Happy 69th Birthday To My Mother, Who's Not An Alcoholic

I guess I've been quite lucky over the years that my Mother doesn't have a computer. I must admit, I've said some not so nice things about her on Facebook and Twitter. All of them erroneous I might add. She's heard from a few other people about some of my comments. (Luckily I don't think she ever heard the jokes about prostitution and crackpipes.) She has a good sense of humor and I actually thought that she would find it all very funny. Well, she didn't. So I promised her that on her birthday, June 2nd, I would write up a blog retracting all of my awful comments. Hey, I need to stay in the Will somehow.

I've actually had friends of mine ask me if she really sweeps up at the Liquor Store after closing so that she can get a discount on Vodka, and if she really used Tequila to boil the Kraft Dinner when I was a kid. I'm here to set the record straight. Lies. All lies. My Mother is not, nor has she ever been, an alcoholic. She did throw up under the table of a restaurant once after drinking too much but we won't talk about that. (Now she's REALLY going to kill me!) But that doesn't mean she's ever had a drinking problem. She had every reason to drink having had to deal with my brother and I for the past forty some odd years.

It's true that she's been a single Mother for as long as I can remember. It's also true that we didn't have much growing up. It's not true however that my brother and I built bicycles out of empty wine bottles and beer cans. Nope. We used Kraft Dinner boxes. When I think back about what we put her through, it makes me feel guilty. But then I'll see a Dairy Queen Blizzard commercial and those feelings will be replaced with hunger pains and sugar cravings. My Mother worked in a bank in Maple Ridge BC for over 25 years. Started as a teller and worked her way up to Assistant Manager. She would often be overdrawn before the end of payday. I told her she was a crappy embezzler. I guess I can joke about that now. Back in the day it would've been like yelling "Everyone, down on the floor!!" She worked probably 50 hours a week. My brother and I played Hockey so she would often get off work and drive one of us to Squamish or Chilliwack or Richmond. We each had one 5 am weekday morning practice a week so twice a week my Mom would set her alarm for 4:30 am and then drop us off, go home to sleep for another 45 minutes or so and then come and pick us up. I don't really know how she ever did it. She doesn't even know. But she never complained. Well not to me anyways. She always put us first. She would even give me five dollars every day just for going to the Liquor Store to get her more Vodka. (I'm kidding, I'm kidding.)

Now we're grown up and her Grandkids have taken over in the driving her crazy department. She's retired and living in a nice place with a beautiful view of Okanagan Lake and she deserves everything that she now has and more.

She may struggle blowing out those 69 candles on her Kahlua cake on Saturday night, and she likely won't share her Kahlua cake and Amaretto Ice Cream with anyone, but she's not an alcoholic. Now I hope I will be back in her good books. Maybe I'll print this out so that she can read it. I only hope that she will be sober enough to comprehend it.

Canucks Crumble As Hawks Win Series

Frustration. Disappointment. Anger. I felt all of the above after the Canucks fell 5-1 at home in game 6 to a Hawks team that took us by the throat and squeezed. That's it. Series over. You can blame a lot of people for losing this series. You can point to Luongo for his below average play through at least a few of the games. You can look at Vigneault who just can't figure out how to win in the Playoffs. You could lay the blame on Kesler or Burrows or Daniel Sedin. I, however, blame myself. I went to my Mother's to watch the game and I forgot my Canucks' jersey. They were 2-0 when I went to her house with my jersey on, including game 5. I am at fault, and now I'll go to the box for 2 minutes and feel shame.

I watched some of the interviews with the Canuck players after the game and none of them wanted to use injuries as an excuse. But realistically, they were already so thin on defence, when you have Sami Salo at 50% at best, and then you lose Alex Edler, it would take a pretty big miracle to beat the Hawks. Kesler had a right shoulder injury and Samuelsson had groin and back problems. I don't consider these excuses. These are reasons why these players didn't play at their best. They gave as much effort as they could and that's all they can do. I haven't heard about Burrows and Daniel Sedin, but I have a feeling they were also suffering from ailments. I realize that injuries are a part of Playoff hockey and I'm sure Chicago had it's share of issues as well. You just can't go into the playoffs expecting to go all the way when you know that you cannot afford for any of your top 4 defencemen to get injured. I said all along, if Salo gets injured they cannot win, and what are the odds of Sami Salo playing anywhere from 16 to 28 playoff games without an injury? Considering he's suffered 39 injuries in his career, I'd say they are not good. Having said that, you have to give him a lot of credit for even playing in game 6. Bruised balls and all.

Looking back to the trading deadline, Mike Gillis very likely knew that Mitchell was done for the year and he knew that Lukowich was out for the season yet all he came up with was Andrew Alberts. No disrespect to Alberts, I mean he would be a pretty good defenceman if he could skate faster than a glacier, but that's just not going to turn you into a contending team. At that time some of the columnists for The Province said that Mike Gillis' failing to get a quality d-man or two would indicate that Gillis realizes that this team is not that close to winning a Cup. I remember being a little upset by those comments. I must admit I can get a little defensive when it comes to my Canucks. Well it certainly appears now that those columnists were exactly right. Maybe it's a good thing that Gillis didn't give up Schneider or Hodgson or even Mayson Raymond. A good GM has to think long term and next year I expect this team to be a lot better with the likely additions of Hodgson and Schroeder. Gillis has a lot of work to do to try and get us some quality defencemen. I'm not convinced that you can go all the way in this league without a superstar d-man. History has shown that it is extremely rare. How many Cups would Detroit have won without Nick Lidstrom? Nobody can dominate a game like a defenceman. They can control games at both ends. A goalie can stand on his head but if nobody on his team can score a goal, he can't possibly win. This team has never really recovered from the tragic loss of Luc Bourdon who very likely would have been that superstar. It's time for Gillis to address this problem.

Back to game 6, I thought Luongo played a great first period and kept us in the game. It's just not realistic to expect him to stand on his head for three periods. That first goal he didn't have much of a chance on and then things quickly started to unravel, not unlike their 3 other losses in this series. I think Luongo is still learning how to play Playoff hockey and with this years Playoffs combined with the Olympics, I think he's learned a lot about staying composed and patient and relaxed. Nobody wants to win more than Luongo but sometimes that can work against him. He's been guilty at times of over-committing and getting too emotional. The best thing that could happen next season would be Luongo giving up the 'C'. It's been a pretty big disaster. He needs to concentrate on playing goal. I'd make Kesler the captain.

I think Alain Vigneault has improved somewhat as a coach this year. He's learned a little more about matching lines and giving the guys who are playing well more ice time. I wish he had better instincts about calling timeouts, and make adjustments during games when needed, and show some intensity once in a while, but I don't think he's capable of any of those. I hope that Mike Gillis decides to make a change, and I would consider Scott Arniel. Whoever it is, they need to come in and show that they are in charge. This starts with taking the 'C' away from Luongo and telling him that he's not in charge of how often he plays. They need someone to come in who doesn't play favorites. You have to earn your ice time. Maybe I'm being a little unfair, but Vigneault has coached good teams throughout his coaching career and he is 2 games below 500. Not good enough. All I ask is that Gillis doesn't make Ryan Walter coach.

The Canucks-Hawks series looked to be the series to watch in round 2 and it's been a huge disappointment. A lot of one-sided games both ways. The Canucks lost their 3 home games by a combined score of 17-7, after having the most home wins in the NHL this year. That's inexcusable. I'd be really bitter if I'd shelled out a couple of hundred bucks to go to one of those games. I don't believe the Canucks lost the series tonight, I think they lost it in game 2. They dominated from the start, got out to a quick 2-0 lead that could have easily been 4-0, and then collapsed. You can blame Luongo for a lot but the fact is that he played well enough in those first 2 games for the Canucks to head home up two games to zip. The Canucks let the Hawks into the series. The great teams find ways to win when the other team is down. The great teams go for the jugular. The Canucks still have a ways to go but I hope they learned a lot in this series. I hope they approach this as a learning experience and have the mindset that they need to improve collectively and individually. There are some really good components there and with a few good signings from Gillis, they will likely be serious contenders next year.

Whatever happens in the off-season, I will continue to be a fan. I've been on the bandwagon for about 35 years and I'm not going to jump off anytime soon. I guess I should be eating my vegetables and taking my vitamins so that I can live long enough to see this team bring that silver chalice to Vancouver. I just know in my Heart that one of these years all the stars will align and that perfect storm will blow in and this team will figure out a way to win it all. I just hope it happens sooner rather than later.

Canucks Look To Extend Series

After playing a solid and composed game 5 in Chicago, and finally showing what this team is capable of, is this Canuck team just setting us up once again for our annual heartbreak? I've shed more tears on my '94 White Hot Canucks towel than I care to remember. They always suck us in, and then just when we start believing, and start discussing that damned parade, they fall apart.

That's all in the past, and today's a new day. When Roberto Luongo plays like Roberto Luongo, there is no telling how far this team can go. I think if he'd played solid this whole series against Chicago they might be resting up for the next series right now. When he is sharp and on his game, the rest of the team seems to be calm and composed. He looked as solid as I've seen him all season on Sunday and we'll need that from him again tonight. I'm just glad that maybe he shut his critics up for a few days. Seriously, if I read Luuuusongo one more time, I may go Postal. That's not funny. Nor is Byfugly by the way. Canuck's fans are anything but original.

And speaking of Sami Salo's nuts, (we were weren't we?) he is a gametime decision after talking a slap shot there at the end of the first period in game 5. I think I'm also a gametime decision just from watching that happen. I was in pain myself. Salo's 39 career injury was ugly and for once I think we would all understand if he's not playing tonight. But we would all be gland, err glad if he did play. (Okay that was bad, sorry.)

The road teams seem to be winning most of the games in the Playoffs this year. (I'd look up the exact stat but I'm too lazy) I think that's because when you play in front of home fans that are freaking out, waving the flags and chanting your name, it's hard not to get too emotional and too pumped up. Calm and composed tends to win hockey games nowadays, and that's how the road teams seem to be approaching the games. It's also easy to get into a game of firewagon, run and gun hockey when you are playing at home. The Canucks will likely lose if they play like that tonight against the Hawks. Calm, cool and composed. That's how you win hockey games now. Well a little effort helps too.

Nice to see Kevin Bieksa again. Wow! How much hockey did he miss? 2 years? I don't know how you just flip a switch and play with such confidence and actually make good decisions, but that's pretty much what happened. Hey, maybe there's hope for Andrew Alberts yet.

It would be nice to see the Sedins get going again. Clearly Daniel is injured (likely along with Kesler, Burrows and Salo, did we mention Salo's nuts?) but injuries are a large part of playoff hockey, and if you're good to go, you need to find a way to contribute.

The other ugly incident last game was a high stick by Byfuglien to the face of Shane O'Brien. I thought I'd accidentally sat on the remote and switched to the Scream Channel. I didn't know somebody could bleed that much. Now I know that that's not a penalty under the present rules, but I think in this particular case it should be. That was a serious follow-through and it should be left to the ref's discretion as to whether or not a penalty is warranted. I'm not saying Byfuglien did it on purpose, but would it be so hard to take a shot and have a follow through that stabs Shane O'Brien right between the blinkers? I don't think so. If they don't adjust this rule I bet they start teaching this at hockey schools. Although in Bettman's NHL I'm quite surprised O'Briend didn't get a penalty for too much Plasma on the ice. Clearly the refs missed a golden opportunity.

There are definitely a few good things that come from the Canucks playing at home. They have last change which is usually important, the fans will be loud and proud (until we give up a goal and then they'll be quiet and ashamed) and most importantly I won't have to listen to that horrific anthem singer in Chicago. Nobody buys a ticket to see him yet he acts like the star of the show. And his voice is painful.

It would sure be disappointing if the Canucks failed to win one game at home in this series, but I really don't have a feeling about tonight's game. I expect Roberto to play well and hopefully the rest of the team will respond. But this Hawks team desperately wants to head to San Jose after the game and not back home to Chicago for a game 7. We'll know a lot more in a few hours.

Haven't We Seen This Movie Before?

It seems like only a year ago that we saw what occurred on Friday night at GM Place. As usual the original was better. This sequel was a waste of time. And money. While this nightmare hasn't ended yet, it's obvious and hauntingly sad ending seems all but a foregone conclusion.

Canucks coach Alain Vigneault has apparently learned nothing from last years loss to the Hawks. He still clearly has no answer for Byfuglien. Or any other Blackhawk for that matter. On paper I think these are two pretty even teams. last year I think the Canucks were definitely the better team. Joel Quenneville is outcoaching Vigneault. I think that's one of the biggest factors that nobody seems to be talking about.

There's no question that Luongo put the team in a hole when he allowed a weak goal 18 seconds into the game. Other than that I don't think he could really be faulted for anything else. When you give Chicago 8 power plays, they are going to score. I don't think there's any stopping them. Don't pick on the penalty killing. They need to stay out of the box in the first place.

Which leads conveniently to the reffing. I agree with the two crosschecking penalties O'Brien received. He needs to control himself better, and put the team first. But the Salo, Daniel Sedin (2), and Raymond penalties were garbage. Daniel got one penalty after his stick broke when he bumped a Chicago player after the whistle. This automatic penalty when you break a stick on a player mentality has to stop. Have you seen how many sticks break in a game? They are breaking all over the ice. Some break when a player receives a pass. It can't be that black and white. While the Mason Raymond incident was technically a penalty, if you are going to call that then they should be blowing the whistle every 20 or 30 seconds. In fact there should be no 5 on 5 play at all. The refs need to call a game so the players know what they can and cannot get away with. Clearly there is no consistency. The officiating in this league is atrocious right now. Did it cost the Canucks the game tonight? I'm glad you asked. Why yes it did in fact. The Blackhawks scored 4 power play goals and a 5th goal a few seconds after a penalty had ended. The league's influence last year resulted in Chicago beating us when they told the refs to allow Luongo to be treated like a pinata and the same thing is happening all over again. Feel free to call it a conspiracy if you wish. Those of you who think I'm being ridiculous are ignoring the facts. The penalties, the disallowed goals, bumping Luongo, pushing Luongo into the net and scoring. Enough's enough. This has got to change or the Canucks can't possibly win this series.

As it is they will have to win 3 in a row, 2 of them in Chicago. No easy task but keep in mind that's exactly what happened in '94 against the Flames. Since Calgary is a Canadian team the refs didn't influence the outcome of that and allowed us to come back and win what I think was one of the best series' in NHL history. It's happened before and it can happen again. It's possible. I just don't see this series even coming back to Vancouver. The way this series has fallen apart for the Canucks, and knowing the killer instinct that the Hawks have, is there any way the Canucks can win Sunday night? And this is coming from an optimist.

The Canucks need to get back to their game. Forget about Byfuglien and concentrate on what they have to do. They need to play on the edge, but don't go over it. Let Byfuglien stand in front of Luongo. You can't move him, so don't take up space in front trying. And don't cross check him in the neck after he's down. Yeah, I'm talking to you Alex. Our defense needs to be better. Starting with replacing Alberts with Rome. Alberts just can't keep up with the play. While we're at it, can we wave a magic wand and turn Kevin Bieksa into Nick Lidstrom? Maybe then we'd have a chance.

No question Luongo has to be better. I don't think it was fair of Vigneault to throw him under the bus though when he said in his post-game comments that Roberto is the second best goalie in this series. If it was that simple I'd actually be able to sleep tonight. Luongo can't see the puck. He can't come out and attack the shooter. He's being bumped and knocked down. 200 feet away, Antti Niemi has had it pretty easy. He's been able to see a huge majority of the shots. The Canucks finally started to be more aggressive tonight but still didn't really bother him enough. Even though he's seeing most of the shots, he still lets out a ton of rebounds that his defencemen gather up and clear out of harms way. At the other end of the ice the Canucks defencemen kick it around until it ends up on a Hawks stick and in it goes. I should also point out that Luongo did his job in the first two games. If the rest of the team had done theirs then they would have headed home up 2-0. I'm sure this series would look a lot different right now and it may have in fact been over by now. I'd like to think that nobody would argue that point. For those of you bitching about Luongo, (and I know there are A LOT of you) if you think he's so bad why do you think the Chicago game plan is always to bump him and not let him see the puck? Quenneville knows that if Luongo can come out and challenge shooters and see the puck that the Canucks will win the series. I can't dumb it down any more than that.

Alain Vigneault has coached some pretty solid teams in Vancouver and Montreal and yet his playoff record is now 2 games below .500. Do you think that those numbers are good enough? I'm the first one to say that most stats you can throw out the window. If stats told the whole story you wouldn't need to have scouts travel all over to watch games. Just look at the box score in the paper and then draft your players. The only stat that really counts are wins and losses. And this playoff stat of Vigneaults stinks. I'm not saying he's a terrible coach, but if you want to win a Stanely Cup I'm not convinced that he's your guy. I haven't completely given up on them yet, maybe there'll be some sort of Mother's Day Miracle, but if they get blown out on Sunday I really hope that Gillis will decide it's time for a change.

Speaking of Gillis, and don't think for a second that he's above any criticism, he failed miserably at the trade deadline. I think this team is actually very close to going all the way, they were just way too thin on defence. And that's with Salo miraculously remaining healthy throughout the playoffs thus far. Gillis probably knew that Mitchell wasn't coming back and he knew Lukowich was done for the year, yet all he could come up with was Alberts? Gillis has done some great things for the Canucks (mainly Samuelsson and Ehrhoff) but I want a GM that will do what is needed at the trade deadline to put us over the top when we are close.

I'm a little down right now but I know that I'll wake up in the morning and the sun will be up, the birds will be chirping. Life will go on as usual. Once I have my medication I will be fine. Tomorrow's a new day. They just need to take it one game at a time, one shift at a time. Our best players need to be our best players. It's do or die. Pick a cliche. Any cliche. It just makes me want to scream knowing that someplace, somewhere out there Gary Bettman is smiling.

After Dismal Start The Hawks Come Back To Tie Series

As a Canucks fan I was very nervous going into game 2. I put a little extra Vodka in my Coke Zero to try to steady the nerves. My fingernails were already long gone. After the Canucks found a way to win game 1 in Chicago, I knew that the Hawks would approach this like a must-win game and I just hoped the Canucks could weather the early storm. That, of course, didn't happen. Quite the opposite actually. The Canucks pinned the Hawks deep in their own zone for the better part of 7 minutes waiting for Antti to cry Uncle. (See what I did there?) While the Canucks did score two big goals, (Mason Raymond and Mikael Samuelsson) they could have easily been up by 4. Then they appeared to get a little complacent. Maybe a little cocky. Or do you give credit to Chicago who, after Quenneville changed things up and put Hossa out with Toews and Kane, scored a huge goal to put an immediate halt on that seemingly unrelenting momentum the Canucks were enjoying?

From then on Chicago basically took over the game. Luongo got more excercise during the over-the-top and annoying National Anthems than he did during the first 7 minutes. I was worried because I know he likes to feel the puck early to get into games. After the Hawks first goal he definitely got his excercise and played a very solid game. I would like to see the Canucks battle more. They didn't really have to battle early because they owned the puck. The hard part is fighting to get the puck back when you don't have it. I thought we played like we were a little afraid as well. It's important to keep your head up and try to avoid getting hit by Byfuglien and Seabrook, but you don't give up the puck to do so. If you need to take a hit to make a play, in the playoffs that's what you have to do. Of course that's easy for me to say while I lounge in my easy chair munching Baked Cheezies, but that's why they live in Mansions and I live in my car. (Okay, that's not true. Just trying to make the story more interesting.) The turning point in this game came on a Canucks power play. The puck bounced over Ehrhoff's stick and Patrick Sharp went end to end and put it in a basically empty net. The Canucks played that power play very poorly and instead of having the killer instinct to get that huge 3rd goal that would have given them a two goal lead, they get out of synch and end up giving up the tying goal. If the Canucks end up losing this series, that's one of the plays that you can probably look back on. It was tight from then on. It seemed to be pretty even. I was thinking we might see overtime in which case I would be pouring myself a triple Vodka Coke Zero. Chicago poured the pressure on and Luongo did everything he could but he just couldn't make the desperation save that he so often makes. Down 3-2 with a minute and a half to go I would've really liked to see a time-out. Get on the same page. Figure out when to get Luongo out. They didn't call one and they never really got on track to threaten to tie it up. Kane score in the empty net to finish things off.

I thought the Hawks exposed our defense as well. Ehrhoff, Bieksa, Alberts, and Edler all had pretty tough games. I think maybe it's time to get Rome into this series and give Alberts a rest. Rome is smaller, but they could use some more mobility back there. I would also put Ryan Johnson in for Rick Rypien if he is ready to go, although that may take too much toughness out of the lineup. Maybe scratch Grabner.

I was frustrated that the Canucks couldn't really test Niemi after the 7 minute mark of the first period. Even with the power plays they had, they had the mindset that it had to be the perfect play. They needed to get the puck on net. He's not that good of a goalie. Move the puck around and set up the one-timer from the point while Burrows or Bernier get in his face.

Once again I was happy with the play of Luongo. He did about all he could do. While I thought the reffing was decent overall, I thought there could have been a goalie interference penalty or two against the Hawks. That Andrew Ladd shot to Luongo's head was not unintentional.

Is it just me or are there more broken sticks than usual? This is now beyond annoying and I fear that it could cost one of these teams the series. Maybe ease up on those slappers. The most dangerous shots in hockey are the wrist shots and backhanders anyways. When Sammy Salo winds up for that big shot the odds are better that he breaks his stick than they are for him getting that shot on the net.

While the Canucks fans can (and often do) scream and yell and whine and cry about the outcome, nobody thought this was going to be easy. I'm sure if the Canucks had won the game there would've been fans bringing brooms to game 3. That wouldn't have been a good idea. I know it's frustrating because that was a very winnable game but they still ended up with a split. For those people saying that Chicago has outplayed us in 5 of the 6 periods, that's just ridiculous. We had a big lead in the first game and let up on them. Who cares which team played better in each period? The Hawks were basically embarrassed. You can't look at hockey in a period by period way. If the Canucks were down by a big margin to Chicago but then outplayed the Hawks in the 3rd to get a little closer, that's not something you can be satisfied with.

The Canucks need to come into GM Place and initiate the play. Own the puck. When you have the puck you are likely to either score or draw penalties. Use their speed, play a solid team game, move the puck and get shots on net. I would bump Niemi whenever possible. Old time hockey. You bump our goalie, we'll bump yours.

If Luongo continues to play well then I think we are in really good shape. They just need to put their foot on the gas pedal and don't let up. At least not until they've scored half a dozen goals. Chicago is too good of a team to let up off the mat. We're still in really good shape and if I'm Chicago I'm a little concerned at this point. Now is the time to put the fear of God in them.

Chicago On The Ropes Going Into Game 2

It may be a little premature to say that this Blackhawk team is in trouble, but they don't look like the dominant superpower that they think they are. In fact there are only two teams in the playoffs that have given up more goals than they've scored. Montreal is the obvious one, but the other is Chicago. Doesn't sound like a superpower to me. I don't think it's a stretch to call this a must win for the Hawks. Going into Vancouver, where the Canucks have been all but unbeatable, down 2-0 would be a nightmare scenario for this team.

The Canucks on the other hand have not played well when they start to get complacent. If they play like that tonight they are in trouble. There is a lot of talk about how dominant the Canucks were in game one, and I don't agree. They were outplayed by a pretty good margin throughout most of the first period. They were a little lucky to have the lead after one, let alone a two goal lead. The key to the entire game was definitely the play of Roberto Luongo. If he can play like this consistently from here on out, there may be no stopping this club. There's a long way to go however, and judging by the way Luongo has played most of the season, that's still a pretty big if.

Look for Chicago to play much more physical tonight. They had trouble getting to Luongo, I expect that to change in game two. Grabner moves up and Demitra moves down to the fourth line which I think is a good move. Demitra was virtually invisible in game one, and if he plays better tonight, Vigneault can move him up if he wants.

I was very happy with the play of the Sedins in game one. Particularly the first shift of the second period. Raymond scored a late goal to end the first and instead of sitting back and protecting that two goal lead, the Sedins and Samuelsson came out and attacked on that first shift of the second, with Henrick eventually putting it in the net. That basically finished off the Hawks who collapsed like Devin Setaguchi after somebody looks at him the wrong way. Maybe the Sedins are the real deal. They are starting to prove that they can perform in the playoffs. People have underestimated them every step of the way, and I don't expect that to change until they win a Stanley Cup. That, by the way, is looking more and more like it could be a serious possibility. We will have a better idea about that in a couple of hours.

Hold On To Your Butts

One of the more famous lines from Jurassic Park came from Samuel L. Jackson. "Hold on to your butts" basically warned the audience to strap on your seat belts and get ready for a hell of a ride. Seventeen years later I think that same phrase could apply in the second round series between Chicago and Vancouver. Jim Hughson might want to say those words before the puck drops in game one. There will likely be no introduction and no character development. There will certainly be no love story. No, there's a genuine hatred between these teams and I would guess that from the opening face-off there will be T-Rex's and Velociraptors running rampant at the United Centre. And you can be sure that Dustin Byfuglien and Bryan Bickell will be in Roberto Luongo's grill quicker than you can say Dilophosaurus. Okay, enough with the Jurassic Park analogy. It was fun while it lasted, but let's move on.

It looks like this should be the series to watch in the second round. I have a bad feeling that whoever makes it through the Western Conference, bruised and battered and exhausted, might end up like the goat did after the T-Rex had his din-din, (dammit, I promised I was going to stop doing that) once Pittsburgh has finished with them. The Canucks have been waiting for this for a long time. They still feel like they should've beat the Hawks last year in the playoffs, and I would have to agree. I think more than anything they were outcoached. Joel Quenneville found a way to get under our skin and it worked. The reffing (or lack thereof) certainly didn't help. I think it's a new and improved Alain Vigneault this year. I'm still not completely sold on him, but I think that he's done a good job this year. The Canucks had some key injuries this year and their number one goalie and arguably their best player had an off year. Despite that, they still won their division. You have to give Vigneault some credit for that.

In The Vancouver Province, columnist Tony Gallagher seems to think that Chicago has the speed advantage. I'm not convinced that is the case. I think we can skate with that team, despite the fact that Andrew Alberts moves like a dinosaur. (There I go again!)

The Canucks had a very long layoff last Spring after sweeping the Blues, this time it's a 5 day layoff, which is stretching it a bit, but still not too bad. I think the Canucks are better prepared after facing a solid Kings team that plays a similar game to the Hawks. Even their goalie Jonathan Quick is similar to Chicago's Niemi. On the other hand the Nashville Predators were everything that the Canucks are not. They have very little scoring up front and are solid on defense. It will be a big adjustment for Chicago to face the Canucks. That may give us a slight edge in the early going.

I was shocked to see in today's Province that they give the edge in goal to Chicago. Clearly somebody made a mistake. While Niemi's numbers may be slightly better in the first round, LA is a much more offensive team than Nashville. Luongo is a much better goalie than Niemi and if he fails to prove that in this series, the Canucks will once again be on the outside looking in once this series reaches it's conclusion.

The good news is that apparently Ryan Johnson and Aaron Rome are close to coming back. We could definitely use Johnson as he takes faceoffs, kills penalties and most importantly, blocks shots. Chicago uses all four lines, so if we can put together a decent enough fourth line so that we can do the same, that would help a lot.

I know a lot of people expect fireworks off the opening face-off, but I'm not sure that's going to happen. I hope the Canucks decide to stick to business and let the Hawks run around if they so desire. Luongo also needs to focus on the puck and forget about that Brachiosaurus parked in his crease. (I just can't stop myself.) I have a feeling that Luongo is going to have a great series. If that happens, and we don't have any injuries to our top four defencemen, I think we're in good shape.

Either way, this series should have suspense and drama, horror (Andrew Alberts) and comedy (the green men) and everything you could hope for. Steven Spielberg would be proud.

NHL Round 2 Predictions: My Annual Coin Flip

Less than 24 hours after the Washington Capitals proved that I am not sniffing glue or huffing unleaded gas (if you read my earlier predictions, I said that the Capitals weren't that good and were going to exit early) it's time for the second round.

The first round had some of the best and most entertaining hockey I've seen in years. Seven of the eight series went to at least six games and the only one that didn't (Philadelphia beat New Jersey in five) was a pretty big upset. Montreal beat Washington 2-1 in the final game of the first round and that was incredibly exciting. If you really thought that Washington was as good as their Regular Season record, you could almost call it the Miracle On Ice: The Squeakquel. I'm not really a fan of either team and even I jumped out of my easy chair and did a couple of fist pumps as the buzzer sounded. (And if you've read any of my blogs, I get out of my easy chair as often as Sarah Palin says something coherent.) I was happy about the outcome for two reasons. One, another Canadian team has advanced (I still would like another look at that high sticking call the Canadiens took in the last minute and a half, they didn't show a very good replay. I don't think CBC wants to stir the conspiracy pot for some reason), and two, the over-rated Ovechkin gets bounced. It has not been a good year for him (by his standards) after getting blown out by Canada in the Olympics and failing to win the Art Ross or the Rocket Richard trophies. Although I am a fan of Ovechkin, I don't think anybody is as exciting as he is to watch, he is not a team player, and a great system will beat his style more often than not provided they also get the goaltending, and Halak was brilliant. In the desperate dying moments of game 7, there was Ovechkin, head down, trying to crash his way to the net. I'd be pissed if I was a teammate. I certainly don't feel sorry for him though. He now has about five months off to spend some of his $10 Mill annual salary.

As far as my predictions from round one, I was 3 for 4 in the West (I still think Chicago was lucky to advance after Nashville basically gave game 5 away), and in the East I was 1 for 4 (only right about Pittsburgh). In my defense, since the West plays very few games against the East and I rarely watched any games that did not involve the Canucks, well, do the math and you'll figure out that I have no clue what I'm talking about as far as the Eastern teams go. Although I think Gerry Cheevers and Bobby Clarke must've played well for the Flyers and Bruins to advance. (They're still playing aren't they?)

Now for round two, I think it's pretty reasonable to say that there are five teams with a legitimate shot at winning the Cup. All four teams in the West and Pittsburgh. The West is really tough to pick, good thing I'm an expert.

Detroit(5) vs San Jose(1): Detroit is certainly peaking at the right time and will be very tough to beat. San Jose is notorious for choking in the playoffs but it's important to remember that they are not the same team as they were in the past. GM Doug Wilson made some significant changes in the offseason and this team is better than previous ones. They also were the best home team in the league in the regular season and they have home ice advantage. Should be a great series. Detroit in 7.

Vancouver (3) vs Chicago (2): This will likely be the series to watch in the second round. These two teams hate each other. Vancouver has been targeting Chicago since they shook hands with them last Spring after the Hawks beat them in six games. It's a better, faster, much more offensive Canucks team, but I think Chicago is better too. While the Canucks are weaker on the back end, Chicago doesn't have a goalie. If Vancouver's defense can get through the series without an injury to one of their top four, and maybe the refs protect Luongo a little bit with a couple of goalie interference calls, Vancouver will win this series in six and the size of the Canucks bandwagon will immediately double.

Over in the East, who the Hell knows. It's time for my annual coin flip.

Montreal (8) vs Pittsburgh (4): The obvious choice would be the Penguins. They play a better team game and have a better system. Also better goaltending. If Montreal is going to stay in this series, Halak will probably have to play four brilliant games. That's simply too much to ask. Pittsburgh in 5.

Philadelphia (7) vs Boston (6): Okay, seriously now. I have no idea. Heads - Boston. Tails - the Flyers. (drum roll...) Heads it is. Boston in 7. You might not want to put too much money on that one.

Gary Bettman: A Hate Story

Gary Bruce Bettman was born on a stormy Spring morning on June 2, 1952 in Queens, New York to a Jewish, ahh screw it. If you want to know his entire pathetic history, try Wikipedia. I'm more interested in his time as Commissioner of the National Hockey League, which began in 1993 and inexplicably continues to this day. Inexplicably is probably the wrong word. The reason he is still there is because of money. I'm sure if you were to ask him about it he would give you his usual Lawyer jargon and never actually come close to answering the question.

The team owners brought Bettman in to raise revenues, and that he has done. They've gone up from $400 Million to $2.2 Billion. Pretty impressive. What's not so impressive is that he has ruined the game that I have come to love over the last 30 some odd years. He knows as much about Hockey as Sarah Palin knows about the Middle East. (Which isn't much in case you thought I might be a Republican.)

Since he became Commissioner the league has added 6 new teams, all of them in the South. He's also taken teams out of Winnipeg and Quebec City and moved them to Phoenix and Colorado. All of this was done for the sole purpose of getting a major American tv contract. So now we have teams in places like Carolina and Nashville where most people don't care about Hockey, and because they went from 24 teams to 30 teams, they've now watered down what was a great product. I still think I could've made the Columbus team in it's first year if I'd tried out and I can barely skate backwards. None of this mattered to Bettman. Money, money, money.

Of course he insists he has nothing against Canada, and that may well be true. He's the type of person that would sell his Grandmother a Toyota. Canada already has tremendous support from a huge majority of the population and so they don't matter to Bettman. He's much more interested in the people of Dallas and Tampa who've never seen a sheet of ice and don't particularly want to. The fact that no Canadian team has won the Stanley Cup since Montreal in 1993 (the year Bettman got the job) and since then both Carolina and Tampa have won Stanley Cups makes me sick to my stomach.

One thing that I discovered in my countless hours (kidding) of research, is that the year after Bettman took the NHL job the average ticket price in the US was $35.07. The average ticket price for Canadian teams was $29.93. This year the average for US teams was $46.57 for an increase of $11.50, and the average for Canadian teams was $70.66 for an increase of an incredible $40.73! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. It's important to remember that we the fans are the reason that the NHL exists and that Bettman even has his job. Without us shelling out the big bucks for a ticket in the nosebleeds, a crappy hot dog and an overpriced jersey made in China, not to mention an overpriced program and $30 for parking, there is no money to pay the players.

This brings me to the topic of the day, the dreaded conspiracy theory. I love conspiracies. W. Bush was behind 911, Nixon was set up and Elvis is a soccer ref somewhere in South America. Ray Ferraro says it is absolutely not possible for a conspiracy to exist in the NHL and he says that it's an insult to every player who's ever played the game. Since he is a former player, I don't think he really is being objective about the whole issue. If there is a conspiracy, I don't think players and coaches would be involved. It's not like Bettman would be talking to the refs before each game to influence the outcome, but there are many many questionable incidents since Bettman took office. The facts don't lie. I don't think there's any question that the NHL wants Chicago, Washington, Phoenix and LA to win and I have no problem with that. As long as they don't try to influence the outcome. If I'm not mistaken, Bettman has admitted in the past that an NHL final involving two Canadian teams would mean financial disaster for the league. It appears to me that the only way a Canadian team will ever win a Stanley Cup is if two Canadian teams make the final.

If you look at the Vancouver-LA series for example, in game two in overtime the Canucks are called for too many men when Kevin Bieksa gets hit with the puck as he's going off the ice. In the rule book that is clearly not a penalty, yet a linesman makes the call. Normally in overtime, even if he played the puck they would overlook it. They don't want to determine the outcome of a game with a call like that. Very questionable. LA by the way scored on the power play to win the game. In the following game the puck goes off of Daniel Sedin's skate as he was stopping in front of goalie Jonathon Quick. Clearly there was no kicking motion. Distinct or otherwise. Clearly, under the rules that is a goal. The refs on the ice called it a goal. Yet it went back to Toronto for them to review. Eight minutes went by and they overturned the call. First of all if you have to look at that play for eight long minutes to see if it was a distinct kicking motion, there was nothing 'distinct' about it. Second, Sedin had less than a half a second to react to the puck coming across while a guy is pushing him towards the net and he is trying to stop. It's simply not possible to kick it in intentionally. The fact that Sedin wasn't even looking at the puck doesn't seem to have any relevance. What pisses me off is the Bettman press conference the following day. He insists the puck was kicked in and they made the right call. He says what Sedin did was dangerous and somebody could have been hurt. I would suggest to Daniel Sedin that next time he's flying towards the net and being pushed from behind that he doesn't turn his skates to stop because that's dangerous. And when he runs the goalie into the net and through the end boards I hope that Bettman will help the LA goalie with his rehabilitation whenever he comes out of his coma. I mean really. Does he think we're all stupid? He also points to this DVD that was sent out to all the clubs that clears up any confusion on the rules. Rule 49.2 deals with kicked in goals. He claims this DVD will prove that the Sedin goal should not have counted. So I watched it. And it made me even angrier. Three of the goals that they say should count involved more of a kicking motion than the disallowed Sedin goal. Bettman, in typical lawyer fashion, is just trying to save his own ass and hope that this all blows away. He says if there was a mistake on the play (which he's quick to say there wasn't) everyone just needs to move on. Mistakes happen. I disagree. A ref will make a mistake on the ice during a game. Hockey is easily the toughest sport to officiate. But the point of video review is to overturn bad calls and get it right. This did the opposite. When you look at numerous angles of a play for eight long minutes, there should be no mistakes.

The only hockey person I've heard that thought it was kicked in was Kelly Hrudey, but then he's a former goalie and thinks that no goal should count. Even Scotty Bowman said they got it wrong, but of course Gary Bettman knows more about hockey than Scotty Bowman. I mean, what has Bowman ever done? Besides winning eleven Stanley Cups I mean.

Apparently I'm not the only one that thinks Gary Bettman is a waste of space. Just go to Garybettmansucks.com , Firebettman.com or Firegarybettman.com for more information. It must be nice to be so popular.

What the team owners have done is sold their souls to the Devil (Bettman, in case you haven't been paying attention) for the almighty Dollar and screwed it's most dedicated fans. I don't know if they could get rid of Bettman if they tried to. He's here to stay. I wouldn't be surprised if he moved the Oilers to Albequerque and the Flames to New Orleans. Hey, why don't we move the Canucks to San Diego? They already have an Orca in the logo, they could be sponsored by Sea World.

Maybe it's time for us Canadian fans to take back the game that we love. I say let's form our own league and put teams in Victoria, Kelowna, Saskatoon, and Halifax. Maybe even Winnipeg, Hamilton and Quebec City. Go a little smaller. Lower salaries and ticket prices. Probably not possible, but I'd be all for it. Even if it meant that Andrew Alberts was quartebacking the point on the power play.

A conspiracy? You be the judge. It wouldn't shock me but I'm not completely convinced just yet. Just keep an eye on the big market American teams and see for yourself. Especially in game sevens. Are they getting the favorable calls? All I can say is that if Nashville or Phoenix wins the Stanley Cup this year, I'm going to start watching Figure Skating.

Canucks Light Up Kings

Our best players have to be our best players. There's nothing better than starting a blog with an overused cliche. However, truer words were never spoken. In an act of desperation Vigneault put Samuelsson back with the Sedin twins in the third period of game 4 and that third period is the turning point in this series thus far. This line has been on fire and Samuelsson is picking corners like he's hitting targets at a skills competition. The Kings simply have no answer for him. 7 goals in 5 games to start these playoffs. That shows you how good the Swedish Olympic team was that he wasn't even good enough to make that team. How did they do again?

Besides the top line, the Bernier, Wellwood, Demitra line had a great game. Good to see Bernier put a couple into open nets. Normally he misses. Hey, the net's only 6 feet across, give him a break.

It's important to not get too excited though. (Well, us fans can get excited as long as the team knows that clinching game will likely be the most difficult to win.) They now have to go back into Staples Centre where they have struggled this year. (Which road building haven't they struggled in?)

The Canucks penalty killing was much better tonight, allowing only one goal that was once again a lucky bounce. Combine that with the fact that Luongo is now outplaying Quick and you have to think that if those trends continue, there is no way the Kings can win this series. Although stranger things have happened.

Speaking of strange things happening, can you believe that Andrew Alberts didn't take a penalty tonight? Sorry, I should have told you to sit down first. He actually played a reasonably solid game which is great news. If this team does go on a run, he is likely going to be a part of it. Thanks for nothing Mathieu Schneider.

Game 6 is Sunday and the Canucks need to keep their foot on the gas pedal. This Kings team appears to be fragile right now and their confidence is shaken. They are a young inexperienced team. This is not the time to let up. Top teams finish off their opponents in these circumstances. It's time for these Canucks to prove they are a top team. It's time to show Gary Bettman that he's going to have to try a lot harder to knock these Canucks out of the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Canucks Look To Stop The Bleeding In Game 4

Now is not the time to push the panic button, but for those bandwagoners out there, good to know you. Take care. The Canucks-Kings series has been one that the Canucks have virtually dominated in every aspect except for special teams and goaltending. Unfortunately, those are probably the two most important. If the Canucks don't figure out there penalty killing and Luongo can't raise his game to at least a solid if unspectacular level, the Canucks will not win this series. Where is that panic button again?

If you take special teams out of the equation, this series is probably 3-0 for Vancouver right now. For those of you saying that the Canucks need to stay out of the box, that's not realistic. You can't play aggressively and with intensity in the playoffs if you know that you cannot take a penalty or you will get scored on. They do need to cut down on their stupid penalties, but more importantly they need to kill a good chunk of them off. In game 3 they didn't even make it beyond the first minute. By the third power play goal it was actually becoming laughable. The most successful way to kill a penalty is be aggressive. The PK forwards have to pressure Doughty and Johnson, who don't ever seem to leave the ice on a power play. I don't know why we started to sit back and watch in that last game.

There's no doubt Luongo needs to be better, he will certainly admit to that, but it all starts in front of him. We need to compete better. They played a great first period in the last game and then came out in the second like they were proud of their accomplishments and could sit back and coast. The trouble was it was only 1-1 at that point.

I hate to keep pointing fingers at Vigneault but at some point in that second period (well before the backbreaking fourth goal) he should have called a time-out. The only reason I think he's reluctant to do so is that he has no clue how to motivate his players. He is not a motivating, intense type of coach, and because he's not, they at least need an intense assistant coach. Ryan Walter shows about as much intensity as a small plastic soapdish. There are certain times when a coach needs to lose it. Like in game 2 when we received that phantom too-many-men call. I would have gone ballistic. If a coach shows that he will battle for his team, that he will do whatever it takes, that he will be intense and emotional when need be, then his players will do the same in return. After the infamous Daniel Sedin goal (err non-goal), I would have gone Jim Playfair. And I would probably have become a hero in the eyes of Canuck fans. I know tht the refs on the ice didn't make that awful decision (actually they made the right call) but you've got to show that these inexcusable mistakes will not be tolerated. On the bright side, I strongly believe that if LA goes on to win this series, that Vigneault will be gone. Nothing personal, I actually think he's very likeable and a pretty good coach, the trouble is good coaches generally don't win Stanley Cups. Great coaches do. Nobody will be happier than myself if he proves me wrong.

The other major obstacle that the Canucks will have to overcome is the apparent fact that the NHL does not want Vancouver to win this series. First of all, I would like to say that I don't really care who the NHL wants to win. Bettman can be a Hurricanes fan for all I care. But if they are trying to influence games, then I have a problem with that. I'm still not sure about a conspiracy against the Canucks and all Canadian teams in general, but you can make a pretty good case for it. The best way to tell is to watch some of these series. The NHL would want Phoenix, Chicago, LA and Washington to win. They've already appeared to have some influence in the Capitals-Canadiens series. It will be interesting to see if that continues. In game two of the Canucks series, the too-many-men penalty that Bieksa took in OT was clearly not a penalty. That's a call the refs would generally not make in overtime even if Bieksa has played the puck intentionally. I was furious. (Vigneault just quietly shook his head.) In game three, I believe it was before the disallowed goal, people seem to be forgetting about Steve Bernier's stick being held when he was in front of an empty net with the puck within 10 feet of him. If he gets his stick loose, it's an easy goal. No call. There are two refs out there and neither of them see one of the most obvious calls that you could make? Then the Daniel Sedin goal that was called back. Clearly there was no kicking motion. That should have been looked at for about 20 seconds and then ruled a goal. The fact that they looked at it for about 8 minutes proves that there was no DISTINCT kicking motion. Not to mention that if you watch the play at regular speed you will see that it's simply not possible for anyone to intentionally kick the puck in with less than a half a second to react while a defenseman is pushing you towards the goalie and you are trying to stop to avoid running the goalie and taking a penalty which will lead to an obvious power play goal against. (*catches breath*) Now you can overlook a ref on the ice making a bad call, but you can't overlook 'experts' in Toronto taking 8 minutes to look at the play from several different angles and then overturning the RIGHT call. Inexcusable.

So the Canucks have a lot to overcome in game 4. It won't be easy, they just have to want the puck more than the Kings and hope for better goaltending. I would love to rant some more but Idol Gives Back is coming on. My rush to finish this will also explain any spelling mistakes. I hope I am forgiven.

My 40th Annual The Vancouver Canucks Will Win The Cup Blog

It seems like only yesterday that my team, the Vancouver Canucks, suffered a complete collapse and were swiftly booted out of the rink and onto the golf course. It was actually last Spring. And the Spring before that. And the Spring...well, you get the message. It's never been easy being a Canucks' fan. I guess there's a reason why Prozac is a bigger seller in BC than any other Province in Canada.(Allegedly) I guess there's a reason why my Mother (the self-proclaimed number one Canucks' fan) has black Lungs, an enlarged Liver and no fingernails. I have a feeling in the next few weeks, she may need a Pacemaker.

I will leave the sordid history of the Canucks (the Gilbert Perrault fiasco (wipes tear), Dale Tallon, Bill Laforge, Mark Messier, Chuck & Bobby, Cam Neely, the Canuck Duck, Lars Lindgren, Todd Bertuzzi etc...) for another time and another blog. Right now let's focus on this season and more importantly, this post-season.

For the first time in Canucks' history, we actually have a team that can score goals in bunches AND a great goalie. (I know some of you will disagree, but more on Luongo a bit later. One thing at a time, sheesh.) Unfortunately we are seriously lacking on defense, that is unless Willie Mitchell makes a miraculous comeback. Andrew Alberts is not a replacement for Willie Mitchell, and he is the sole reason my Mother might need that Pacemaker I was taking about.

Looking at the 16 teams in the Playoffs this year, I would say that Vancouver is the only team that you could not only make a really good case for them winning the Cup, but you could also make a pretty good case for them getting swept in the first round. The glass is half full guy would say Luongo is the best goalie in the league and he knows he has to prove it in the Playoffs, not in the regular season. The Sedins are much, much better than last year and they are unstoppable. No team can match our speed. Our defense has held up reasonably well down the stretch and will get the job done, kind of bending without breaking. Kesler and Burrows have had career years. Samuelsson has won a Stanley Cup, an Olympic Gold Medal and a World Championship. Demitra was the top scorer in the Olympics in Vancouver and an all-star. These 4 will step it up in the playoffs and we'll have a big parade down Robson in June. Again, that's coming from the glass is half full guy.

Now the glass is half empty guy would say Luongo is mentally tired and has lost confidence and cannot just flick a switch and play well in the Playoffs. The Sedins do not show up in the Playoffs and can be shut down over a 7 game series. Salo has had a great season, but he's a ticking time bomb. He won't make it through the first round without an injury or a sore throat or a hangnail. The defense is way too thin. You can't expect guys like O'Brien and Edler to play top 4 minutes. And Andrew Alberts is quite possibly the worst defenseman in the playoffs. The glass is half empty guy predicts they will get swept by LA and Vigneault will be fired. I'm not really sure who is more accurate, maybe somewhere in between, but as my Mother always says I don't care if the glass is half empty or half full, as long as it contains some Grey Goose.

While the LA Kings are a good young, talented team and not to be taken lightly, that is the team the Canucks wanted to play in the first round. Flying to LA is a lot easier than flying to Detroit or Nashville. Not to mention, I think Detroit and Nashville are better teams. On paper the Canucks are a better team, plain and simple. Unfortunately that was true against the Black Hawks last year and we all know what happened there. The Canucks are a much faster team with a lot better goaltending. On paper. If Luongo plays even just average for him, I think this series is over in 5. Of course he didn't play average most of the year. He's had a little bit of time to rest now which is a good thing. Not very often do the Canucks get a chance to cruise through the end of the regular season and rest some players so that is always a great bonus. I do wish that Vigneault had played Raycroft more after the Olympic break though. Luongo played the equivalent of 4 game 7's in a row and that has to take a toll mentally. I would have called up Schneider from the Moose to back up Raycroft and told Luongo to stay home for a week or so. Raycroft was playing well enough and with a rested Luongo who knows, maybe we could've won the Western Conference. Not that that matters anymore. It's all about winning one thing. The Hart Trophy. (Kidding)

At the forward position it's great to see that Vigneault actually has some options. If Burrows is struggling with the Twins he can bring in Samuelsson. If the Kings are having trouble with our speed, he can dress Grabner and put him with Raymond and Kesler. If they are playing tough, he can bring in Hordichuk. Options are only good if you are a good bench coach though, and I'm still not sold on Vigneault. I probably never will be until this team goes all the way. I think he was badly outcoached by Quenneville last season against the Hawks. (Why do I keep bringing that series up? I think I may need counselling.) Either way we have 3 solid lines that can score and a pretty good checking line although we will miss Ryan Johnson's shot blocking and penalty killing.

Our defense is the biggest concern. People have been freaking on Luongo since the Olympic break, but really I blame our defense the most. Of course when Luongo loses his trust in his defense, then he looks like the bad guy. I'm just glad Mike Gillis was able to steal Ehrhoff from the Sharks or we would likely not have even made the playoffs. If Salo can stay healthy (I wouldn't bet 2 cents on that happening) and Rome, O'Brien and Alberts can just keep it simple, they might be able to keep the puck out of their own net just enough to outscore their opponents. I would expect that no matter how far the Canucks go, there will be the odd blow out against them. And then my Mother will hit the bottle yet again.

I'm picking the Canucks to win in 5 games and of course they will go on to beat Detroit, San Jose and then the New Jersey Devils. I just want to see them play to their potential and give it their best. If they are beat by a better team, I can live with that. Though I will still be bitter for the whole Summer. It's an exciting time right now to be a Canucks' fan and it should be very exciting hockey. We've been spoiled this year with the play of the Sedins. Hard to believe that Luongo did anything but carry the team this year and they still won their division. If he gets hot, lookout.

For game one I will be putting on the authentic Jersey, wearing my Canuck touque, flying the Canuck flags, waving the Canuck towel and I'll have my Coke Zero and Baked Cheezies for good luck. With all of that how could they possibly come up short? I know I know. For 40 years they've found a way. But it's time to look ahead, not behind. It's time to go all the way for the first time in our history. Or my Mother just might end up in intensive care.

My 2nd Annual NHL Playoff Hockey Predictions

After going a perfect 15-0 during last years playoffs I thought I'd really go out on a limb this year and make my predictions BEFORE the playoffs start. I know it's a little risky, but I'm going to try to be brave. I'm going to write a blog tomorrow on the odds of my Vancouver Canucks winning the Stanley Cup. (I only call them 'my Vancouver Canucks' when they actually make the playoffs). Since I have done endless research (Google) and extensive scouting (NHL.com) I'm recommending that after reading this, you head to Vegas to make a whole crapload of money. (Can I say 'shit' on here?) So here are my first round picks, followed by the rest of my playoff predictions. Enjoy. If you can stay awake.

We will start off in the much stronger Western Conference. In fact we'll call the Western Conference the NHL, and the Eastern Conference the AHL. Now that may piss off a few East Coasters, but I don't care. If you want to drop the gloves, I'm sure I could find somebody who would fight you.

Starting with the San Jose Sharks (1) against the Colorado Avalanche (8), I think this is one of the easiest series to predict. While San Jose is notorious for choking in the post-season, Colorado faded big time down the stretch and their goalie Craig Anderson, who played great most of the season, really started to tire down the stretch. Look for a quick exit by the Avalanche. I'll pick San Jose in 5.

My favorite match-up of the first round is definitely Chicago (2) vs Nashville (7). Okay so maybe I'm still a little bitter that the Hawks beat my Canucks in the second round last year but I think this is going to be a lot closer than people expect. Nashville is my dark horse this year. I'm shocked at all the 'experts' that are picking Chicago to win the Stanley Cup. You read it here first, it's not going to happen. There's a little something called goaltending that tends to be pretty important come playoff time and the Hawks simply don't have it. Their so-called number one goalie going into the playoffs is Antti Niemi. Auntie Em would do a better job keeping pucks out of the net and she can't even skate. (For those of you under 40 that is a Wizard Of Oz reference.) Their backup Cristobal Huet, who is likely to play a game or two in this series, has been absolutely horrible as of late. For the Predators Pekka Rinne has been great in net this year. While he is unproven in the playoffs, I think he will be solid in this series. He's going to have to outplay the opposing goalie, which is kind of like shooting fish in a barrel. Let's go with Nashville in 6.

Since I'm writing a Canuck Blog tomorrow (hopefully the first of many this postseason) I won't go into detail about the Vancouver (3) - LA (6) series. Let's just say Vancouver in 5 and move on.

Another great match-up is Phoenix (4) against Detroit (5). Who would've thought going into this season that these two teams would meet in the playoffs and Phoenix would have home ice advantage. Now that's just crazy talk. There were two reasons for the Coyotes success this year. One, they gave Gretzky the boot. Sure he was a brilliant player blah blah blah, but what the Hell does he know about coaching a team with very little offensive talent? Judging from the results during his time in Phoenix, not much. Two, the amazing play of goaltender Ilya Bryzgalov. They also have a solid team with some depth and are well coached. They are in tough against a healthy and hungry Detroit team however. I had the opportunity to watch the Wings practice in Kelowna a few weeks ago and they looked fast and confident. That Red Wing swagger is still there and they are also very well coached. This is the toughest series to predict. I'm going to pick Detroit in 6. For Phoenix to pull off an upset, and it's certainly not outside of the realm of possibility, Bryzgalov will have to steal at least a couple of games.

Over to the AHL err Eastern Conference, the number one team (not to mention the first team overall in the league) is the Washington Capitals. It's important to mention that they play in by far the weakest division in the league. They are the only team in their division to make the playoffs. Why does that matter? Because they play more games against their division rivals than any other teams. And seriously, if the Eastern Conference is the AHL, you could consider the SouthEast Division Bantam C. I'm not saying that they aren't a good team, I'm just saying well, okay yeah I'm saying they aren't a good team. At least not really a serious contender at this point. I'm sure some of you are thinking that I've been smoking too much hash (do people still smoke hash these days?) but I think the Capitals are due to be upset early in the playoffs. It's just not going to be in the first round against the Montreal Canadiens (8). I will pick the Caps in 5.

New Jersey (2) against Philadelphia (7) could also be a tough series. While I would normally pick the Devils to win this series, the Flyers did win 5 of 6 against them in the regular season. But since the Devils have Marty Brodeur, I think that he will probably be the difference. I think he may feel he has something to prove since he sat on the bench and watched Roberto Luongo steal the spotlight and strike Gold in Vancouver. Now is his time to do just that (steal the spotlight, not strike Gold in Vancouver). New Jersey in 6.

Buffalo (3) vs Boston (6): Ryan Miller has easily been one of the top 5 players in the league this season and a serious contender for the Hart Trophy as league MVP and I think that he alone will win this series against the Bruins. The rest of the team can stay home and rest. Sabres in 5.

And finally we have Pittsburgh (4) against Ottawa (5). While there are some question marks concerning the Penguins, namely goalie Marc-Andre Fleury and last year's league MVP Evgeny Malkin, I think they will cruise against a pretty weak Senators team. Let's go with Pittsburgh in a 4 game sweep.

On to the 2nd round. In the West we have San Jose vs Nashville. I'll pick the Sharks. Vancouver vs Detroit. I'll pick the Canucks. (Hey, I've picked them to win the Cup for 40 miserable years, I can't stop now.)

In the East, Washington vs Pittsburgh will obviously be the big match-up. I feel pretty confident that the Penguins will win that series. For New Jersey against Buffalo, it's going to come down to goaltending. I hate to bet against Ryan Miller but I'll pick New Jersey to pull through. I also think New Jersey will beat Pittsburgh in the Conference finals where they will meet and lose to(you guessed it) my Vancouver Canucks.

Lastly, I predict that Luongo will hand off the Cup to Henrik Sedin and I will cry like a little baby after doing laps around my living room in my Canuck jersey and slippers while waving my Canuck flag.

Those are my predictions, free of charge. Now enjoy your trip to Vegas.

Oscars hits and Mrs-My post-Oscar blog

I don't know why, but every year I am duped into watching the Oscars at 5 o' clock. Of course they don't actually start until 5:30, but my memory span continues to shrink. I wish I could say the same for my stomach. 5 o' clock is when the actresses of Hollywood strut their stuff (most of which we can see, whatever happened to needing to use our imagination?) down the red carpet. Call me cynical, but I don't really care 'who' they are wearing. And is it really necessary for the 8 foot long trains? Aren't any of these people worried about a backlash from their fans, many of whom can barely afford to feed themselves while watching the big show? I mean I could barely afford that second bag of Baked Cheezies. Oh well, we all know that Hollywood is a big facade and that most of those women slept with their directors to make it in Hollywood in the first place and are now spending most of their money on Coke and Heroin (allegedly). With that cheerful little insight into Tinseltown, so begins my post Oscar blog.

I was really looking forward to Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin hosting, and I was very surprised when Neil Patrick Harris came out to begin the show. He is a very talented guy and did a great song and dance number. I wonder if the Producers of the show wanted to kind of test the waters a bit to see people's reactions before letting him host a show. I thought it was great and hopefully he gets the opportunity next year. As for Steve Martin and Alex Baldwin, while I thought there were a few funny moments, they weren't as funny as I expected. I know they have some great writers working on this material and they have a lot of time to do it. It's not like they are doing a show a week or anything, so I expected better. I get the feeling that Alec Baldwin would've done better on his own.

One of my favorite parts of the Oscars is always the original song performances. It breaks up the monotony of what is generally a very long show. Why they decided to do without the performances is anyone's guess but I think it's the ultimate arrogance of Hollywood to think they can just show trailers of films and have actresses strut around in ridiculous dresses with million dollar necklaces and that will be entertainment enough. The only real moments of entertainment were the Neil Patrick Harris opening number and the dances during the Original Score nominees.

Speaking of arrogance, in my Oscar blog the other day I may have come across as a little egotistical. (Who me?) I gloated about how I'm rarely ever wrong when it comes to predictions. Well last night was a humbling experience. I think the problem was I got a little underdog happy. I should've stuck to the favorites a little more. And to think I got BOTH original and adapted screenplays wrong, well that's a first for me. I still insist that there is nothing more important in a movie than the screenplay, so those are always my favorite categories. In a perfect World the writers would get paid as much as the stars. No matter how good the acting or the directing is, you can't make up for a horrible script. I did pick two mild upsets, and I was wrong both times. And now, I feel shame.

I was also wrong about Best Director, although I was pretty sure by that time who would win. I never let myself make changes midway through however. The Hurt Locker was the big winner on the night, and there was just no stopping it. I was even wrong about the Documentaries and the Shorts, throwing my theories for a loop. It almost makes me think that the Academy actually WATCHED all the nominees. Well now that is just crazy talk.

I also pride myself in getting the Best Score category right every year. I picked Avatar, but after hearing clips of all the performances just before they opened the envelope, I wanted to change my pick to Up. I'd forgotten how amazing that music is. And if you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it, for adults as much as kids. Anyways, I was glad to see that Up won, but pissed that I had to make another x on my paper. As if I didn't already feel like a big enough failure. Final tally on the night: 11 right, 13 wrong. (and 5 dozen of Grandma's Spring Rolls, 2 bags of Baked Cheezies and 9 glasses of Punch Drunk.) On the bright side, since only one or two people will actually read this blog, in next year's Oscar blog I can claim once again that I was perfect.

I thought the homage to John Hughes was very tasteful. I don't use the word tasteful very often when it comes to the Academy Awards. I thought he was a great writer and director and was very saddened by his death. The Breakfast Club and Trains, Planes, and Automobiles are two or my all-time favorite movies. I was further saddened (or maybe mortified is a more appropriate word) when Molly Ringwald, Judd Nelson and the rest of the former child stars came out to talk about Hughes. Molly Ringwald looked like Zsa Zsa Gabor and Nelson looked like Abe Lincoln. Boy do I feel old.

I have to admit, I was not happy that Sandra Bullock won Best Actress. (I was so sure I was going to win that award before her. Now I'm bitter.) I haven't even seen The Blind Side so I probably shouldn't comment until I do, but you know that's never stopped me before. I was really impressed with Bullock's speech however and now I'm glad she won. I actually got a tear in my eye. I think it was the only tear of the night. Unfortunately there were not many great speeches. In today's ADHD World, there is too much pressure on the winners to deliver their speeches in 12 seconds. Some of the greatest moments in Oscar history were speeches. Like when Martin Luther King Jr won and then did his famous 'I had a dream' speech. Okay, so that wasn't the Oscars but I don't imagine you're reading this blog for historical accuracy.

I really liked Mon'ique's speech as well. Especially her comment about the Academy voting for her because of her performance and not politics. Hollywood is a game and most of the winner's at the Oscars play that game. It's all politics unfortunately. (You didn't really think Halle Berry won an Oscar based on talent did you?) Mon'ique was determined not to play the game and let her performance do the talking. Many critics didn't think that she would win because of it. I'm glad to see that she did.

I also liked the Obituary part of the show. It was a nice touch having James Taylor sing along to it. Hard to believe but I've already forgotten what the song was. Did I mention that I am going senile? Oh jeez, it's almost time for my medication. While it was a touching tribute to the many people that Hollywood has lost in the past year, they forgot about Farrah Fawcett and Estelle Getty. On Twitter, Roger Ebert said 'epic fail'. I wish he wouldn't say that. He's much too old.

Possibly the funniest moment for Martin and Baldwin was their Paranormal Activity spoof. It involved them rolling around in bed in fast motion. At one point Steve Martin walked over and slapped Alec Baldwin on the face, making one of my predictions come true.

As the show went on, it seemed pretty obvious that they were falling behind. The often lame and embarrassing banter of the presenters was replaced with just the reading of the nominees and the opening of the envelope. At least lame and embarrasssing is entertaining. The reading of the nominees is just boring. The weirdest moment happened right at the end. Tom Hanks walked out to present the Best Picture winner. He didn't even read the nominees, he just said "and the winner is...The Hurt Locker." Kathryn Bigelow was hugging everyone around her (except her ex-husband) before I realized that it wasn't a joke. That kind of wrecked a perfectly mediocre show. Are they that afraid of going into the Amazing Race's time slot? (I hate to get sidetracked but the Amazing Race hasn't been 'amazing' in 8 years.)

I did like the fact that Steve Martin tried to steal Kathryn Bigelow's Oscar at the end and then he said 'this show was so long that Avatar now takes place in the past." Truer words were never spoken.

Oscar LaVista Baby: My Academy Award Predictions

It seems like only yesterday that I was making predictions for last years Oscars. I generally do pretty well picking the winners. I hate to brag, but I think I was only wrong once last year and it was for Best Supporting Actress in an Animated Short Foreign Documentary which is always a crapshoot. I have done extensive research. I have seen every single Best Picture Nominee. (Okay, I've only seen five, but I watched the trailers for the others.) Today's blog will include some gossip (James Cameron is planning to scream 'I'm the King of Pandora!!!'), some social commentary (is the construction of the Academy Award bad for Global Warming?), some predictions (I'll go out on a limb and say that somebody will thank God for making all this possible), and of course, most importantly some recipes for your Oscar Party.

Let's start with some gossip. Apparently Sacha Baron Cohen and Ben Stiller were going to do a spoof of Avatar and Sacha was going to play a pregnant Avatar and claim that it was James Cameron's baby. Then it was going to turn all Jerry Springer. Sounds like a funny bit and I think that Sacha Baron Cohen is hilarious. He was great in both Borat and Bruno and I loved him in Sweeney Todd. I'm sure it would have been great. The problem is that the Producer of the Oscars is a friend of James Cameron's and thinks he would be so offended he may even walk out of the theatre. So it's been cancelled and Sacha Baron Cohen is staying at home in London. Now this makes James Cameron look like a tool, which he very well may be. But my first thought is, if he walked out wouldn't that be tv gold? Don't you want everyone talking about the Oscars, even if maybe it's a bad thing? I bet you'd get more viewers next year. I'd be trying to piss off everyone. Taunting them, cursing at them. Especially that bitch Meryl Streep.

I've seen some of the ads for the Oscars featuring the hosts Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin, and they were actually pretty funny. I personally don't think Steve Martin is very funny (and I'm still pissed that he's remade the Pink Panther movies, he is certainly no Peter Sellers) but maybe with help from Alec Bladwin he will be. I predict some plastic surgery jokes, maybe a bitch slap or two and lots and lots of tap dancing. Now for my Oscar picks.

Feel free to go to Oscar.com to read all of the nominees, but I'm much too lazy to type all of that so I'm just going to talk about the potential winners. Beginning with Best Picture. For the first time there are going to be 10 nominees. I'm not sure the point of that except that it does help to promote more movies. But let's be honest. This is really only a four horse race. The two real favorites are The Hurt Locker and Avatar. Followed by Precious and Up In The Air. Most of the other six nominations are well deserved but personally I would give District 9 the boot and put in it's place Where The Wild Things Are. Though it's not for everyone, I loved it. My pick this year for Best Picture is The Hurt Locker. I feel pretty good about this one. I would probably even bet a toonie.

Best Actor is probably the easiest to pick this year. Jeff Bridges will win for Crazy Heart. This is a sure thing. It's a great story. The Dude will finally get his Oscar.

Best Actress is really tough this year and I'm just so thankful that I'm an expert. If I wasn't then this would be even tougher. I hate to bet against Meryl Streep and Helen Mirren but one thing that the Academy voters like is a big upset. Gabourey Sidibe from Precious is my surprise pick. I also predict that she will get a standing O from the crowd and that Meryl and her posse will storm out in a huff.

Best Supporting Actor is another tough one. Unfortunately I haven't seen that many movies this year because that would involve putting down the potato chips and getting out of my comfy easy chair. I feel like I did writing my Biology 12 Exam in High School. I'm just basically guessing. Eeny, meeny, miney, moe. I'm picking Christoph Waltz for his brilliant performance in Inglourious Basterds, and yes I did see that one.

In the Best Supporting Actress category, it looks like Penelope Cruz continues to be overrated. She's not the first (Marilyn Monroe) and she definitely won't be the last. I saw Nine and found it very disappointing but at the time I said that Marion Cotillard should be nominated for Best Supporting Actress. They didn't nominate the right person. Anyways, thankfully Penelope won't win. And the envelope please...the winner is Mo'Nique for Precious.

The Best Director category is another tough one. You could make a case for any of the nominees. The favorites are James Cameron and his ex-wife (that has to be awkward) Kathryn Bigelow but I'm going to go against the grain and pick another upset. My pick is Lee Daniels who directed Precious. And I might even put a nickel on it.

For Best Adapted Screenplay I think it's a battle between Precious and Up In The Air and since (if my picks are correct) Jason Reitman will have been shut out to this point, I'm going to give it to Reitman and Sheldon Turner for Up In The Air.

For Best Original Screenplay Mark Boal, who wrote The Hurt Locker script, would be the favorite, but this is an opportunity to give Quentin Tarantino an award. My ample gut tells me that that is exactly what is going to happen.

Best Animated Feature will be between The Fantastic Mr Fox and Up, but since Up is only the second animated feature ever to be nominated for Best Picture, it's a pretty safe bet to win this award. Besides, how can you bet against a movie that involves a house flying to South America? I can't.

Now I'm not going to get into every single category but one of the most enjoyable things about watching the Oscars is trying to predict the winners of the categories where I have absolutely no idea. Like for Animated Shorts and Documentaries. Surprisingly I am often right. My theory is that whenever there are kids involved or poverty in third world countries, that's what will win. Why? Because as clueless as I am about the nominees, the Academy is just as clueless. Most of them don't watch all the nominees. The title of the movie and the photo shown are also often factors. Let's look at Best Documentary for example. Keeping in mind that I haven't seen any of these (and where is Michael Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story by the way?) Looking at the photos and reading the titles I will bet you that Which Way Home will take home the Oscar. You just know I'm going to gloat in my next blog if and when that happens.

Using the same theories, for Documentary Short I'm going to pick The Last Truck: Closing Of A GM Plant. How can the Academy vote against a piece of Americana? I don't think they will. Whether the movie is good or not is almost irrelevent.

For Foreign Language Film, I'm picking The White Ribbon from Germany. Mainly because I have seen it nominated in a few others categories. That reason is good enough for a lot of Academy Members. Jeez, I'm starting to get cynical in my old age.

For Original Score I will pick James Horner for Avatar though I'm disappointed that Where The Wild Things Are didn't get a nomination. I loved the music in that movie.

The Original Song category is one of the easier picks. The Weary Kind from the movie Crazy Heart will take the trophy. Ryan Bingham, who was homeless not long ago, will accept the award with T. Bone Burnett.

As I said I'm not going to go through every nomination. I will keep track at home (from my infamous easy chair) and I will write another blog after the show to let you know how I did. Now it's time to get to the most important part of this blog, food and drink.

I like to have an Oscar Party at my house. I would recommend that you do that on Oscar Night though that is optional. I would suggest you have everyone show up before the show starts (5pm pst) so that you can all watch the old people with their new faces walk down the red carpet. It never ceases to amaze me how they can strut their stuff and talk about who they are wearing when a huge majority of viewers are struggling just to make their cable payment at the end of the month. I have to collect pop bottles and squeegee cars just to afford to buy tinfoil which I have to put on my head and touch my tv screen just to get good reception of the Oscars. Still, I'm not really offended and I can't help but be glued to the tv, albeit with aluminum foil in my hair.

To liven up your party, you can make it an Oscar Strip Party. Every time someone is wrong about a prediction, they have to remove a piece of clothing. I've been to many of these over the years and they are a lot of fun. Luckily I've never ended up in my Birthday suit by the end. Well it could be luck or it could be the fact that I'm always wearing 17 pairs of underwear and 8 scarves.

Food is another important part of any Oscar Party. What goes better with movies than Popcorn? Nothing, I say. But forget about that crappy microwave popcorn. The healthiest way to make popcorn is to buy the kernels in bulk, put a small amount of them in a paper bag and nuke them. They are done when your smoke alarm is ringing. As a topping, forget about that margarine. I don't like eating something that is created in a science lab. It's butter or nothing for me. But how much? I like to compare it to milk in cereal. If your cereal is floating then you've put in too much milk. Well that's like popcorn. Only put in enough butter so that the popcorn isn't floating. Oh, and you may want to eat it with a spoon.

Another popular appy at my Oscar Parties is my homemade Spring Rolls. I'll even reveal my secret recipe. Just drive to your local Walmart, head to the frozen food section and find the Wong Wing Spring Rolls. Then you take them home, put them in your oven for 25 minutes at 350 degrees and they are ready to be served with a nice sweet and sour sauce. Be careful to hide the box when you serve them while claiming they are made from your Great Grandmothers secret recipe.

Do you have friends that are health conscious? That's too bad. Health conscious people are boring and tend to smell. I say don't invite them. If you do invite them, make sure you have a bowl of baked Cheezies ready, probably in a dark corner.

As my Mother always taught me, no party is a real party without booze. (At least I think that's what she said she was always slurring her words.) So here is my Mother's favorite punch recipe. Hopefully you have a nice crystal punch bowl, but if you don't just use a big tupperware dish like my Mother always does. In it put 1 ounce of Orange Juice, 1 ounce of Strawberry juice, 1 26'er of Grey Goose Vodka and 3 bottles of Dom Perignon. You can add a few slices of Strawberries on the top for a garnish if you'd like. It's called Punch Drunk. Not only is this a mighty tasty beverage, but it will ensure that you will be hosed before the first award is given out. That's always a good thing. But be warned, keep this punch away from a fireplace. It is an extreme fire hazard. Your breath will be as well.

Well that should get you well on your way to hosting a great Oscar Party. It should prove to be a very exciting night as usual. And after all the tears, laughter and hair pulling, I will be there with my Post-Oscar Wrap. (Why does that make me think of food?)

Honest To Blog: Blogging Do's and Don't's

I just found out that a couple of my relatives have now started blogs of their own. They already seem to be getting the hang of it, and are finding out just how much fun it can be to reveal your soul to the cyber-World. But just in case they need a little help, here are a few pointers that will ensure your blog is enjoyable to read and will keep people coming back for more.

One of the most important things is DO NOT mention your bank card pin numbers or credit card numbers in your blog. That is a big no no. Instead, I highly recommend that you e-mail them to me for safe keeping.

You can spice up your blog with a good joke, but beware, recently deceased celebrities are off limits. I made a Patrick Swayze joke and you wouldn't believe the backlash. (Incidentally, I'm still waiting for Jennifer Grey to die so I can say "NOBODY takes Baby to the coroner!!") It's also a little embarrassing to make dead jokes about celebrities who are not yet dead. I've been making Betty White's corpse jokes for years, and keep forgetting that she's still alive. Abraham Lincoln is still a touchy one. Although my Mother always hated him. He used to sit behind her in class and flick her ears. Then my Mom would often turn and smack his face. That always made his head explode.

Liven up your blog by embellishing things to make them more interesting. Here's an example of a boring sentence: 'I woke up in the morning and drove to the bank where I applied for that Loan I've been talking about.' Oh, sorry I dozed off there. Did I miss anything? Now let's spice up that sentence and make it POP! 'I regained consciousness as that bright orb rose above the Mountains and dragged my lazy behind out of bed, put on my ski mask and hot wired my landlord's car so I could hold up my bank so I'd have some drug money for the weekend.' Do you see how much better that is? Hmm, maybe I should teach a course at UBC.

Another important rule is that you should never under any circumstances make fun of my Mother's 'weakness' for Vodka or her addiction to Kraft Dinner. That's MY job! Since my Mother has no computer I am safe there, which leads to my next point. Only trash talk the people who a)don't have a computer, b)are illiterate or c)have a reach at least four inches less than you. It's also really annoying when people label things a)b)c) etc... Unless it's me, then it's hilarious.

It's also a very good idea to keep on topic. Pick a topic for your blog and stick to it. I mean, you shouldn't be writing a blog about the Vancouver Canucks and then start talking about donuts and nachos. That's crazy talk. Although cakes and cupcakes are NEVER off-limits. Cake is so good. Especially chocolate. Oh and Purdy's Chocolates are good too. I could eat them all day every day. Oh yeah. So anyways, my point is, ALWAYS STAY ON TOPIC.

It's also very annoying to capitalize certain words to emphasize your points. We can all read. It's not like we're STUPID!

You should also be mindful of your reader's demographics. If your readers are mostly Men, you should be using the words 'dude', 'football', 'remote control' and 'Pam Anderson' as often as possible. If your readers are mostly Women then it's important to dumb down your blogs. No fancy shmancy words like 'certainly', 'definitely' or 'boot'. And if it's old women, you just can't use the word 'bingo' enough.

You should also remember that there could possibly be an English Teacher or two reading your blog. For this reason, you must always proof read your work to check for spelling mistakes and run on sentences. And remember NOTHING will make an English Teacher stop reading your blog like a dangling participle.

Finally, it can be very effective to use a key word in your headline. Whore, bong, and bitch-slap tend to get the most attention. And attention is certainly what you want.

Hopefully that will help you guys get on the right path (or write path, see what I did there) in terms of your blogs. Try to be honest and informative, but if that seems a bit boring feel free to bullshit.

Tears On My Birthday Cake, a Birthday song I wrote

TEARS ON MY BIRTHDAY CAKE

WRITTEN BY COREY STRATTON ON JANUARY 19, 2010



I can think of forty-one reasons to break down.

Let forty-one candles fall to the ground.

What little pride I have left is gone,

As I’m holding balloons with my party hat on.



I’m older now than ever before.

That nursing home’s knocking on my front door.

Soon I’ll need a walker and a hearing aid.

What little hair left on my head will have greyed.



Tears on my Birthday Cake,

Are pooling together and forming a lake.

When my time comes,

They’ll serve Beer at my Wake,

But right now I’m wiping up tears,

On my Birthday Cake.



Forty-one times I’ve heard that damned Birthday Song,

With waiters and waitresses singing along.

So happy and cheerful they sing out of tune,

As I get one year closer to my doom.




Tears on my Birthday Cake,

Are pooling together and forming a lake.

When my time comes,

They’ll serve Beer at my Wake.

But right now I’m wiping up tears,

On my Birthday Cake.



Sure I could be sad as I pick up the knife,

But I’m happy with what I have done with my life.

You may think I’m upset, you may think I’m annoyed,

But these tears on my cheeks are tears of joy.



Tears on my Birthday Cake,

Are pooling together and forming a lake.

When my time comes,

They’ll serve Beer at my Wake.

With these tears of joy running down my face,

I’ll have another piece of Birthday Cake.




Now, where did I put that Prune Juice?

Climate Change Is No Hoax

Here is a link to an article that appeared in The Vancouver Province today. It basically calls Global Warming a hoax. This is from a columnist from Edmonton who also claims that abortions are twice as likely to cause Cancer than second hand smoke. That sounded like a joke. But it wasn't. Following this, is my response.


http://digital.theprovince.com/epaper/viewer.aspx




I would find this article laughable if it didn't mean that more people will be duped into thinking that Global Warming is a hoax. I would be curious to know what Lorne Gunter's hidden agenda is. Any reputable Climate Scientist will tell you there is a 90-95 percent chance that Global Warming exists. (I should note that Scientists will say there is a slightly less than 100 percent chance that the sun will come up tomorrow.) Do you want to risk your kids, your Grandkids, your Great-Grandkids future? I don't. Mr. Gunter claims that Scientists have been tricking the public by manipulating numbers. Maybe there is some truth to that. I don't know. But if it is true, it would only be because the public isn't waking up to the crisis and they are trying to get our attention. They all have kids and Grandkids too.
　
I'm not going to try and convince anybody one way or the other, but I would urge you to use a little common sense. There are two sides as there often is. You have virtually all of the reputable Climate Scientists saying this is a real crisis, and you have the other side saying it is a hoax. The other side is a large group of Lobbyists paid by the Oil and Coal Industries. Many of them also tried convincing us that smoking does not lead to Cancer. Those are facts. Their goal here is to stall us as long as possible, so the Oil and Coal Industries can make as much money as possible. Surprise surprise, it's all about money. The Lobbyists goal is to confuse the public. Not hard to do actually. They could probably convince the public that the Earth is flat if they wanted too, but why would they? There's no money in that.
　
If you want to learn just how the Lobbyists are tricking and confusing the public, I strongly urge you to read James Hoggan's brilliant Climate Cover-Up. It will probably make you as mad as it made me.
　
While I am angered by ignorant people such as Mr. Gunter, I am disappointed in how irresponsible The Province is in putting this garbage in their newspaper. Could it be that Shell, Chevron etc... advertise in your paper? While that may help your profits in the short term, you won't sell many papers on a dead Planet.