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 0.6184 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.
What will be fun (if true) will be hearing thrice-divorced sex tourist Rush Limbaugh getting all indignant over this.
Gosh, I really, really like Rocky Anderson.... and Larry King.
At tonight's Indiana Senate debate with Joe Donnelly...
It's hard to imagine a better way for the Republicans to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory than to have Trump start throwing bombs. In particular, the divorce story/rumor seems to have "Yosemite Sam" written all over it, unless, as someone said, there were allegations of domestic violence.
Right--absent abuse allegations, what's the narrative from the Trump/GOP side? "The Obamas almost got divorced 12 years ago--but they didn't, and they apparently have a really strong marriage now....but he KEPT THIS A SECRET!"
Not exactly potent stuff, particularly since, well, if the R's want to accuse Obama of inappropriate secrecy on this point, the segue back to Romney's unreleased tax returns pretty much writes itself...
EDIT: Also, what 4401 said.
Yeah, but now that the deadline looms, it's totally unfair for Obama and the Dems to play hardball with it, or something.
Obama proposed a number of solutions to the debt ceiling issue. Sequestration was the one that the House Republicans went for. It wasn't his first choice, or his third choice.
It was Obama's proposal - contrary to what he said in the debate. Getting something like that wrong is pretty unusual, no? Not that easy to spin either, although I see folks are trying.
He's the gift that never stops giving for that show.
This is kinda crazy. The sequester was no one's plan. The plan was that the super committee would meet, come up with a pretty standard "grand bargain", that was loosely based on Bowles-Simpson, with something between 10 and 25% of the deficit reduction coming from new revenues. The sequester was designed so that people would want to make a deal.
The military spending cuts, which were the matter of discussion, were the House Republicans' idea. Obama wanted revenue as a trigger. Republicans insisted on defense cuts instead.
The sequester was the administration's idea. House Republicans chose defense spending as their poison pill over revenue increasers. The idea for the defense cuts came from the hill. The administration wanted revenue.
Oh that evil Obama.
MSNBC Audience Boos 9-Year-Old Girl For Supporting Romney
(Sorry if posted already; haven't read about ~250 preceding comments.)
MSNBC Audience Boos 9-Year-Old Girl For Supporting Romney
Probably brought it on herself by disagreeing with Chris Mathews' rant.
She needs to learn some time. Why not now?
No thanks to Obama, McCoy. The increase comes despite his anti-oil policies.
EDIT: Remember when?
EDIT: Coke to Zonk.
As this stalwart Republican recommends
It would be nice if Mourdock completely imploded over the next two weeks, so I don't have to spend two hours standing in line to vote. Geez, the GOP screwed this up.
What a weird clip. The booing seems good-natured, but 2-3 different guys feel the need to lean into the mic & emphasize it... and the mom keeps grabbing onto her daughter (when the camera turns toward them), although the daughter seems totally fine. You'd almost think someone was trying to make something out of nothing, here.
Or younger: every time somebody on my FB feed tries to "prove" the President's awesomeness via pictures with kids - "The babies know!" - it just makes me sad.
When I read you guys complaining about your Facebook feeds, I realize (and am thankful for) the fact that I have relatively smart friends.
The army and marines report on how many bayonets and horses they currently own.
Yes. Just as it was all Obama's fault when the sequestration deal became necessary, because he couldn't get Congress to agree on a deal to avert a debt ceiling crisis before then. Heads, R's win; tails, Obama loses.
"The Army said today it has 419,155 bayonets in its inventory. The Marine Corps has another 195,334 bayonets that it bought in 2004 and it plans on buying 175,061 more bayonets this year. A Marine official says it’s not accurate to add the two totals together as the new ones will include replacements for ones already in service as well as additional stocks.
The Army also reported today that it has 176 horses. The horses kept at Fort Myer, Va., are used mainly for ceremonial duties at Arlington Cemetery and the Capital region. There are also some horses located at Fort Hood, Texas."
So, Obama was absolutely right. I'll bet the Army had several million bayonets in 1917. Certainly by 1918. And probably > 100,000 horses.
No early voting in your county? I voted the other day and didn't have to wait in line at all, just walked up, signed in, and voted. It probably didn't take 15 minutes at the most; much better than standing in line for two hours on election day.
The bayonet numbers sound right to me. The normal distribution is one bayonet per rifle, plus some spares. My National Guard company had 60-70 of the things that were only taken out of their storage box once a year to clean off any surface rust and to make sure they were sharp. I assume that troops in combat zones would be issued their bayonets and then most people would just use them to open ration packets and cut whatever needed cutting. It's doubtful they would ever get used for their intended purpose, as my first sergeant used to tell us, "if you are close enough to someone to stab him with a knife, you're too damn close".
I'm thinking the Akin/Mourdock brouhahas will be echoed in the ND senate race over the next couple weeks. The Dem Heitkamp's surprisingly competitive, Rick Berg has the same reactionary abortion position Akin and Mourdock have, the seat would be an important hold for the Dems, and ND's a cheap state to advertise in.
What? Sure I live in inner ring suburbia, but I never wait more than 10 minutes to vote. In and out. Of course this is MN always one of the top states in voter participation. I am sure the whole stupid Voter ID initiative will slow things down for me inthe future though. Good thing it will disenfranchise voters AND cost taxpayer money inorder to make it a bigger pain in the neck to vote. What is not to love?
The GOP's selectively pro-big government. Film at 11.
I loved the bayonet and horses response. I don't think that was rehearsed. There's no way Obama could anticipate Romney saying something as stupid as "We have fewer ships now than in WWI.", and it showed quick wit. On the other hand, he totally blew it when he overplayed his hand. The "We have these things called aircraft carries..." went way too far, and came off as childish. I would have given him an A+ on the response if he had stopped at horses. As it is, I give him a C-.
Other than the fact that the line is in Romney's stump speech. But facts are for sissies, amirite?
EDIT: Coke to 'zop
I'm sort of invested by now.
Not so sure about this. Having The Hairpiece contribute to keeping the nut-jobs in a froth (and thus ready to get out the vote) while Romney pivots to the center to convince the "undecided" "independents" that he really isn't bugshit crazy isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Absolutely
OK, if true, then I take it back. I don't follow as closely as others. I still think it was a great response at first, until he went too far.
Godwin?
And thus, Obama is Hitler.
Probably, although then, like today, if you ever get to the point where you're using the bayonet, you're already ######.
I prefer Diet Dr. Pepper to Coke, Sam.
Supposedly bayonets were first used in hunting where they were used to fend off the animals you were firing at. I don't know if I really believe that though. The first bayonets were plug bayonets and using them meant you couldn't fire your musket. So you have a highly inaccurate weapon that forces you to get in real close to your prey and if you happen to miss or wound the animal and it charges you are you really going to have time to pull out a bayonet and plug it into your musket?
I loved that the Obama camp never responded to this on the trail, knowing Romney wouldn't be able to resist using it during the debate, and whopped him but good in front of a large live tv audience instead of a press room. Plate discipline works for politicians too.
No. Back in the times of the legends of the days of yore, the bayonet charge was an accepted aspect of infantry doctrine. McCoy essentially has the right of it in #4457. It made some sense in an era of slow loading, inaccurate guns.
In modern warfare, I imagine most infantry would very much prefer to spare themselves the weight and not carry one.
Bill Clinton is in many ways a much better natural politician than Obama, but the discipline difference is night and day between the two and their campaigns. Bush II ran a pretty disciplined campaign too. The Romney campaign has been OK on this I think, not terrible but not great either.
OK, if true, then I take it back.
Yeah, and Ryan made reference to it in the VP debate as well.
What really doesn't work is if someone is coming back in from the garage, where he went to get a beer, and he hears the president saying "And we have these ships that go under the water, that we call submarines." I thought, for a moment, that he'd suffered some sort of breakdown in front of a live, national audience.
I had to go online to look up what the hell he was talking about. Forgetting, once again, that I have digital tv and could just have gone back to the start.
and as usual, it took 50 plus years for most nations to change doctrine after it was exposed as a really bad idea in 1860's when the Civil War ushered in the era of rifled infantry weapons. Fredricksburg, Gettysburg, et cetera, should have decisively retired the tactic.
The reason why it didn't is because most of the world hadn't industrialized nor professionalized their armed forces. Plus even against industrialized nations with professional armies the bayonet was still a useful tool in smaller settings. You don't have 10,000 troops bayonet charge a line of 10,000 riflemen but at the squad level it could still be utilized.
Think of the Zulu Wars when you want to see how useful a bayonet can be. Armies out in the bush not connected well to supply lines facing lightning quick attacks fro Zulus and suddenly the bayonet becomes a useful weapon.
Zulu Wars
Military commanders weren't as stupid as the stereotypes of WWI suggest.
Yeah, a bayonet charge in the face of an opposition using rifles with Minie ball ammunition became nigh suicidal. The Minie ball allowed both faster loading and more accurate fire, and inflicted more devastating wounds than most muskets.
Tell that to Joshua Chamberlain.
How about George Pickett the next day?
Hell even before then, having infantry charge straight into an entrenched line of rifles/muskets could be a pretty dumb idea
until breech-loaders took over, muskets were faster firing than rifles.
anyway, what really made Civil War battle lines so deadly as compared to Napoleonic and earlier formations was not rifles as much as it was the use of percussion caps which sped of rate of reloading and lowered the rate of misfires...
The greatly expanded range of rifled weapons prevented the sort of Napeoleonic levee en masse charge. You couldn't get close enough to concentrate enough troops
even better were/would have been sawed off shotguns and submachine guns...
One of the very last significant massed infantry assaults (5000+ men charging all at once) was late in the Iran Iraq War, the Iranians thought it was a good idea to have 10,000 "Basij" armed with Kalashnikovs straight into Iraqi lines outside Basra...
the result was some 10,000 casualties....
of course the Iranians won that battle, because while the Iraqi's were slaughtering the Basij they were outflanked by two regular Iranian Army divisions...
I suspect this is a tactical decision driven by candidates. The swamps of south GA aren't going to turn out a big GOTV effort for Mitt Romney. They will turn out for their local guys. Obama still inspires Democrats to get out the vote far more than local pols do.
Clownshoes.
The Big Reveal!
When he does that, he will become transparent, like other Presidents.
But it also sounds like a question of resources; the Obama group seems to have hired young pros for these offices, and to demand standardization, while the Republicans leave some to volunteer coordinators and so on. It did sound like the Republicans have good targeted lists of voters. And the Republican challenge is different since they tend to have high rates of registration and turnout, so they have less to gain by investing there. And more to gain by trying to persuade committed but undecided voters.
Democrats start with a bigger pool of voters but many of them are hard to turn out. Republicans start with a high commitment to turnout but a smaller pool of voters. So they face different challenges, and I'm open to the idea that Romney made the rational decision to deemphasive GOTV, but the contrast is interesting.
But really -- can anyone argue that the world wouldn't be a slightly better place tomorrow if whatever it is that is curled around Trump's dome crawled off it tonight and strangled him in his sleep?
I think I could even make it through the inevitable "love him or hate him" retrospectives that I'm sure all manner of cable nets would produce in the wake of it.
Apparently I can mail it in, which I think I'll do, but the courthouse is about a half-hour drive each way.
It's weird, I live in a wealthy (very) Republican district in a Republican state, but voting in Presidential elections has proven to be a huge PITA.
Actually 17th!
The first bayonets were "plug bayonets", which was essentially a knife that you shove down the barrel of the gun. As demonstrated by this fearsome warrior.
I'd say the bayonet in all its forms was a useful weapon from roughly a couple decades after the Thirty Years' War to roughly the years before the Crimean War. 160 odd years or so...not a bad run.
Trump certainly seems to be proof positive that you can at least be a "paper millionaire" and still add no value to the world, yes.
I think that is a woman.
I'd say the bayonet in all its forms was a useful weapon from roughly a couple decades after the Thirty Years' War to roughly the years before the Crimean War. 160 odd years or so...not a bad run.
Zulu War was fought in 1879 and the bayonet was used effectively in the Crimean War.
The problem with Trump, as with many another public figure, was that he figured that splashy real-estate management translated into statesmanship. The downside of the rink episode was perhaps to make him believe he was a civic leader, and not just a guy who built casinos and such.
Well yes, I was hoping it was clear that I was making a very general claim there.
The bayonet didn't all of a sudden become useless in the practice of killing people in 1848, but it's hey-day in the "big leagues", if you will, was pretty much done.
But really -- can anyone argue that the world wouldn't be a slightly better place tomorrow if whatever it is that is curled around Trump's dome crawled off it tonight and strangled him in his sleep?
Not really, though I'd rather that he got run over by a truck while chasing his toupee across Broadway.
It's from a Monmouth Rebellion recreationist society judging by the website google image sent me to. I don't know what or where Fort Tryon Park is, but if it's in Taunton then maybe!
The issue is that from Civil War to WWI most of the wars being fought were of the small scale skirmish variety against "natives" and in that environment the bayonet was still very useful. The infantry square of the late 19th century out in the bush was a formidable obstacle to any native army.
But RCP also admitted, on Oct. 15, "Indiana regulates polling strictly, so we've been starved for information here. The best guess is that Mourdock is ahead, but that it is still a close race."
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main