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

Sunday, March 31, 2013

OTP: April 2013: Daily Caller: Baseball and the GOP: To rebrand the party, think like a sports fan

This week’s GOP autopsy report, commissioned by RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, is a great start in the much-needed task of rebranding the Republican Party. As the chairman acknowledged, “the way we communicate our principles isn’t resonating widely enough” and “we have to be more inclusive.” The report contains 219 recommendations to “connect people to our principles.” To achieve that goal, the party will need a strategic vision of how voters think about politics, which is something that the report lacks. For that, the GOP can learn a lot from another American passion: baseball.

This year, about 75 million Americans will go to the baseball stadium to watch a ballgame, about the same number as those who will vote in next year’s election. We rarely think about why someone becomes a baseball fan, or why they root for a certain team. Nor do we usually think about why someone chooses to vote for a certain political party. But it’s actually a very useful exercise.

When it comes to baseball, fan loyalty has almost nothing to do with the brain, and almost everything to do with the heart. In all of history, there’s never been a baseball fan who rooted for his team because it had the lowest ticket prices, or because it had the most taxpayer-friendly stadium deal, or because its players did the most community service. For the vast majority of Americans, rooting for a baseball team — not to mention, voting for a political party — isn’t really a rational choice; it’s more of a statement of personal identity — a statement telling the world, “This is who I am.” And for most people, defining “who I am” starts with family and community, before branching out into areas like race, age, gender, and class.

Family is pretty straightforward. If your mom and dad are Yankee fans, you’re almost certainly a Yankee fan. The same is true in politics. If your mom and dad are Republicans, you’re almost certainly a Republican.

Community is also pretty straightforward. If you grew up in, say, Philadelphia, chances are pretty great you’re a Phillies fan. Likewise, someone who grew up in Republican territory like, say, suburban Dallas or rural Indiana is much more likely to become a Republican than a nearly identical person from Seattle or Santa Fe.

Cities with more than one baseball team, like New York or Chicago, show revealing breakdowns by race and gender. The racial split in Chicago between Cubs fans on the North Side and White Sox fans on the South Side is well-documented. In New York, there’s an intriguing gender gap between Mets and Yankee fans, with women gravitating a lot more to the Yanks. While there’s a few theories out there trying to explain that, one obvious answer leaps out: Yankees heartthrob Derek Jeter.

In sports, as in politics, people’s convictions can’t be conveniently reduced to who their parents are or what they look like. But those things are an important foundation, upon which more rational sentiments come into being. Once you’re attached to your team on an emotional level — seeing them as a personal reflection of who you are and what you care about most — a rational exterior comes into being through phrases like “the Red Sox are the best team because they have the most heart” or “the Republicans are the best party because they know how to create jobs.”

Tripon Posted: March 31, 2013 at 10:52 AM | 6544 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: politics

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 30 of 66 pages ‹ First  < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 >  Last ›
   2901. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:18 PM (#4416492)
Ray, that you have been reduced to defending the POST as a reliable source of information is just beyond sad.

That really hasn't been the point of this at all.
   2902. Lassus Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:18 PM (#4416493)
If shoes are a potential threat, search them all. If some need not be searched, then none need be. It's as pointless as shutting off the lights.

As an adult terrorist, you're going to trust a 13-year-old kid not to fiddle with his explosive shoes? Have you ever been around children, Miserlou? ;-)
   2903. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:25 PM (#4416499)
As an adult terrorist, you're going to trust a 13-year-old kid not to fiddle with his explosive shoes? Have you ever been around children, Miserlou? ;-)


I realize this is meant to be a joke, but I'm thinking that an adult smuggles explosives in the shoes of an unknowing child, and them assembles them into a weapon on the other side of security.

Or, alternatively. My 13 YO son has the same shoe size as me. He uses my dress shoes as needed, which he did on a recent trip to NYC. He doesn't need to take off his shoes in security, so he wears mine until we get through the other side.
   2904. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:31 PM (#4416503)
I got to imagine tours of the FBI headquarters weren't all that interesting to begin with. I mean not that Ive been called in for questioning in the last few years, but isnt it just a bunch of offices, cubes, and conference rooms?


There used to also be interrogation rooms, conference rooms, all kinds of labs, evidence storage and examinatiion rooms...

The FBI also used to let (closely supervised) tourists fire guns at silhouettes of famous criminals like John Dillinger. Next to the White House and Congress and the National Gallery, The FBI headquarters was rivaled in tourist interest in DC only by the Walter Reed Medical Museum, whose attendance was spurred for decades by an unstoppable rumor that Dillinger's alleged foot long Johnson** was on public display. Practically every school kid in Washington was at one point conned by that tall tale into making the pilgrimage up 16th Street or Georgia Avenue, and enough of them claimed to have seen the evidence that there was always a fresh supply of suckers.

**Some people even stretched this rumor to the point where this prodigious assault weapon of John D's was so big that he allegedly had to "wrap it around his leg". The persistence of that urban myth was just about a perfect distillation of 1950's sixth grade culture.
   2905. Lassus Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:37 PM (#4416506)
I realize this is meant to be a joke, but I'm thinking that an adult smuggles explosives in the shoes of an unknowing child, and them assembles them into a weapon on the other side of security.

I was obviously teasing, but I really think the chances of any kid unknowingly having enough somethings in his shoe to make a bomb is about as close to zero as one can get. Kids are bored, they pay attention to things like their shoes.


Or, alternatively. My 13 YO son has the same shoe size as me.

Do the authorities know you're pushing roids or super-soldier serum on your children?
   2906. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:38 PM (#4416508)
Do the authorities know you're pushing roids or super-soldier serum on your children?


I've said too mu
   2907. McCoy Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:39 PM (#4416509)
I find it amusing that Seth McFarlane is not happy with the Family Guy edit that makes it look like he is cracking a joke about a bomb going off at the Boston Marathon when his original joke was about Peter driving in the marathon and killing runners.
   2908. steagles Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:40 PM (#4416510)
Do the authorities know you're pushing roids or super-soldier serum on your children?
either that or he copulated with one of the 6 WNBA players that aren't playing for the home team.
   2909. Morty Causa Posted: April 16, 2013 at 11:49 PM (#4416517)
Something to complement 2904--another tale of a legendary schlong.

It Ain't Chopped Liver

Once, probably sometime in the late 1940s, there was a birthday party for Eddie Cantor's wife, Ida. Among the guests: Fanny Brice, Leo Durocher, Danny Kaye, Judy Garland, Mickey Rooney, Jack Benny, George Burns, Gracie Allen, Milton Berle, and Lewis. Everyone's eating and talking and carrying on when, between the hors d'oeuvres and the brisket, Berle emerges from the kitchen with a tray of chopped liver.

"Milton comes out—you know where this is going, don't you?" Lewis asks. I nod. If it's a Milton Berle story, you can assume it involves Berle's legendary schlong. "It's laying on top of the chopped liver, surrounded by all the garnish!" Lewis exclaims, utterly delighted. "And he's walking around to each person at the party: 'Do you want some? Do you want some chopped liver?' He made fifteen to eighteen moves, and everyone is crippled with laughter. Crippled. I couldn't do anything but stare at it. I said, 'Jesus Christ. It's true.'"


   2910. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:14 AM (#4416524)
I wonder if, through the magic of the internet, we will eventually discover WHY the lights were out. Surely there was a park or field manager who made the decision. These strange edicts are often accompanied by deadly serious explanations about the safety of the children, and so on. I look forward to this discovery.

Ray, that you have been reduced to defending the POST as a reliable source of information is just beyond sad.
Just remember, you consider him a Valuable Poster.

@2909: Trust me, it's kind of a drag having a third leg. Imagine going out with a woman, with all the excitement of the buildup, but not knowing if sex is even possible.
   2911. Publius Publicola Posted: April 17, 2013 at 09:01 AM (#4416599)
@2909: Trust me, it's kind of a drag having a third leg. Imagine going out with a woman, with all the excitement of the buildup, but not knowing if sex is even possible.


Only like ear-#######, huh?
   2912. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: April 17, 2013 at 09:15 AM (#4416605)
I'm related to the late Phil Silvers, and he told folks in my family that the Milton Berle stories were 100% true.
   2913. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 09:47 AM (#4416632)
Irrelevant to the fact that they decided to search his place. They don't search places of people they believe aren't involved.


Virtually no cop anywhere, ever, will decline the opportunity to search someone's house if given permission to do so.
   2914. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:01 AM (#4416641)
Virtually no cop anywhere, ever, will decline the opportunity to search someone's house if given permission to do so.

But nor will they ask if they think they can get useful evidence or leads.

The guy was obviously a "suspect" (*) and it's simply comical that it's being denied. More comical is the impulse that leads people to wish to deny it so fervently.

(*) And apparently no longer is. The surprise that someone could be under suspicion but upon further investigation no longer under suspicion is another absolute howler.
   2915. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:03 AM (#4416642)
This picture and comments pretty much convicts the guy


I'm confused. Aren't guns and gold some of the most 'MURICAN things out there? Stick a decal of a bald eagle on that thing, and it'd probably make Ted Nugent wet himself with joy.
   2916. JE (Jason) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:14 AM (#4416651)
Are we nearly done bashing the New York Post? If so, is there similar concern over the New York Daily News?
   2917. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:17 AM (#4416652)
Stick a decal of a bald eagle on that thing, and it'd probably make Ted Nugent wet himself with joy.


Are we still talking about Milton Berle here?
   2918. spike Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:18 AM (#4416655)
Ted Nugent wet himself with joy.

He only does that to dodge the draft.

Speaking of Ted, it was a year ago Monday he promised he'd be dead or in jail by now.
   2919. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM (#4416657)
The guy was obviously a "suspect" (*) and it's simply comical that it's being denied. More comical is the impulse that leads people to wish to deny it so fervently.

(*) And apparently no longer is. The surprise that someone could be under suspicion but upon further investigation no longer under suspicion is another absolute howler.


You have to understand that the worst case scenario for the leftists who make up the Cathedral would be an attack by foreign nationals. Such an event would gin up feelings of nationalism, which they want to avoid at all costs; feelings of nationalism lead to immigration restriction, as well as more aggressive foreign policy. Hard to slash military budgets when people feel under attack by foreign powers.

An attack by right wing domestic terrorists would be the best case scenario; they could make political hay out of that. But even if it turns out domestic left wing terrorists were responsible, they'll just be whitewashed as mentally ill crazies; no harm, no foul.

Anyway, that's why the usual suspects (heh) are spinning so hard that the Saudi guy isn't a suspect, won't be a suspect, couldn't POSSIBLY have EVER been a suspect.
   2920. tshipman Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:26 AM (#4416664)
You have to understand that the worst case scenario for the leftists who make up the Cathedral would be an attack by foreign nationals.


It's the worst case scenario for everyone. How would you like it if going to the ballgame was like going to the airport?
   2921. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:31 AM (#4416667)
Are we nearly done bashing the New York Post? If so, is there similar concern over the New York Daily News?


Yeah, that's not good. The guy quoted in the article who said that if they couldn't run it unedited they shouldn't have run it at all is absolutely right.
   2922. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:31 AM (#4416668)
You have to understand that the worst case scenario for the leftists who make up the Cathedral would be an attack by foreign nationals. Such an event would gin up feelings of nationalism, which they want to avoid at all costs; feelings of nationalism lead to immigration restriction, as well as more aggressive foreign policy. Hard to slash military budgets when people feel under attack by foreign powers.

An attack by right wing domestic terrorists would be the best case scenario; they could make political hay out of that. But even if it turns out domestic left wing terrorists were responsible, they'll just be whitewashed as mentally ill crazies; no harm, no foul.


Speaking as a "leftist", I would tend to think that the best-case scenario would involve no attack at all...
   2923. BrianBrianson Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:32 AM (#4416669)
It's the worst case scenario for everyone. How would you like it if going to the ballgame was like going to the airport?


It doesn't matter who's resonsible with respect to that. All cases work equally well to motivate groping people to let them enter a stadium.
   2924. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:41 AM (#4416678)
You have to understand that the worst case scenario for the leftists who make up the Cathedral would be an attack by foreign nationals. Such an event would gin up feelings of nationalism, which they want to avoid at all costs; feelings of nationalism lead to immigration restriction, as well as more aggressive foreign policy. Hard to slash military budgets when people feel under attack by foreign powers.

Of course the flip side of that is that the talk radio crowd is praying that such an attack would be by a foreign national, so that it would be easier to gin up nationalism, restrict immigration, start another war, and give the military everything it wants. Which is pretty much what happened after 9/11, much to their delight.

--------------------------------------------------

Speaking as a "leftist", I would tend to think that the best-case scenario would involve no attack at all...

This.
   2925. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:41 AM (#4416679)
Speaking as a "leftist", I would tend to think that the best-case scenario would involve no attack at all...


Nope. "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," remember? No attack is far inferior to an attack that allows one to paint one's political enemies in the worst possible light.

It's the worst case scenario for everyone. How would you like it if going to the ballgame was like going to the airport?


It doesn't matter who's resonsible with respect to that. All cases work equally well to motivate groping people to let them enter a stadium.


Bingo. All that matters is that there is political will to capitalize on the fear created. It doesn't really matter who did the bombing, if the goal is to set up a new groping bureaucracy.
   2926. Lassus Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:44 AM (#4416683)
But even if it turns out domestic left wing terrorists were responsible

Just out of curiosity, what type of group or personal views would satisfy your judgment of left-wing terrorists?


The Daily News is a.) ever-so-slightly less trashy in their general coverage, b.) less hideously designed, and c.) significantly better in their comics section. According to Joe, they are also a liberal rag, so it's kind of hard to figure them out. They are barely less crappy but also (usually, but not this week, I guess) a lot less clumsy about it.


Nope. "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," remember?

Economic theory =/= explosion reality.
   2927. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:45 AM (#4416684)
All that matters is that there is political will to capitalize on the fear created. It doesn't really matter who did the bombing, if the goal is to set up a new groping bureaucracy.


If you think anyone but a handful of misguided bureaucrats want that, you are seriously mistaken. I probably qualify as one of your lefty boogeymen, and I can't stand what 90% of the TSA does.
   2928. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:52 AM (#4416688)
Nope. "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," remember? No attack is far inferior to an attack that allows one to paint one's political enemies in the worst possible light.

Now that the attack has happened, it's a sunk cost, and you just know the lefties are wishing fervently for it to be a right-wing domestic group of nuts. Any sampling of sites like DU would show this clearly, so much so that it's not even worth the bother.

It's tough to get a read on who this was. If it were a-Q or an offshoot, you'd think there would be "credit" taken by now. It was Tax Day, so it's certainly possible that rightist loons did it. I wouldn't be shocked if it was leftist loons, though if I had to bet, I'd put them third on the list. I'd probably go somthing like 50% chance ME, 30% rightists, 20% leftists. Maybe 35/15 rightist/leftist. The leftist option is growing, IMHO.
   2929. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:52 AM (#4416689)
If you think anyone but a handful of misguided bureaucrats want that, you are seriously mistaken. I probably qualify as one of your lefty boogeymen, and I can't stand what 90% of the TSA does.


And yet, ecce TSA. They probably have a favorability rating somewhere below herpes, but there they are! Now think for a few minutes how that came (and continues) to be.
   2930. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM (#4416690)
The DN did a bad and stupid thing. The alternatives are so easily available--either run that photo or run a different one. Someone made a very foolish decision. It's possible they had understandable even honorable motives, but that's why you have rules about important issues, so you can check your good impulses as well as your bad ones.

The Post violated a different even more fundamental norm--get it right--and has then violated the ultimate journalistic norm--own up when you f-up--and for #1 one could imagine meh or bad motivations. For #2 there's nothing but bad motivations that are possible; a refusal to own up is the sign of things deeply out of alignment.
   2931. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:55 AM (#4416693)
Of course the flip side of that is that the talk radio crowd is praying that such an attack would be by a foreign national, so that it would be easier to gin up nationalism, restrict immigration, start another war, and give the military everything it wants. Which is pretty much what happened after 9/11, much to their delight.

That's what any sane person would hope for at this point. Who wants to add another terrorist element to the already too long list? What non-zealot would possibly "pray" for this to be domestic?
   2932. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 10:59 AM (#4416700)
Nope. "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," remember?

Economic theory =/= explosion reality.


As SBB pointed out, it's already happened; now it's a sunk cost. And assuming it turns out right wing domestic terrorists are behind it, the left stands to gain considerable advantage. Far more advantage than they could hope for if it had never happened at all. Setting up false flags and whatnot is extremely risky; too great a chance of getting caught and the consequences would be devastating. But hoping one's enemies engage in such relatively insignificant (but politically ruinous) acts of terrorism? Absolutely! It's like Christmas coming twice a year.
   2933. Lassus Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:05 AM (#4416704)
As SBB pointed out, it's already happened; now it's a sunk cost. And assuming it turns out right wing domestic terrorists are behind it, the left stands to gain considerable advantage. Far more advantage than they could hope for if it had never happened at all. Setting up false flags and whatnot is extremely risky; too great a chance of getting caught and the consequences would be devastating. But hoping one's enemies engage in such relatively insignificant (but politically ruinous) acts of terrorism? Absolutely! It's like Christmas coming twice a year.

Fair enough. The funny thing is, I almost wonder if it is domestic if it will be someone so far right they curve around to the left, or vice-versa on the left. Could end up being someone who ends up being no help to anyone. Or maybe that's just optimistic.

I'd only prefer it being domestic - on any side - because it's far easier to deal with, IMO.
   2934. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:05 AM (#4416705)
Of course the flip side of that is that the talk radio crowd is praying that such an attack would be by a foreign national, so that it would be easier to gin up nationalism, restrict immigration, start another war, and give the military everything it wants. Which is pretty much what happened after 9/11, much to their delight.

That's what any sane person would hope for at this point.


That's a pretty good summary of your rather quaint conception of sanity. But hey, you are what you are.

Who wants to add another terrorist element to the already too long list? What non-zealot would possibly "pray" for this to be domestic?

I can see why a sane Saudi or a sane tax resister might pray that one of "his" people would turn out not to be connected, but other than the understandable self-interest of people like that, what sane person would possibly be praying for such an attack to be tied to any particular person or group?
   2935. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:09 AM (#4416713)
As SBB pointed out, it's already happened; now it's a sunk cost. And assuming it turns out right wing domestic terrorists are behind it, the left stands to gain considerable advantage. Far more advantage than they could hope for if it had never happened at all. Setting up false flags and whatnot is extremely risky; too great a chance of getting caught and the consequences would be devastating. But hoping one's enemies engage in such relatively insignificant (but politically ruinous) acts of terrorism? Absolutely! It's like Christmas coming twice a year.

And of course the right wing's agenda would have absolutely nothing to gain if the attacker turned out to be a Saudi. They'd be evenhanded to a fault, and draw absolutely no conclusions from that.

Seriously, isn't anyone just hoping that they find out who did it, and stop trying to jostle for some sort of overarching narrative?
   2936. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:10 AM (#4416714)
I can see why a sane Saudi or a sane tax resister might pray that one of "his" people would turn out not to be connected, but other than the understandable self-interest of people like that, what sane person would possibly be praying for such an attack to be tied to any particular person or group?

Someone who doesn't want additional terrorist groups to have sprouted up, that's who. What sane person would want there to be another aggrieved group having resorted to terrorism?

For example, I'm really hoping that this isn't some lefty outfit. It would be nice if lefties weren't hoping so fervently that it was a righty outfit, but that's apparently too much to hope for.
   2937. tshipman Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4416715)
That's what any sane person would hope for at this point. Who wants to add another terrorist element to the already too long list? What non-zealot would possibly "pray" for this to be domestic?


I swear to Christ. SBB, you yourself posted a few pages ago that a foreign national was the worst case scenario and I agreed with you. Can you not bother to maintain intellectual consistency for five pages?


As SBB pointed out, it's already happened; now it's a sunk cost. And assuming it turns out right wing domestic terrorists are behind it, the left stands to gain considerable advantage. Far more advantage than they could hope for if it had never happened at all. Setting up false flags and whatnot is extremely risky; too great a chance of getting caught and the consequences would be devastating. But hoping one's enemies engage in such relatively insignificant (but politically ruinous) acts of terrorism? Absolutely! It's like Christmas coming twice a year.


You are crazy, and what you are writing is actively offensive.
   2938. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:11 AM (#4416717)
I can see why a sane Saudi or a sane tax resister might pray that one of "his" people would turn out not to be connected, but other than the understandable self-interest of people like that, what sane person would possibly be praying for such an attack to be tied to any particular person or group?
An idiot?
   2939. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:15 AM (#4416720)
They'd be evenhanded to a fault, and draw absolutely no conclusions from that.

Yeah, because the important thing if we find that a-Q is resorting to lower level bombings is to be "evenhanded" (*) and to "draw no conclusions."

Where do you come up with these things?

(*) Meaning what? Evenhandedness as between terrorists and non-terrorists?
   2940. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:17 AM (#4416722)
And of course the right wing's agenda would have absolutely nothing to gain if the attacker turned out to be a Saudi. They'd be evenhanded to a fault, and draw absolutely no conclusions from that.


Goodness you're tiresome with the tu quoque, is that the only form of argument you know? Yes, of course the right is hoping the culprit is somebody who will allow them to make political hay; they'd be even bigger fools than usual not to. My original post was not a condemnation of what the left was doing, but rather an explanation of why they were doing what they were doing.
   2941. BrianBrianson Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:18 AM (#4416725)
If you think anyone but a handful of misguided bureaucrats want that, you are seriously mistaken. I probably qualify as one of your lefty boogeymen, and I can't stand what 90% of the TSA does.


People who like authoritarian cattle-herding are naturally attracted to government and law enforcement. Hence TSA et al.
   2942. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM (#4416726)
I swear to Christ. SBB, you yourself posted a few pages ago that a foreign national was the worst case scenario and I agreed with you. Can you not bother to maintain intellectual consistency for five pages?

Yes, correct -- it would be nightmarish if this were to be a campaign of low-level everyday bombings. I'd still prefer the enemy I know to a new enemy, but I hear what you're saying.
   2943. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:22 AM (#4416733)
Nope. "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," remember? No attack is far inferior to an attack that allows one to paint one's political enemies in the worst possible light.


Plus think about all the cool photo-ops you can get out of it - standing majestically on rubble wielding a bullhorn, heroic landings on aircraft carriers, humbly toting decorative roast turkeys. I don't see any downside.
   2944. bunyon Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:23 AM (#4416737)
Of course the flip side of that is that the talk radio crowd is praying that such an attack would be by a foreign national, so that it would be easier to gin up nationalism, restrict immigration, start another war, and give the military everything it wants. Which is pretty much what happened after 9/11, much to their delight.

That's what any sane person would hope for at this point. Who wants to add another terrorist element to the already too long list? What non-zealot would possibly "pray" for this to be domestic?


Short memories. Americans have been bombing Americans since before there was a Saudi Arabia.

Just recently: McVeigh and Rudolph. Note that neither "claimed responsibility" in the aftermath as, typically, do the Islamic terrorists.
   2945. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM (#4416747)
I can see why a sane Saudi or a sane tax resister might pray that one of "his" people would turn out not to be connected, but other than the understandable self-interest of people like that, what sane person would possibly be praying for such an attack to be tied to any particular person or group?

Someone who doesn't want additional terrorist groups to have sprouted up, that's who. What sane person would want there to be another aggrieved group having resorted to terrorism?


As Bunyon notes, then why aren't you praying that it turns out to be another unabomber, or another McVeigh? That wouldn't exactly be a new development.

EDIT / note to Bunyon: Those two paragraphs you quoted in 2944 weren't by the same person. The first paragraph was my reply to Good Face, and the second was SBB's reply to me.
   2946. formerly dp Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM (#4416748)
You are crazy
Why is this framed as a revelation?

To me (to anyone?), the worst thing about this attack is that innocent people were killed and maimed. If this was any sort of non-domestic terrorism, more innocent people are going to be killed and maimed. We'll be drone-striking just to make ourselves look tough-- and that usually ends up killing as many innocents as the attack on Monday did. Hopefully, we'll stop short of needlessly invading another sovereign nation this time. What happened in Boston was terrible. That sort of suffering should not be inflicted on anyone. It is worth bearing in mind that Iraqis are still dealing with this sort of thing on the regular, directly because of the destabilization brought about by the bloodythirsty American response to 9/11.

Edit: we're up to 884 civilian deaths from the drone attacks in Pakistan alone. Our response to this sort of attack would definitely push that number higher, if they were in any way connected to AQ.
   2947. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:29 AM (#4416751)

Backing a currency with a finite asset like gold is a very practical way to keep government spending in check.


Hmmm

What?

Huh?

   2948. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4416756)
Would it be wrong to root in a bipartisan way for this to be a joint Anthony Weiner/Mark Sanford plot so we can get rid of both those guys at once?
   2949. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM (#4416758)
And of course the right wing's agenda would have absolutely nothing to gain if the attacker turned out to be a Saudi. They'd be evenhanded to a fault, and draw absolutely no conclusions from that.

Goodness you're tiresome with the tu quoque, is that the only form of argument you know? Yes, of course the right is hoping the culprit is somebody who will allow them to make political hay; they'd be even bigger fools than usual not to. My original post was not a condemnation of what the left was doing, but rather an explanation of why they were doing what they were doing.


When one of BTF's more outspoken righties like yourself only hypothesizes a response from a stereotyped "leftist", and doesn't acknowledge that stereotyped rightists are equally likely chime in with their own partisan prayers, what other conclusions should we infer from that omission? That you're just channeling the equally evenhanded Charles Krauthammer?
   2950. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM (#4416759)
Something sure to provoke no strong opinions here.
   2951. Ron J2 Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:37 AM (#4416762)
Fascinating reporting on a new paper out demolishing Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff on the effect of high government debt on the economy. Explanation here

One basic point. Key coding error in one of the spreadsheet.

Money quote: This error is needed to get the results they published, and it would go a long way to explaining why it has been impossible for others to replicate these results. If this error turns out to be an actual mistake Reinhart-Rogoff made, well, all I can hope is that future historians note that one of the core empirical points providing the intellectual foundation for the global move to austerity in the early 2010s was based on someone accidentally not updating a row formula in Excel.
   2952. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4416764)
That sort of suffering should not be inflicted on anyone. It is worth bearing in mind that Iraqis are still dealing with this sort of thing on the regular, directly because of the destabilization brought about by the bloodythirsty American response to 9/11 freedom.


Fixed a typo for you.
   2953. The Good Face Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4416765)
You are crazy, and what you are writing is actively offensive.


Here you go. If you want some pearls to clutch, that'll be extra.
   2954. BrianBrianson Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:41 AM (#4416770)
The key to enjoying flying is to be five foot one and 95 pounds. You should've planned ahead instead of drinking five pints of milk a day as a child, and ending up a six foot three, eighttteen stone man. Now it's tough titties for us (figuratively, obviously my literal titties are pretty soft).
   2955. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM (#4416775)
2950: I literally owe him a beer. (From, like, 15 years ago - though the odds he even remembers me are slight.)
   2956. JE (Jason) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:45 AM (#4416779)
Would it be wrong to root in a bipartisan way for this to be a joint Anthony Weiner/Mark Sanford plot so we can get rid of both those guys at once?

That's (future) Mayor Anthony Weiner to you, fella.
   2957. JE (Jason) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:48 AM (#4416785)
Something sure to provoke no strong opinions here.

That thread has to crack the all-time top 10, right?
   2958. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:48 AM (#4416787)
#2 in today's polls! Two reactions: 1) that can't be right, 2) it is proof no one likes any of the candidates at all.
   2959. bunyon Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:49 AM (#4416789)
I'm 6'4". Recline your seat if you want. However, should you do so, any movement on my part will shake your seat. I discovered I have no need to passively aggressively kick your seat. A reclined seat leaves me no choice but a lot of contact with your seatback and I am restless. Just as you have a right to recline your seat, I have a right to move when I like. So, sleep well.

Also, I have allergies.
   2960. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:50 AM (#4416790)
And yet, ecce TSA. They probably have a favorability rating somewhere below herpes, but there they are! Now think for a few minutes how that came (and continues) to be.


Because of the lefties?
   2961. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:51 AM (#4416792)
Kicking the seat is a jerk move.
The original reclining thread is definitely one of my finest contributions to this community - I remember actively trying to keep that thing going.
   2962. formerly dp Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM (#4416796)
That's (future) Mayor Anthony Weiner to you, fella.
And (future) Congressman Mark Sanford. Although maybe not, after this.
   2963. Greg K Posted: April 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM (#4416797)
I'm 6'0, but have no problem flying, even with reclined seats. I'm quite good at fitting into tight spots despite my size (settle down).

Seat-reclining isn't so much something I disapprove of, as it is a behaviour that is so completely foreign to me that I sometimes question whether people who do it are the same species as me. Like making your bed.

I don't hold it against anyone, I just find it fascinating from an anthropological point of view.

   2964. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:01 PM (#4416804)
Jenny Sanford's feelings when she filed the complaint must have been sweet. The story goes that they agreed jointly that neither would run for the sake of the kids, then he announced publicly the next day that he was only running because she wouldn't. What a guy!
   2965. spike Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:01 PM (#4416805)
And (future) Congressman Mark Sanford. Although maybe not, after this.

He's going to win - the people of SC support traditional adultery, between one man and one woman and another woman.

   2966. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:01 PM (#4416806)
To me (to anyone?), the worst thing about this attack is that innocent people were killed and maimed. If this was any sort of non-domestic terrorism, more innocent people are going to be killed and maimed. We'll be drone-striking just to make ourselves look tough-- and that usually ends up killing as many innocents as the attack on Monday did. Hopefully, we'll stop short of needlessly invading another sovereign nation this time. What happened in Boston was terrible. That sort of suffering should not be inflicted on anyone. It is worth bearing in mind that Iraqis are still dealing with this sort of thing on the regular, directly because of the destabilization brought about by the bloodythirsty American response to 9/11.

Edit: we're up to 884 civilian deaths from the drone attacks in Pakistan alone. Our response to this sort of attack would definitely push that number higher, if they were in any way connected to AQ.


What you describe is a feature, not a bug. The purpose of the American government is to protect the interests of American citizens, not citizens of Pakistan or Iraq or Canada or anywhere else. If killing Pakistani civilians is necessary to protect the lives of American civilians, then, dems the breaks for Pakistan. I agree that this breaks down on the margins (killing 100,000 Iraqis to save the lives of one American - probably not justified), but if it was 100 or maybe even 1000 Pakistani's? That's the Pakistani's problem.

I've argued this point against many of my fellow Jews in connection with the Holocaust. If FDR or Churchill concluded that saving Jews in Eastern Europe was counter to the interests of the citizens which elected them, then they did the right thing by staying out of the way of the killing. Protecting the lives of non-citizens, contra the interets and desires of citizens is not the job of an elected government.

In many instances the goal of saving the lives of non-citizens and the interests of citizens coincide, but not always. Drones in Pakistan or Yemen are an example where they are opposed.
   2967. Lassus Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:02 PM (#4416807)
Reclining seats, non-reclining seats, I could give a ####. The last flight I was on last week, a regular-sized plane from Atlanta to Syracuse, halfway through I found out that the back end of the plane just had an exit door. No crew or food area, just bathrooms and emergency exit. No one back there at all. I spent the rest of the flight in abject discomfort that someone would just decide to open the damn door and kill us all.
   2968. JE (Jason) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:03 PM (#4416808)
Regarding seat reclinations, what bothers me the most by far is when I am attempting to asleep on a redeye and the passenger sitting behind me yanks the back of my seat in order to stand.
   2969. formerly dp Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:10 PM (#4416814)
What you describe is a feature, not a bug. The purpose of the American government is to protect the interests of American citizens, not citizens of Pakistan or Iraq or Canada or anywhere else. If killing Pakistani civilians is necessary to protect the lives of American civilians, then, dems the breaks for Pakistan.
With that sot of attitude, you don't get to act all surprised and morally superior when their relatives come over here and try to blow us up.

On top of that, it's not at all clear that the deaths from drone attacks are stopping any sort of imminent threat to the US population.
   2970. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:13 PM (#4416819)
With that sot of attitude, you don't get to act all surprised and morally superior when their relatives come over here and try to blow us up.


I agree. And the risk of that should enter into the calculation of using drones.
   2971. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:16 PM (#4416823)
Suspicious letter sent to Obama

I think it's time we put Skynet in charge.
   2972. McCoy Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:17 PM (#4416824)
The key to enjoying flying is to be five foot one and 95 pounds.

The real key to enjoying flying is to not be some fool who gets mad or annoyed at little things.
   2973. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:19 PM (#4416827)
Reclining seats, non-reclining seats, I could give a ####. The last flight I was on last week, a regular-sized plane from Atlanta to Syracuse, halfway through I found out that the back end of the plane just had an exit door. No crew or food area, just bathrooms and emergency exit. No one back there at all. I spent the rest of the flight in abject discomfort that someone would just decide to open the damn door and kill us all.


You'll be happy to know that to open an airplane door you have to first pull it inwards before you can push it open. This is to make it nearly impossible to open it when the plane is at altitude and the cabin is pressurized. Someone could probably open it during landing, but not at any point at which you might worry about being sucked into the void.
   2974. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:22 PM (#4416831)
Fascinating reporting on a new paper out demolishing Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff on the effect of high government debt on the economy. Explanation here

One basic point. Key coding error in one of the spreadsheet.

Money quote: This error is needed to get the results they published, and it would go a long way to explaining why it has been impossible for others to replicate these results. If this error turns out to be an actual mistake Reinhart-Rogoff made, well, all I can hope is that future historians note that one of the core empirical points providing the intellectual foundation for the global move to austerity in the early 2010s was based on someone accidentally not updating a row formula in Excel.


So someone owes us a flux capacitor so that we can essentially re-fight the last 4-6 years of budget battles without the red herring in the mix, right?

   2975. greenback calls it soccer Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:28 PM (#4416838)
In the age of the Internet, when it would take five minutes to put that dataset online, it is obscene that it took five years to find R&R's errors. This makes academia look like a ####### joke.
   2976. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:31 PM (#4416842)
Just to add to the link RonJ posted -- and folks, we're essentially talking about the entire intellectual underpinning of GOP economic policy preferences for at least the last 6 years here -- more troubling than the Excel formula error is that cherry-picking of data points to build the case.

I.e., As I read it, the study had 110 possible data points... but 14 of them were mysteriously and inexplicably excluded. This means their result -- which mind, folks like Paul Ryan have been using as the pedestal of their economic argument -- is terribly skewed:

Herndon-Ash-Pollin find that they exclude Australia (1946-1950), New Zealand (1946-1949), and Canada (1946-1950). This has consequences, as these countries have high-debt and solid growth. Canada had debt-to-GDP over 90 percent during this period and 3 percent growth. New Zealand had a debt/GDP over 90 percent from 1946-1951. If you use the average growth rate across all those years it is 2.58 percent. If you only use the last year, as Reinhart-Rogoff does, it has a growth rate of -7.6 percent. That's a big difference, especially considering how they weigh the countries.
   2977. McCoy Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:34 PM (#4416845)
Why did anyone accept one study as fact and try to base policy around it? That seems awfully stupid.
   2978. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:36 PM (#4416852)
In the age of the Internet, when it would take five minutes to put that dataset online, it is obscene that it took five years to find R&R's errors. This makes academia look like a ####### joke.


Rogoff/Reinhart weren't forthcoming in releasing their data -- just their conclusions and an outline of their methodology... I think it makes academia look like something more nefarious than a joke -- it's "white paper for hire" mercenary work, where the degreed sources are enough to get everyone to concur that the result has merit.
   2979. 'zop sympathizes with the wrong ####### people Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4416859)

Rogoff/Reinhart weren't forthcoming in releasing their data -- just their conclusions and an outline of their methodology... I think it makes academia look like something more nefarious than a joke -- it's "white paper for hire" mercenary work, where the degreed sources are enough to get everyone to concur that the result has merit.


This is why climate data is generally shared publicly as soon as possible, to avoid these kind of shenanigans. See http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleoclimate-data
   2980. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4416860)
Why did anyone accept one study as fact and try to base policy around it? That seems awfully stupid.
I think they picked their policy and then went looking for studies.

My sense as someone in a different field: R/R should be run out of academia in disgrace but nothing would have been changed in politics if they had never published that paper. The Republicans had their policy preferences set once they lost the 2008 election.
   2981. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:48 PM (#4416872)
R/R have done a lot of good work, though. They're the ones who initially pointed out that recessions brought on by financial crises took a lot longer to recover from than regular recessions. The real error here is that they didn't release their methodology. The excel error is only a minor part of the flaws in their work, but it's just incredibly sloppy.
   2982. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 12:49 PM (#4416873)
Why did anyone accept one study as fact and try to base policy around it? That seems awfully stupid.


Well, because the baseline policy preference already existed -- for a variety of reasons, some real, some ideological....

I.e., Of course, there IS a point where debt can really inhibit growth. In words - it's the point where servicing your debt obligations stunts expansion and investment... what Reinhart/Rogoff did is put a number on it... a number that just happened to ensnare a number of Eurozone countries now contracting significantly while they undergo 'austerity', and which also happens to be germane to the US economic policy/political discussion.

The ideological is more rooted in just not liking the current breadth, depth, and manner of government spending.

Both those things existed before this -- the study was just the spark to move forward with preconceived policy....

Edit: Coke to GregD... and I'd also agree with scott - though, I'm far from a regular in economic wonk circles - I do try to stay well-read. The issue is more with this specific output than the authors in general. It's most certainly possible for very good scholars to produce a crap piece of 'scholarly work'.
   2983. greenback calls it soccer Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:01 PM (#4416886)
I think it makes academia look like something more nefarious than a joke -- it's "white paper for hire" mercenary work, where the degreed sources are enough to get everyone to concur that the result has merit.

That will exist as long as academia has influence over public policy, which it should. We're adults, we can deal with tobacco companies funding bogus research.

But the age where you publish 'broad methodology' and only 'broad methodology' must come to an end. The various screenshots show a fifty row spreadsheet. I can scrape that much PitchFX data off mlb.com from tonight's games in five minutes. It's embarrassing that a quantitative discipline is that far behind the times.
   2984. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:03 PM (#4416887)
Of course, there IS a point where debt can really inhibit growth. In words - it's the point where servicing your debt obligations stunts expansion and investment... what Reinhart/Rogoff did is put a number on it... a number that just happened to ensnare a number of Eurozone countries now contracting significantly while they undergo 'austerity', and which also happens to be germane to the US economic policy/political discussion.

A point which Paul Krugman has been making for the past 4 years, with virtually nobody but a few lonely liberals seeming to pay any attention, at least in Washington.
   2985. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:07 PM (#4416894)
The various screenshots show a fifty row spreadsheet. I can scrape that much PitchFX data off mlb.com from tonight's games in five minutes. It's embarrassing that a quantitative discipline is that far behind the times.


What other data relevant to their hypothesis is there to work with? Is there complete economic data back to 1946 for more than those 50 countries?
   2986. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:07 PM (#4416896)
FWIW, R&R response...

I think they fail to address one of the key points of the refutation -- namely, R&R were presenting more of a cliff -- a rather hard fall at a certain point, whereas the more complete run through their model using all data points and correcting the error shows much smoother decline in GDP.... Basically -- they were claiming contraction at a certain debt point, when in fact -- it's more like a smaller effect/slightly lower growth at their target level. Doesn't mean there ISN'T a cliff jumping point -- just that it would seem to be somewhere higher than R&R saw in their initial paper (not to mention, that the cliff might actually be not-so-easy to normalize when you consider that if someone will loan you money at 0% interest, you probably ought to take that loan debt be damned).

I do feel for them a bit regarding the misuse of their study -- i.e., they weren't necessarily trying to build a case for austerity or actually make policy proposals... just presenting a (flawed) study that others ran with.... but then again, it's hard for me to believe they didn't expect others to run with this.
   2987. spike Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:08 PM (#4416898)
Investigators believe they have identified a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, a source who has been briefed on the investigation told CNN's John King.
Link
   2988. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:11 PM (#4416901)
You mean another suspect, don't you?
   2989. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:13 PM (#4416902)
A point which Paul Krugman has been making for the past 4 years, with virtually nobody but a few lonely liberals seeming to pay any attention, at least in Washington.


Well I think we can safely discount Krugman since he filed for bankruptcy last month.
   2990. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:15 PM (#4416903)
I think they picked their policy and then went looking for studies.


Yep. They accepted it because it told them what they wanted to hear.
   2991. McCoy Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:18 PM (#4416907)
Investigators believe they have identified a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, a source who has been briefed on the investigation told CNN's John King.

Hey, why are there so many cop cars and black SUVs on my street?
   2992. zonk Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:19 PM (#4416909)
Investigators believe they have identified a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, a source who has been briefed on the investigation told CNN's John King.

Hey, why are there so many cop cars and black SUVs on my street?


Theo has juice... and he knows what you've been saying about him.
   2993. McCoy Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:20 PM (#4416911)
NOTHING BUT POSITIVE THINGS!! NOW PLEASE STEP AWAY FROM MY DOOR.
   2994. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:22 PM (#4416913)
Investigators believe they have identified a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, a source who has been briefed on the investigation told CNN's John King.

Sheer rumor until Merriam-Webster confirms.
   2995. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:24 PM (#4416914)
You mean another suspect, don't you?


Not really. A guy detained and questioned in the immediate chaos of the event is not nearly the same as a guy identified the second day, after the smoke (literally) clears.
   2996. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:33 PM (#4416920)
You mean another suspect, don't you?

"A" and "another" both work. Though it is in fact "another," it doesn't need to be called that for gramatical or reportorial accuracy.

The suspicions here are likely better-aimed, but we'll see how it plays out.
   2997. GregD Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4416922)
over/under on reddit calling the shot on the suspect?
   2998. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4416923)
Here's my take on suspectgate. Yes, the Saudi guy fit a dictionary definition of suspect, and the Post was correct on some semantic level. But because the police are very careful with the use of the word, and generally don't call someone a suspect unless they have some good evidence, well beyond "He's an Arab and he looked suspicious", that calling someone a suspect when the police don't is irresponsible. It leads people to believe that there is a good chance the perpetrator has been found and gives a false sense of hope to the public. The Post is free to use their own definitions, but I'm free to think they acted irresponsibly and to call them on it. And it doesn't have anything to do with political correctness.

   2999. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:37 PM (#4416926)
Sam, I was poking fun at the Post defenders, which I hope my previous post makes clear.
   3000. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: April 17, 2013 at 01:38 PM (#4416927)
Investigators believe they have identified a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, a source who has been briefed on the investigation told CNN's John King.

I've got dinner riding on 'looney right-wing white guy'. C'mon, looney right-wing white guy!
Page 30 of 66 pages ‹ First  < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8 23 2014
(1 - 2:48pm, Aug 23)
Last: odds are meatwad is drunk

NewsblogMGL: Which teams are optimizing their lineups?
(19 - 2:47pm, Aug 23)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(5007 - 2:44pm, Aug 23)
Last: The Id of SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogPosnanski: The Royals might actually know what they are doing
(109 - 2:13pm, Aug 23)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogBrisbee: Rusney Castillo reminds us how screwed amateur players can be
(30 - 1:54pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bug Selig

NewsblogPete Rose’s Reckless Gamble
(9 - 1:52pm, Aug 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogFG: Ben Revere and the Emptiest Batting Average Ever
(36 - 1:43pm, Aug 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogManny Machado Likely Out For Season
(29 - 1:42pm, Aug 23)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(300 - 1:42pm, Aug 23)
Last: smileyy

NewsblogSources:  Cubs cut grounds crew’s hours to avoid paying health benefits
(33 - 1:24pm, Aug 23)
Last: puck

NewsblogLooking past the stat line: Mark Appel
(2 - 1:19pm, Aug 23)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(515 - 12:45pm, Aug 23)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogBA (Badler): Seven Reasons Why MLB’s New International Rules Are Backward
(6 - 11:15am, Aug 23)
Last: puck

NewsblogFG: Brian McCann Probably Couldn’t Be Given Away For Free
(48 - 10:49am, Aug 23)
Last: Ziggy

NewsblogDowney: Let Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame already
(91 - 10:15am, Aug 23)
Last: Bourbon Samurai in Asia

Page rendered in 0.6197 seconds
52 querie(s) executed