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

Thursday, September 22, 2011

ESPN: Ban foils Manny Ramirez’s comeback plans

Pregnant pause…......for a Winston Llenas sighting!

Manny Ramirez will have to scuttle existing plans to play for a team in the Dominican Republic because his Major League Baseball-mandated drug suspension still has to be served, a source close to the situation told ESPN’s Colleen Dominguez.

An MLB official confirmed that since Ramirez has unresolved MLB drug-program violations and the Dominican winter league is affiliated with MLB, commissioner Bud Selig’s office considers him ineligible to play in the league.

If the former World Series MVP wants to play ball again, the source said, he would have to play for an independent league club unaffiliated with MLB.

Ramirez told ESPNdeportes.com’s Enrique Rojas that his representatives will meet with MLB officials on Thursday at 10 a.m. ET to discuss his participation in the Dominican league.

“I’m really interested and enthusiastic about playing baseball [in the Dominican Republic], but I can’t control the future,” Rodriguez said via phone Wednesday, adding that he’s been training in a batting cage in Miami. “Let’s just wait and see what’s the outcome of that meeting; it would be really sad if I’m not allowed to play.”

“Rodriguez” ?

Repoz Posted: September 22, 2011 at 10:19 AM | 106 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: history, international, steroids

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 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 12:59 PM (#3932928)
Andy Rooney wrote this article.
   2. Joey B. is counting the days to Trea Turner Posted: September 22, 2011 at 01:08 PM (#3932940)
It's probably better this way. Down there you can do every steroid known to mankind, so now there's no need for him to start doing them again. If he's lucky, maybe his poor heart won't give up the ghost in the next five years.
   3. Textbook Editor Posted: September 22, 2011 at 01:18 PM (#3932948)
Awesome! The Camden Riversharks need a bopper for next year!
   4. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 01:54 PM (#3933004)
Does this mean if someone is suspended in the Dominican Leagues for whatever reason they cannot play in MLB? What about the minors? I thought suspended MLB players could play there?

And why does baseball-ref have autoplay ads? Autoplay ads are worse than Hitler.
   5. Rants Mulliniks Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:03 PM (#3933011)
The bigger question is why does BBREF have ads for some site called Glam.com? Talk about missing your target audience.
   6. charityslave is thinking about baseball Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:11 PM (#3933017)
He would be perfect on the Canseco and the Yuma Scorpions. I smell a reality show!
   7. The Piehole of David Wells Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:13 PM (#3933018)
Rodriguez said via phone Wednesday

Did I miss something in the quote above? Or is this just the author thinking that Ramirez and Rodriguez are interchangeable?
   8. Rancischley Leweschquens (Tim Wallach was my Hero) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:15 PM (#3933023)
Autoplay ads are worse than Hitler.

No. They are not. I just finished reading If This Is a Man, so I don't find Hitler jokes funny at all.
   9. bobm Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:38 PM (#3933053)
Ban foils Manny Ramirez’s comeback plans

This is either today's article of the day from 100 years ago, or a science fiction piece about a time-travelling league president. :)
   10. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:49 PM (#3933065)
“Rodriguez” ?

Manny may have tipped his plan to play under an assumed name using the Bobby Valentine disguise.
   11. Hack Wilson Posted: September 22, 2011 at 02:54 PM (#3933070)
Manny is being treated most unfairly, possibly in a discriminatory way. What about the Steve Howe lifetime ban exceptions? Why shouldn't that apply to Manny? And no minor league deal, back with the Red Sox who should be required to play him in left every game this season and the playoffs. Where is the ACLU when needed.
   12. Run Joe Run Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:03 PM (#3933079)
Am i mistaken - that in order to serve his sentence he has to get a team to sign him? Who will sign him to not play? Does a Major league team need to sign him (and pay the minimum salary)?
   13. Joey B. is counting the days to Trea Turner Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:11 PM (#3933085)
Am i mistaken - that in order to serve his sentence he has to get a team to sign him?

You're not mistaken. This became true as soon as he did his retirement papers.

Who will sign him to not play?

Unless "Gonfalon Bubble" somehow or another manages to buy a MLB-affiliated organization, nobody in a million years.
   14. Yonder Alonso in misguided trousers (cardinal) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:32 PM (#3933094)
Autoplay ads are worse than Hitler.

No. They are not. I just finished reading If This Is a Man, so I don't find Hitler jokes funny at all.

Not to drag this off-topic, but I started reading "The Second World War: A Complete History" by Martin Gilbert recently, but by page 8 I realized I couldn't read very much in one sitting because seemingly every other sentence was a punch right in the gut.


But autoplay ads are pretty bad.
   15. Dave Spiwak Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:34 PM (#3933097)
Am i mistaken - that in order to serve his sentence he has to get a team to sign him? Who will sign him to not play? Does a Major league team need to sign him (and pay the minimum salary)?


In all seriousness, this seems like a really obvious Catch-22 that could be easily solved by tagging a clause onto a 15-, 30- or 100-game suspension like "- or 1 year if the player is not under contract." Does MLB really not write bans this way?

I guess the flip side is that under the current system, you can still sign a guy with a pending suspension, but then you have to wait for the game suspension period to lapse, which seems like a fair enough punishment for signing someone who has quit, "retired," or otherwise been dropped from a contract to avoid a suspension.
   16. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:40 PM (#3933102)
Autoplay ads are worse than Hitler.

No. They are not. I just finished reading If This Is a Man, so I don't find Hitler jokes funny at all.


Autoplay ads are worse than Mussolini?
   17. Dale Sams Posted: September 22, 2011 at 03:57 PM (#3933114)
but I can’t control the future


You predestination freaks are the worst.
   18. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 04:08 PM (#3933125)
Am i mistaken - that in order to serve his sentence he has to get a team to sign him? Who will sign him to not play? Does a Major league team need to sign him (and pay the minimum salary)?

Wait, do players still get paid during a PED suspension? I was under the impression that if you are suspended, you don't get paid for those games.
   19. Jose is Absurdly Unemployed Posted: September 22, 2011 at 04:20 PM (#3933132)
I guess the flip side is that under the current system, you can still sign a guy with a pending suspension, but then you have to wait for the game suspension period to lapse, which seems like a fair enough punishment for signing someone who has quit, "retired," or otherwise been dropped from a contract to avoid a suspension.


There is no risk to signing a player like Ramirez is there? For example, let's say the Red Sox wanted to have him be DH next year at some point. They sign him today and his 100 days starts counting so it drags into late June/early July. Meanwhile, I don't think players get paid when they are on a PED suspension so the club is out no money (the Sox might have a Bolshevik Bud tax issue, not sure how it would count) so the only risk is the 40 man roster.

I think.

In Manny's case he's 39 year old or whatever it is so no one is going to take that chance. If he were say Jacoby Ellsbury or Colby Rasmus, I think plenty of teams would be willing to wait through 2/3rds of a season to get a player like that back.
   20. Bourbon Samurai, what price fettucine? Posted: September 22, 2011 at 04:55 PM (#3933155)
Could he sign with a Dominicain club, then have their games he misses count against the suspension? Otherwise seems like could be a "death sentence" for a borderline guy.
   21. SoSH U at work Posted: September 22, 2011 at 04:59 PM (#3933158)
Manny's kind of a unique case, in part because he brought it upon himself by retiring.

But if a guy gets suspended and is immediately released, then the suspension should continue to run while he is unemployed. That way, the suspension doesn't turn into a death sentence for a player of marginal skill level (let's face it, even if there's no payroll outlay to the indivdual during his ban, teams are most often going to shy away from signing a borderline guy who has to begin serving a suspension before he can join the team).

Edit: Coke to Bourbon.
   22. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:11 PM (#3933168)
If Manny isn't allowed to play in any MLB-affiliated leagues, what's the highest league level he could play in? Japan I would guess, but it sounds like Manny would want to be closer to home. Where else could he go? The Mexican League? Jose Canseco's team?
   23. ray james Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:17 PM (#3933170)
Not to drag this off-topic, but I started reading "The Second World War: A Complete History" by Martin Gilbert recently, but by page 8 I realized I couldn't read very much in one sitting because seemingly every other sentence was a punch right in the gut.


Please elaborate. What did you find so "Gut-punching"?
   24. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:21 PM (#3933174)
#13:
Who will sign him to not play?
Unless "Gonfalon Bubble" somehow or another manages to buy a MLB-affiliated organization, nobody in a million years.


I get erections from girls, Joey B. gets them from thinking about baseball careers ending.
   25. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:26 PM (#3933178)
I didn't read the article, but when I saw the headline I immediately conjured up a vision of Manny looking something like this, and saying "CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!"
   26. ray james Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:26 PM (#3933180)
I get erections from girls...


Ehhh, if they have erections to give you, they're not girls.
   27. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:34 PM (#3933187)
Edit: Coke to Bourbon.


That's certainly the way I like it.
   28. Joey B. is counting the days to Trea Turner Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:35 PM (#3933188)
I get erections from girls

So in other words, you're a pedophile. Keep that to yourself, you sick bastard.
   29. Jose is Absurdly Unemployed Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:42 PM (#3933191)
Oh good, this should be fun.
   30. SoSH U at work Posted: September 22, 2011 at 05:46 PM (#3933193)
Strangely enough, I get erections from Joey and Gonfalon insulting each other on the internet. So I'm really excited about this thread's prospects.
   31. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 22, 2011 at 06:29 PM (#3933228)
JoeBita, light of my life, fire of my loins!
   32. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 06:48 PM (#3933239)
But if a guy gets suspended and is immediately released, then the suspension should continue to run while he is unemployed. That way, the suspension doesn't turn into a death sentence for a player of marginal skill level (let's face it, even if there's no payroll outlay to the indivdual during his ban, teams are most often going to shy away from signing a borderline guy who has to begin serving a suspension before he can join the team).


Whatever happened with Mike Jacobs? He was release after being suspended for HGH. Is he eligible now?
   33. JJ1986 Posted: September 22, 2011 at 06:52 PM (#3933241)
I'm pretty sure Neifi Perez is still suspended if he ever wanted to come back.
   34. Yonder Alonso in misguided trousers (cardinal) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 07:28 PM (#3933273)
Not to drag this off-topic, but I started reading "The Second World War: A Complete History" by Martin Gilbert recently, but by page 8 I realized I couldn't read very much in one sitting because seemingly every other sentence was a punch right in the gut.


@ 23- Please elaborate. What did you find so "Gut-punching"?

The cold, comprehensive, and systematic murdering of a great deal of Poland's population in various horrifying and degrading ways from basically day 1 of the war by the Nazis. I don't know how elaborate you want, but it's pretty awful.
   35. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 07:31 PM (#3933279)
The cold, comprehensive, and systematic murdering of a great deal of Poland's population in various horrifying and degrading ways from basically day 1 of the war by the Nazis.


Well maybe they shouldn't have invaded Germany to start with.
   36. Zach Posted: September 22, 2011 at 07:46 PM (#3933297)
The cold, comprehensive, and systematic murdering of a great deal of Poland's population in various horrifying and degrading ways from basically day 1 of the war by the Nazis. I don't know how elaborate you want, but it's pretty awful.

The Hitler Kiss is a very interesting memoir by a leader of the Czech resistance (the "kiss" refers to a shot in the back of the head by the SS). At one point, he describes how someone who was helping him hide inadvertently walked past the police station and had an emotional breakdown because they could hear the gunshots.
   37. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 22, 2011 at 08:11 PM (#3933331)
The cold, comprehensive, and systematic murdering of a great deal of Poland's population in various horrifying and degrading ways from basically day 1 of the war by the Nazis. I don't know how elaborate you want, but it's pretty awful.

Did you not know about this before, or is it just the reading of it again that hits you?

Read "Harvest of Sorrows" by Robert Conquest if you want soem gut-punching on a much less publicized genocide you don't know much about.
   38. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 22, 2011 at 08:24 PM (#3933344)
WW II was in all the papers, but since there was no TV or Internet, some may have missed it.
   39. Textbook Editor Posted: September 22, 2011 at 08:32 PM (#3933354)
   40. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 22, 2011 at 08:39 PM (#3933359)
Has it been a million years already?
   41. Athletic Supporter is USDA certified lean Posted: September 22, 2011 at 08:53 PM (#3933367)
Manny was good at first, but then he went too far.
   42. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 22, 2011 at 09:40 PM (#3933404)
Read "Harvest of Sorrows" by Robert Conquest if you want some gut-punching on a much less publicized genocide you don't know much about.

The Stalin-directed famine of the early 30's obviously hasn't been as well publicized as the Holocaust, but by now there's a small library of books on the subject, including at least one that came out in 1936. And when it comes to the WWII era, if you want to see a movie that's infinitely more gut-punching than Schindler's List, take a look at Katyn.
   43. Khrushin it bro Posted: September 22, 2011 at 09:49 PM (#3933416)
This is just another case of Ramirez being Rodriguez...
   44. Hugh Jorgan Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:13 AM (#3933592)
The Stalin-directed famine of the early 30's obviously hasn't been as well publicized as the Holocaust

If only those oppressed Russians had come to dominate the media in the U.S., we all know more about that instead.

gut-punching on a much less publicized genocide

is there any other type of genocide? Is there a slightly friendlier version of genocide I am not aware of? Did monty python do a skit once on polite genocide? If not, that'd been very funny.
   45. Spahn Insane Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:20 AM (#3933602)
I'm so sick of Repoz posting these steroid threads as Joey B bait, which I am compelled, AT GUNPOINT, to participate in.
   46. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:22 AM (#3933607)
If only those oppressed Russians had come to dominate the media in the U.S., we all know more about that instead.

WTF?
   47. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:27 AM (#3933618)
The Stalin-directed famine of the early 30's obviously hasn't been as well publicized as the Holocaust, but by now there's a small library of books on the subject, including at least one that came out in 1936.

Sure, but I would guess that the average American is unaware that 5-10 million Ukrainians died due to "de-kulakization", collectivization and an intentionally inflicted famine in 1929-33. Most all of them are aware that Hitler and the Nazis killed ~6 mil. Jews and ~6 mil. non-Jews in the Holocaust.
   48. Steve Treder Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:35 AM (#3933628)
I'm so sick of Repoz posting these steroid threads as Joey B bait, which I am compelled, AT GUNPOINT, to participate in.

RDF
   49. willcarrolldoesnotsuk Posted: September 23, 2011 at 12:42 AM (#3933639)
Surely we must all agree at the very least that autoplay ads are worse than Mr. Rogers.
   50. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 01:04 AM (#3933663)
The Stalin-directed famine of the early 30's obviously hasn't been as well publicized as the Holocaust, but by now there's a small library of books on the subject, including at least one that came out in 1936.

Sure, but I would guess that the average American is unaware that 5-10 million Ukrainians died due to "de-kulakization", collectivization and an intentionally inflicted famine in 1929-33. Most all of them are aware that Hitler and the Nazis killed ~6 mil. Jews and ~6 mil. non-Jews in the Holocaust.


I seriously doubt if the average American (meaning anything close to 50%) has the slightest knowledge of the Holocaust, but of course it's still true that more Americans know about it than know about the Ukrainian famine. I only meant to note that for anyone who is interested (still not too many, alas), the facts about the famine are much easier to come by now than they were 30 years ago. Before that time, you pretty much had only the 1936 Ammende book, the Canadian published Ukrainian "Black Deeds of The Kremlin" set from the early 50's, one of Lev Kopelev's memoirs, and a handful of American Congressional reports that nobody paid much attention to. But starting with the "Firing Line" TV show in the 80's with Conquest, Harrison Salisbury, and Christopher Hitchens, there's been a lot of new stuff that's come out, even if most of it just winds up on the remainder tables.
   51. Snowboy Posted: September 23, 2011 at 01:11 AM (#3933674)
41. Athletic Supporter's only fan is changing costumes Posted: September 22, 2011 at 04:53 PM (#3933367)

Manny was good at first, but then he went too far.


Primey nomination
In the context of this thread? Primey
   52. The Long Arm of Rudy Law Posted: September 23, 2011 at 02:04 AM (#3933730)
The name "Leo Núñez" is now available.
   53. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:09 AM (#3933773)
I seriously doubt if the average American (meaning anything close to 50%) has the slightest knowledge of the Holocaust


What do you mean by "the slightest knowledge"? Don't like 90% of all adults in this country know that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews?
   54. Javy Joan Baez (chris h.) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:13 AM (#3933774)
Yeah, I'm not sure where that 50% thing came. Folks may be murky on the details, but I refuse to believe that there are a significant number of adults who don't know what the Holocaust was.
   55. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:34 AM (#3933787)
I seriously doubt if the average American (meaning anything close to 50%) has the slightest knowledge of the Holocaust

What do you mean by "the slightest knowledge"? Don't like 90% of all adults in this country know that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews?


I'd bet my entire net worth on the under of that proposition, and I seriously doubt if a sizable minority of Americans even could identify the 3 major axis powers, let alone have any idea what "axis powers" meant.

And while it may be true that over 50% of the adult population has heard somewhere along the way that "Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews", I doubt if more than even half of those people could give you a reasonably coherent definition of "Holocaust" as it relates to WWII, could tell you the approximate number of Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, or even tell you the years that WWII took place. I may be wrong about this, but I'd love to see any concrete evidence to the contrary.
   56. Javy Joan Baez (chris h.) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:39 AM (#3933790)
What do you mean by "the slightest knowledge"? Don't like 90% of all adults in this country know that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews?

I'd bet my entire net worth on the under of that proposition, and I seriously doubt if a sizable minority of Americans even could identify the 3 major axis powers, let alone have any idea what "axis powers" meant.

That's different (although I'd bet against you, assuming we could agree on what "sizable" means).
And while it may be true that over 50% of the adult population has heard somewhere along the way that "Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews",

Which should qualify as having the "slightest knowledge of the Holocaust" IMO...
I doubt if more than even half of those people could give you a reasonably coherent definition of "Holocaust" as it relates to WWII, could tell you the approximate number of Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, or even tell you the years that WWII took place. I may be wrong about this, but I'd love to see any concrete evidence to the contrary.

I'd be willing to bet that more than 50% of adults could at least tell you what a concentration camp was, as well as give that coherent definition.

I'm with you on the numbers and years, though, but lots of people have trouble with remembering dates anyway. ('Twas my biggest problem in history class as a lad...)
   57. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:41 AM (#3933792)
I'd bet my entire net worth on the under of that proposition, and I seriously doubt if a sizable minority of Americans even could identify the 3 major axis powers, let alone have any idea what "axis powers" meant.


Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, of course.
   58. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:43 AM (#3933793)
I'd be willing to bet that more than 50% of adults could at least tell you what a concentration camp was, as well as give that coherent definition.


Sure, but how many of them think they're run by FEMA to imprison Americans when Hussein X's Afro-Jihadi army comes for their white women?
   59. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:44 AM (#3933795)
1998 Poll Commissioned by National Holocaust Museum

About 81 percent said that the Holocaust remains “very important” or “extremely important” as an instrument for teaching the lessons of history....
The poll suggested that Americans have major gaps in their knowledge of the Holocaust, but that a surprising number want to learn more....
Most correctly identified Jews as the primary victims of the gas chambers, but 19 percent answered incorrectly when asked if the Holocaust took place during World War II.
More troubling, 78 percent answered that Hitler and the Nazis, not the “German government,” were responsible for the Holocaust. And 71 percent indicated that the United States granted refuge “to all European Jews who asked.”
.... The survey suggested that Holocaust education in the schools continues to spread. Only 48 percent of respondents overall indicated that they had studied the Holocaust in school — but the figure rose to 75 percent for those under 34....
According to the survey, 77 percent of Americans have heard of the [National Holocaust] museum, which ranks it near the top of a list of leading museums in the country.
   60. Something Other Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:00 AM (#3933837)
No one ever went broke underestimating the historical knowledge of the American people.

Outside of a nearby university I can't have a coherent, useful discussion of history. It's just not what people in the States trouble with.
   61. vortex of dissipation Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:25 AM (#3933840)
I doubt if more than even half of those people could give you a reasonably coherent definition of "Holocaust" as it relates to WWII, could tell you the approximate number of Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, or even tell you the years that WWII took place.


And half of those would say that it started in 1941.
   62. Spahn Insane Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:09 PM (#3934029)
Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, of course.

Not Iraq anymore. They've been replaced by the the Muslamic Republic of Kenya. Or perhaps simply Teh Gay.
   63. Ron J Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:20 PM (#3934039)
Don't like 90% of all adults in this country know that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews?


I'd be a tad surprised if it's quite that high -- particularly if you include the various flavors of holocaust deniers.

I mean there's a pretty sizable number of people who don't believe that the US landed on the moon in 1969. And the holocaust is ancient history compared to the moon landings.
   64. Nasty Nate Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:21 PM (#3934041)
More troubling, 78 percent answered that Hitler and the Nazis, not the “German government,” were responsible for the Holocaust.


strange sentence
   65. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:26 PM (#3934044)
More troubling, 78 percent answered that Hitler and the Nazis, not the “German government,” were responsible for the Holocaust.


strange sentence


Concur. I assume a similar % of Americans, if asked "who launched the invasion of Iraq?", would say Bush, not the "American government".
   66. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:28 PM (#3934046)
particularly if you include the various flavors of holocaust deniers


But Holocaust deniers know what the Holocaust is. They just think it's fictional. I was including them in my 90% (although I also assume - perhaps optimistically - that they're a very small percentage).

I took Andy's comment in #50 to suggest that he thought a majority of Americans would respond to the question, "What was the Holocaust?" with a blank stare and shoulder shrug. That seems absurd to me.
   67. ColonelTom Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:35 PM (#3934050)
In all seriousness, this seems like a really obvious Catch-22 that could be easily solved by tagging a clause onto a 15-, 30- or 100-game suspension like "- or 1 year if the player is not under contract." Does MLB really not write bans this way?


The MLBPA ought to sue the hell out of MLB for not having a way for the suspension to expire without a team's signing the player. It's effectively a lifetime ban for guys like Ramirez.
   68. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:45 PM (#3934055)
What do you mean by "the slightest knowledge"? Don't like 90% of all adults in this country know that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews?


I'd bet my entire net worth on the under of that proposition, and I seriously doubt if a sizable minority of Americans even could identify the 3 major axis powers, let alone have any idea what "axis powers" meant.

That's different (although I'd bet against you, assuming we could agree on what "sizable" means).


I'd define it as more than 1/4 or 1/3 of the adult population, and would strongly advise you to hold onto your money. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if it turned out that more people thought that we were fighting Russia in WWII than knew we were fighting Italy.

And while it may be true that over 50% of the adult population has heard somewhere along the way that "Hitler and the Nazis murdered Jews",

Which should qualify as having the "slightest knowledge of the Holocaust" IMO...


Fair enough, but that's about as slight as you can get, and that's after quite a few years of high school history classes in some districts that have incorporated the Holocaust into their studies.

I doubt if more than even half of those people could give you a reasonably coherent definition of "Holocaust" as it relates to WWII, could tell you the approximate number of Jews who were murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators, or even tell you the years that WWII took place. I may be wrong about this, but I'd love to see any concrete evidence to the contrary.

I'd be willing to bet that more than 50% of adults could at least tell you what a concentration camp was, as well as give that coherent definition.


If by "coherent" you mean that they could describe the difference between a generic concentration camp and the sort of (ahem) more advanced concentration camps that were a feature of Hitler's Europe, then no, I don't think that you'd get anywhere near 50%. That may be a bit harsh, but I think that people who frequent sites like this sometimes lose track of the point that Something Other made in #60, which is that the overwhelming majority of Americans (and probably the overwhelming majority of people everywhere) simply have no interest in history. Even in my former book shop, which had one of the best selections of history books found anywhere, and was located in one of the most affluent and best educated zip codes in the country, only a relatively small minority of my customers ever ventured into the European history or military history sections. And this was true even before the internet came along and destroyed the brick and mortar used book business.
   69. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:52 PM (#3934061)
The MLBPA ought to sue the hell out of MLB for not having a way for the suspension to expire without a team's signing the player. It's effectively a lifetime ban for guys like Ramirez.

There was. Manny retired after game 5 of this season. If he hadn't, he would have served his suspension and been elligble to return after game 105.

This is completely self-inflicted.
   70. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:54 PM (#3934063)

I'd be willing to bet that more than 50% of adults could at least tell you what a concentration camp was, as well as give that coherent definition.


Well, maybe ... but what percentage of them would cite Hogan's Heroes in formulating their response?
   71. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 03:57 PM (#3934065)
only a relatively small minority of my customers ever ventured into the military or European history or military history sections


I'm not sure why you think a deep interest in and knowledge of military history are necessary to know what the Holocaust was. Adolf Hitler is the go-to example in this country of pure evil and it's precisely because of the Holocaust that he has that reputation. Maybe it's a generational thing (although I'm not a young man), but in my experience, the Holocaust is one of those common knowledge things that everybody just sort of knows, like that George Washington was the first President, and black people in the U.S. used to be slaves.

Going back to your earlier statement, I'm not sure why you think knowing that Italy or Japan was part of the "axis" in World War II is necessary to understanding the Holocaust, either, since the Holocaust didn't really have much, if anything, to do with those countries anyway. Nor am I sure what you're getting at with the "sort of (ahem) more advanced concentration camps" commment; if all you mean is that the Germans killed their concentration camp prisoners, then, yes, anybody who knows what the Holocaust is would know that, because that's precisely what the Holocaust is.

I'm not suggesting that Americans (or I) are any kind of experts on World War II or have a particularly deep knowledge of (or interest in) the Holocaust. But I think they know the basics of it pretty much.
   72. zenbitz Posted: September 23, 2011 at 04:01 PM (#3934070)
Hey i was hoping for a steriod thread, but i guess a wwii/ignorance of the masses will do
   73. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: September 23, 2011 at 04:04 PM (#3934072)
More troubling, 78 percent answered that Hitler and the Nazis, not the “German government,” were responsible for the Holocaust.

strange sentence


Concur. I assume a similar % of Americans, if asked "who launched the invasion of Iraq?", would say Bush, not the "American government".


Yeah, I don't get that at all, even from a nitpicking standpoint. By the time of the Kristallnacht, there was no factual difference between the NSDAP and the "German government". They're the same damn thing, what the hell is "troubling" about it?
   74. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 04:46 PM (#3934118)
If by "coherent" you mean that they could describe the difference between a generic concentration camp and the sort of (ahem) more advanced concentration camps that were a feature of Hitler's Europe, then no, I don't think that you'd get anywhere near 50%.

Nor am I sure what you're getting at with the "sort of (ahem) more advanced concentration camps" commment; if all you mean is that the Germans killed their concentration camp prisoners, then, yes, anybody who knows what the Holocaust is would know that, because that's precisely what the Holocaust is.


To take Kiko Sakata's post a bit further - I would bet significantly over 50% of Americans know what a concentration camp is and associate it 100% with the Holocaust not knowing concentration camps can be something other than 'places where Jews were killed by the Nazis'. It would amaze me if 20% of Americans know we sent Japanese to internment camps during the same time period.
   75. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 04:55 PM (#3934126)
only a relatively small minority of my customers ever ventured into the military or European history or military history sections

I'm not sure why you think a deep interest in and knowledge of military history are necessary to know what the Holocaust was.


I didn't say that it was, but IMO it's an illustration of a lack of historical curiosity on the part of most Americans, even the most highly educated ones.

Adolf Hitler is the go-to example in this country of pure evil and it's precisely because of the Holocaust that he has that reputation.

I'd say that for most Americans of the WWII generation his reputation was much more of a factor of his attempt to enslave the world. And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure. To the extent that what you say is true, it's at best an indirect factor for most people.

Maybe it's a generational thing (although I'm not a young man), but in my experience, the Holocaust is one of those common knowledge things that everybody just sort of knows, like that George Washington was the first President, and black people in the U.S. used to be slaves.

I guess you're just far more optimistic about the level of historical knowledge in this country than I am. Even with that easy out definition of "common knowledge", I doubt if it's anywhere near the "everybody" level.

Going back to your earlier statement, I'm not sure why you think knowing that Italy or Japan was part of the "axis" in World War II is necessary to understanding the Holocaust, either, since the Holocaust didn't really have much, if anything, to do with those countries anyway.

But again, like the comment I made about my book shop's customers, that was more of a way of illustrating the superficiality of the idea that having "heard of" the Holocaust in some vague way has any sort of substantive meaning.

Nor am I sure what you're getting at with the "sort of (ahem) more advanced concentration camps" commment; if all you mean is that the Germans killed their concentration camp prisoners, then, yes, anybody who knows what the Holocaust is would know that, because that's precisely what the Holocaust is.

What I meant is that if you asked most people to describe Hitler's concentration camps from before 1941/42, you'd probably get the same answer as if you asked them to describe Auschwitz or Treblinka. In the context of how you're framing the issue, that's not important, but I do think that it's a point that's worth mentioning.

I'm not suggesting that Americans (or I) are any kind of experts on World War II or have a particularly deep knowledge of (or interest in) the Holocaust. But I think they know the basics of it pretty much.

I think that to the extent that a majority of American adults know "the basics" about WWII, they know that

---We were in it

---We won

---Lots of people were killed

---Hitler was on the other side

---Hitler was an evil man

---Hitler killed the Jews

---It all happened before my time

Beyond that, you're rapidly sinking towards the Mendoza line. How many people (and not just Americans) do you think would be able to give you these "basics", which really are pretty ####### basic?

---The approximate year the Pacific Theatre began, with an allowable five year margin of error

---A coherent description of what the "Hitler-Stalin" pact was, and when it took place in relationship to the outbreak of the European Theatre

---Whether or not Germany invaded the USSR before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, with anyone who takes longer than ten seconds to answer it placed in the "incorrect" category, since by that point they'd obviously just be guessing

---What country suffered the most casualties during the course of the war (with either the USSR or China permitted as a correct answer)

---What country we used the A-bomb against

---The year the war ended

I'd bet that you might get a majority of Americans to answer the next to last question correctly, but that's it.
   76. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 04:56 PM (#3934128)
To take Kiko Sakata's post a bit further - I would bet significantly over 50% of Americans know what a concentration camp is and associate it 100% with the Holocaust not knowing concentration camps can be something other than 'places where Jews were killed by the Nazis'. It would amaze me if 20% of Americans know we sent Japanese to internment camps during the same time period.

I think that sloppy language by historians is to blame.

"Concentration camp" shouldn't be used to mean "death camp" or "extermination camp".
   77. Lassus Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#3934132)
And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure.

Kids.

Today.

Etc.

Sorry, Andy, not buying it.


I think that sloppy language by historians is to blame. "Concentration camp" shouldn't be used to mean "death camp" or "extermination camp".

Maybe, but as the best-known concentration camps of all time were death camps, I don't think there's much specific blame to assess.
   78. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#3934135)
Yeah, I don't get that at all, even from a nitpicking standpoint. By the time of the Kristallnacht, there was no factual difference between the NSDAP and the "German government". They're the same damn thing, what the hell is "troubling" about it?

Yeah, and in truth, you could even date that back to the day that Hitler first consolidated his control over the government, which you could place at some chosen point between 1933 and 1934. After that it was mostly a distinction without much substantive difference. Whenever it came down to a dispute between Hitler and his subordinates, it was like betting that Sandy Koufax could strike out Bob Buhl.
   79. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:08 PM (#3934141)
And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure.

Kids.

Today.

Etc.

Sorry, Andy, not buying it.


Not buying what? I wasn't meaning it as any sort of a point against "kids today" at all. When I was 18 years old, I doubt if most "kids" of my generation (b. 1944) knew any more about the Spanish-American war than today's kids know about WWII, and almost certainly it was even less. The last thing I've ever thought, about today's students, today's baseball, or today's anything else, is that there's some inherent superiority to past generations. All generations are the product of their surrounding environment, and to try to ascribe moral virtues to one generation or the other makes about as much sense as anthropomorphism.
   80. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:16 PM (#3934149)
And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure.


To a certain subset of the current generation of young adults, he's the Obama of Germany!
   81. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:19 PM (#3934155)
When I was 18 years old, I doubt if most "kids" of my generation (b. 1944) knew any more about the Spanish-American war than today's kids know about WWII

I'm not confident about about that comparison. It's a bit like saying that any of today's Lady Gaga fans who are unaware of the Beatles' songs and significance are a lot like the original 1964 Beatlemaniacs who couldn't tell you anything about Russ Columbo.
   82. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:28 PM (#3934167)
When I was 18 years old, I doubt if most "kids" of my generation (b. 1944) knew any more about the Spanish-American war than today's kids know about WWII, and almost certainly it was even less.

I'm not confident about about that comparison. It's a bit like saying that any of today's Lady Gaga fans who are unaware of the Beatles' songs and significance are a lot like the original 1964 Beatlemaniacs who couldn't tell you anything about Russ Columbo.


If by that you mean it's unfair to the high school class of 1962, since WWII is of vastly greater importance to most Americans than the Spanish-American war, then I'd agree. But the generic point is that after the passage of a certain number of years, everything just becomes fuzzy in the memory of most people.
   83. vortex of dissipation Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:35 PM (#3934176)
---The approximate year the Pacific Theatre began


That's actually a bit of a difficult question, depending on whether you date it from Japan's aggression against China and/or Mongolia, or against the Western powers.
   84. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#3934180)
And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure.


Hitler is not a 'distant historical figure' to a young adult. I think you are really underestimating the amount of pop culture he appears in. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Henry VIII - these are distant historical figures that young adult have probably heard of but couldn't place in a historical context. The vast majority of high-school and college kids could tell you who Hitler was - Nazi, WWII, killed Jews.

I think that to the extent that a majority of American adults know "the basics" about WWII, they know that

---We were in it
---We won
---Lots of people were killed
---Hitler was on the other side
---Hitler was an evil man
---Hitler killed the Jews
---It all happened before my time

Beyond that, you're rapidly sinking towards the Mendoza line. How many people (and not just Americans) do you think would be able to give you these "basics", which really are pretty ####### basic?

---The approximate year the Pacific Theatre began, with an allowable five year margin of error
---A coherent description of what the "Hitler-Stalin" pact was, and when it took place in relationship to the outbreak of the European Theatre
---Whether or not Germany invaded the USSR before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, with anyone who takes longer than ten seconds to answer it placed in the "incorrect" category, since by that point they'd obviously just be guessing
---What country suffered the most casualties during the course of the war (with either the USSR or China permitted as a correct answer)
---What country we used the A-bomb against
---The year the war ended
I'd bet that you might get a majority of Americans to answer the next to last question correctly, but that's it.


You have some odd choices for the 'basics' on a war. The Hitler-Stalin pact is not a basic. Death counts are not basic, time-lining the opening front of a conflict between two other countries and pearl harbor is not a basic. And some people just suck with dates, I can't remember my phone number, doesn't mean I am stupid, I just don't ever use it. I know all about WWII, never learned absolute dates, and I don't discuss it enough to have them slowly ingrain themselves into my subconsciousness.

I guarantee most Americans know we dropped the bombs on Japan. Just do a search on google for facebook responses to Japan winning the world cup...it's disheartening to say the least.
   85. Arva Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#3934181)
Jolly, you do realize that a sizable amount of popular media focuses on WWII. And very few of those shy away from the Holocaust (in fact, play certain video games and you'd think the reason for WWII was to stop the holocaust). I suspect that most people know quite a lot about WWII because it is a very profitable period of time to exploit. Just a few examples:

The History Channel
Call of Duty series: 55 million copies, $3,000,000,000
Medal of Honor series: Can't find sales data, listed as one of the best selling franchises of all time on the Wiki, for what its worth.
Wolfenstein series: Also can't find sales data, but spawned at least four sequels.
Schindler's List: $96,065,768
Saving Private Ryan: $216,540,909
Inglourious Basterds: $120,831,050
Band of Brothers

In video games, people were afraid for a few years to make video games out of any other war because the lack of the WWII hook. For whatever reason, WWII has captured this generation of adults imagination, as has the holocaust. I suspect you'd be surprise at the amount of people who know what WWII and the Holocaust are just from exposure to popular media. They may only have knowledge from these items, but they'll know more than you're suggesting.

Coke to Jacksone
   86. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:46 PM (#3934188)
Hitler is not a 'distant historical figure' to a young adult. I think you are really underestimating the amount of pop culture he appears in. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Henry VIII - these are distant historical figures that young adult have probably heard of but couldn't place in a historical context.


Funny you mention popular culture WRT Hitler, as HBO tried it's level best to rectify the latter 2 with Rome and The Tudors. Caesar and Henry are of course 2 guys with bad haircuts who slept with a lot of beautiful women.
   87. rr Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:55 PM (#3934193)
Arva sighting. KY baby.

I teach at a CC, developmental stuff, and IME about 80-90% of kids know their "Hitler basics." Evil guy, German, goofy stache, killed Jews, lost war to USA. Most of them IME have never even heard of Josef Stalin.

I read the Conquest book snapper mentioned, based on hearing about it here and on Andy's rec. Worth it; learned a lot.
   88. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:56 PM (#3934195)
Funny you mention popular culture WRT Hitler, as HBO tried it's level best to rectify the latter 2 with Rome and The Tudors. Caesar and Henry are of course 2 guys with bad haircuts who slept with a lot of beautiful women.


And Colin Farrell (and Oliver Stone and Angelina Jolie) did his best to butcher A to the G - what a terrible piece of crap that movie was - but I still think most people would not know who they were.

#85 - you can add Valkyrie to the list, grossing $200,276,784 in the theaters with everyone's favorite Scientologist (hah! love how scientologist isn't a recognized word) playing a part.
   89. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:56 PM (#3934196)
Wolfenstein series: Also can't find sales data, but spawned at least four sequels.


Hitler's occult-powered cyborgs could have really turned the tide of the war if it wasn't for that Blazkowicz fella.
   90. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 23, 2011 at 05:57 PM (#3934198)
#81: I'm not confident about about that comparison.

I'm gonna go get the papers get the papers.
   91. rr Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:01 PM (#3934203)
Hitler's occult-powered cyborgs

This would make a good BTF handle.
   92. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:35 PM (#3934241)
My teenage kids know a helluva lot more about WWII than they know about Vietnam, or for that matter, Dessert Storm. "Huh, what do you mean there was another Iraq war?"
   93. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:45 PM (#3934251)
But the generic point is that after the passage of a certain number of years, everything just becomes fuzzy in the memory of most people.


But World War II was never "in the memory" of the vast majority of Americans. After a further certain number of years, the distance back in time doesn't matter and it just all becomes history. Virtually nobody in the U.S. knows more about the Spanish-American War than about the Civil War, even though the former happened 30-some years after the latter, because they're both history, but the latter is much more important history.

in fact, play certain video games and you'd think the reason for WWII was to stop the holocaust


I suspect this is a very common misconception. In fact, I think it's probably true that more Americans today know more about the Holocaust than was true of Americans in the early 1940s.
   94. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:45 PM (#3934252)
---The approximate year the Pacific Theatre began

That's actually a bit of a difficult question, depending on whether you date it from Japan's aggression against China and/or Mongolia, or against the Western powers.


It started in 1931, and had been going on for 10 years before Pearl Harbor. I do think that this is pretty basic stuff, although in order to avoid ambiguity in the question I'd want to make sure it wasn't suggesting the date that the Western powers became involved.

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

And to the current generation of young adults, he's a distant historical figure.

Hitler is not a 'distant historical figure' to a young adult. I think you are really underestimating the amount of pop culture he appears in. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Henry VIII - these are distant historical figures that young adult have probably heard of but couldn't place in a historical context. The vast majority of high-school and college kids could tell you who Hitler was - Nazi, WWII, killed Jews.


Those are all good points, but I'd still question how much actual knowledge beyond "Hitler bad, killed lots of Jews" gets retained from all those movies and video games that Arva mentions, and how much of it will be retained five years from now.

You have some odd choices for the 'basics' on a war. The Hitler-Stalin pact is not a basic.

I would respectfully disagree with that. Anyone who doesn't know the basics of the when and why of that agreement doesn't even know the Classic Comics book version of WWII. Without the pact that kept Stalin out of Germany's way while he conquered western Poland, the outbreak of the war might well have been delayed for months or even years. Not to mention the seismic effect it had on the whole psychology of the resistance movement, although knowledge of that would obviously be a bit more advanced.

Death counts are not basic,

The actual death tolls aren't basic knowledge, but knowing that the Russians and the Chinese had many times as many casualties as we did most certainly is.

time-lining the opening front of a conflict between two other countries and pearl harbor is not a basic.

I guess we just disagree here, though I'd give partial credit to anyone who knew that our involvement in the war was somewhere in the first half of the 40's, and not in any other decade.

And some people just suck with dates, I can't remember my phone number, doesn't mean I am stupid, I just don't ever use it. I know all about WWII, never learned absolute dates, and I don't discuss it enough to have them slowly ingrain themselves into my subconsciousness.

This doesn't have anything to do with stupidity or rote memorization, but it does have to do with the idea that you can't be said to have any real knowledge of WWII if you don't know anything as basic as the points I mentioned above. How can you possibly describe WWII intelligently if you don't know about the Hitler-Stalin pact, or if you don't know that the war had been raging for a full 10 years before Pearl Harbor, or if you don't know that the great brunt of the war was borne by the Russians, the Chinese, and the Eastern Europeans, and not by the Americans?
   95. Kiko Sakata Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:53 PM (#3934259)
This doesn't have anything to do with stupidity or rote memorization, but it does have to do with the idea that you can't be said to have any real knowledge of WWII if you don't know anything as basic as the points I mentioned above.


Everything you say here may well be correct, but the original tangent was a response to you saying this:

"I seriously doubt if the average American (meaning anything close to 50%) has the slightest knowledge of the Holocaust"

To which, I would just make two points:

1) "slightest knowledge" is an exceptionally low bar, far lower than knowing that the Pacific theater of World War II started in 1931

2) The "Holocaust" is not the same as World War II. Obviously, they happened at the same time and the latter is part of the context of the former (and, to some extent, vice-versa), but I'm not sure that one needs to know anything at all about China and Japan when discussing the Holocaust.
   96. CrosbyBird Posted: September 23, 2011 at 06:56 PM (#3934260)
Outside of a nearby university I can't have a coherent, useful discussion of history. It's just not what people in the States trouble with.

It's really not the fault of the individual students. It's the way we teach history (prior to college). Textbooks are written to appeal to a broad base of schools, so that they will be purchased by schools in every state. That means you can't really afford controversy if you print a textbook. The thing is, practically any interesting discussion of history needs to entertain unpleasant things in order to tell the whole story.

Think about what a traditional high school history class teaches about Helen Keller. Most high school students think the story ends when she learns to communicate, but that's only the beginning of the story.

Or think about the Vietnam War. There are three pictures that you pretty much have to see to really understand the war: the execution of the Viet Cong soldier, the self-immolation of the Buddhist monk, and the screaming naked girl running away from the napalm strike. But these pictures are controversial, and many textbooks leave them out.

When I left high school, I thought history was the least interesting subject, and I never took a single history class in college. While I've tried to self-educate, and I don't consider myself to be entirely ignorant, there's a giant hole of knowledge that doesn't exist in other subjects. I can leap right into a piece of literature or a math problem or a book about science and enjoy pulling it apart, but a big part of my mind still fights history as the relatively meaningless memorization of facts, names, and dates.
   97. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 07:03 PM (#3934266)
But the generic point is that after the passage of a certain number of years, everything just becomes fuzzy in the memory of most people.

But World War II was never "in the memory" of the vast majority of Americans.


But of course it was, unless you discount the firsthand stories told by parents and grandparents who lived through those years, both in battle and on the home front. And that's what's now slipping away, in spite of the video games and movies.

Just to give you one small point of illustration: When was the last time you ever saw a newspaper acknowledge the anniversary of Pearl Harbor or V-E / V-J Days with anything more than a brief story about a ceremony held by a handful of surviving nonagenarians? Compare that to all the 9/ll anniversary remembrances. Obviously there's no moral point to this, only the importance of the time factor.

After a further certain number of years, the distance back in time doesn't matter and it just all becomes history. Virtually nobody in the U.S. knows more about the Spanish-American War than about the Civil War, even though the former happened 30-some years after the latter, because they're both history, but the former is much more important history.

True, but the reason for that is that it took place on our own soil, and because beyond the history buffs, entire generations of southerners kept the flame of resentment alive for reasons that weren't exactly benign.

in fact, play certain video games and you'd think the reason for WWII was to stop the holocaust


I suspect this is a very common misconception. In fact, I think it's probably true that more Americans today know more about the Holocaust than was true of Americans in the early 1940s.

No question about that, since although news of the Holocaust at the time could be found by anyone who really cared to look, it was mostly found only in the back pages of the newspapers and through the grapevine of refugee organizations. It certainly wasn't anything that most Americans were even vaguely aware of, in great part due to the fact that our government didn't want us to be "distracted" from the task of bringing down Hitler and Tojo.

A somewhat related and rather sad fact is that in the immediate aftermath of the war and the discovery of the death camps, a sizable percentage of Americans blamed the Jews for causing Hitler to act as he did. Anti-semitism in America at that point was at a near all-time high.
   98. CrosbyBird Posted: September 23, 2011 at 07:04 PM (#3934268)
In video games, people were afraid for a few years to make video games out of any other war because the lack of the WWII hook.

It's hard to find an easier bad guy than the Nazis. There's very little risk of some anti-defamation group complaining that you're treating them unfairly.
   99. . Posted: September 23, 2011 at 07:06 PM (#3934270)
This would make a good BTF handle.

You know who would have liked Hitler's Occult-Powered Cyborgs as a BTF handle?

Hitler, that's who.
   100. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 23, 2011 at 07:06 PM (#3934271)
Kiko (#95),

Fair enough. I don't think we're really disagreeing about anything of substance.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt!
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogIs Mike Trout really better than Derek Jeter?
(46 - 12:43am, Aug 24)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-23-19
(98 - 12:20am, Aug 24)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogMLB bans playing in Venezuela amid Trump order
(8 - 11:58pm, Aug 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogThe reason Reymin Guduan was suspended
(11 - 11:52pm, Aug 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogAlex Rodriguez shares painful details of MLB suspension on Danica Patrick's podcast
(21 - 10:57pm, Aug 23)
Last: majorflaw

NewsblogLEADING OFF: Players get creative, Yanks at Dodger Stadium
(2 - 10:56pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogJudge upholds arbitration ruling that Orioles owed Nationals $296.8 million in MASN TV rights dispute
(7 - 9:16pm, Aug 23)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogI was a bird-flipping Little League menace -- and it’s time to come clean
(4 - 9:12pm, Aug 23)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogHow players are using uniform numbers to break MLB's unwritten rules
(26 - 9:10pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - A New Season is Upon Baldrick
(561 - 9:10pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogCarl Yastrzemski knows it'll be 'emotional' to see Mike play at Fenway
(10 - 9:04pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jose is Absurdly Unemployed

NewsblogOMNICHATTER hereby orders you to bring home your chatter!, for August 23, 2019
(2 - 9:03pm, Aug 23)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogMLB warns sexual enhancers may include PEDs
(25 - 9:01pm, Aug 23)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOMNICHATTER is King of the News! for August 22, 2019
(65 - 7:44pm, Aug 23)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogJustin Verlander responds after Astros block Free Press from media session
(41 - 6:21pm, Aug 23)
Last: Jeff Frances the Mute

Page rendered in 0.8684 seconds
46 querie(s) executed