Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 1 of 2 pages
Framing all criticism of Obama as racist is disgusting.
If I somehow reach my 90s, I'm going to start living incredibly badly. Horrible nutrition, boozing it up. Every day at that point is gravy.
Charlie Manuel just used Cliff Lee as a pinch runner. I don't believe I have ever seen a guy with a $120 milllion contract used that way before.
I stop listening to anyone that pulls the racism card when talking politics. It's as silly as the socialist card. It's the goodwin (for me) law of politcal discussion. If you can't be reasonable and understand nuances, then there is no reason to talk with you.
That suggests that racism is never on the table as a point of discussion... It's still a significant issue (though often on an institutional level, rather than overt and intended).
this is garbage posting this topic outside of the politics thread
"Hip-hop is only just now finding its way into baseball"
I'm pretty sure I don't care anymore about what Jonathan Papelbon thinks about gun control than I do what Barack Obama thinks about closer by committee.
this is garbage posting this topic outside of the politics thread
Well, it's typical Repoz.
I'm having a hard time seeing the world as worse off if hip-hop had died in a corner somewhere after the brilliant Public Enemy peaked with their 3rd album.
@60: please try not to bore us with the same old trivial nonsense that implies art has no objective qualities.
'Music peaked at the exact moment, when I was most vulnerable to being emotionally manipulated, due to hormonal imbalances.'
Objectively, Hip Hop over the last 20 years has been orders of magnitudes better, than it was in 1990. Only an incredibly biased person would claim otherwise.
If I somehow reach my 90s, I'm going to start living incredibly baldly.
Hip Hop is an extremely limited form
By and large, people who say they like hip hop but don't acknowledge that 1992-1996 was an astonishing hip-hop renaissance are the most tedious people in the world.
If you can't appreciate early 90's Tribe Called Quest, Nas, Notorious BIG, Pharcyde, Common or Wu-Tang then you might just lead with the fact that you don't like that "hippity-hop" music.
Today's best Hip-Hop is much, much better than yesterday's best Hip-Hop.
Today's typical Hip-Hop is much, much worse than yesterday's typical Hip-Hop.
Given time, most musical styles evolve and improve; and given popularity, most musical styles devolve. Hip-Hop is doing both right now.
The same Dr. Dre whose verse's sounding good are entirely a testament to his ghostwriter
It's as silly as the socialist card.
I'll just pretend that Pedroia's is "Hobo Humpin Slobo Babe"
Yeah, although it's kind of impressive that people managed to turn a thread about guns into something even less interesting.
I'm perfectly capable of having a discussion about racist policies(say voter id laws, death penalty or mandatory drug sentencing) with people defending the policies without assuming they are racist or accusing them of being racist.
In a world where Chicago and Detroit exist, blatant stealing of elections has to be a bigger concern than the fact that getting a State ID is a little bit of a pain in the butt, doesn't it?
But - It blows my mind every time someone tries to couch the idea that each person should be limited to one vote (and be, you know, alive to cast it) as racist. In a world where Chicago and Detroit exist, blatant stealing of elections has to be a bigger concern than the fact that getting a State ID is a little bit of a pain in the butt, doesn't it?
We want to encourage people to vote, not make it more difficult than it has to be.
Gerrymandering is 10x the problem voter id is and yet it gets not even 1/10th the coverage or attention.
Because both sides like it
madvillain: are you suggesting that atcq represents typical hip-hop and krs-one the best? 'cause that would be crazy talk. my opinions there aside...
And gun law reform, as so vividly demonstrated this week.
Wait, you mean the Verve Pipe isn't good? ####...
I don't know if that's true. The polls I've seen have shown that at best there is a pretty solid split in terms of how many people want more/same/less gun control. Personally I want more but a very meaningful percentage of people in this country don't.
Having spent a good amount of time (too much really) working electoral politics in a big city (NYC) I can tell you for a fact that voter fraud is almost impossible to pull off on a large scale unless...wait for it -- you can manipulate the electronic voting machines, which to my knowledge, has been a concern among progressives for awhile.
Ultimately I don't see a problem with it, if you 1. don't require a payment for the id 2. don't require a special birth certificate that requires a payment to acquire 3. Give sufficient notice and time for people to get it...and 6 months is not sufficient amount of time. We want to encourage people to vote, not make it more difficult than it has to be.
I think you're talking about the manipulation of votes after they've been cast. I was referring to the practice of Bob Jones voting as himself, Bob Jr., little George, cousin Ed, and dead Grandpa Pete.
Judging by my Facebook page about half the people think that not having slightly more gun control is tantamount to being in favor of child massacres and the other half of people think that giving the "pro-gun control" people an inch is tantamount to giving them a mile because no matter what they say what they really want is for all guns to be outlawed like in Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany.
The problem with that is that half the people who are against "more gun control" think that the provisions of the recently proposed bills are already in the existing laws. Don't let anyone kid themselves into thinking the NRA doesn't invest its money wisely.
If you live in a rural environment, everybody you know has a gun and the ones who tell you that you shouldn't have one are usually the same people who will lecture you on why you should go gluten free and that meat is murder.
I think a ton of it has to do with how the issue is framed by the media. It seems every time the issue comes up theres something silly like a person saying, "why should we have these weapons just so a redneck can hunt." That's going to put a huge number of people on the defensive right away. The fact is, most guns that people own wouldn't be affected in a meaningful way, and as much as I like my guns I can't see any possible reason why someone would think their right to own an AR-15 is constitutionally protected.
There's also some regional elements to it as well. The two sides tend to live pretty segregated lives. If your a city person you only ever tend to see criminals and cops with guns. If you live in a rural environment, everybody you know has a gun and the ones who tell you that you shouldn't have one are usually the same people who will lecture you on why you should go gluten free and that meat is murder. Its hard for either side to get a clear picture of what the other side really wants, because they don't know anything about the other side.
I've never heard anyone tell me either of those things, and I lived in Mississippi and Tennessee for 11 years. But hey, hippies, amirite?
The problem is that informed gun owners rightfully don't see much difference between an AR-15 and any other rifle. They are scarier looking, and that is about it. It's one of the few times that the conservatives are actually more informed on the issue than the liberals, yet instead of taking their strong arguments(which is basically why the AR-15 and not the Remington 7400? or any other rifle?) the large majority of them go with the simplistic argument '2nd amendment = hitler' etc. Anti-gun arguments(those in which we are talking about outlawing a particular weapon...not talking about registration) should have to prove their case, not make the pro-gun prove theirs first...and to be honest, I've yet to see a strong or even a weak argument for banning a particular rifle, that was presented in an informed manner. All assault weapons are already outlawed(assault weapons mean the ability to switch over to fully auto fire or even a 3 round burst) so when people are going after AR-15, they are going after a weapon because of it's look, not because of it's function.
Finding reliable stats on gun ownership isn't easy, but at least one survey estimates that the percentage of households in the South and Mountain West is down to about 40%. Of course that would include Denver, Atlanta, etc., so the rural areas would likely be much higher. but I have to wonder if even 10% of those non-gun owners would even be able to tell you WTF "gluten-free" even means, let alone be preaching against it.
Not sure there is all that much misrepresentation. Manysome small minority gun control advocates are for as much gun control as they can get the votes to pass. They would impose the near total bans found in NYC, Chicago & pre-Heller DC in other jurisdictions if they could, but have to settle for "half-measures" because of limited support - but those half-measures are never the final goal.
Then how would you explain the disconnect between what large numbers of people think is already covered by existing gun laws and what actually isn't covered by them? Someone's sure as hell is responsible for that widespread lack of knowledge, and there's one big lobbying group and one big industry that have a common major interest in perpetuating this level of ignorance.
Andy, the average American probably doesn't know the difference between the deficit and the debt
gun owner but here baseball fan first and i really, really, really hate that this thread exists. this should be in the political thread and i am really disappointed it has not been shut down
Many gun control advocates are for as much gun control as they can get the votes to pass. They would impose the near total bans found in NYC, Chicago & pre-Heller DC in other jurisdictions if they could, but have to settle for "half-measures" because of limited support - but those half-measures are never the final goal.
just looking to raise hackles
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (2 members)
Page rendered in 0.8820 seconds, 73 querie(s) executed