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

Tuesday, October 02, 2012

OTP: October 2012-THE RACE: As Candidates Prep, Attention in DC split between politics and baseball

While President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney bone up in Nevada and Colorado for Wednesday’s opening debate, back in the nation’s capital attention is split between the hard-fought presidential race and baseball playoffs.

The Nationals won the first division baseball championship for a Washington team since 1933 by clinching the National League East race Monday night.

Washington, D.C., has the only ballpark where so many Cabinet members, politicians and other luminaries routinely gather and where fans now are openly rooting for a particular president — one who served more than a century ago, Theodore Roosevelt.

“Let Teddy Win” banners and buttons are everywhere. Fans like 2008 GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona say it’s time for Roosevelt’s 500-plus losing streak to end.

[...]

“Teddy, you are the victim of a vast left-wing conspiracy by the commie pinko libs in this town,” McCain said in a video played in the stadium Monday night. “But you can overcome that.”

The October 2012 “OT: Politics” thread starts ... now.

Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 02, 2012 at 02:14 PM | 6119 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nationals, 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 13 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >  Last ›
   1201. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 09:00 AM (#4260243)
Three day rolling average for Obama for Oct 5th through the 7th was 51%.
   1202. JL Posted: October 09, 2012 at 09:02 AM (#4260246)
The reason that we don't allow polygamy and incest under our current law is because those things creep us out. Polygamy wasn't outlawed because of child marriage (which should be illegal on its own because of consent issues) and incest wasn't outlawed because of birth defects.

Not clear to me that this is accurate. Certainly those things creep us out now, but these laws have been around in Western society for awhile now. I don't see that as the only reason for those laws being enacted or existing. As noted above, there are practical reasons for drawing these bright lines, even if you don't agree with them. We do it in other areas (such a defining minors by age).
   1203. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 09:09 AM (#4260250)
Morning comes with some overnight updates in Ohio.

292,000 Democrat ballots and 254,000 Republican ballots.
   1204. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 09:53 AM (#4260282)
This is typical Joe K nonsense.


I
m not even sure there is "typical" JoeK BS
The bullshit comes fast and furious, he pours it on even when he doesn't have to, I mean the last week has been very good for Joek, but he can't help himself, even when the going is good he can't resist embellishing...

but then again he is/was an "agent," one of the few forms of human life lower than lawyers on the BS scale...
still well above Dick Morris though
   1205. The Good Face Posted: October 09, 2012 at 09:57 AM (#4260284)
Not clear to me that this is accurate. Certainly those things creep us out now, but these laws have been around in Western society for awhile now. I don't see that as the only reason for those laws being enacted or existing. As noted above, there are practical reasons for drawing these bright lines, even if you don't agree with them. We do it in other areas (such a defining minors by age).


And for quite awhile, gay marriage was nigh unthinkable in Western society. Your bigotry is not a good enough reason to prohibit polygamous/polyandrous or incestuous marriages.
   1206. JL Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:02 AM (#4260290)
Deleted - did not further discussion
   1207. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:08 AM (#4260295)
What "blunder" are you talking about?
Geez, you really love to double down on your mistakes instead of just owning them and moving on.

I referred to the last pre-debate poll in 2004 and you referred to an early-October poll in 2012. Only a world-class pedant would consider that a "blunder."

As I've pointed out once or twice already, it's illogical to compare Oct. 2, 2012, with Oct. 2, 2004, since the first 2004 debate was on Sept. 30 and the first 2012 debate wasn't until Oct. 3. But if you insist on comparing exact dates, that's your prerogative. I look forward to your (attempted) comparison of Nov. 5, 2012 to Nov. 5, 2004.

***
even when the going is good he can't resist embellishing...

I didn't embellish anything. Bitter Mouse seems to think in one version of English and write in another. He has an odd habit of objecting to accurate descriptions of his written positions.
   1208. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:13 AM (#4260299)

Just saw this on Twitter:

Paul Ryan has done 179 interviews since August. Joe Biden has done 1. — http://politi.co/WMfdlQ

(The tweet says 179 and the story says 197. Not sure which is accurate, but it's a stark difference.)
   1209. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:17 AM (#4260307)
I look forward to your (attempted) comparison of Nov. 5, 2012 to Nov. 5, 2004.

I doubt you will.

Amusing that numbers that don't agree with you are illogical to use. Go figure. Never could have seen that coming.
   1210. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:23 AM (#4260318)
So RNC Political Director Wiley sent out a memo the other day to supporters talking about how well Romney is doing and how enthusiastic the base now is. He rattles off 4 states in which republicans seem to be doing well in absentee and early balloting. Ohio was not one of the states he listed.
   1211. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:44 AM (#4260346)
He rattles off 4 states in which republicans seem to be doing well in absentee and early balloting. Ohio was not one of the states he listed.

No, actually, he rattled off the names of four states in which more Republicans had requested absentee ballots than Democrats. Just because that's not true in Ohio doesn't, in the slightest, refute the prior claims of the GOP making gains in enthusiasm in the Buckeye State compared to 2008. (In fact, the same memo says the GOP has made "3 times more phone calls and 25 times more door knocks than this time in '08" in the state of Ohio.)

***

In other news, the Rasmussen daily tracker again has the race locked at 48-48, but the swing-state tracker flipped from yesterday, going from 49-47 Obama to 49-47 Romney.
   1212. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:47 AM (#4260354)
Just because that's not true in Ohio doesn't, in the slightest, refute the prior claims of the GOP making gains in enthusiasm in the Buckeye State compared to 2008.

I didn't know my statement was meant to be taken as a refutation of prior claims that I've never attempted to refute. Silly me.

I simply noted that a RNC rah-rah piece couldn't really find much to rah-rah about in Ohio.
   1213. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:47 AM (#4260355)
Joe, do you have a favorite baseball team?
   1214. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:51 AM (#4260362)
I didn't know my statement was meant to be taken as a refutation of prior claims that I've never attempted to refute. Silly me.

Ah, so you've been posting all these Ohio updates and comments just as general information and not because I made prior comments about Ohio. Okay. My mistake.

I simply noted that a RNC rah-rah piece couldn't really find much to rah-rah about in Ohio.

Except the memo did "rah-rah" the GOP's efforts in Ohio: "[We've made] 3 times more phone calls and 25 times more door knocks than this time in '08" in Ohio.

***

Joe, do you have a favorite baseball tea?

No, I'm a coffee drinker.
   1215. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 10:59 AM (#4260374)
Lassus — Jokes aside, I don't have a favorite MLB team. The Astros are still my sentimental favorite, as I grew up working for an Astros affiliate in my hometown, but these days I follow them more than cheer for them.

***

This Big Bird ad from Obama is a real head-scratcher. If the crew at MSNBC doesn't like it, it was probably a bad idea.
   1216. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:03 AM (#4260379)
And yet in the other states he showed what all that extra work has done. If door knocks are the strongest rah rah you can provide that is pretty weak.
   1217. The District Attorney Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:04 AM (#4260380)
The twitter feeds of no name people should be given as much time and analysis as the comments on Fox Nation.
Anyone as incredibly gorgeous as Stacey Dash is going to get at least some attention when they speak.

Seriously, she's incredibly gorgeous. Ah well.
   1218. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:04 AM (#4260382)
Except the memo did "rah-rah" the GOP's efforts in Ohio: "[We've made] 3 times more phone calls and 25 times more door knocks than this time in '08" in Ohio.

Well, the players on the Astros made a lot of efforts to win, too. And?
   1219. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:06 AM (#4260385)
. If the crew at MSNBC doesn't like it, it was probably a bad idea.


You mean a former Republican congressman who once voted to eliminate funding for PSB? That guy thought it was a bad idea? Shocking.
   1220. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:10 AM (#4260390)
Seriously, she's incredibly gorgeous.

And she's 46!

***
Well, the players on the Astros made a lot of efforts to win, too. And?

Is that really where you were going with that?

***
You mean a former Republican congressman who once voted to eliminate funding for PSB? That guy thought it was a bad idea? Shocking.

Well, Scarborough is no hardcore right-winger, and neither are Brzezinksi and Barnicle.
   1221. tshipman Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:11 AM (#4260392)
Re: Ads and Obama:

Obama has put up quite a few ads that people didn't like. Obama does extensive focus-testing on ads before releasing them to determine how effective they'll be. I have no real opinion on the specific ad, not having seen it, but it's quite likely that the ad tested well before its release.

   1222. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:15 AM (#4260395)
If you think you're doing well in OH, you say you're doing well in OH. You don't say, "We're trying really hard in OH." If that's a 'rah-rah', it sounds rather weak to me. YMMV.
   1223. The District Attorney Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:19 AM (#4260401)
And she's 46!
She still looks about 25.

I feel like the Dems made the decision to go with Big Bird because they are trying to be consistent with a "Romney is a soulless plutocrat" narrative, and they want to stick with that rather than try to embrace the somewhat contradictory "Romney is a flip-flopper" narrative that would be the more direct response to Romney's debate performance.

I don't love it as anything beyond an attempt to irritate. Although I assume PBS is one of your more popular government spending programs, it's obviously not going to swing peoples' votes by itself, and I think trying to blow "Romney wants to cut PBS" up into "Romney will shred the safety net" will strike people as frivolous.
   1224. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:20 AM (#4260404)
Big bird is an easy talking point to get across.
   1225. zenbitz Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:23 AM (#4260408)
@1199 fixing inheritance is a feature, not a bug.
   1226. Ron J2 Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:30 AM (#4260414)
incest wasn't outlawed because of birth defects.


Heinlein quoters don't seem as keen to invoke him on this.
   1227. just plain joe Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:31 AM (#4260415)
And she's 46!


I had not heard of her before today (don't watch much TV or go to the movies). She is a strikingly attractive woman.
   1228. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4260416)
His mood turned when I started asking him about Romney's shifts in argument. No, he didn't read Romney's site, he doesn't know Romney's budget proposals (other than to increase military spending), he didn't know that Romney had pledged to cut taxes instead of hold the line, etc. And then he made it clear: he doesn't care what Romney's position is on those things. He wanted to cut taxes? Good! Now he doesn't? Good! Not only that, but he defended Romney's position shifts (shifts that he didn't know existed): "A man is allowed to change his mind." Our wives made us stop talking politics.

Between my brother and my birther/truther father-in-law, election season has become hell.


Aren't most voters like your brother, though? They're not following the issues and the position shifts as closely as people on BBTF are.

Though I don't know why "position shifts" are necessarily bad things.
   1229. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:16 PM (#4260458)
I had not heard of Stacey Dash before today.
She is extremely shiny.

Also, I can understand why Obama would not want to start throwing around charges of being a "flip-flopper" - associations with past & present Dem failures, that kind of thing.
   1230. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:17 PM (#4260459)
Re: Ads and Obama:

Obama has put up quite a few ads that people didn't like. Obama does extensive focus-testing on ads before releasing them to determine how effective they'll be.


I think a big difference between many political ads and many products/services ads is that there is no "focus testing" for particular politcal ads before release, the political ads are done on the fly (and on the cheap), they are meant to be topical, take advantage of a news event, etc.

Also, the political ads have different purposes/audiences in mind:

1: Convince undecideds to vote for you
2: convince undecideds to NOT vote for the other guy
3: fire up the base to come out
4; dampen the enthusiasm of the other side's base
5: convince people leaning the other way to vote your way
6: convince people leaning your way to elan further your way

Many campaigns will try to tailor the media to/for a specific audience, back in 1999/2000 Bush's people prepared a video/DVD top "introduce" Bush, to explain how he went from a young rascal who perhaps drank too much and could be a bit irresponsible, to a man who found god, and through his faith in god and god's grace, quit drinking, to fly right and became a family man and a productive member of society- this video was distributed to churches and church lead/run organizations - why? Because committed church going evangelicals EAT THAT STUFF UP- OTOH it wasn't disseminated outside that audience (not deliberately anyway), because other audiences would either dismiss it outright as fluff - or worse have their pandering/BS detectors overload...

What was the point of the Bush church DVD? It was to get a segment of the base EXCITED about Bush, it was to not only get them behind him for the primary, it was supposed to get that segment of the base out in a greater % than usual during the general. It was very effective, but if you are not among those for whom it was supposed to reach, you would likely scratch your head and say, "why did they waste so much money on this?"

The Bush DVD was innocuous, but other presentations politcos make to their base- or more specifically to a segment of their base are less so- guys on the far right and left say stuff to their core supporters all the time that would turn off most people (witness Broun and Akins this cycle, I've seen "ethnic" pols in NYC talk about "reparations") I actually do not know why national politicians do not make more use of their opponents ads- if I was a Dem I'd say, hey, let's run some of Bachmans's ads in NYC on BET... If I was a Repub I'd say hey, let;s run some of Rangels' Ads on the Nashville Channel, in Alabama...






   1231. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4260470)
Aren't most voters like your brother, though? They're not following the issues and the position shifts as closely as people on BBTF are.


Or the polls...

Or they follow the Polls like this:

"I heard that Romney was winning" (meaning they saw a headline trumpet the latest PEW poll, but they really have no knowledge other than that headline))

"I heard that Obama was winning"(meaning they saw a headline trumpet the PEW poll from a week or so ago, but they really have no knowledge other than that headline))

"Polls are useless, according to the Polls McCain was winning (meaning they really pay no attention to polls, but have a vague recollection of once hearing that McCain was beating Obama in 2008, or maybe it was Kerry over Bush in 2004, whatever...)
   1232. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4260477)

Charlie Fuqua, the Republican candidate for the Arkansas House of Representatives who called for expelling Muslims from the United States in his book, also wrote in support for instituting the death penalty for "rebellious children."

In "God's Law," Fuqua's 2012 book, the candidate wrote that while parents love their children, a process could be set up to allow for the institution of the death penalty for "rebellious children," according to the Arkansas Times. Fuqua, who is anti-abortion, points out that the course of action involved in sentencing a child to death is described in the Bible and would involve judicial approval. While it is unlikely that many parents would seek to have their children killed by the government, Fuqua wrote, such power would serve as a way to stop rebellious children.

According to the Arkansas Times, Fuqua wrote:

The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:
This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children. I cannot think of one instance in the Scripture where parents had their child put to death. Why is this so? Other than the love Christ has for us, there is no greater love then [sic] that of a parent for their child. The last people who would want to see a child put to death would be the parents of the child. Even so, the Scrpture [sic] provides a safe guard to protect children from parents who would wrongly exercise the death penalty against them. Parents are required to bring their children to the gate of the city. The gate of the city was the place where the elders of the city met and made judicial pronouncements. In other words, the parents were required to take their children to a court of law and lay out their case before the proper judicial authority, and let the judicial authority determine if the child should be put to death. I know of many cases of rebellious children, however, I cannot think of one case where I believe that a parent had given up on their child to the point that they would have taken their child to a court of law and asked the court to rule that the child be put to death. Even though this procedure would rarely be used, if it were the law of land, it would give parents authority. Children would know that their parents had authority and it would be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.



I imagine it would look a little something like this!
   1233. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4260478)
The non-tracking national and state polls look bad for Bam right now. The major tracking polls seem to have picked up a stabilization of the race and some recent O gains. My gut feeling is that the traditional polls are lagging the tracking polls slightly, and that next few days will show the Romney bounce receding. But we won't know for a few days.

Suffice it to say, Romney is polling extremely well in the non-tracking polls right now.
   1234. rr Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:28 PM (#4260480)
I had not heard of Stacey Dash before today.


She was in Clueless back in the 90s with Alicia Silverstone, and I am sure that was and will be fodder for a lot of bad jokes. She also did a Playboy spread a few years back.
   1235. BDC Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:30 PM (#4260483)
support for instituting the death penalty for "rebellious children."

This guy probably read his kids Goldilocks while pointing out that the bears had every right to eat her.
   1236. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:32 PM (#4260487)
The non-tracking national and state polls look bad for Bam right now. The major tracking polls seem to have picked up a stabilization of the race and some recent O gains. My gut feeling is that the traditional polls are lagging the tracking polls slightly, and that next few days will show the Romney bounce receding. But we won't know for a few days.

Suffice it to say, Romney is polling extremely well in the non-tracking polls right now.


Which is why Silver is cautioning people to wait until all the polls reflect the full effect of last week's events, both the debate and the jobs report. He weighs the new Pew poll more than any other single poll, but it still remains but one poll among many.
   1237. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:38 PM (#4260490)
He has an odd habit of objecting to accurate descriptions of his written positions.


I don't object to accurate descriptions, your descriptions on the other hand ...
   1238. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:39 PM (#4260493)
The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:


Execution seems a little harsh. Why not just sell them into slavery? The kids stay alive, the parents make a little extra scratch. Win-win.
   1239. Greg K Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:43 PM (#4260497)
She was in Clueless back in the 90s with Alicia Silverstone, and I am sure that was and will be fodder for a lot of bad jokes. She also did a Playboy spread a few years back.

Until I saw the Gwyneth Paltrow version I literally had no idea Clueless was an adaptation of Emma. Though the fact that she ends up with SPOILER ALERT! her step-brother should have clued the viewer in that it was adapted from an era with slightly different cultural norms.

I don't actually recall much about the movie, except to think that Paul Rudd had been around for quite a while before turning into the cash chow he is now. One of my favourite movies from high school was The Size of Watermelons starring Rudd and Donal Logue. There isn't even a wiki page for it...has anyone else seen that movie? Is it worth a re-visit or is it just a nostalgia-induced delusion?

EDIT: Speaking of adaptations and Paul Rudd...I thought "Road Trip", the modern day re-imagining of Rudd's classic "Overnight Delivery", was a great example of how putting a story in a new historical context can really bring out previously unexplored themes.
   1240. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4260500)
Romney up 48-47 in Ohio — in a survey with a Dem+9 advantage.
   1241. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:48 PM (#4260503)
Yet another sign of demographic changes in the US, courtesy of Pew:
The number of Americans who say they have no religious affiliation has hit an all-time high — about one in five American adults — according to a new study released Tuesday (Oct. 9) by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.


With some pretty significant implications, too. The study shows that “nones” lean heavily Democratic — 75 percent voted for Barack Obama in 2008, about the same percentage of evangelical Christians who voted for John McCain.


“The change is occurring among both men and women, those with college educations and those without, within several income levels and in all regions of the U.S.,” said Cary Funk, another of the study’s lead researchers. “The growth does tend to be concentrated among whites, with no significant change with blacks and Hispanics. “


But read the whole thing.
   1242. spycake Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:51 PM (#4260507)
Joe, what's the point of citing a poll with a Dem+9 advantage? Do you really believe that the electorate is going to be more Dem than in 2008?
   1243. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:54 PM (#4260509)
I literally had no idea Clueless was an adaptation of Emma.


Austen and Shakespeare are truly great writers. The universality of what they wrote about means adaptations of their work are meaningful even today. There are bits that stick out from time to time, but overall it is striking how well they do transport across time.
   1244. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 12:55 PM (#4260510)
Joe, what's the point of citing a poll with a Dem+9 advantage? Do you really believe that the electorate is going to be more Dem than in 2008?

I certainly don't, which is why that poll is doubly good news for Romney.
   1245. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:00 PM (#4260518)
The number of Americans who say they have no religious affiliation has hit an all-time high — about one in five American adults — according to a new study released Tuesday (Oct. 9) by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.


Yet another sign of how ###### this country is.

I just hope I'm dead, and doing my 300,000 years in purgatory before we get to the 3rd c. Rome phase. Unfortunately, the full blown Caligula phase is pretty much here already.
   1246. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4260523)
hey snapper, long time.

I don't agree with you (and in general think US/Rome analogies are way over done), but it is good to see you still reading, if not posting as much.

Edit: And if I missed a bunch of posts by you, sorry. I generally read the text of a post first and then the poster (not sure why, but it is a firm habit now), and I sometimes don't look at who the poster is.
   1247. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:05 PM (#4260524)
Yet another sign of how ###### this country is.


Cheer up, Snapper, at least you've got Charlie Fuqua on your side:

"There is a strange alliance between the liberal left and the Muslim religion. It may be that since both are the enemies of Christianity, that they both believe that, my enemy's enemy is my friend," Fuqua writes. "However there are several similarities between the two. Both are antichrist in that they both deny that Jesus is God in the flesh of man, and the savior of mankind. They both also hold that their cause should take over the entire world through violent, bloody, revolution."
   1248. Swedish Chef Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:06 PM (#4260526)
I just hope I'm dead, and doing my 300,000 years in purgatory before we get to the 3rd c. Rome phase. Unfortunately, the full blown Caligula phase is pretty much here already.

This has vibes of Phil K Dick's personal theology (as related in Valis).
   1249. DA Baracus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:09 PM (#4260527)
American Research Group? Pollster fight!

Silver has a history with Bennett:

Dick Bennett, the pollster for ARG, responded by posting items on his Website such as “Nate Silver is Wrong Again,” and mocking FiveThirtyEight’s slogan (“Electoral Projections Done Right”) in a tone that echoed current political attack ads. (“So much for electoral projections done right.”) Then, in June, Silver posted an open letter to Bennett, which read, “It has been a long and hard-fought primary campaign. We’ve both had our share of successes, and made our share of mistakes. Granted, you made a few more than I did”—and in that last sentence, every word but “Granted” was a separate link to an ARG polling misfire. Then Silver challenged Bennett to a contest, in which each site would call the elections results, state-by-state, with a $1,000 bounty per state. Bennett never took him up on it, and this is what he has to say about Silver now: “What he does is different than what I do. There’s a market for that. There’s also a lady down the street who will read your palm.”


American Research Group was also "effectively 'banned'" from RCP for a while.

(Edited for tone.)
   1250. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:09 PM (#4260529)
Gallup's daily update seems to be wackier than usual. They have President Obama's approval rating improving to 53/42, but Obama's lead among registered voters falling to 49-46, and then Obama loses 5 points through their Likely Voter screen, so he ends up losing to Romney 49-47. That seems like a lot of people saying either, "Yeah, I think Obama's doing a good job, but I'm going to vote for Romney" or "Yeah, I think Obama's doing a good job, but I think I'll probably just stay home on Election Day".
   1251. DA Baracus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:10 PM (#4260530)
Yet another sign of how ###### this country is.


You misspelled "awesome."
   1252. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:12 PM (#4260535)
hey snapper, long time.

I don't agree with you (and in general think US/Rome analogies are way over done), but it is good to see you still reading, if not posting as much.


I've been posting on and of in this thread. Thanks for the sentiment anyway.

But, seriously, we should be very, very afraid of the disintegration of social institutions in this country.

We're half-way to the destruction of the nuclear family, the work ethic (more specifically the shame of an able bodied man not working) is eroding rapidly, and mainline Protestantism has collapsed.

A free society can't survive on wealth and individual autonomy alone. We'll either fall prey to a domestic demagogue, and lose our freedom, or we'll be conquered by another civilization.
   1253. Chicago Joe Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:14 PM (#4260538)
I assume that's NTR Joe Kehoskie.
   1254. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:14 PM (#4260539)
Funny. As an Atheist and Liberal ...

alliance between the liberal left and the Muslim religion - well it is called Islam, and I am more than willing to ally with many who follow Islam. Some really great people there.

enemies of Christianity - not me. Christianity is OK by me, I just don't believe.

deny that Jesus is God in the flesh of man, and the savior of mankind - got me here.

their cause should take over the entire world through violent, bloody, revolution - ummm no. Take over through peace and love, following the teachings of Gandhi and/or MLK, then sure I guess. Or we can all just believe what we want and let others do the same.
   1255. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:19 PM (#4260546)
You misspelled "awesome."

You really don't understand. Even if you hate religion personally, you are a huge beneficiary of the beneficial effects on society. Our free society is a direct descendent of Christianity, whether you like it or not.

Look at Europe to see what happens when a society loses its faith. People stop bothering to reproduce themselves.

If the trends don't reverse, in 100 years, there won't be something recognizable as a European Civilization in Europe. If the same trends continue to happen here, there won't be an America either.

Don't be foolish enough to think you can lose Western civilization, and keep Western liberty. Won't happen.
   1256. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:22 PM (#4260549)
Take over through peace and love, following the teachings of Gandhi and/or MLK, then sure I guess. Or we can all just believe what we want and let others do the same.

This is where your logic breaks down. What do you do when the other side doesn't believe in letting you have your own opinions on faith? You either fight, or you succumb.

Gandhi and MLK would be dead in 30 sec. if facing a Stalin, or Mao, or Wahhabist. Their ability to succeed was 100% a creature of working a civilized. Western, Christian milieu.
   1257. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:26 PM (#4260555)
Romney up 48-47 in Ohio — in a survey with a Dem+9 advantage.

That same ARG poll also had Romney up by 3 points a month ago, after Obama's convention bump.
   1258. Tilden Katz Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:32 PM (#4260559)
Our free society is a direct descendent of Christianity, whether you like it or not.


Except, you know, the freedom to marry who you want and have ownership over your own reproductive system.
   1259. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:36 PM (#4260560)
But, seriously, we should be very, very afraid of the disintegration of social institutions in this country.


Societies and social institutions change. Change does not necessarily mean disintegrate though. The family is not disintegrating, but it is definitely changing. But gay marriage is small potatoes compared to allowing divorce, and that change left the barn a long time ago. I am not convinced about work ethic eroding (it might be I guess), and it could be really bad for a society, but I am not sure it has to be. Mainline Protestantism, I guess I don't follow enough to know if it is disintegrating, but I would argue they need to look in the mirror if what they are selling is not being bought.

A free society can't survive on wealth and individual autonomy alone. We'll either fall prey to a domestic demagogue, and lose our freedom, or we'll be conquered by another civilization.


I agree, but there is more to social institutions than organized religion. In any event I don't think organized religion is going away any time soon
   1260. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:40 PM (#4260563)
Unfortunately, the full blown Caligula phase is pretty much here already.

This seems a rather inaccurately shrill example. Not that that's a surprise from you on this topic, but it still merits pointing out.
   1261. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:40 PM (#4260564)
This is where your logic breaks down. What do you do when the other side doesn't believe in letting you have your own opinions on faith? You either fight, or you succumb.


The interesting part of this is the phrase "the other side". Who is the other side here? I am not seeing the immediate threat from the other that you are.
   1262. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:42 PM (#4260565)
The family is not disintegrating, but it is definitely changing.

You live in the suburbs, huh?
   1263. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:48 PM (#4260570)
Except, you know, the freedom to marry who you want and have ownership over your own reproductive system.

The idea that you would be free to have a different opinion on those issues from the societal tradition is most certainly a Christian idea. Freedom of conscience is a 100% Christian idea.

Societies and social institutions change. Change does not necessarily mean disintegrate though. The family is not disintegrating, but it is definitely changing. But gay marriage is small potatoes compared to allowing divorce, and that change left the barn a long time ago. I am not convinced about work ethic eroding (it might be I guess), and it could be really bad for a society, but I am not sure it has to be. Mainline Protestantism, I guess I don't follow enough to know if it is disintegrating, but I would argue they need to look in the mirror if what they are selling is not being bought.

I wasn't talking about gay "marriage", that's a symptom not the real disease.

The real issue vis-a-vis the family is we are approaching 50% of children born to single mothers. Divorce is actually down. The issue is people never getting married in the first place, especially among the working class.

As for work, 50 years ago a man who "dropped out of the labor force" and took gov't benefits would be deeply ashamed. His friends would ridicule him, and no woman would give him the time of day, if he were single.

Today women seem happy to fornicate and reproduce with men who have no jobs, no prospects, and no plans on changing. Hell, the women even support them.

Mainline Protestantism abandoned basic Christian teaching, and followed the Liberal party line (pro-abortion, pro-divorce, pro-homosexuality); there's no mystery why it failed. We're still left with all those congregants who have lost their religious attachment.
   1264. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:48 PM (#4260571)
Unfortunately, the full blown Caligula phase is pretty much here already.

This seems a rather inaccurately shrill example. Not that that's a surprise from you on this topic, but it still merits pointing out.


True. I think that griping about US/Rome not being a good match only works if you expect history to EXACTLY repeat itself. Big picture, I think it is pretty close but that we're well back in Republic days, lurching our way happily toward empire. We'll get there, to be sure. Another analogy might be that we're just about where the Brits were around 1760.

But there will never be exact parallels. History is a guide, not a script.



As to the decline of social institutions, I broadly agree that we don't want them to disintegrate. But they have to adapt as well. Which I think they will. They'll resond to fewer folks coming out in such a way as to protect the brand but become more attractive. Divorce has already been mentioned - people wanted it and churches went along with it. You can already find churches popping up to serve the gay community and my guess is more will follow.
   1265. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:48 PM (#4260572)
I can't see how work ethic is eroding.
   1266. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:52 PM (#4260578)

The interesting part of this is the phrase "the other side". Who is the other side here? I am not seeing the immediate threat from the other that you are.


Anyone who is anti-liberty. It could end up being a fascist/nationalist movement, could be real socialists (e.g. Chavez types), could be militant Islam, could be the Chinese socialist/facist system.

The point is that Liberty is the exception in world history, not the default. And, without supporting societal institutions. Liberty can't survive.

This seems a rather inaccurately shrill example.

Really? Is there anything Caligula was accused of doing that's considered shocking and immoral in Liberal cosmopolitan circles today?
   1267. JL Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:56 PM (#4260584)
The idea that you would be free to have a different opinion on those issues from the societal tradition is most certainly a Christian idea. Freedom of conscience is a 100% Christian idea.


How so? Are you saying that no other religions came upon this on their own?

Mainline Protestantism abandoned basic Christian teaching, and followed the Liberal party line (pro-abortion, pro-divorce, pro-homosexuality); there's no mystery why it failed. We're still left with all those congregants who have lost their religious attachment.


Not sure what you mean by failure. There are many mainline Protestant churchs doing great things in the US and the world. To characterize them as you do is no more insulting than some of the characterizations of the Roman Catholic Church that you take offense at.
   1268. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:57 PM (#4260585)
Our free society is a direct descendent of Christianity, whether you like it or not.


It is interesting to think about how our free society came about. Of course the first step would be to define what we meant by the terms - they are deceptively simple.

For a long time developmental economists thought that capitalism was really only truly compatible with Protestantism. Since Clearly Catholic and non-Christian countries had economies that lagged behind the "good Protestant" countries’ economies (Like England and Germany). These theories were then altered to include Asian countries (Japan and later others). Needless to say you need to be careful about correlation versus causation when doing this sort of analysis - and I would say the same is true for our free society analysis.

In my rodent mind the single most important event (series of events) that led to Western Society being what it is (economically and socially) was the Black Death. I suspect it was necessary (but not sufficient) to end up where we are to have something like that happen.

Next up, someone (hi Joe) claims I am pro-Bubonic Plague and think what we need now is another Black Death pandemic.

   1269. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:58 PM (#4260588)
Is there anything Caligula was accused of doing that's considered shocking and immoral in Liberal cosmopolitan circles today?


Wikipedia talks quite a bit about Caligula killing people (to seize their land, Senators he thought were traitors). Assuming you mean "Liberal cosmpolitan circles" in the United States (and Europe), I'm pretty sure they're very strongly anti-killing people (anti-war, anti-capital punishment).
   1270. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2012 at 01:58 PM (#4260589)
Today women seem happy to fornicate and reproduce with men who have no jobs, no prospects, and no plans on changing. Hell, the women even support them.

Your clear allocation of blame is awesome, as usual.

As far as people not giving twoshits if they are unemployed, talk to some of them. Your population of welfare queens is always zombie-esque in their numbers.
   1271. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:01 PM (#4260591)
Your clear allocation of blame is awesome, as usual.

Show me 10 single mothers, and I'll show you at least 7 women who made really bad choices about the men with whom they reproduced.
   1272. Tilden Katz Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:01 PM (#4260592)
Anyone who is anti-liberty. It could end up being a fascist/nationalist movement, could be real socialists (e.g. Chavez types), could be militant Islam, could be the Chinese socialist/facist system.


Are people like Charlie Fuqua anti-liberty? Because they have a hell of a lot more influence in this country than any of the groups you mentioned.

Is there anything Caligula was accused of doing that's considered shocking and immoral in Liberal cosmopolitan circles today?


Murdering people for pleasure? Feeding prisoners to animals? Incest? Making his horse a senator?
   1273. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:02 PM (#4260593)
Freedom of conscience is a 100% Christian idea.

Tell it to the Spanish during the Inquisition. Or anyone of a number of papal states. Or a Brit during the reign of any of Henry V's kids.


Liberty is something that people like to have but not like to give. Occasionally a group of people will get together and agree to let everyone be free for awhile. As you say, most governments don't foster liberty but that is almost as true of Christian socieities as it is any other. Yes, the most free nations ever have been Christian but I tend to think they got there first, not that it is innate to Christian society. In any case, I don't find most of the churches I grew up around to really be yelling loud about liberty today; quite the opposite in fact.
   1274. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:03 PM (#4260595)
Not sure what you mean by failure. There are many mainline Protestant churchs doing great things in the US and the world. To characterize them as you do is no more insulting than some of the characterizations of the Roman Catholic Church that you take offense at.

They've lost membership at an alarming rate. That's what I meant by failure. Not meant as a judgement on individual members, most of whom I'm sure are lovely people, who try to do good as they see it.

Your clear allocation of blame is awesome, as usual.

Are we going to pretend that women don't control access to sex now?
   1275. Famous Original Joe C Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:06 PM (#4260600)

The idea that you would be free to have a different opinion on those issues from the societal tradition is most certainly a Christian idea. Freedom of conscience is a 100% Christian idea.

Paging MCoA. MCoA, requesting back up.

I agree, but there is more to social institutions than organized religion. In any event I don't think organized religion is going away any time soon


QFT.

   1276. McCoy Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:07 PM (#4260601)
Show me 10 single mothers, and I'll show you at least 7 women who made really bad choices about the men with whom they reproduced.

Hell, show me 10 married mothers, and I'll show you at least 7 couples who made really bad choices about with whom they reproduced with.
   1277. Famous Original Joe C Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:09 PM (#4260603)
Are we going to pretend that women don't control access to sex now?


What is this even supposed to mean?

I just hope I'm dead, and doing my 300,000 years in purgatory


Do you *literally* believe this, or was it just a turn of phrase?
   1278. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:11 PM (#4260608)
Are people like Charlie Fuqua anti-liberty? Because they have a hell of a lot more influence in this country than any of the groups you mentioned.

Not familiar with his position.

Tell it to the Spanish during the Inquisition. Or anyone of a number of papal states. Or a Brit during the reign of any of Henry V's kids.

Why do you exclude the Protestants? They were just as happy to kill heretics?

I'm not pretending the idea of religious liberty always existed in the Christian world, I'm just saying that's where it arose.

In my rodent mind the single most important event (series of events) that led to Western Society being what it is (economically and socially) was the Black Death. I suspect it was necessary (but not sufficient) to end up where we are to have something like that happen.

I don't think so. Europe in the High Middle Ages (1000-1300) was doing exceedingly well. Rapid growth, rising power; hence they were able to launch the Crusades. And their wasn't a very harsh religious discipline. Everyone was Catholic, so being lax wasn't a huge threat. Most conflict were Church vs. State, not amongst Christian factions (with the exception of the wacko Albigensians). The main religious movements of this era was the Franciscans, and Dominicans, who focused on individual piety.

It really was only the rise of Protestantism that gave the militant edge to Christianity (both Catholic and Protestant). Now you had Church/State vs. other Church/State conflict, and deviation from the party line became much less tolerated.
   1279. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4260609)
Romney now leading by 0.4 points at RCP, with leads in Florida, North Carolina, Colorado, and Missouri. Obama holding at +0.3 in Virginia and +1.7 (but dropping) in Ohio.

Gallup has switched to likely voters, which was a big hit for Obama. He went from being up 5 a couple days ago to being down 2 today.
   1280. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4260610)
You really don't understand. Even if you hate religion personally, you are a huge beneficiary of the beneficial effects on society. Our free society is a direct descendant of Christianity, whether you like it or not.

Don't be foolish enough to think you can lose Western civilization, and keep Western liberty. Won't happen.


Our free society is direct descendant of the enlightenment - the enemy of which was, well YOU (and by you I don't mean you personally, though you are included) it was by fighting AGAINST the church not through the church that Western-style liberty was achieved

claiming the converse, which is what you are doing is so wrongheaded as to be perverse.
   1281. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4260611)
Are we going to pretend that women don't control access to sex now?


What is this even supposed to mean?

Probably something to do with the old cliche that "The best birth control device is the Bible that I press between my knees whenever a man wants to have sex. It never fails."
   1282. Tilden Katz Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:14 PM (#4260612)
Not familiar with his position.


Charlie Fuqua, the Republican candidate for the Arkansas House of Representatives who called for expelling Muslims from the United States in his book, also wrote in support for instituting the death penalty for "rebellious children."

In "God's Law," Fuqua's 2012 book, the candidate wrote that while parents love their children, a process could be set up to allow for the institution of the death penalty for "rebellious children," according to the Arkansas Times. Fuqua, who is anti-abortion, points out that the course of action involved in sentencing a child to death is described in the Bible and would involve judicial approval. While it is unlikely that many parents would seek to have their children killed by the government, Fuqua wrote, such power would serve as a way to stop rebellious children.

According to the Arkansas Times, Fuqua wrote:


The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:
This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children. I cannot think of one instance in the Scripture where parents had their child put to death. Why is this so? Other than the love Christ has for us, there is no greater love then [sic] that of a parent for their child. The last people who would want to see a child put to death would be the parents of the child. Even so, the Scrpture [sic] provides a safe guard to protect children from parents who would wrongly exercise the death penalty against them. Parents are required to bring their children to the gate of the city. The gate of the city was the place where the elders of the city met and made judicial pronouncements. In other words, the parents were required to take their children to a court of law and lay out their case before the proper judicial authority, and let the judicial authority determine if the child should be put to death. I know of many cases of rebellious children, however, I cannot think of one case where I believe that a parent had given up on their child to the point that they would have taken their child to a court of law and asked the court to rule that the child be put to death. Even though this procedure would rarely be used, if it were the law of land, it would give parents authority. Children would know that their parents had authority and it would be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.

   1283. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4260613)
Are we going to pretend that women don't control access to sex now?

What is this even supposed to mean?


It means that single men are usually willing to have sex with a lot of women. At least, a woman can almost always find someone willing to have sex with them. Women are (or should be) much more choosy, since sex has potentially much higher cost to women than men. Especially men with no wages to garnishee for child supporttttt.
   1284. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:16 PM (#4260614)
What is this even supposed to mean?


It's always the slut's fault.

Seriously, I sometimes think that Snapper is a strawman conjured up by some anti-Catholic zealot.

   1285. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:18 PM (#4260616)
Our free society is direct descendant of the enlightenment - the enemy of which was, well YOU (and by you I don't mean you personally, though you are included) it was by fighting AGAINST the church not through the church that Western-style liberty was achieved

claiming the converse, which is what you are doing is so wrongheaded as to be perverse.


But the idea of individual conscience and liberty of conscience is at heart a Christian idea. Yes, the institutional Church (Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox) often opposed it, but only in a Christian milieu was the Enlightenment possible.
   1286. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:18 PM (#4260617)
In my rodent mind the single most important event (series of events) that led to Western Society being what it is (economically and socially) was the Black Death. I suspect it was necessary (but not sufficient) to end up where we are to have something like that happen.

I don't think so. Europe in the High Middle Ages (1000-1300) was doing exceedingly well. Rapid growth, rising power; hence they were able to launch the Crusades. And their wasn't a very harsh religious discipline. Everyone was Catholic, so being lax wasn't a huge threat. Most conflict were Church vs. State, not amongst Christian factions (with the exception of the wacko Albigensians). The main religious movements of this era was the Franciscans, and Dominicans, who focused on individual piety.


The black death greatly hastened the end of fuedalism.
   1287. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:19 PM (#4260619)
It really was only the rise of Protestantism that gave the militant edge to Christianity (both Catholic and Protestant). Now you had Church/State vs. other Church/State conflict, and deviation from the party line became much less tolerated.


And what gave rise to Protestantism? A corrupt and morally bankrupt catholic church.
   1288. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:20 PM (#4260621)

Probably something to do with the old cliche that "The best birth control device is the Bible that I press between my knees whenever a man wants to have sex. It never fails."


No, it means quite simply, that it is usually the woman who decides if a couple is going to have sex.

Also, it almost always the woman who suffers if she has a child with the wrong man. Therefore, it would behoove women not to have children with men who are uninterested in commitment, and supporting their children.



   1289. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:22 PM (#4260622)
Romney now leading by 0.4 points at RCP


it's 0.7 now

Of the 4 most recent polls the most favorable one to Obama is Ras...
Gallup has switched to likely voters, which was a big hit for Obama. He went from being up 5 a couple days ago to being down 2 today.



Gallup's likely voter screen was WAAAAAY off in 2010
They had Repubs winning the House by 15 points, Repubs won by 6.8
(in 2008 they overestimated Obama by quite a lot as well)
   1290. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:22 PM (#4260623)
It means that single men are usually willing to have sex with a lot of women. At least, a woman can almost always find someone willing to have sex with them. Women are (or should be) much more choosy, since sex has potentially much higher cost to women than men. Especially men with no wages to garnishee for child supporttttt.


Most of the single mothers I know are single because they left their abusive husbands. So in that case, I guess it is their fault for choosing poorly.
   1291. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:22 PM (#4260624)
True. I think that griping about US/Rome not being a good match only works if you expect history to EXACTLY repeat itself. Big picture, I think it is pretty close but that we're well back in Republic days, lurching our way happily toward empire. We'll get there, to be sure. Another analogy might be that we're just about where the Brits were around 1760.


I strongly disagree. The US is integrated into a global society in a way that Rome never was. Rome was in many ways alone and largely surrounded by barbarians, the US has many partners and is integreated with its barbarians and watching those countries grow and change and improve. The Roman world was largely (not entirely I admit) zero sum, where barbarian king X gained by conquering a province of Rome's (or by making a military alliance with Rome to not be conquered or by holding off the legions). The modern world is distinctly non-zero sum.

A major science or technological breakthrough in ancient China did not really help Rome. A breakthrough in modern China (or Malaysia, Japan, Denmark, ...) helps the whole world. Even the definition of Empire has changed. In some ways the US post WWII is an Empire, but more economic than physical.

The world is qualitatively different now and trying to draw that sort a parallel is (I think) not useful.
   1292. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:23 PM (#4260625)
Seriously, I sometimes think that Snapper is a strawman conjured up by some anti-Catholic zealot.

On the contrary, AFAICT his views reflect much of mainstream conservative Catholic teaching. I only wish that there would be a liberal Catholic or two who would take the time to engage with him on his own terms. There are millions of such Catholics out there, but apparently not enough baseball fans among them.
   1293. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4260626)
And what gave rise to Protestantism? A corrupt and morally bankrupt catholic church.

Correct, that's the same thing that gave rise to the Franciscans and Dominicans, and numerous other Catholic reform movements.

All I'm saying is that if you were interested in the ability to hold non-conforming religious ideas w/o being hassled, you were much better off under the, often corrupt, Catholic Church of the 12th c., than under the much more zealous, and righteous catholic or Protestant Churches of the 16th century.
   1294. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:25 PM (#4260627)
Assuming you mean "Liberal cosmpolitan circles" in the United States (and Europe), I'm pretty sure they're very strongly anti-killing people (anti-war, anti-capital punishment).

Illustrating the difference between "liberal" and "Democrat": Democrats are preparing to vote in their pro-capital-punishment, pro-war candidate for the second time.
If Dems are anti-killing people, they're being very quiet about it. Maybe after the election?
   1295. Greg K Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:26 PM (#4260628)
In my rodent mind the single most important event (series of events) that led to Western Society being what it is (economically and socially) was the Black Death. I suspect it was necessary (but not sufficient) to end up where we are to have something like that happen.

I'd be curious to hear more on this line of thought. Not that I disagree, just that I've always been fascinated by the economic and social legacies of the Black Death. Perhaps this isn't the forum for a lengthy digression into 14th century economic history...but I want one dammit!

Tell it to the Spanish during the Inquisition. Or anyone of a number of papal states. Or a Brit during the reign of any of Henry V's kids.

Why do you exclude the Protestants? They were just as happy to kill heretics?

To be fair, I think he meant Henry VIII's kids, among whom were a couple Protestants.
   1296. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:27 PM (#4260629)
Most of the single mothers I know are single because they left their abusive husbands. So in that case, I guess it is their fault for choosing poorly.

It's either that or that they never should have gotten married in the first place, since their expectations were so completely unrealistic that they were never going to be satisfied. Of course you could say the same thing about most single fathers, but the consequences of their stupidity or unrealistic expectations are seldom quite as long-lasting.
   1297. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:28 PM (#4260631)
It's always the slut's fault.

Seriously, I sometimes think that Snapper is a strawman conjured up by some anti-Catholic zealot.


Don't be an idiot. I've never said that a man bears any less blame than a woman for fornication. The moral blame is equal. In fact, the man probably bears more moral blame, on average, b/c they are usually the ones who fail to raise/support the children.

The issue is that women (and their children) suffer 99% of the real-world negative consequences of single-parenting. Therefore, they're the ones that need to make good choices in the men they pair up with.
   1298. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:28 PM (#4260632)
I'd be curious to hear more on this line of thought. Not that I disagree, just that I've always been fascinated by the economic and social legacies of the Black Death. Perhaps this isn't the forum for a lengthy digression into 14th century economic history...but I want one dammit!


Time for OT: History!
   1299. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:28 PM (#4260633)
What's really funny is that Romney's unskewed lead has dwindled to 2.5

Why is that funny?

1: the unskewed guy predicted himself that his average and the real polls would start to converge
2: the unskewed guy said his average and the real polls would start to converge because pollsters would start unskewing their polls as the election neared- so they don't get "caught"
3; He's obviously forcing his average towards the center- thereby fulfilling his own prediction- but he'd doing it at a time right after the Debate that everyone agrees Romney won - so during a week where everyone else has Romney surging, he has Romney losing some 5 points

So the conclusion is that in unskewed guy's world, Obama won the debate and has a 5 point debate bounce.

   1300. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: October 09, 2012 at 02:30 PM (#4260634)
I just hope I'm dead, and doing my 300,000 years in purgatory

Do you *literally* believe this, or was it just a turn of phrase?


What do you mean? I literally believe that when I die I will be judged by God, and sent to Heaven, Hell or Purgatory. I also know I'm not that good a person, and haven't led that good a life, so, a long stay in purgatory is probably my best hope.
Page 13 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSending Gordon | Joe Blogs
(27 - 4:51pm, Oct 31)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(4894 - 4:50pm, Oct 31)
Last: Ron J2

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(656 - 4:49pm, Oct 31)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogMLB.com - In pursuit of Maddon, Cubs dismiss Renteria
(12 - 4:46pm, Oct 31)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogAP: Sandoval, Shields Among 121 Free Agents
(13 - 4:42pm, Oct 31)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogFull Count » Red Sox sign Koji Uehara to 2-year contract
(34 - 4:42pm, Oct 31)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogBoston.com: Youk Retires
(13 - 4:39pm, Oct 31)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogFree Agency Contract Calculator - Beyond the Box Score
(1 - 4:38pm, Oct 31)
Last: fra paolo

NewsblogJoe Maddon is to become Cubs manager, sources say
(138 - 4:22pm, Oct 31)
Last: Bunny Vincennes

NewsblogRelix: Watch the Exact Moment the Phish Crowd Found Out the Giants Won the World Series
(1 - 4:17pm, Oct 31)
Last: vortex of dissipation

Newsblog2014-2015 MLB free agent power ranking
(2 - 4:16pm, Oct 31)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogDeadline: World Series Ratings: Game 7 Scores Home Run For Fox
(33 - 4:11pm, Oct 31)
Last: BDC

NewsblogGabe Kapler to the LA Dodgers Front Office? Misadventures in Twitter Direct Messages
(1 - 4:03pm, Oct 31)
Last: asinwreck

NewsblogStatcast: Gordon stops 90 feet from tying Game 7
(17 - 4:02pm, Oct 31)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogAFL Saguaros at Rafters
(3 - 3:30pm, Oct 31)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

Page rendered in 1.1555 seconds
52 querie(s) executed