Tuesday, October 23, 2007

A not so friendly Habs note.

Dear Reader/Lurker/Person passing by,

I have been spending the past hours, more accurately the whole day, gloating. And that is because I am a bad hockey fan. I know I should spread messages of love, peace and understanding. But fuck – did you just see the score? Is that a score I should pretend to be all calm about? I’ll be honest here; I wasn’t very enthused at the start. The Habs were on the chopping block for my love of all things Hockey. And they wasted no time in proving their love for me. Komisarek got on his knees and – bless his heart – he begged to not be left behind. Markov told me that without me, he wouldn’t be able to read basic street signs. Plekanec had a turtleneck dedicated to me. And well Kovalev – he did something?

And yes, Huet. Oh Huet. The French bastard stole my heart.

Nonetheless it was a bit pear shaped, the Habs only had 50% of what penalties the Bruins had. Manny the Tranny was hung out to dry and Francis Bouillon finished with a +3. Fancy that.

And by the way, I am still an awful fan. I told the resident Canucks fan that his team sucked so much I was proud to wear my Oilers shirt (only because he told me to get rid of it). I even poked fun at the kind of things the team lost to, even if I enjoyed the Canucks I couldn’t pass up a good gloating.

And yes boys and girls, Jordi may be the fun aunt but she isn’t the aunt you listen to. Especially when she touches the vino.

And as a parting note, guess the defendant!

Plaintiff soon began to suspect that her husband was having an affair with her brother's wife. In the summer of 2002, she confronted defendant about her suspicions; both defendant and her sister-in-law denied having an affair, and plaintiff had no reason to disbelieve them. She allowed her brother and sister-in-law to remain living with them. On December 24, 2002, however, defendant admitted to having an adulterous relationship with his sister-in-law. When, on December 28, 2002, plaintiff learned that the affair was continuing, she removed defendant's belongings from the marital home and asked him to leave. He stayed in hotels and then an apartment for the first few months of 2003.
After the separation, plaintiff still had access to the couple's joint bank account and to her credit cards. Because she was uncertain about her future, she immediately withdrew $300,000 from their joint account and deposited the money into an account in her own name. Plaintiff admitted that she spent some of this money on plastic surgeries for herself and her sister and for a car for her sister. She claimed that some of the spending on her sister was consistent with the couple's prior gift-giving practices and that some of it was to compensate her sister for helping plaintiff with the children.

5 comments:

Shan said...

Yes, it is way overdue and refreshing to see the Habs win by a formidable score. But they need to be able to put up more of those kinds of performances. Teams that are playoff bound from time to time dominate lesser teams, fail to ever do this is a bad sign. And in no way do I think the Habs dominated the Bruins, Huet stood his ground and made it look good, but getting contributions from the whole team is essential.

I was also pleased to see Brisebois score.

Re: defendant
I'm not certain who that is, but that is awful.

Kirsten said...

Manny the tranny, I like that. I'm pretty sure I never heard that one in MN, but I've heard plenty of others, so if you are looking for rude things to call him, I'm your girl.

CapsChick said...

Ooh ooh! I know who the defendant is, I do! Pick me!! It's not, by chance, a certain goalie on a certain team known (quite appropriately) as the Devils, is it? :D

Oh, Marty. Bad bad bad boy.

Sherry said...

Oh Jordi, that one is too easy. It's nice when court papers are public property, isn't it?

Cruel Britannia said...

Man, if it hadn't been for the whole married thing, that cars and plastic surgery bit sounds like the MO for the girlfriend of a certain... uh... *nasally enhanced* Penguin.