he responds to you...I'd be curious to what he has to say!