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 0.6665 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.
Yes.
Yes, it is totally the Left that does not care about Mexicans (dead or otherwise). Or your whole story is suspect and the chain of causaility you have build it weak and we reject your premise and conclusion. Whichever.
The market reminds me of a disease-infested crack whore prostitute that runs around moaning 'gimme some rock... just gimme a little rock... I'll make you happy, baby..."
Oh, except well-dressed.
Because when dealing with diplomacy, with other nations and other cultures in a very public setting, the most important thing is to be brutally honest and straightforward. And if you aren't, if you try to accomodate their view or otherwise engage in ... well diplomacy you are in fact histories greatest monster and we should evaluate everything in light of what you said publically to those other nations.
Good thinking.
Just like a Liberal, to take credit for everyone elses hard work of posting. And Mike Crudale.
Yeah, it's much better to stand up and lie, thus insulting everyone's intelligence and requiring a subsequent mea culpa by you and your secretary of state.
Obama knew Benghazi wasn't triggered by the YouTube video and the people in Libya knew it wasn't triggered by the YouTube video, so Obama's U.N. speech was only brilliant in the minds of Obama Delusionists.
That can be said about any job, and the alpha in any job always thinks, to a lesser or greater degree, that he can transcend the taboos--especially when everyone else is doing the same. Moreover, screwing women isn't incompatible with any job. Looking at it this way is like blaming Dawkins and the New Atheists for calling out the religious ######## and the moderate apologists. One's right and one's not. Reverting to some protocol involving courtesy, custom and deference just lets those who are wrong stack the deck.
Clearly. The Left doesn't care about Mexicans at all, except of course for when they're sneakily luring them over the border to apply for Social Security, have babies and vote perpetually Democratic.
The disadvantage of having a workaholic do anything is that they love working so much that time isn't a limiter for them and they may be less focused on finishing their particular project. Whereas someone who wants to get home to the family is more likely to cut to the chase and focus on the goal so they can be done.
According to Karl Rove, no presidential candidate has ever been at or over 50 in the Gallup LV in mid-October and lost. (Admittedly, Gallup has had a strange polling year, but it's an interesting piece of trivia nonetheless.)
That's almost entirely true, and it almost entirely misses the point. Who was wrong here to begin with? Clinton in doing what he did, or those guys in making of it what they did? You choose.
If it wouldn't have been this, it would have been something else, because that was the nature of the opposition--and it still is. Saying ou have to meet its standards, which aren't stgandards but expediencies, is Playing into their hands. It's allowing them to be tghe house in a game of roulette.
October 18, 2012: The date on which Sam Hutcheson finally posted some truth in an OT: Politics thread.
Curly Howard: "But look at the ducks!"
Agreed, 100%.
Joe you are new to this whole diplomacy thing, right?
Diplomacy is very often lies, even lies when everyone in the room knows you are lying. It means saying something (like some crappy film) has most significance than it really does because your audience has concerns (interest, what have you) in said crappy film. Many of the people in the Muslim world were and are concerned about the film, so when talking to the UN you talk about the film way more than it deserves. Even if you have to lie. because this is diplomacy it is not your high school paper on the incident.
Of course if Obama had used lies, you know blew them way out of proportion (100x what he did) and used them as a pretext for war then it would have been awesome according to you. Using harmless dissembling in the service of some aim other than war - near impeachible offense.
Romney also leads on the RCP Electoral College Map 206 - 201 (NC went from toss-up to R). Might be the first time that has happened.
Yeah, lying about the deaths of four Americans and tossing the First Amendment into the shredder = totally harmless.
It can't be both to differing degrees? Clinton had a mild transgression after which he made some mistakes in handling it. The opposition (which as you said was determind to find something) then went nuts in a really pathetic showing.
I am not saying you have to meet anyone's standards, merely relaying what happened. No one is perfect, and those imperfections have impact. I am not saying the morals of the Washington elite, the opposition, or the public at large are correct, simply they do influence the shape of events in politics.
That's what you're going with huh? OK, I'll bite. In what way was he doing that? How was the First Amendment impacted at all by Obama speaking to the UN about some crappy movie on YouTube?
And lies about four deaths. Yes talking about said crappy movie on YouTube really dishonored their memory (or something). If only he had evidence about "yellow cake" it would all be OK.
Seriously dude, you need to find something else to get worked up about. This one is not working out for you (IMO).
Obama lied, people died!
Obama did X. Thus X is treasonous and evil. Welcome to the world of Joey K.
Actually, it does dishonor their memory to claim they died because of a YouTube video and not because the State Dept. had them working in a war-zone consulate that was protected only by four locals "armed" with batons and handcuffs.
Frankly, I believe it's absurd to blame Obama for the security of a consulate, but he threw that good will out the window when he spent weeks blaming the YouTube video instead of just admitting what everyone else knew to be true on Day 1 or Day 2. The State Dept.'s security service watched the attack in real time via video link. They knew there was no YouTube protest in Benghazi, and yet the administration lied about it for weeks, including sending Susan Rice on her now-infamous tour of the Sunday shows.
Wait, that's the reason it dishonors them?
Man, George Bush really dishonored a lot of people on 9/11/01.
And the right place to have a discussion of Embassy security* and the cause of the deaths is in front of the UN? That's silly. The UN is for discussing issues of interest to the nations there, not an airing of exactly what happened.
And what about that 1st being tossed into the shredder? What part of the 1st did he "shred"?
* Don't forget the Obama administration asking for more money for security and being told to fly a kite by House Republicans.
The imaginary part where the President is not allowed to say anything that disparages a YouTube clip.
Please.
Being offended on other people's behalf is the Bay Area's chief export; please leave this kind of thing to the specialists.
This is embarrassing. When a budget gets cut, you reallocate resources to the highest priorities. Obama found money in the consular budget to give the French consulate full military protection, and it found money to send a fleet of Chevy Volts to consulates throughout Europe. The idea that Obama & Co. desperately wanted to secure the Benghazi consulate but just couldn't scrape together enough money to pay for a few more guards and a few guns is just silly. It's embarrassing for people to even make such a claim.
He seemed, in the 60 seconds I was watching him, like a very nice, ordinary guy; he got out of the chopper, stretched his arms out like to say "what a beautiful day", took his jacket off and tossed it over his shoulder, said hi to the secret service guy, turned into the sun and stretched his arms again, then an aid sort of tapped him on the shoulder and he turned and walked over to his limo.
No answer Joe? Was it just a throw away line? If so I'll move along, but I have heard similar things in the past and I am really interested in how anyone could think or say such an obviously incorrect thing with any kind of seriousness.
And if they had had more money they could have maybe saved four lives. But the House Republicans hate government hate spending money, which is their right, but there are consequences. You are right, that is kind of embarrassing, and sad.
You are correct that when things get cut you have to adjust but that doesn't mean that cracks don't appear. In case you've never actually worked on a budget before they don't simply hand you a check and say do with it what you want for the rest of the year.
You might want to breathe into a paper bag or something. It seems like you're getting a little worked up.
Obama tossed the First Amendment in the shredder when he "asked" -- wink, wink -- Google to "review" the video.
This is pathetic. I'm embarrassed for you right now.
The idea that Chevy Volts for the consulate in Vienna was a higher-priority expenditure of scarce budgetary dollars than providing armed guards to a consulate in a war zone is so dumb that I didn't think even a liberal would try to make it. But, alas, I was wrong.
Except for the part where nothing in the first amendment has anything to do with what President Obama did. What law did Obama/Congress pass? What law did they break? How did this shred anything?
The whole Chevy Volt canard very much sounds like an anti-welfare queen screed - "and then she used food stamps to pay for ice cream. Must be nice to get free ice cream." The whole thing is an obvious attempt to gin up outrage, the fact that hybrid cars are used in this is a very nice touch by the way, kind of ties in with blackening the "green" movement and everything.
Pretty simple though. Obama wanted more money for security. Was told no. Security failed. The same people that said no to more money blame it entirely on the guy who wanted more money for security. Everything else is just trying to misdirect attention. And no I am not saying it would not have happened if the money had been forthcoming - that is not knowable. But we do know what did happen without it.
I'm not going to keep going in circles here, because your position is too dumb to take seriously.
I don't know how things operate in the Bitter Mouse household, but out here in the real world, people are forced to prioritize the use of scarce resources. Unfortunately for Amb. Stevens & Co., the Obama State Dept. thought buying Chevy Volts for the European consulates was a higher priority than providing basic security for our Benghazi consulate. Anyone with some basic common sense would disagree with this perversion of basic priorities, but common sense seems to be in short supply these days, especially when government is involved.
But anyway, don't worry: As Obama has said, Benghazi was just a "bump in the road" — a bump those new Chevy Volts presumably can drive right over.
So it is pretty obvious you've never actually worked on putting together a budget or had to operate under one. The decision wasn't more armed guards in Libya or Chevy Volts for Europe. That isn't how budgets work.
And in Joe K world there are only two places to spend money. Hybrid Cars (Scary Green Technology!) or security for the only consulate in the entire world - Benghazi. There were no other choices, no other options, no other consulates. There is no evaluation of the relative importance of our embassies in Europe (Pretty important as it turns out) versus spreading that (very small amount) of money across all the consultates in the world. Or does it happen that benghazi is the only consulate in the world needing more security? Would the more-evil-than-Satan hybrid cars have paid for every consulate to have its security to be upgraded? Was that money even enough to pay for one consulate to be upgraded? Was/is benghazi the most insecure and strategic consulate in the world? Do you think the Republican House was right to deny the money? Should they refuse further money for consular security?
Your position is silly and what is more you know it.
And yes I am still hoping to hear how Obama talking to a private company about a video posted on servers around the world violates - SHREDS! - the first amendment.
EDIT: And it is sneaky how Joe has moved the conversation away from the UN speech (where the sub-thread started) once it was clear (again) there was nothing there into general budgeting and talking to Google. Crazy like a fox I say.
So the Obama State Dept. isn't responsible for the budget the Obama State Dept. drew up and implemented?
***
LOL. If one of the other dead people's families says the opposite, then what?
When the consulates in France and Belgium have more armed guards than the consulate in a war zone, there might be a flaw in the security assessments and budgetary decisions that were made.
Great news!
Romney now leading Obama 52-45 in the Gallup LV, and Romney up +1.0 at RCP.
So no answer to the questions about scary hybrids and consulate security or shredding of the first amendment?
And if extemists attack a consulate in France, stripped of its security resources, who would be the first to parrot GOP talking points about how irresponsible it was to leave such a high visibility place so vulnerable?
"Look at the bombings and other terrorist acts that have taken place in Europe with its free and easy borders! They live in a fantasy land to allow that to happen. An attack in a minor consulate in a minor war torn country is one thing, but to allow it on French soil - outrage!"
It almost writes itself.
Absentee and early voting data from nine states that are generally viewed as competitive at the presidential level show Democrats requesting and returning more absentee ballots than they did in 2008 in Florida and Iowa. And in Iowa, where in-person early voting has already begun, those numbers are also strong for Democrats.
In other states, the picture is too incomplete to be drawing too many broad conclusions at this point.
“There’s certainly something going in on these states where more Democrats are casting mail ballots than Republicans, at a comparable point in 2008,” said Michael McDonald, an early voting expert at George Mason University. “It’s happening in Florida … and it’s happening in Iowa.”
Early Voting Trends
I've already answered all of this. If the State Dept. could find money for Chevy Volts, then it could find money for armed guards in Benghazi. The entire discussion is ludicrous.
The GOP is targeting soft voters in the early period, while the Dems are simply trying to bank as many early votes as possible. Strategists on both sides have admitted as much.
You're the one who's in Syracuse.
So the Obama State Dept. isn't responsible for the budget the Obama State Dept. drew up and implemented?
Do you understand how government departments get a budget?
In other states, the picture is too incomplete to be drawing too many broad conclusions at this point.
“There’s certainly something going in on these states where more Democrats are casting mail ballots than Republicans, at a comparable point in 2008,” said Michael McDonald, an early voting expert at George Mason University. “It’s happening in Florida … and it’s happening in Iowa.”
But, but, JoeK told us the numbers were going to be down and the enthusiasm wasn't there.
Doesn't everyone? All the money goes straight onto Obama's pockets, he buys every poor black person an iPhone, then spends the rest on Chevy Volts.
Except for how President Obama talking to Google shredded the first amendment.
How much did the Volts cost? How much does enhancing security at a Consulate like Benghazi cost? How many Consulates need their security upgraded? How much did the Obama administration request that was cut out by the GOP House? (I bet $10,000 it was More $ than the couple of hybrids cost).
Really you are asserting it shred the first amendment. You are pretending a couple hybrids could pay for security for every consulate in the world that needs an upgrade. And you are ignoring this started with your assertions about Obama's UN speech, but there was nothing there about any of this so you abandoned that a while ago to segue into this nonsense.
Blind squirrel you found a nut!
EDIT: Removed some random apostrophes.
That's below the belt, even by BBTF standards. Where's Furtado?
***
The Obama State Dept. drew up its proposed budget and then it was allocated money via the continuing resolution (since, of course, Obama can't get a budget passed).
You're not suggesting the House GOP insisted the State Dept. spend money on Chevy Volts instead of security, are you?
How are things looking in Ohio? You've been slacking off.
Speaking of welfare, spending is up a staggering 32 percent in the past four years:
Barry O's legacy looking worse by the day.
Things are looking good in Ohio. Over 344,000 registered Democrats at this point and over 50,00 person lead over the Republicans. Every day Dems have increased their lead on Republicans.
What's the split? In 2008 early and absentee voting in Ohio, it was Dem+14.
I'm guessing they were jerking off to all the war footage.
When BTF's resident escapee from the Fox News discussion boards calls your position too dumb to take seriously, you're winning.
Oliver Perez isn't black.
Idiots.
And to a Mouse calling someone a squirrel is a compliment, rodents with fluffy tails are to be admired (They have much better PR than Rats and Mice do after all). The blind part was an insult and I feel bad about that though.
Hey I resemble that remark. And I just apologized, because I don't think insults are the way to go (before I read your post by the way). But that is the code I hold myself to, other people need to lookout for themselves. Joe K also has a code, he'll call a comment names but rarely if ever a person (and I respect that about him, BTW).
But you, I don't want you to ever change. It wouldn't be the same BTF without neck stabbings.
If you spend big money on Chevy Volts but then cry poverty when people learn your war-zone consulate had less security than the consulate in Belgium, you deserve all the ridicule you receive.
***
But if we're in the middle of a "huge recovery," as Michelle Obama claims, then shouldn't counter-cyclical forces have the welfare numbers trending down right now rather than trending higher?
They are teaching some crazy pinko #### to economists nowadays...
==
And Vlad, thanks for that link way upthread.
Some things are in front of the trends, some are spot on, and some lag. Recoveries are not "everything moves together all at once". And for the record, while there are hopeful signs, I am not on board with claiming a huge recovery. Sounds like a poitical statement and not economic.
Hopeful signs include housing and construction starts and the recent Gallup poll which showed increases in nemployment (decreases in unemployment? both? can't remember). The recent monetary announcements were a good sign to. Let's hope the economy does get better.
Well, the article you linked to cites 2011 numbers for welfare. Since it is currently October, 2012, you should probably use more recent numbers to make that point.
Also, it looks like housing starts have gone up in September (compared with August). Perhaps most importantly, the number of permits given tracks with this, which supports that it is a real growth (as opposed to just statistical noise).
Nah, it was a long time ago (late 80s). I am not sure what they are teaching the punks these days, but it sounds like Micro Economics has become ascendent over Macro (which is a darn shame actually). From what I hear elegant mathematics and "foundational underpinnings" are more important than actually explaining what is happening in the real world at many grad schools.
"Recovery summer" was in 2010, was it not?
Unless Obama gets re-elected.
You only think that is a joke.
Regardless, those bastards did a number on you.
Do you take all marketing this seriously? Were you shocked to find out that it's not only choosy moms who choose Jiff, but also those who just buy whatever peanut butter is on sale in a given week?
Is that what you were referring to? Because your quote of Michelle Obama occured was reported on earlier this month. If you are arguing something else, you should say so. Because a cynic would say you were moving the goalposts after getting caught on the facts.
I actually went to a very "right wing" econ school (University of Illinois Chicago) so I learned all about Rational Expectations and other joyous bits in addition to some Keynesian (and Neo-Keynesian) economics.
I never liked Jiff. I am a crunchy peanut butter kind of mouse. Is Jiff the one (or a one) that adds all that sugar?
Take your pick. "Recovery summer" was in 2010, Michelle Obama says we're in a "huge recovery" in 2012, and yet welfare spending is trending ever higher.
Why would you want peanut butter at all in a world that has Bovril and Marmite?
What year is it? You want a phosphate with that?
I think all of the major brands load their stuff up with sugar. But I sort of prefer it that way. And I'm with Bitter on crunchy v. creamy.
Isn't McCoy a huge prosthelytizer for the PB&J?
This is like those silly "pizza or tacos" arguments. Peanut butter AND Marmite are awesome, although not at the same time. New Zealand Marmite beats the British stuff hands down though.
Does anyone at all know how much was spent on these Volts?
New Zealand Marmite beats the British stuff hands down though.
Comparing New Zealand food and British food really sets the bar pretty low on both sides.
Yikes.
Excellent analysis.
Care to quote what he said on the subject during the debate Tuesday night? Or does that not fit the narrative you're being fed by the right-wing media machine?
Eh, most every place has at least a few foods that are awesome. New Zealand has really good mussels, killer meat pies, great dairy products, and some tasty desserts (ANZAC biscuits, Lamingtons, Pavlova). Great Britain has... um... pork pies. Those are pretty great. A proper cream tea is nothing to sneeze at either. Also, fried stuff. Everybody likes fried stuff.
What he said in the debate was one of the most dishonest statements ever uttered in a presidential debate. If not for Romney being flabbergasted by Obama's blatant dishonesty, Obama would have been creamed. Obama & Co. blamed the YouTube video for weeks after the Benghazi attack, and no amount of spin or revisionist history can change that inconvenient truth.
You apparently had Romney on mute during the first debate .
You're having a tough time following your own threads. Your post implied Obama expressed a lack of emotion on the consulate deaths. I'm asking you what he said specifically about his feelings on the killings during the debate. You can quote him on it, unless you think it'll mess up your story.
But I do love how the deaths of 4 Americans in Libya are enough to have you freaking the #### out over Obama and Chevy Volts, but during the Bush administration, the deaths of 4 Americas on foreign soil was light day in the battle for freedom . Were you on the intertubes screaming for a proper investigation of Pat Tillman's death? Or griping over the way Bush lied about the Jessica Lynch mission? Did you hold your government to account for the coordinated program of racist torture that took place at Abu Ghirab?
==
This Yankee/Tigers series is absolutely awesome.
And really, is there any evidence that Romney would have done better, or even different? Romney hasn't exhibited an iota of nuanced knowledge about the area. He's not running on it at all. There's no reason to think that the gang of folks who want to slash funding for overseas protection would have done anything different in Benghazi.
Expect your facts don't support mocking Michelle Obama's quote. Your moving the goal posts because you got caught being fast and loose with the facts you used to support your argument. Just admit it and move on. You might gain some credibility.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main