User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5062 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
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.
1. Rich Posted: March 13, 2008 at 04:00 AM (#2711682)Of course, the idea is more that they'll get 100% free publicity tomorrow.
Or a sledgehammer.
For those not in the know, this is funny. (He's legally blind.)
RDF.
Wouldn't it make more sense to play the loop from "Revolution 9"?
Joe Bruno Stadium would be a whole lot more natural setting for this, anyway, though Bruno has been pretty reserved through this whole thing so far.
Dumb hillbillies.
The pointless and unnecessary efforts to avoid this fact in stories has been amusing.
It's inspiring to those who are blind or who know such; neutral yet interesting to most; and I know of no hate group that wants to protest.
It is what it is, to beat that dead horse.
then again, my state elected Mitt Romney, so who am i to talk?
I've seen it reported plenty, but I'm in NY. I suspect people in most other states couldn't care less who our governor is, or if he's blind.
He's also, by all accounts, a heck of a guy.
Back to the hooker jokes.
Aside, the South's underrated for literacy, among other things. As a Yankee (Maryland) small press, let me just say, Columbia, SC and Decatur, GA have two of the best book festivals around (Miami's the finest on the East Coast).
Although, I heard this from Geraldine Ferraro: 'If Paterson could see, he would not be in this position. And if he was deaf (or otherwise differently abled) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept'
They should reduce admission for all fans who show up wearing pimp hats.
Must have been some phonebook.
Aside, the South's underrated for literacy, among other things. As a Yankee (Maryland) small press, let me just say, Columbia, SC and Decatur, GA have two of the best book festivals around (Miami's the finest on the East Coast).
Glad to see that things have changed in Augusta over the past 19 years, and I'm well aware of many other very good book shops in the South. But that link you gave is obviously incomplete, unless by some Satanic anti-Miracle the Christian bookstores have all disappeared. Beyond that, if you look at the names on the link, it's predominately chains and textbook stores.
You're just attacking Geraldine Ferraro because she can see!
More like Love Potion #9
Not in this photo. She's a man baby!
Which has actually now been parodied into "Love client #9".
I have a theory that this is the only way left, today, to get good people in high offices. Get them into the second spot, through hook or crook, and then have the number one die (or pay for sex).
I thought the joke was that he was black, and the idea of a non-Caucasian being allowed to umpire in a game of base-ball was so ludicrous I guffawed heartily.
I laughed at game six of the 97 NLCS too.
If only. He's actually been having the Divorce From Hell, with all kinds of shenanigans from both sides over their 6-year-old daughter. The judge has had to admonish them more than once. Plus there's the ongoing fallout from his administration, the latest being the revelation that their e-mail retention policy was "Wait 30 days and erase it".
We've got a drought, we're praying for rain every day.
Don't forget the $1 all-pork hot dogs and $1 beer to go with that promotion.
Touche, and also the "Let's Roll" cheerleaders on the dugout tops in birkas.
"Big D Cups" has a nicer ring and has less of the ivory tower stink.
Why would it need to be secret? You could put up big billboards on the highway reading, "You suck, blindies!" They'd never know.
Get a grip, gents. Unless she has kegels that could choke a python, ain't no tang worth $5400 a night.
Gee, ya' think her thang's just a petri dish of STD's, or what? No thanks, boys. I'd rather not have my weenus become infected.
Besides, tfbg9's never paid for it in his life!
Anyway he wasnt paying for the tang, he was paying for it to leave.
The myspace page is a riot. "Whatever destroys me makes me stronger"
That's a pretty hefty shipping cost.
And presumably, Spitzer's wife wasn't offering a one-time engagement. (Perhaps I shouldn't presume that...)
So where are all the posters who were certain that Obama would have to be handled gingerly this election?
It's still there, kevin. I particularly enjoyed,
"Ashley Alexandra Dupre's Details... Here For:
Dating, Serious Relationships, Friends"
Oops--forgot one!
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but as far as I can tell, Ferraro is evidence of that point. She made a strong comment about Obama -- and had to resign over it.
As usual, I could have been clearer. I see Clinton regularly exploiting race to try to win the nomination. I did think we were going to have to wait until the general to see this kind of thing (Bill Clinton's comments comparing Obama's to Jesse Jackson's primary wins, doctoring a photo to make Obama look darker, the 'well as far as I know he's not a Muslim' response from Hillary, leaking the photo of Obama in Kenyan clothing to Drudge, Ferraro's junk), but it's not like Democrats aren't able to screw up a near-automatic win.
I am as anti-Clinton as can be, but this charge is silly. Nobody darkened any images on purpose. The other stuff is true.
And it hardly needs to be said that the Hillary gang are the last ones who should be saying that other people are "lucky to be who they are", as if their gal really made it on her own without any help.
But this is what happens when you live in the cesspool of identity politics.
That was Andy and to some extent me. The point was that using race against Obama might backfire badly, and that certain types of personal attacks against him might backfire as well with certain voters--not that he can't be attacked on issues, mistakes or positions. As Ray says, Ferraro's stepping down and HRC's apology to black voters, after her initially luke-warm "disagreement", demonstrates there is some truth in that idea. The "first" of anything in the sociohistorical sense always carries with it extra elements that lead to conflicts.
Pedroia is very lucky he is who he is. He wouldn't be in this position if he weren't short, white, saber-friendly and scrappy.
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/03/amid-charges-of.html
I don't doubt I'm more cynical than you, and that's not something I'm happy about--it's just that I'd be very surprised if all of this wasn't largely orchestrated by the Clintons, who are clearly willing to take the risk, and the hit, if it gets Hillary the nomination. And it's clear enough, too, after the last month, that Hillary will do anything to win the nomination, even at the risk of destroying the party in the general--her asserting that she and McCain are ready to be commander-in-chief, and that Obama isn't, made that perfectly clear.
Ferraro has been making these statements for the last two weeks in a variety of venues, smearing the tripe, if you will. It wasn't some accidental off-the-cuff blunder.
That's great stuff, Barca:
I think Obama may have no choice in the end but to disassociate himself from this guy, because when people start seeing that his spiritual advisor is a total maniac who screams "God damn America" at the top of his lungs, that is not going to play too well at all in mainstream America.
I don't think it will just be Wright, Joey--it'll be Wright, it'll be the lie that Obama was whispering one thing to the Canadians on NAFTA while he was publicly saying something else, it'll be tarring (pun intended) Obama with an association, no matter how distant, with any and every black extremist, it'll be casting just a little doubt on whether he's really a Christian, on whether he has a secret agenda, and so on and so on. Since Clinton has no chance to win in the regular delegate count she has to make him unelectable in the eyes of the super delegates, and that means smearing, lying, and so on. She'll try to, make no mistake about that.
While I had a suspicion that the Democrats would find some way to lose the election from their invincible position, I still find it incredible.
If the Dems lose this election, they should blow up the party and see what takes its place. There is just no way they should have lost in 2000, 04 or 08. If they can't even win ONE of those, they have no business operating.
I'd agree with this. However, watching them lose elections they should have won going away has been fun to watch for me. Reading about how Hillary spent her money, $100,000 finger sandwiches in Iowa, $5,000 for snow shovels on a sunny day, etc....has been a hoot.
It may look a little different when it is one-on-one again, but the idea that the Demos are "invincible" would only be true if Bush were going for a third term. McCain, flaws and all, is the best the Repubs have among the people in their party who want the job. I said over a year ago, on one of the first political threads, that while I thought Hillary Clinton would likely be the nominee, she cannot win the general. I still believe that. Obama/McCain will be very close if that is the matchup. Clinton/McCain will be as well, but I think McCain will edge her out.
I am not as cynical about the Clintons as most people, so I am agnostic on whether it was Ferraro being unguarded and dumb, or if the Clinton campaign put her up to it to play on resentments.
And this is based on what?
This just in: percentage of Americans who believe Obama is a Muslim: 13
Percentage of Clinton's vote in Missouri that came from Republicans: 24
Well, Whoopee for you.
Maybe the BTF bigwhigs should set up a catch-all Election 2008 politics thread, so those of us who are into it will not annoy those who are not.
Well, that's kinda rude.... Forgive me for commenting on the article, how dare I?!
The Republicans have the advantage that a generally liberal press acts as a strong screening mechanism. If the situation were reversed, I could see them going with Romney or Huckabee and facing a nasty shock in the general election.
For a liberal candidate from a liberal state, the general election might be the first time they've faced continued scrutiny from an opposition press. I can't help but think that if there were a conservative counterpart to the New York Times reporting through the primary season, Kerry never would have seemed like a viable candidate in the first place.
You misunderstood. I was saying I think it might be better if we kept the election on one thread, instead of having it periodically hijack other stuff. But that's not my call.
You post this without commenting on it. Do you believe these are people that will be voting for Clinton in November? Or was there a movement in the state to attempt to get the candidate they think can be beat the nomination?
So are you supporting the white male candidate, or one of the other candidates?
I put it up just as an fyi thing, and because it surprised me a little.
On due consideration I have a hard time imagining that Clinton is swinging that many Republicans to the Democratic side for the duration of 2008. I've heard second hand, fwiw, that Limbaugh et al were encouraging Republicans to vote for Hilary to help her stay in the race so that she could keep 'bloodying' Obama. That seems more likely to me than large numbers of Mississippi Republicans deciding, hey, that Clinton woman would make a pretty good president after all!
You meant Mississippi all along, not Missouri, right?
Uh. Heh. Er. Yes. Mississippi.
Now to a state I can remember and even spell: Hillary is today claiming the Michigan results were fair (as I'm sure you know, Obama and Edwards withdrew their names from the ballot) and should be recognized.
That was Andy and to some extent me. The point was that using race against Obama might backfire badly, and that certain types of personal attacks against him might backfire as well with certain voters--not that he can't be attacked on issues, mistakes or positions. As Ray says, Ferraro's stepping down and HRC's apology to black voters, after her initially luke-warm "disagreement", demonstrates there is some truth in that idea. The "first" of anything in the sociohistorical sense always carries with it extra elements that lead to conflicts.
Yeah, that was me, and I think that the events of the past two days have shown that at least for now, my instincts were correct. You only have to read the various forums that accompanied the news stories to note that blacks (and many whies) are very plssed at both Clinton and Ferraro, with more than a few of them saying that they'll sit it out if Clinton wins the nomination. As a Democrat, I find it more than a little disheartening, if not that surprising, that McCain has been far quicker to shoot down racially oriented remarks than Clinton is. But Ferraro is such a complete redass that I doubt if she needs Hillary to egg her on in her six pack of gonorrhea running off at the mouth schtick. She's fully capable of acting like that on her own.
Knocking Obama on associations with people like Wright is silly, since obviously Wright isn't "influencing" Obama's opinions on race. But in and of iself you can't say that this sort of BS represents anything particularly racial---all candidates have potentially embarrassing associations that often get brought up, and in this case better now than in the Fall. Anyway, he's been questioned about Wright for at least half a year, and has probably answered the questions to the satisfaction of anyone this side of the Limbaughs. I doubt if it'll cost him any votes in November.
And if McCain runs a clean campaign and keeps the focus on experience, he has a very good chance of attracting enough independents to let the warring Democrats present the Republicans with another E-Z Pass to the White House. The people running Clinton's campaign have shown themselves to be absolute geniuses in the fine art of tone deafness, and I have to think it stems from the same bunker mentality that's been Hillary's m.o. since more or less forever. In many ways those people of hers might as well be Republican operatives, for all the help they're giving McCain come November.
How do they compare with your coworker's?
Remember when you said she had nice tits?
Then remember when you panicked that she might read it on this public board?
That was fun.
But Clinton does understand that she can't win the presidency without winning the nomination, and if she has to polarize the party along racial lines to win the nomination, she'll do it--I believe that's obvious by now. We know it's essentially impossible for Clinton to end up with a majority of the nonsuperdelegates--and we know she knows this--she therefore understands that to get enough superdelegates to take the nomination she has to ruin Obama so that he's no longer perceived as a viable candidate in the general election. It's what she has to do to win, and she's willing to do it.
I agree, but I also would have thought letting the idea linger that Obama was a Muslim was silly as well, sort of along the lines of claiming that Saddam Hussein was allied with Al-Qaida prior to 9/11...
McCain may well appear to run a clean campaign, and I agree that as a strategy it's likely his best. There are plenty of willing surrogates and 527s happy to slander and smear, so he's covered there, and there's no chance at all he'll tell them to shut up and go back to their caves. I don't agree that Hillary is particularly tone deaf, at least not in the last month, as she has managed to bring race to the fore without hopelessly sullying herself. That part of her campaign has been brilliant (sickening, but brilliant), in that it revived a candidacy all but stone dead just a few weaks ago--remember how some serious commentators were talking about her resigning from race for the good of the party?
Which is, I suspect, what separates intelligent, thoughtful guys like you who routinely consider the greater good from Hillary and her cohort--they're not interestied in the Democrats winning, they're intersted in they themselves winning. The party is a vehicle, and very little more than that.
If they're like me, they'd rather vote for McCain than Clinton, and they get more justified with every passing day.
Which is, I suspect, what separates intelligent, thoughtful guys like you who routinely consider the greater good from Hillary and her cohort--they're not interestied in the Democrats winning, they're intersted in they themselves winning. The party is a vehicle, and very little more than that.
Since I'm willing to give most everyone the benefit of the doubt, including Hillary Clinton, I can only hope that she comes to her senses and realizes the potential damage to the whole society that her campaign surrogates are fomenting. There is more to life than winning an election.
she must think that those people whom her surrogates are totally alienating today are all going to swallow bottles of amnesia potion # 9 in six weeks. I doubt it.
If they're like me, they'd rather vote for McCain than Clinton, and they get more justified with every passing day.
My personal choice would have to be constrained by the thought of McCain's Supreme Court and regulatory commission apppointments, but if it were merely a matter of demonstrated political character, I'd take McCain in a blink. Nearly all politicians are almost by definition classic Type A personalities who are best appreciated at a distance, but there's little I've read about McCain that doesn't say to me than he's better than nearly any pol who's risen to his level of public recognition.
Interesting, Doc--how do you tend to vote, if you don't mind my asking?
For me there's also the small matter of the occupation of Iraq. There's no evidence that the occupation has increased the likelihood of political reconciliation within Iraq, it has nothing useful in common with US troop presence in Korea, Germany, or Japan, it distracts enormously from actually making the world and the US safer, and it's not sustainable. McCain is so wrong on this I couldn't vote for him if this were the only issue, let alone the activist right-wing judges he'd appoint, the presposterous war time tax cuts for the wealthy, and so on.
As Raymond Chandler said, "that's like being the guy in the leper colony with the most fingers."
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main