Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

Calcaterra: Police pull their guns on Torii Hunter … while he’s in his own home

It was reported here. I assume if Hunter was less than accurate in his tweets, there would be something contradicting it in the story.

Hunter later tweeted his thanks to the Newport Beach police, saying “they did a great job of protecting my home. Thanks guys!”

Man. I spent part of last weekend in Orange County, California. It is a pretty lily white place. You don’t suppose they would have done the same thing if, say, C.J. Wilson came out the door while the alarm was going off, do you?

Nah, never. Because as my conservative friends always tell me, there is no more racism in this country.

Thanks to Herm.

Repoz Posted: April 04, 2012 at 08:48 PM | 329 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: angels

Reader Comments and Retorts

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 3 of 4 pages  < 1 2 3 4 > 
   201. TDF, situational idiot Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:39 AM (#4097846)
Doing nothing would be compromise. No increases, no cuts.
Of course, to Republicans, it means "No increases to the spending I don't like, no cuts to the spending I do."

EDIT:

And no tax increases to the industries I like (agriculture, oil production, my income) and no tax cuts to the ones I don't (solar power).
   202. The Good Face Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4097852)
I miss the old days when republicans at least pretended to be willing to compromise.


Why compromise? We have conflicting ideas about the role of government. If you believe that doing X is wrong, why is doing half of X wise or noble? The system is working exactly as it was designed to work, and sooner or later it'll sort itself out. I'll never understand this liberal notion that disagreement is failure (on the part of the other guy obviously).
   203. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:44 AM (#4097855)
I miss the old days when liberals at least pretended they didn't want to run the U.S. as a dictatorship.


I see what you did there.
   204. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4097858)
Why compromise?


Because that's how the nation runs without descending into Civil War.
   205. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:50 AM (#4097867)
Because that's how the nation runs without descending into Civil War.

Right, but the compromise between increasing gov't size 30% and cutting it 30% isn't to increase it 15%.

The current state of affairs is a compromise. Just b/c Republicans won't go further in the Democrats preferred direction is not an indictment of Republicans. It's their job.
   206. The Good Face Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4097870)
Because that's how the nation runs without descending into Civil War.


You only say that because your side would lose.
   207. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:01 PM (#4097881)
Torii Hunter has been aging remarkably well offensively. How is his defense these days?
   208. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:07 PM (#4097891)
I have a question for conservatives on this board. How much government is "too much?"

I have a conservative friend who rails against high taxes but I can't get him to identify specific. He'll rail against the EPA, but if I ask him, "Do you think the EPA should be eliminated? Do you think we should just let businesses decide what clean water and air is?" he'll say we need some regulation.

Do conservatives think we should have taxes to pay for schools? What's a reasonable salary for a teacher? How many students should a teacher be in charge of?

What about roads? Should they be maintained? At what level?

Police and firemen? Several towns have nearly eliminated them to save money: see Vallejo, CA. Crime has skyrocketed in that town. And in several other wealthy towns that scaled back on police, criminals have been robbing people at gunpoint in broad daylight. One woman on This American Life a few weeks ago told how criminals stole her brass downspouts off her house in the middle of the day, while she was home. She yelled at them to stop, but they didn't. What's an acceptable level of policing?

Most conservatives, I think, support a strong military. At what level though? There seems to me to be enormous waste, and a ton that could be cut.

What about Social Security? And Medicare? I'm a very liberal liberal, and I think there's a lot of waste in Medicare.

What about unemployment benefits? Should we have them at all? What do you do with all those people who don't have jobs? (And remember that the system in place needs to have about 5% unemployment in order to work. If you go above that you start to have problems.)

I guess what I don't get is that the money that the government spends goes to real people with real jobs. Even if it's blown on crazy conference things, real Americans get that money and then presumably spend it in the economy. I'd like to hear specifics.

As to taxes, is it fair that a company like GE gets billions of dollars in refunds and doesn't pay taxes? What do you say to Warren Buffet's claim that taxes actually spur growth? Would you be in favor of amending the tax code to eliminate loopholes, as President Obama has advocated? If you do, that would effectively raise tax revenue without raising taxes. Would you be for that?

I'd also like to go on record as saying that I'd like to eliminate waste. There's enough of it to make me think that there needs to be something done.
   209. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:08 PM (#4097893)
You only say that because your side would lose.

Primey. I believe it might be the shortest civil war on record. You've got every combat branch of the military dominated by conservatives, plus all the gun nuts on one side.
   210. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4097894)
You only say that because your side would lose.


I don't know if this is a joke or not, but the government side wins, hands down. There might be defections from the military to the seceding side, but the vast majority of the military will always be on the side of the government in Washington, DC. Luckily we probably won't ever have to find out because Americans are an undemonstrative bunch. They rarely take to the streets even when doing so would undeniably be in their interest to do so, and when push comes to shove, as after 9/11, people just overwhelmingly support their government in whatever it decides to do.
   211. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:11 PM (#4097895)
the officer class is dominated by conservatives. Not so much with the enlisted men and women.
   212. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:14 PM (#4097899)
The current state of affairs is a compromise. Just b/c Republicans won't go further in the Democrats preferred direction is not an indictment of Republicans


The discussion at hand, I believe, is about paying debt that is *already acquired,* no?
   213. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:15 PM (#4097901)
I have a question for conservatives on this board. How much government is "too much?"

I don't have a complete manifesto on hand, but I'd say maybe 30% of GDP is appropriate vs. the 40%+ we spend now.

A lot of Conservative objections also have to do with how badly the money is wasted, and regulation and other interference that don't show up in spending totals.

Do conservatives think we should have taxes to pay for schools? What's a reasonable salary for a teacher? How many students should a teacher be in charge of?

To take that specific, yes, I believe we should have public funding of K-12 education, I just don't think gov't is any good at running schools.

I'd want a fully voucherized system. Each parent gets a check from the gov't for each kid (adjusted for local cost of living, and disabilities where relevent) and spends it at whatever private school they want.

Let teachers make whatever the market dictates, and let good teachers get more and bad teachers less (or get fired).
   214. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:15 PM (#4097902)
You only say that because your side would lose.


The only man who frequented this board who might have had a chance against me is currently rehabbing in his Milwaukee area home. But keep telling yourselves stories, man. I particularly like the one where you think you know what "side" I'm on, despite hours and hours of evidence to the contrary.
   215. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:18 PM (#4097906)
I'd also like to go on record as saying that I'd like to eliminate waste.


This is an empty statement. You have to define what "waste" is.
   216. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:18 PM (#4097907)
the officer class is dominated by conservatives. Not so much with the enlisted men and women.

In the combat arms (infantry, armor, artillery, engineers, special forces) they are. Look at the recruiting patterns; dominated by the South, Midwest and rural areas in general. The guys in those branches don't join to gain career skills; they want to serve.

I don't know if this is a joke or not, but the government side wins, hands down. There might be defections from the military to the seceding side, but the vast majority of the military will always be on the side of the government in Washington, DC.

Civil war kind of presupposes that "the government" no longer has legitimacy.

You'd never ever see secession, b/c the issues aren't regional. You'd have a military backed coup instead.
   217. Chicago Joe Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:19 PM (#4097908)
'd want a fully voucherized system. Each parent gets a check from the gov't for each kid (adjusted for local cost of living, and disabilities where relevent) and spends it at whatever private school they want.

Let teachers make whatever the market dictates, and let good teachers get more and bad teachers less (or get fired).


I'd be on board with this, but only if the system is entirely non-profit.
   218. Chicago Joe Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:20 PM (#4097909)
The guys in those branches don't join to gain career skills; they want a job.


FTFY.
   219. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4097913)
The guys in those branches don't join to gain career skills; they want a job.


Your just showing ignorance of our military. These people actually believe in serving their country.

If you wanted a job, you become a technician or a nurse, a marketable skill post-military. You go Infantry for other reasons.
   220. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:28 PM (#4097917)
I'd be on board with this, but only if the system is entirely non-profit.

I think that's a dictinction w/o a difference. Non-profits reap huge profits (look at Universities), they just spend it on adding bureaucracy rather than dividends.

I'd leave the market open to everyone, religious and secular, non-profit and for profit. If for profit companies gain market power and try to exploit it, you can always add controls later. If each state is the "single payer" there's little chance of anyone gaining monopoly power to rival it.
   221. Chicago Joe Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:28 PM (#4097918)
Your just showing ignorance of our military. These people actually believe in serving their country.


With 6 cousins (2nd and closer) and several friends currently serving, I wouldn't be too quick with that statement.
The fact is, while they are proud to serve and eager to do their duty, the areas of the country in which they grew up have little in the way of job opportunity. The military was the best option for them at the time.
   222. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:28 PM (#4097919)
This is an empty statement. You have to define what "waste" is.


To give an example, where I worked last year there was a job opening for "Programmer Analyst." This person was supposed to be able to do, you know, actual programming for a program that recorded professors' lectures for over-enrolled courses. But the person they hired couldn't actually do any programming. He just didn't know how. So they had to hire a second person to fill the original position. But he couldn't program either. So they promoted both out of their positions and created a 3rd position: "Programmer." The guy they hired for that could actually program. But now they needed two people to do the work that the other guys that they had promoted had taken on.

This is one example I've seen numerous times. I'm all for employing people, but in this particular example 5 people were hired for 1 position. That's ridiculous. What tends to happen in government is that any new alteration to its structure tends to calcify rather quickly. When once someone is doing a job, its very hard to eliminate that job. And despite what they say, you'll NEVER find an elected official who actually wants to eliminate jobs.

I've seen this happen in government. I once worked on a project for the land records office in a county in New York. I was part of a team implementing a Y2K upgrade. Part of that Y2K upgrade meant trying to figure out what people actually did for their jobs and then modeling that in a new software workflow. What we found was that you could actually eliminate 30% of the staff, including one person who entered specific information into a ledger that was hundreds of years old. No one knew why that person entered that information into the ledger, and as far as we could find out, ONLY that person used that ledger. The information it contained was already being captured in multiple places elsewhere. When we told the elected officials and appointees, all Republicans, that we could eliminate 30% of the staff, they MADE US remodel the workflow so that it could accommodate all of the staff.

That's waste.
   223. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:29 PM (#4097920)
Your just showing ignorance of our military. These people actually believe in serving their country.

So do. Some want a job. Some believe in serving their country and want a job. Some people in combat arms from rural areas are conservative, some are not. Military culture is not monolithic.
   224. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:32 PM (#4097922)
These people actually believe in serving their country.


Which is why it's so odd that the right wing nutters here think they would casually commit treason and break their oaths without a second thought, no?
   225. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:32 PM (#4097923)
That's waste.


Sure. Anecdotal, but sure.

That #### happens in the private sector all the time, too.
   226. The Good Face Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:34 PM (#4097924)
But keep telling yourselves stories, man. I particularly like the one where you think you know what "side" I'm on, despite hours and hours of evidence to the contrary.


The losing side of course.
   227. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:41 PM (#4097930)
That #### happens in the private sector all the time, too.


It's not public money that's paying for it, though. I actually will accept a LOT of waste because I think money spent on jobs is money spent IN the economy. That's just good for people. Debt is good because it creates trust and opportunities for trust. You need debt and trust to create wealth.

The problem is a lot of waste creates distrust. Take for example Medicare. It pays for those stupid scooters that fat people ride. Congratulations! You're fat! You win a scooter! They should be walking MORE not less. Because of that kind of thing, now people think ALL of Medicare is a waste. Medicare needs to be more selective about what kinds of things it pays for. And pay MORE for the things people really need. Wouldn't it be great if medicare could pay entirely for really expensive things, like cancer treatment? I'd rather have a bunch of people getting free or greatly reduced-cost cancer treatment than a bunch of fat people riding scooters.

I don't think we need a reduction in funding or taxes. What I'd rather see is funneling that waste into areas where it's actually needed: shoring up Social Security & Medicare, etc. I'm prepared, however, unlike many of the conservative ilk, to accept a certain amount of waste. As long as the vast majority of taxpayer money is not spent on waste.
   228. ?Donde esta Dagoberto Campaneris? Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:50 PM (#4097935)
Torii Hunter has been aging remarkably well offensively. How is his defense these days?

He has lost a lot of the speed that let him patrol the gaps at a premium level so he's not really a starting centerfielder anymore. But, he doesn't have to be one and he is solid in right field. Decent arm (15 assists last year) good hands- not someone you have to worry about.

He probably won't hit well enough to be an everyday rightfielder, but after this year, I could see him being a good platoon player or fourth outfielder for a couple of years if he's interested in going that route. He has hit lefties really well the last few years (except 2010) and he could fill in at any of the OF spots for short stretches. With a reduced role, he could provide some good value for a couple more seasons.

His signing has gone just about as well as could have been reasonably expected when it was made.
   229. Ray (RDP) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 12:59 PM (#4097946)
This is an empty statement. You have to define what "waste" is.


Employing people to design an iPhone app so that people with $500 iPhones can find out where to go to get their taxpayer-funded condoms.

And then having taxpayers pay for condoms for the people with the $500 iPhones.

Let me know if you need help with any other basic questions.

   230. Downtown Bookie Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:14 PM (#4097980)
I have a question for conservatives on this board. How much government is "too much?"


Judging by their actions, I think it's fair to say that both conservatives and liberals in the US think there's "too much" government when the government is doing stuff they don't like. Conversely, both conservatives and liberals love "big government" when the government is doing stuff they do like.

DB
   231. depletion Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:34 PM (#4098055)
That's waste.


Sure. Anecdotal, but sure.

That #### happens in the private sector all the time, too.

You're dead if you waste too much money as a commercial entity. I see it go on in an endless stream in the fed gov't every day.
By the way, speaking of racism, no outrage for Marion Barry last night?
“We got to do something about these Asians coming in and opening up businesses and dirty shops,” Barry said. “They ought to go. I’m going to say that right now. But we need African-American businesspeople to be able to take their places, too.”
   232. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:41 PM (#4098078)
By the way, speaking of racism, no outrage for Marion Barry last night?

Flat out racist.
   233. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:45 PM (#4098095)
"Dirty shops" is such a crude and oafish term, but I guess we shouldn't expect anything better from such an obvious bigot. I love the nod to ethnic cleansing, too.
   234. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:48 PM (#4098102)
I don't think anyone is going to dispute the claim that Marion Barry is a racist a**hole
   235. asdf1234 Posted: April 05, 2012 at 01:49 PM (#4098104)
You're dead if you waste too much money as a commercial entity. I see it go on in an endless stream in the fed gov't every day.
By the way, speaking of racism, no outrage for Marion Barry last night?


I discovered that leftists and civil rights leaders in particular are incapable of being racist back when Jesse was complaining to a reporter about Hymietown.

Thankfully, the media saw through his charade and we haven't heard from him since.
   236. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:22 PM (#4098425)
My God, what a pointless ####### thread.

It'll probably end up getting thousands of posts, like all the pointless threads around here do.



When I was 5 or 6, I got into a huge argument with my brother about who would win in a fight between He-Man and Superman. These threads always remind me of that.

So what's the over/under on how many posts this thread reaches before it's closed down due to excessive name calling? I'm guessing 1000...
   237. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:26 PM (#4098449)
Are you an idiot? Superman, of course.
   238. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:30 PM (#4098464)
Are you an idiot? Superman, of course.

WHAT?!!! You're as delusional as my brother! :)

He-Man would totally win. I once saw him lift Castle Greyskull over his head!
   239. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:37 PM (#4098496)
I think reversing the Earth's spin trumps any other feat of strength.
   240. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:42 PM (#4098508)
I think reversing the Earth's spin trumps any other feat of strength.

But that was just silly. If Superman can turn back time like that, why doesn't he just keep doing it whenever something bad happens?
   241. AROM Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:45 PM (#4098521)
Superman vs. Batman:

1. Surprise fight - neither one knows they have to fight but are thrown in a steel cage and forced to fight to the death. Superman wins easily. Though the scenario is silly - how can you force Superman to do anything, or keep him in a steel cage?

2. They both know about the fight in advance and have time to prepare. Batman secures some kryptonite and prepares a devious trap, but Superman knows he'd do this, picks up a mountain, and throws it on top of Batman's general vicinity to remove the threat.

3. Batman surprises an unaware Superman with a Kryptonite weapon and finishes him off. His only chance is to start with an advantage.
   242. Randy Jones Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4098531)
Superman vs. Batman:

1. Surprise fight - neither one knows they have to fight but are thrown in a steel cage and forced to fight to the death. Superman wins easily. Though the scenario is silly - how can you force Superman to do anything, or keep him in a steel cage?

2. They both know about the fight in advance and have time to prepare. Batman secures some kryptonite and prepares a devious trap, but Superman knows he'd do this, picks up a mountain, and throws it on top of Batman's general vicinity to remove the threat.

3. Batman surprises an unaware Superman with a Kryptonite weapon and finishes him off. His only chance is to start with an advantage.


Batman keeps a supply of Kryptonite just in case Superman ever turns evil, gets mind controlled, etc.
   243. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4098533)
It's probably kind of a hassle, so it's only worth the effort to save someone he knows.
   244. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:01 PM (#4098596)
Batman keeps a supply of Kryptonite just in case Superman ever turns evil, gets mind controlled, etc.

Exactly. If we're talking about the Adam West Batman, there's no doubt he'd already have some liquid kryptonite spray tucked away in that handy belt of his just in case.
   245. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:05 PM (#4098610)
It's probably kind of a hassle, so it's only worth the effort to save someone he knows.

Do you think reversing the Earth's rotation might have some unforseen butterfly effect type consequences?

If yes, then Superman is a very selfish person.
   246. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:20 PM (#4098671)
He's the most powerful guy in the universe, so it's entirely possible that he's also kind of a d**k.
   247. Esmailyn Gonzalez Sr. Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:31 PM (#4098714)
I'd also like to go on record as saying that I'd like to eliminate waste.

I think we should increase waste!

   248. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:32 PM (#4098720)
He's the most powerful guy in the universe, so it's entirely possible that he's also kind of a d**k.

(Peter Griffin is imagining himself in Hell, sees Superman playing cards at a table with Hitler, Al Capone, and John Wilkes Boothe)

Peter: Hey, what are you doing here?

Superman: I killed a hooker. She made a crack about me being faster than a speeding bullet, so I ripped her in half like a phone book.
   249. formerly dp Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:36 PM (#4098731)
He's the most powerful guy in the universe, so it's entirely possible that he's also kind of a d**k.

This is sort of the premise in Mark Waid's Irredeemable.
   250. andrewberg Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:46 PM (#4098747)
I never understood that part of Superman II. Spinning the Earth backwards would turn back time in the most literal sense- we would have to reset our watches and tape our daily trivia back onto our desk calendars- but there is no way it would cause events to un-happen. That seems to imply that everything that does happen is somehow caused by the Earth's rotation, and that's absurd.
   251. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 04:57 PM (#4098776)
I never understood that part of Superman II. Spinning the Earth backwards would turn back time in the most literal sense- we would have to reset our watches and tape our daily trivia back onto our desk calendars- but there is no way it would cause events to un-happen. That seems to imply that everything that does happen is somehow caused by the Earth's rotation, and that's absurd.


Is time in the physical sense local? Because Superman's trick leaves aside the problem of the earth's orbit around the sun, the sun's orbit around the center of the galaxy and the rest of the ####### movement in the universe (which means also Superman's movement, thus we've reached paradox). If you want to roll back time, don't you have to roll back the entire universe?
   252. DA Baracus Posted: April 05, 2012 at 05:06 PM (#4098823)
That seems to imply that everything that does happen is somehow caused by the Earth's rotation, and that's absurd.


Tell that to Superman's face.
   253. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 05:07 PM (#4098826)
Is time in the physical sense local? Because Superman's trick leaves aside the problem of the earth's orbit around the sun, the sun's orbit around the center of the galaxy and the rest of the ####### movement in the universe (which means also Superman's movement, thus we've reached paradox). If you want to roll back time, don't you have to roll back the entire universe?

Seems like a lot of possible negative fallout just to bring one chick back to life that wasn't even hot...
   254. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 05, 2012 at 05:28 PM (#4098850)
The problem is a lot of waste creates distrust. Take for example Medicare.

It's crazy how much waste there is in Medicare. Just in Miami, the estimates are between $5 million and $10 million per day. When they can't even narrow down the fraud estimate in a single city to within a billion dollars, that might be the sign of a serious problem.

source: Medicare fraud rampant in South Florida
   255. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 05, 2012 at 05:33 PM (#4098854)

Also I would imagine that the force necessary to reverse the Earth's rotation and then re-reverse it would have a lot of negative physical consequences on the Earth itself.
   256. Eddo Posted: April 05, 2012 at 05:35 PM (#4098858)
I'm far from a comic book nerd, but it always puzzled me that Superman ever struggled with any enemies. His powers are basically: "Can do everything as well as anyone ever. Also, can fly and can only be killed with a substance not native to Earth." It seems like he didn't get the most out of his abilities.

On that note, perhaps Superman would make some tactical blunder, and Batman would take advantage? Of course, without Kryptonite, he couldn't kill Superman...
   257. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 06:10 PM (#4098898)
I'm far from a comic book nerd, but it always puzzled me that Superman ever struggled with any enemies. His powers are basically: "Can do everything as well as anyone ever. Also, can fly and can only be killed with a substance not native to Earth." It seems like he didn't get the most out of his abilities.

Superman was never one of my faves because of this invincibility. It's just not suspenseful to be shot at when you know the bullets are just gonna bounce off if you get hit. Yawn...

Edit: But yeah, I think the writers always made him struggle with enemies just cuz it would've been really boring and predictable if he always did take full advantage of his superiority. It'd be like watching Pujols play against Little Leaguers (on second thought, that at least might be funny...)
   258. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 05, 2012 at 06:37 PM (#4098917)
"Can do everything as well as anyone ever. Also, can fly and can only be killed with a substance not native to Earth." It seems like he didn't get the most out of his abilities.
Probably came up in the Pirates farm system.
   259. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: April 05, 2012 at 06:41 PM (#4098919)
Edit: But yeah, I think the writers always made him struggle with enemies just cuz it would've been really boring and predictable if he always did take full advantage of his superiority. It'd be like watching Pujols play against Little Leaguers (on second thought, that at least might be funny...)

But they sure came up with some crazy ways to make this "struggle" happen.
Anybody else remember the bad guy whose superpower was that he could make other people do his will, simply by saying "[do whatever], PLEASE"?
   260. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 06:48 PM (#4098927)
But they sure came up with some crazy ways to make this "struggle" happen. Anybody else remember the bad guy whose superpower was that he could make other people do his will, simply by saying "[do whatever], PLEASE"?

I never actually read the comics; all my opinions are based on the movies. But yeah, that's pretty dumb.
   261. Manny Coon Posted: April 05, 2012 at 06:53 PM (#4098931)
He-Man would totally win. I once saw him lift Castle Greyskull over his head!


He-Man once threw castle grayskull out of a white hole into another dimension! Skeltor on white holes: "it's like a black hole, only not as dense!"

However apparently He-Man and Superman have fought before, from some website I found:

That's why one of He-Man's most impressive acts occurred in DC Comics Presents #47 (1982), when he fought Superman for a few rounds (Superman, being vulnerable to magic, was being controlled by Skeletor, of course). Superman won the fight (barely), and was eventually freed from Skeletor's control and teamed up with He-Man to save the day. Still, the fact that He-Man held his own for a few minutes against pre-Crisis Superman puts him in an elite class of superheroes.


Of course this also means Superman was dumb enough to get mind-controlled by Skeletor.
   262. McCoy Posted: April 05, 2012 at 07:05 PM (#4098961)
So instead of talking about Patton vs Rommel we are going to talk about Batman vs Superman in a Calcaterra thread?

And does Calcaterra mean land of lime or heel land?
   263. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: April 05, 2012 at 07:08 PM (#4098962)
Superman did not reverse the Earth's rotation. He flew himself faster than the speed of light and he went back in time. When we see the earth spinning backwards it's from his perspective. He's seeing time go backwards.

What has puzzled me all these years is that the film makes a big deal out of his father saying not to interfere that way. Then Superman does interfere and there are zero consequences.
   264. Booey Posted: April 05, 2012 at 07:09 PM (#4098963)
Superman won the fight (barely),

Dammit! Almost 30 years later, and I find out my brother won the argument after all. You just ruined my day. :(

A couple of He-Man related questions:

Why is only Skeletor's face devoid of skin, rather than his entire body like the Grim Reaper?

And why is He-Man so much stronger than everyone else when they all have the same identical overly muscled physique? It seemed like they made the bodies for all the toys with the same mold and just changed the skin and underpants color for different characters. Even Man-At-Arms, who was supposed to be old was just as buff as He-Man!

   265. McCoy Posted: April 05, 2012 at 07:12 PM (#4098966)
Then Superman does interfere and there are zero consequences.

Did you see what Lois Lane looked and sounded like?
   266. ?Donde esta Dagoberto Campaneris? Posted: April 05, 2012 at 07:33 PM (#4098980)
And why is He-Man so much stronger than everyone else when they all have the same identical overly muscled physique?

By the power of Grayskull, silly.
   267. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: April 05, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4099057)
By the power of Grayskull steroids, silly.
   268. Dale Sams Posted: April 05, 2012 at 09:02 PM (#4099060)
Then Superman does interfere and there are zero consequences.


consequences.
   269. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 05, 2012 at 09:42 PM (#4099075)
I was always more bugged by the handy superpower-remover phone booth that emerged from the Arctic Sea because of the green glowstick. That, and the magic expand-and-cling cellophane "S" logos that you can throw across the room.
   270. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 10:08 PM (#4099090)
Superman did not reverse the Earth's rotation. He flew himself faster than the speed of light and he went back in time. When we see the earth spinning backwards it's from his perspective. He's seeing time go backwards.


Wait, what? How do you know that?
   271. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 05, 2012 at 10:26 PM (#4099105)
consequences


Awesome! And thank you!
   272. Jay Z Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4099131)
I think that's a dictinction w/o a difference. Non-profits reap huge profits (look at Universities), they just spend it on adding bureaucracy rather than dividends.

I'd leave the market open to everyone, religious and secular, non-profit and for profit. If for profit companies gain market power and try to exploit it, you can always add controls later. If each state is the "single payer" there's little chance of anyone gaining monopoly power to rival it.


The government is not going to be the single payer. The government is going to pay a flat fee, and the schools are going to charge the parents on top of that. It's a crappy system, it's the same bad system that we're using for healthcare and college education.

Your top-tier privates are going to be voucher + whatever the people pay to go there now. If everyone has a voucher, then the voucher is worthless in bidding. Everyone just slaps a voucher on top of the money they already pay, the same people go, and the private school gets a windfall. And maybe the K-12 education gets a little more gold-plated than it needs to be.

The voucher + zero is going to be a babysitter period, or a kickback scheme, or both. Whatever you think you are getting with our current system, you are going to be getting less with the voucher. Where they gonna go? In all of the places where schools are having problems now, some private enterprise is going to come in on its white horse? A lot of those places don't have a lot of private enterprise, either.

With the current system you do have controls. School referenda get voted up and down all the time. People pay their taxes and at the end of the day there are in fact schools. With vouchers people pay their taxes, and then they pay some more, what are ya gonna do, have your kid fall behind?
   273. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: April 05, 2012 at 11:50 PM (#4099142)
Wait, what? How do you know that?

Occam's Razor. As everyone has pointed out in this thread, the alternative is massively stupid and full of logic holes. It's the only thing that makes sense, and to be honest, it's the only thing I ever thought until discussions like these many years later.
   274. McCoy Posted: April 06, 2012 at 12:34 AM (#4099151)
If we are watching Superman fly around the Earth how is it from his perspective?
   275. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: April 06, 2012 at 12:55 AM (#4099156)
What do you want, a camera shot from his eyes? That wouldn't show anything. I didn't mean literally as if he had a catcher's mask with a camera in it. He flies super fast, and eventually goes back in time.

Nothing else makes sense.
   276. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: April 06, 2012 at 01:10 AM (#4099160)
Occam's Razor. As everyone has pointed out in this thread, the alternative is massively stupid and full of logic holes. It's the only thing that makes sense, and to be honest, it's the only thing I ever thought until discussions like these many years later.


I looked it up after I read it here and others seem to have come to the same conclusion as you in almost exactly the same way. So, kudos! One guy had a really great question about the problem of time travel:

When Superman goes back in time and we follow him, and we see that we are following him back in time by the fact that Earth's rotation slows and reverses, the ionization trail he left behind remains visible. Or actually, it continues to fade as it had been before Superman reached light speed. The trail far behind him continued to fade as we watched, even though we were seeing an earlier time when the earlier part of the trail was brighter, though the whole trail was shorter. We should have seen the trail evolve backward in time, along with Earth's rotation.


   277. bookbook Posted: April 06, 2012 at 01:19 AM (#4099162)
I'm surprised that people don't mention the biggest drawback of nuclear power - it's phenomenally expensive to do "safely", even before considering the "externality" of the expense of dealing with the waste for generations. Would it get cheaper at much higher volumes? I don't really see how.

There is such vast potential in solar power, and such a wonderfully positive decentralizing effect for independent-minded conservative sorts, that it needs to be a part of the solution going forward.

I wish the conservative point of view on global warming was correct. I really do. Wish casting turns out not to be the best way to approach our future.
   278. base ball chick Posted: April 06, 2012 at 01:49 AM (#4099169)
I wonder if grrls are not into comic books because men in long underwear and gloves look silly.

And if you are from some other galaxy, why the interest in fighting crime? and if you are so super, why is there still so much if it?

   279. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 06, 2012 at 04:11 AM (#4099185)
I wish the conservative point of view on global warming was correct. I really do. Wish casting turns out not to be the best way to approach our future.

It has nothing to do with wishcasting; it has to do with the foolishness of unilateral disarmament. It simply makes no sense for the U.S. to spend a staggering amount of money and to roll back its standard of living when we know, in advance, that China, India, Brazil, and a slew of other developing countries have no interest in doing similarly.
   280. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: April 06, 2012 at 05:10 AM (#4099188)
Superman could probably just blow really hard and end global warming by himself if he wanted to.

And if Earth's climate gets too damaged, we could all just go live on Eternia. That place seems a lot more interesting than Earth anyway.
   281. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: April 06, 2012 at 06:26 AM (#4099196)
It pays for those stupid scooters that fat people ride. Congratulations! You're fat! You win a scooter!

Maybe you should spend five minutes thinking about this one.

And pay MORE for the things people really need

You know what people who have a great deal of trouble walking really need?
   282. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: April 06, 2012 at 06:31 AM (#4099198)
I hear what David Wells' Piehole is saying about waste. But $50,000 wasted on employing somebody who is only marginally useful is about a million times better than $50,000 wasted on a ####### bomb to blow up villagers.

Is there any more egregious example of waste than our huge stockpiles of cold war era weapons? I'm reminded of this line from The Hurt Locker:

"Spc. Owen Eldridge: Aren't you glad the Army has all these tanks parked here? Just in case the Russians come and we have to have a big tank battle?"

I'm curious what percentage of the fighting vehicles this country builds go their entire length of service without firing a single round in combat.
   283. Ray (RDP) Posted: April 06, 2012 at 07:46 AM (#4099201)
It has nothing to do with wishcasting; it has to do with the foolishness of unilateral disarmament. It simply makes no sense for the U.S. to spend a staggering amount of money and to roll back its standard of living when we know, in advance, that China, India, Brazil, and a slew of other developing countries have no interest in doing similarly.


Yes. Do people think the US = the world, or something? What we do is only a fraction of what the world does. Even if this gargantuanly silly idea that we could alter the climate were valid, we'd need the world on board. And, unlike in Superman II where the president of the US surrenders to Zod on behalf of the entire world, Obama is not president of the world.
   284. Lassus Posted: April 06, 2012 at 08:54 AM (#4099223)
Yes.

High-five!
   285. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 06, 2012 at 09:43 AM (#4099251)
I wonder if grrls are not into comic books because men in long underwear and gloves look silly.

Hmmmmm, maybe that explains the gender gap.
   286. McCoy Posted: April 06, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4099269)
I'm curious what percentage of the fighting vehicles this country builds go their entire length of service without firing a single round in combat.

People without tanks tend to have tanks used on them.
   287. Ron J Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:07 AM (#4099336)
#282 Tom Clancy said something to the effect that any weapon system that's so effective it never gets used is money well spent.

The funny (ha-ha) thing about (in particular) Iraq (and to a lesser extent Afghanistan) is that there was significantly more wear and tear on the various fighting vehicles than had been planned for. (In don't mean in the war itself, but in terms of the army's long term budgeting process) Quite expensive. The rebuilding program saw much more use than had been planned for.

In a very real sense they're built to be shown but not used hard.

   288. villageidiom Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:21 AM (#4099344)
When we started from Torii Hunter and meandered through comic book superheroes, somehow I figured the conversation would have moved on to Nyjer Morgan by now.
   289. Booey Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:27 AM (#4099348)
I wonder if grrls are not into comic books because men in long underwear and gloves look silly.

The underpants over your clothes look isn't sexy? Damn...

And if you are from some other galaxy, why the interest in fighting crime? and if you are so super, why is there still so much if it?

I always wondered this too. I know I'd be on my best behavior if I knew that Superman/Batman/Spiderman were watching over me. Why wouldn't all these crime organizations just relocate to another city?
   290. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4099349)
[em And, unlike in Superman II where the president of the US surrenders to Zod on behalf of the entire world, Obama is not president of the world.]

Well, in Superman IV, Superman flies all around the world and it's daytime everywhere. So in the world of Superman something's clearly amiss. Maybe the rest of the world is OK with the US ruling and even went so far as to change their daylight hours to match.

Oh, and that scene where he flies around the world he shows off a never before seen ability. He uses his wall-building vision to rebuild the Great Wall of China. I mean, I guess it's probably literally never come up before that he's been in a situation where he had to rebuild a wall with his vision. So that's probably why we haven't seen that power before.
   291. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:29 AM (#4099350)
3. Batman surprises an unaware Superman with a Kryptonite weapon and finishes him off. His only chance is to start with an advantage.


This fight has happened. Batman wins. Then he has a heart attack and dies.
   292. Morty Causa Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:37 AM (#4099360)
Like all life and death physical contests, this one would be no different: it subtly morphs into erotic playfulness.
   293. Lassus Posted: April 06, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4099363)
Then he has a heart attack and dies.

Well, not really.
   294. phredbird Posted: April 06, 2012 at 01:40 PM (#4099487)
well ... am i the only one who gets the sense that this thread saved itself from doom at the last minute?
   295. Mark Donelson Posted: April 06, 2012 at 01:59 PM (#4099510)
well ... am i the only one who gets the sense that this thread saved itself from doom at the last minute?

It ain't over till it's over, phredbird.
   296. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: April 06, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4099525)
Occam's Razor. As everyone has pointed out in this thread, the alternative is massively stupid and full of logic holes. It's the only thing that makes sense, and to be honest, it's the only thing I ever thought until discussions like these many years later.
But...didn't they also show him then flying around the Earth in the other direction, until it started spinning the other way again? There wouldn't be any point to that if he was just time traveling. (Unless he overshot or something I guess.)

That said, the time travel thing had never occurred to me, and it does make a lot more sense.

Yeah, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjgsnWtBQm0
   297. villageidiom Posted: April 06, 2012 at 02:29 PM (#4099541)
But...didn't they also show him then flying around the Earth in the other direction, until it started spinning the other way again? There wouldn't be any point to that if he was just time traveling. (Unless he overshot or something I guess.)
I don't think we understand how one would control the direction of time travel anyway, let alone how that would be visually represented in a work of fiction.
   298. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: April 06, 2012 at 03:00 PM (#4099570)
So Bryce Harper and Mike Trout are both available in fantasy, I want to claim squatter's rights on one. Who's a better bet to contribute more this season?
   299. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: April 06, 2012 at 03:17 PM (#4099586)
I'd take Harper. The Angels have a lot more options than Nats in the OF. I think Washington is far more likely to stick it out if they hit a rough patch.
   300. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: April 06, 2012 at 03:25 PM (#4099595)
I'd take Trout. While I agree with FPH that Harper may be more likely to play, Trout is more likely to be good. Harper hit for a 750 OPS in the high minors last year, Trout hit over 950.

ZiPS projects Trout to hit 340/415 with a pile of steals, and Harper to hit 315/405 with only a handful of steals. As of the end of last season, Trout was pretty clearly the more advanced, more MLB-ready prospect of the two.
Page 3 of 4 pages  < 1 2 3 4 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Tuque
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogAthletics Acquire Adam Dunn
(28 - 10:10am, Sep 01)
Last: DKDC

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(45 - 10:09am, Sep 01)
Last: Alex meets the threshold for granular review

NewsblogExtreme Moneyball: The Houston Astros Go All In on Data Analysis
(1 - 10:00am, Sep 01)
Last: Weratych

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(947 - 9:56am, Sep 01)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-1-2014
(2 - 9:36am, Sep 01)
Last: Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde

NewsblogBob Melvin calls Athletics 'pathetic' after Angels sweep four-game set
(5 - 8:50am, Sep 01)
Last: Swedish Chef

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(6299 - 8:29am, Sep 01)
Last: BDC

NewsblogJesus Montero gets heckled by Mariners cross checker during rehab stint
(59 - 8:21am, Sep 01)
Last: BrianBrianson

NewsblogBlue Jays Acquire Mayberry Jr.
(4 - 7:45am, Sep 01)
Last: Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama

NewsblogSherman: How Reds react to second-half swoon will be major factor in offseason
(6 - 6:06am, Sep 01)
Last: Davo Dozier

NewsblogTigers' Miguel Cabrera appears to re-injure ankle, leaves game
(10 - 3:48am, Sep 01)
Last: Cooper Nielson

NewsblogBackman named PCL’s top manager
(12 - 2:57am, Sep 01)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(779 - 2:09am, Sep 01)
Last: DJS and the Infinite Sadness

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(90 - 12:53am, Sep 01)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-31-2014
(100 - 12:29am, Sep 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

Page rendered in 0.6481 seconds
52 querie(s) executed