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

Saturday, February 01, 2014

OTP - Feb 2014: Politics remains a hurdle for immigration reform

Yet Obama might find his best-chance legislative compromise in an issue that lately has seemed to be on life support: an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws.

Curiously, immigration was an issue the president barely mentioned in this year’s speech. Maybe he does not want to interfere with those Republicans who actually agree with him on the need to bring the nation’s millions of undocumented workers out of the shadows.

Bitter Mouse Posted: February 01, 2014 at 04:01 PM | 3524 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 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 8 of 36 pages ‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >  Last ›
   701. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 07, 2014 at 11:25 PM (#4653535)

The Dole retrospective today made this article about another tenured Kansas senator seem quite poignant. The willingness to shed their political compass to keep the gig and avoid being "Lugared" ironically validates one of the Tea Partiers' complaints: a willingness to proclaim previous allies or positions as detrimental to the state with a straight face merely to retain power is the essence of venality.


THE IRON LAW OF OLIGARCHY

Roberts recently flipped his position on the gun control bill last year and voted against the recent federal spending bill, despite spending the last few years lobbying for the $400 million Bio-Agri-Defense Facility in KS that was in the bill. I suspect he's feeling the heat a bit.

When former Congresswoman Nancy Boyda (D-KS) pulled off a big upset in 2010 and defeated five-term Congressman Jim Ryun (the former long distance runner), one of the big reasons why was I guess his office was just terrible at constituent services. Politics is still local.
   702. Shibal Posted: February 07, 2014 at 11:37 PM (#4653539)
Which Congressmen saw that play or movie and said nothing? Hilary Clinton, among others, sharply criticized the movie (which was Canadian by the way). I guess she has more courage than Brindestine. Please point out some comments here calling for Bush to assassinated.

You can youtube any anti-war rally in back during the Bush era and you'll see far worse than what was said at this town-hall. Even our now Secretary of State had a pleasant conversation with Bill Maher back in 2006.

Maher: You could have went to New Hampshire and killed two birds with one stone.

Kerry: Or, I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.

Back then assassination chic was the rage though, so it was all just good fun I guess.

   703. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 07, 2014 at 11:56 PM (#4653544)
WTF? "Kill the real bird with one stone" is the same as "President Obama "should be executed as an enemy combatant"??? Talk about false equivalencies.
   704. zonk Posted: February 08, 2014 at 12:15 AM (#4653551)
Perhaps, but if that is so, it's been the case for a while. But unlike George W. Bush, no one has written a book, or a play, or made a movie fictionalizing Obama's assassination. And of course, there were the comments right here on BBTF.


As you've made a habit of the last few pages, you're missing the point.

There have always been and will always be emissaries from the fever swamp that visit us.

I am not speaking of the person that made the comment.

I am speaking of the fact that a sitting ####### US congressman lacks the balls - or lacks the mental stability himself - to face this nonsense down on the spot.

Right or left, doesn't matter. For better or for worse - people like a sitting Congressman occupy a position that can either legitimize or delegitimize such odious - and dangerous - sentiments. When a congressman - a sitting, ####### congressman - is faced directly and intimately with such sentiments, it is the responsibility of that congressman to make clear that it's not a sentiment welcome in any society that calls itself civilized or free. Doing so does not deny complaints, it does not deny other injustices, perceived or otherwise. It simply sets a baseline for a civilized society.

A congressman - one of just a few hundred federally elected leaders, however terrible they may be at their jobs, however some portion of the country may disagree with them on policy - ought to take upon him or herself the responsibility to tamp down such conflagrations, at least and at minimum - when confronted directly with them.

Plenty of people talk - right and left, again - about totalitarianism, naziism, stalinism, and all sorts of sundry abominations to free and just societies. Those things do not happen with single sparks or single acts. They grow and metastasize with a thousand little tumors like this. There is no global chemotherapy for them - but they are kept in check because a free and just society has leaders who snip them when they come across them.

This congressman failed and he ought to be ashamed... and everyone in such a position - right and left, just as if it were a 90% Democratic Congressman facing a 'friendly' audience calling for the execution of the Commerce Security or whatnot - ought to have the stones face down and denounce such sentiments when confronted directly with it.

Lead.

I have no love for John McCain - but I do remember the infamous "he's an Arab" exchange from the 2008 campaign. Obviously, the liberal in me wishes he would have followed up his response with an additional "... but so what if he WAS an Arab?"... But I give McCain all the credit in the world for facing down such similar sentiments, perhaps even at the cost of 'whipping up the base'. No one needs - or should court - this sort of base. These sorts of people will never go away and they will always exist -- but when you chuckle and coddle them, you grant them power and you give the implicit license to their brand of hell.

   705. Tilden Katz Posted: February 08, 2014 at 01:25 AM (#4653560)
Zonk is right here. There will always be cranks who want members of the other party brutally murdered. That's unavoidable. But elected officials should rise above the level of cranks, and should challenge such crank statements, rather than giving a friendly laugh.

Still waiting for TYC to substantiate his claim that BBTF members were calling for Bush's assassination.
   706. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 08, 2014 at 08:39 AM (#4653581)
In the autumn of 1963, a Georgia movie theater showing "P.T. 109" had a marquee reading "SEE THE JAPS ALMOST GET KENNEDY"
   707. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 08, 2014 at 10:26 AM (#4653607)
In the autumn of 1963, a Georgia movie theater showing "P.T. 109" had a marquee reading "SEE THE JAPS ALMOST GET KENNEDY"

It's a book rather than a movie, but in the weeks following JFK's assassination, the biggest book store in Durham (N.C.) kept its pre-assassination display of Victor Lasky's JFK: The Man and the Myth as the only Kennedy book it had in its window. And it wasn't just one copy, either, but a whole window full of them.

For movie marquees, though, I still love the one, also in Durham, that was featuring one of those Brazilian snuff movies that were a brief fad in the 70's. I forget the movie's title, but underneath it the marquee read "FILMED IN SOUTH AMERICA----WHERE LIFE IS CHEAP".
   708. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 08, 2014 at 12:05 PM (#4653627)
Since BBTF favorite Nate Silver is still on hiatus, those desiring an empirical election prediction fix may want to take a look at The Washington Post's Monkey Cage Blog, which gives the GOP a 44% chance of taking control of the Senate in 2014, using 1952-2012 data, and a 64% chance using 1980-2102 data, which it suggests may be better methodology. Their individual state analysis gives the GOP better than 70% odds of picking up West Virginia & South Dakota, and groups Iowa, Montana, Louisiana & Alaska in the 52-55% range, although it also suggests its model may be understating Republican chances in Arkansas due to the incumbent Democrat having run unopposed in his last election. Although empirical prediction is a significant part of the Monkey Cage's content, it is a multi-author production that addresses other matters, too. Time will tell how reliable its model is.
   709. spike Posted: February 08, 2014 at 02:01 PM (#4653656)
It's like these guys just can't shut up about guaranteed loser issues. That's why I remain optimistic about the '14 elections

Huck wants to to talk about libidos some more
   710. Tilden Katz Posted: February 08, 2014 at 02:11 PM (#4653659)
Hey Clapper, were you able to find those death threats?
   711. Monty Predicts a Padres-Mariners WS in 2016 Posted: February 08, 2014 at 02:12 PM (#4653660)
Time will tell how reliable its model is.


It sounds like their model is to present two different predictions ahead of time so that no matter how things shake out, they'll have one prediction they can point to.
   712. Morty Causa Posted: February 08, 2014 at 02:17 PM (#4653662)
Once you have to start defining the words you use, it never ends. First libido, next it will be lexicon (gay female conservatives? When he feels he has to explain the word "Cavuto", it's all over but the crying.
   713. greenback calls it soccer Posted: February 08, 2014 at 03:02 PM (#4653677)
those desiring an empirical election prediction fix may want to take a look at The Washington Post's Monkey Cage Blog, which gives the GOP a 44% chance of taking control of the Senate in 2014, using 1952-2012 data, and a 64% chance using 1980-2102 data, which it suggests may be better methodology.

That looks suspiciously like the Colorado crap from a year and a half ago. I mean, I'm not betting against McConnell, but a 97% chance for him creates a smell test problem.
   714. BDC Posted: February 08, 2014 at 03:04 PM (#4653678)
Huck wants to to talk about libidos some more

I get it now. Sex is an awesome gift from God, and don't engage in it unless you want to get pregnant. That's a venerable point of view, for sure.
   715. Tilden Katz Posted: February 08, 2014 at 03:11 PM (#4653680)
Man that Colorado model was great. Missed an average of five states, despite the fact that it was released just before the 2012 election (meaning all its misses were retroactive and the results were already known).
   716. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 08, 2014 at 03:21 PM (#4653682)
That looks suspiciously like the Colorado crap from a year and a half ago.

What's the basis for that? Different people are involved, and the precise formula hasn't been revealed. Seems like another way of saying you disagree.
   717. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 08, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4653697)
I feel obligated to pass this on - Obama's Gallup Poll Job Approval Rating Is Down To 39%. Again.

No need to thank me.
   718. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 08, 2014 at 05:31 PM (#4653701)

I feel obligated to pass this on - Obama's Gallup Poll Job Approval Rating Is Down To 39%. Again.


What about now? I expect hourly updates. Thanks.
   719. spike Posted: February 08, 2014 at 05:49 PM (#4653706)
Man that Colorado model was great.

I am always a bit bemused by the logic that starts with the result and looks backward to find a commonality, and then presumes the relationship is static. Homer Nobody, fireballing lefty has never lost a Monday night start in 10 tries! I like his chances next Monday!
   720. Tilden Katz Posted: February 08, 2014 at 05:53 PM (#4653707)
Eric Holder expands rights and recognition for same-sex couples, even in states that do not have marriage equality. I think this is a great move. Do you have any thoughts on this Clapper?
   721. spike Posted: February 08, 2014 at 06:30 PM (#4653716)
Unsurprisngly, Christie didn't know about the memo criticizing Wildstein either.

I hope someone asks him at his next presser what he "does" know when it comes to staff actions.
   722. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 09, 2014 at 12:39 AM (#4653759)

Eric Holder expands rights and recognition for same-sex couples, even in states that do not have marriage equality. I think this is a great move. Do you have any thoughts on this Clapper?


It will be interesting when the GOP takes the WH again someday, if they roll back these executive gay-friendly measures. I would think once its been done, it will seem pretty dickish to go back.
   723. Howie Menckel Posted: February 09, 2014 at 12:52 AM (#4653765)

I doubt they'll do that, when they can expand in areas more of interest to them, with an Obama shield as part of the blueprint.

Left or right, executive expansions of power understandably scare a lot of people.
   724. Delorians Posted: February 09, 2014 at 01:01 AM (#4653768)
which gives the GOP a 64% chance of taking control of the Senate in 2014, using 1980-2102 data,

If using 1980-2102 data, I'd think they'd be able to narrow it down to either 0% or 100%.
   725. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 09, 2014 at 01:51 AM (#4653775)
Will you project me,
Will you elect me,
When I'm 64%?

Pollsters all screw me,
Won't you unskew me,
When I'm 64%?
   726. Random Transaction Generator Posted: February 09, 2014 at 02:06 AM (#4653780)
those desiring an empirical election prediction fix may want to take a look at The Washington Post's Monkey Cage Blog, which gives the GOP a 44% chance of taking control of the Senate in 2014, using 1952-2012 data, and a 64% chance using 1980-2102 data, which it suggests may be better methodology.

That looks suspiciously like the Colorado crap from a year and a half ago. I mean, I'm not betting against McConnell, but a 97% chance for him creates a smell test problem.


Just as a reminder, the Colorado "prediction" for the 2012 presidential election was the most optimistic pro-Romney prediction that was publicly made available.
Their guess of 330 EV for Romney was 5 more than what Dick Morris predicted.

If you're worse at election predictions than Dick Morris...well, maybe you shouldn't be in that business ever again.
   727. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 09, 2014 at 09:28 AM (#4653798)
It will be interesting when the GOP takes the WH again someday, if they roll back these executive gay-friendly measures. I would think once its been done, it will seem pretty dickish to go back.

Any Republican candidate for the foreseeable future is going to have to declare himself one way or the other about this. First the primary wingnuts will force him to do it before the convention, and then the media will press him on it during the general election campaign.

And he's going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. One way and the "Christian" vote will sit on its judgmental hands and call him a "RINO" and an apologist for the "gay lifestyle". The other way and he gives the Democratic base a huge reason to get out the vote. Until the GOP realizes that many of its base's most cherished beliefs are anathema to most of the country, this is but one example of the problems they'll be facing in presidential elections. And it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys.
   728. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 09, 2014 at 02:02 PM (#4653877)
So apparently Obama is going to do a few more executive actions this year. This will 1) advance his agenda, 2) promote the D brand in the leftish voter base, 3) drive GOP/Teapers insane and send them out frothing onto the news shows, which will 4) motivate the D base to come out and vote against the "party of Todd Akin" to coin a phrase.

The Gooper/Teapers don't seem to have grasped the practical teaching of that briar patch story at all.
   729. Shibal Posted: February 09, 2014 at 03:18 PM (#4653901)
Any Republican candidate for the foreseeable future is going to have to declare himself one way or the other about this. First the primary wingnuts will force him to do it before the convention, and then the media will press him on it during the general election campaign.

And he's going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. One way and the "Christian" vote will sit on its judgmental hands and call him a "RINO" and an apologist for the "gay lifestyle". The other way and he gives the Democratic base a huge reason to get out the vote.


So Dick Cheney sure was called a RINO and all sorts of names when he came out in favor of gay marriage 10 years ago? All the while Obama was declaring he was opposed to gay marriage, saying marriage was between a man and a woman?

Weird.

Just a word of cynicism here. Politicians of both parties will stick their fingers in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. Most Democrats figured out 2-3 years ago that they had to support gay marriage after strongly opposing it. Lots of money in the gay community. So they "evolved". GOPers will do likewise over the next few years.

And no one will care. Gay marriage isn't like abortion, where changing views (one way or the other) signifies a core weakness in one's values.


   730. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: February 09, 2014 at 04:53 PM (#4653924)

So Dick Cheney sure was called a RINO and all sorts of names when he came out in favor of gay marriage 10 years ago?


Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well.
   731. JuanGone..except1game Posted: February 09, 2014 at 07:23 PM (#4653962)
So Dick Cheney sure was called a RINO and all sorts of names when he came out in favor of gay marriage 10 years ago?


Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well.

Dick also said that "deficits don't matter". Dick has long been one of the Right's Bishop Emeritus's, due to his ability to be hated by anyone to the left of Evan Bayh. If he came out for single payer, the Right would just twiddle their thumbs and act like it didn't happen.
   732. Shibal Posted: February 09, 2014 at 08:14 PM (#4653968)

Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well.


Since no one cares about the Vice Presidency, running on the ticket in 2000 and 2004 doesn't count? bwahahaha

Beautiful.

Thanks for the history lesson. Got a good laugh out of it.






   733. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 09, 2014 at 09:23 PM (#4653979)
Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well.


Since no one cares about the Vice Presidency, running on the ticket in 2000 and 2004 doesn't count?

In 2000, Mary Cheney's lesbianism was denied (falsely) by her mother** during an interview with Cokie Roberts, while criticizing Roberts and the media for even raising the question, in spite of the fact that Mary was then working for Coors as a liason to gays and lesbians and had already come out.

In 2004, Dick Cheney came out in favor of leaving the marriage issue to the states, at a time when exactly one state (Massachusetts) had legalized same-sex marriage.

And with Kerry and Edwards both supporting choice, where would voters who disagreed with Cheney have gone? Especially since his boss (Bush) had come out in favor of the DOMA.

None of these dodges will be available to a prospective Republican candidate in 2016. They're going to be screwed no matter which way they go on the issue of gay marriage; the only question is whether it's in the primaries or in the general election.

**Lynne Cheney said that "Mary has never declared such a thing." That artful bit of phrasing was a bit hit with gays and lesbians.
   734. Howie Menckel Posted: February 09, 2014 at 09:25 PM (#4653980)

college star awaiting NFL draft announces he's gay

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/10/sports/michael-sam-college-football-star-says-he-is-gay-ahead-of-nfl-draft.html?action=click&contentCollection=Media®ion=Footer&module=TopNews&pgtype=article

   735. zonk Posted: February 09, 2014 at 09:30 PM (#4653983)
Wait...

Has Dick Cheney actually come out in favor of 'gay marriage'?

My recollection is that while he's said in diplomatic terms the whole area of gay rights is one where he 'differs' from the standard GOP line - but to my knowledge, he hasn't been all that specific beyond making it clear that he doesn't share the conservative view of homosexuality as a sin or flaw.
   736. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 09, 2014 at 09:48 PM (#4653989)
Has Dick Cheney actually come out in favor of 'gay marriage'?

Yes he has, but he waited until May of 2009 to do so, and he still says it should be left to the states. OTOH he also supported the Maryland referendum that legalized SSM in 2012, so in his case the federalist position wasn't your typical weasel-mouthed way of ducking the issue.
   737. Lassus Posted: February 09, 2014 at 10:04 PM (#4653993)
   738. Shibal Posted: February 09, 2014 at 10:20 PM (#4653997)
In 2000, Mary Cheney's lesbianism was denied (falsely) by her mother** during an interview with Cokie Roberts, while criticizing Roberts and the media for even raising the question, in spite of the fact that Mary was then working for Coors as a liason to gays and lesbians and had already come out.


A mother should get pissed that she's asked on national TV about a gay daughter when that daughter has not come out as gay to a national audience. Maybe Cokie can ask Michelle Obama if Malai has lost her virginity yet. No right to privacy when Daddy is in politics, that's your thinking?


In 2004, Dick Cheney came out in favor of leaving the marriage issue to the states, at a time when exactly one state (Massachusetts) had legalized same-sex marriage.


Oh, that's a bad thing, eh? He should have waited until May 2013 before announcing his support for gay marriage, like Hillary did? Or wait until May 2012 before announcing it like Obama did? Maybe he should have have been like just about every other politician in the country in 2004 and say marriage is between a man and woman only?

**Lynne Cheney said that "Mary has never declared such a thing." That artful bit of phrasing was a bit hit with gays and lesbians.


The GLAAD crowd overreacted to some random comment? Why, that happens about six times a day. No surprise there.
   739. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 09, 2014 at 10:59 PM (#4654007)
You're not arguing with me here, Shibal, since all I was doing was putting your analogy between Cheney 2000 / 2004 and a potential GOP presidential candidate into a more historically relevant context. The Democrats have nothing to do with this, since their primary voters' views on gay marriage won't force Hillary or Biden or Whoever into taking a position that will come back to haunt them after the convention. That's going to be strictly a Republican problem.

If you can explain the relevance of Dick Cheney's defense of his daughter's choice in 2000, when the primaries were long over, and his POST-VP endorsement of gay marriage (when he's not running for anything except history's vindication), to the sort of Hobson's Choice that a Rubio or a Ryan will face between their base's prejudices and the general electorate's live-and-let-live philosophy, then you should probably be talking to every GOP candidate you can find, because there's gold in them thar hills for a good circle squarer.
   740. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 09, 2014 at 11:20 PM (#4654014)
Since no one cares about the Vice Presidency, running on the ticket in 2000 and 2004 doesn't count?


The statement was that Cheney has not run in a primary since 1988. This is true on the facts. In 2000, Cheney did not run in the primaries. After Bush won the GOP primaries (more or less) he picked senior statesman of the party Dick Cheney to run his VP selection committee. Cheney, quite famously, came back with "Actually you should pick me." In 2004, no GOP pol challenged Bush/Cheney in the primaries.

Try reading closer next time.
   741. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 09, 2014 at 11:23 PM (#4654015)
Yes he has, but he waited until May of 2009 to do so, and he still says it should be left to the states.


Actually, gay marriage was something Cheney was against it before he for it before he was against it again. When he was in office with W Bush, he was against it. When he retired out office, he was for it in a show of support for his lesbian daughter. But then his non-lesbian daughter decided to run for Senate in WY and Dick threw his other daughter back under the bus as need for political posturing overrode his sense of fatherly love.
   742. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 09, 2014 at 11:41 PM (#4654020)

A mother should get pissed that she's asked on national TV about a gay daughter when that daughter has not come out as gay to a national audience. Maybe Cokie can ask Michelle Obama if Malai has lost her virginity yet. No right to privacy when Daddy is in politics, that's your thinking?


Mary Cheney had served on the board and was the official spokesperson of the Republican Unity Conference, an organization of gay Republicans dedicated to re-electing Bush, from 2002-2003. She was the gay and lesbian liason for Coors Brewing Company. I'd hardly say she was keeping it a secret. And the affairs of adult children who are actively engaged in a campaign (she was the Director of VP Operations for the 2004 campaign) are quite a bit different than the affairs of high school children of political figures.
   743. bobm Posted: February 09, 2014 at 11:56 PM (#4654026)
[737]

FTFA:
After Petraeus was forced to resign as CIA Director over an extramarital affair, Clinton sent him a note expressing sympathy and harkening back to her struggles on the other side of an adultery scandal.

"I have a little experience," she wrote.
   744. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:25 AM (#4654045)
Mary Cheney had served on the board and was the official spokesperson of the Republican Unity Conference, an organization of gay Republicans dedicated to re-electing Bush, from 2002-2003. She was the gay and lesbian liason for Coors Brewing Company. I'd hardly say she was keeping it a secret. And the affairs of adult children who are actively engaged in a campaign (she was the Director of VP Operations for the 2004 campaign) are quite a bit different than the affairs of high school children of political figures.


The Lynn Cheney interview was in 2000, just a few days after Cheney was chosen by Bush to be his VP and long before Mary Cheney got involved in the campaigning.
   745. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:39 AM (#4654052)
The statement was that Cheney has not run in a primary since 1988. This is true on the facts. In 2000, Cheney did not run in the primaries. After Bush won the GOP primaries (more or less) he picked senior statesman of the party Dick Cheney to run his VP selection committee. Cheney, quite famously, came back with "Actually you should pick me." In 2004, no GOP pol challenged Bush/Cheney in the primaries.

Try reading closer next time.


And that's your theory as to why Dick Cheney wasn't called a RINO?

   746. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 10, 2014 at 08:46 AM (#4654082)
And that's your theory as to why Dick Cheney wasn't called a RINO?

Let's see Dick Cheney go on the 2016 campaign trail and remind those Iowa and New Hampshire primary voters that he favored that 2012 Maryland gay marriage referendum. Being called a RINO at that point would be the least of his worries.
   747. zonk Posted: February 10, 2014 at 08:59 AM (#4654085)
Is that what this is all about? Why Dick Cheney doesn't get called a RINO?

Because that's an easy one... Dick Cheney has spent the last 15 years high on the certainty of his own brilliance and has been openly belligerent to anyone that dares disagree with that assessment. Whatever policy disagreements they might have with you, if you have an R next to your name and can pull that song and dance off to the level of a Dick Cheney, you'll never get slapped with a RINO label.
   748. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 10, 2014 at 09:12 AM (#4654087)
So really, the root issue is IMO, which sides benefits from the dynamics associated with gay rights, especially with regards to the presidential primaries and general election? To that larger and more relevant question, well for years team blue had the overall bad spot in that equation, but the last few years and going forward for a few more, the GOP has a tough go of it.

The primary voters who are most coveted are very much to the right on this issue, as they are on immigration and a couple other places. And the general public at a national level is very quickly moving toward acceptance of gays in all ways. Really quickly, to the point that the persuadable suburban swing voters, mom driving a minivan and so on, have decided or will have decided in favor in huge numbers by the time the next Presidential election rolls in.

Of course there are a bunch of policies where the default base GOP position is not popular (minimum wage, immigration, tax rates on the rich, income inequality in general, environmental policy, gun control,and so on), which will lead to attempts to change the conversation away from policy to character and other similar things.
   749. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 10, 2014 at 09:49 AM (#4654092)
college star awaiting NFL draft announces he's gay


Good for him, I hope. I thought an established player would be the first, but I guess dude just decided hiding who he was, was not worth it, even though it will hurt his draft stock a bit (from everything I have read).

For his sake I hope NFL execs realize how fast public opinion is changing on this issue, decide this will neither help nor hurt the club, and evaluate him as a just a player and draft him accordingly. And if he ends on up one of my teams I will cheer him, if he is playing against my teams I hope he does poorly, but in general I wish him well - because I admire courage.
   750. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 09:51 AM (#4654093)
And that's your theory as to why Dick Cheney wasn't called a RINO?


To mirror zonk @747, is that your thing here? Is this some sort of pissy slap fight over if, when or why Dick Cheney was or was not called a "RINO?" I have little to no interest in something that pointless. I merely replied above to correct your mistake with regard to Cheney and primaries. The statement made was that Cheney hadn't been in a primary since 1988. You claimed that he had been in primaries in 2000 and 2004. That statement was factually false. Dick Cheney was not in a primary in 2000 or 2004. The last primary he was involved in was 1988. That statement was true.

As to the question of if/when/how/why/whether/whatfor/whatever about Cheney and accusations of "RINO:"

1. Dick Cheney was not called a RINO prior to 2000 because he held positions at the time that were well within the mainstream of the (then much broader) party tent.

2. Dick Cheney was not called a RINO from 2000-2008 because he was part of a political team that had won the White House two terms running; when they're winning, the GOP rarely deploys the RINO label, especially not against the successful office winners. The term is saved for explaining why they are losing when they fail to win.

3. Dick Cheney has not been called a RINO as often as, say, W. Bush since 2009, simply because he was Veep and stepped back into the henchman shadows to which he naturally belongs after exiting office. Nonetheless, there are plenty of Tea Party Republicans who will tell you in no uncertain terms that anyone associated with the Bush era GOP were "RINOs" and, for example, that's why the GOP record on exploding the national debt doesn't really count (because they weren't "real" Republicans, after all.)
   751. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 09:54 AM (#4654094)
For his sake I hope NFL execs realize how fast public opinion is changing on this issue, decide this will neither help nor hurt the club, and evaluate him as a just a player and draft him accordingly.


Not a chance. He just dropped 20 rounds due to "clubhouse concerns."
   752. Len Lansford, Carney Barker Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:09 AM (#4654098)
Not a chance. He just dropped 20 rounds due to "clubhouse concerns."


He came out to his Missouri teammates last season, who then went 12-2, 7-1 in the SEC, and won the Cotton Bowl. But I'm sure there will be plenty of hand-wringing among scouts and the media, regardless.
   753. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:17 AM (#4654103)
The statement made was that Cheney hadn't been in a primary since 1988. You claimed that he had been in primaries in 2000 and 2004. That statement was factually false. Dick Cheney was not in a primary in 2000 or 2004. The last primary he was involved in was 1988. That statement was true.


You are making stuff up. I said he ran on the ticket in 2000 and 2004. I never mentioned anything about Cheney being involved in primaries during those years. As some idiot said in #740, try reading closer next time.

   754. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:20 AM (#4654104)
In the 2004 vice presidential debate, both Cheney and John Edwards were asked why they opposed gay marriage. They both gave bland answers. Cheney's was so empty that the moderator asked, "That's it?" The similarly insipid Edwards said, "I think the Vice President and his wife love their daughter. I think they love her very much." This was enough to kick off one of those kabuki outrage storms. Mary Cheney called Edwards "total slime." (Which, if she'd been referring to just about anything else besides his debate performance, would have been accurate.) Soon afterwards, when John Kerry mentioned Mary Cheney during a debate question about whether or not homosexuality is a choice (""We're all God's children. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as"), mother Lynne Cheney said, "The only thing I can conclude is he is not a good man. I'm speaking as a mom, What a cheap and tawdry political trick." Elizabeth Edwards chimed in, "She's overreacted to this and treated it as if it's shameful to have this discussion. I think that it indicates a certain amount of shame with respect to her daughter's sexual preferences." Dick Cheney said, "You saw a man who will do and say anything to get elected, and I am not just speaking as a father here, although I am a pretty angry father."

Mary Cheney had been openly gay for years; in February 2004 Newsweek wrote: "Even so, her presence [during the 2000 campaign and at the Republican National Convention] seemed to bolster the "compassionate conservative" image the Bush-Cheney ticket hoped to portray. After her father became veep, Mary joined the gay-friendly Republican Unity Coalition and gave speeches encouraging the GOP to reach out to women, minorities and gays. "We can make sexual orientation a nonissue for the Republican Party, and we can help achieve equality for all gay and lesbian Americans," she said in an April 2002 statement." In August 2000, Time wrote: "When reporters asked about Mary Cheney's personal life, however, they were told the campaign wouldn't discuss it. Last week Mary Cheney, 31, stayed in Wyoming after her dad's debut rally. She was away from the suburban Denver home she shares with her girlfriend Heather and away from the constantly ringing phone. She was torn over how to handle press inquiries about her homosexuality. "I love my father," she told an acquaintance. "I don't want to be a distraction." ..."She's encouraging people to call the campaign, because that will force them to come up with some answers," said Mike Smith, a Denver gay activist who has known Cheney for three years... Mary Cheney isn't a gay activist. But until May, she worked for Coors Brewing Co. as liaison to the gay community, and she gave buckets of the brewer's money to gay causes. ("She was one of our secret weapons in terms of donations," an activist said.) She traveled the country defending the company at meetings of gay radicals who oppose the G.O.P. politics of the Coors family... For now, she's keeping quiet about Dad's politics. "It must be very tough for her to feel that second-class status implied by his positions," says Dee Mosbacher, the lesbian daughter of Robert Mosbacher, Commerce Secretary under Bush's father."
   755. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:41 AM (#4654110)
He came out to his Missouri teammates last season, who then went 12-2, 7-1 in the SEC, and won the Cotton Bowl. But I'm sure there will be plenty of hand-wringing among scouts and the media, regardless.


"I don't think football is ready for [an openly gay player] just yet," said an NFL player personnel assistant. "In the coming decade or two, it's going to be acceptable, but at this point in time it's still a man's-man game. To call somebody a [gay slur] is still so commonplace. It'd chemically imbalance an NFL locker room and meeting room."

One of many quotes from NFL people to the same effect.
   756. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:43 AM (#4654111)
Man, I hope re-litigating the Bush and Clinton administrations sticks as the preferred strategy of the Republicans.
   757. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:47 AM (#4654114)
@730 SdeB wrote:

Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well.


@732 you quoted @730 and replied:

Since no one cares about the Vice Presidency, running on the ticket in 2000 and 2004 doesn't count? bwahahaha


You clearly and obviously misread SdeB's point at 730 and jumped in to smart-ass it up about how stupid it was to say Cheney "didn't run on a ticket in 2000 and 2004." That was, quite clearly, not what was stated at 730. You got it wrong. He was right. Cheney hasn't run in a primary since 1988. He did not run in primaries in 2000 or 2004. Just admit you read it to fast, jumped to the gotcha and got it wrong. Everyone does that occasionally. You did it here. Own it and move on.

   758. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:49 AM (#4654117)
It's interesting to note that the quotes in 755 are from executives and scouts/coaches rather than players. It doesn't change the situation, but I suspect the players are way ahead of them, in the same way younger people are way ahead generally. The coaching/executive group are not giving their audience or their team enough credit, but I guess that is the way of bigotry in the first place.

//"in a decade or two it's going to be acceptable"? There will be athletes in gay marketing campaigns by the end of this decade.
   759. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:52 AM (#4654123)
It's interesting to note that the quotes in 755 are from executives and scouts/coaches rather than players. It doesn't change the situation, but I suspect the players are way ahead of them, in the same way younger people are way ahead generally. The coaching/executive group are not giving their audience or their team enough credit, but I guess that is the way of bigotry in the first place.


Perhaps. Even likely. But there's also going to be a large, and probably vocal (internally, in the clubhouse) contingent of players *aghast* at the idea of a gay man in their midst. NFL lockerooms are very much a Bible-thumping environment.

EDIT: and of course, it's the conservative front office suits who run draft day. Sam's draft stock just plummeted. Period.
   760. zonk Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:56 AM (#4654127)
It's interesting to note that the quotes in 755 are from executives and scouts/coaches rather than players. It doesn't change the situation, but I suspect the players are way ahead of them, in the same way younger people are way ahead generally. The coaching/executive group are not giving their audience or their team enough credit, but I guess that is the way of bigotry in the first place.


This, I hope.

The response from other players - on twitter and elsewhere - has been universally positive...

As Deion Sanders tweeted --

Michael Sam isn't the 1st gay player in the NFL although he is the 1st 2 come out.#realtalk Let's show him love like a family member. Truth


Sams might be just fine in a locker room... Now, the comments section of any newspaper on the other hand?
   761. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:57 AM (#4654130)
I am always a bit bemused by the logic that starts with the result and looks backward to find a commonality, and then presumes the relationship is static. Homer Nobody, fireballing lefty has never lost a Monday night start in 10 tries! I like his chances next Monday!


The term for that is overfitting.

Folks sometimes forget that correlation does not equal causation-
   762. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:59 AM (#4654132)
Well, selfishly I hope the 49ers or Vikings get him at a bargain draft position and he turns into a superstar.

Yeah the NFL is very risk averse though in everything it does, so it did likely hurt his draft position (20 rounds might be a bit much, since the draft does not go that long).

In the long run though if he performs he will do well, because results matter - see the NFL careers of Michael Vick and Tim Tebow for an example, if you can play everything else will be forgotten.
   763. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:59 AM (#4654133)
The response from other players - on twitter and elsewhere - has been universally positive...


Deion Sanders is an ex-player, a commentator, and a minister. It's unlikely he represents a valid sampling of the NFL locker room. It's unlikely that he would have been as open and positive in his playing days as "Prime Time" as he is now, as a wise elder statesman of the league. And it's likely that the sample of players who are on Twitter skew toward oversampling the types of players who would embrace a gay player in the league. Certainly, the folks who oppose it viscerally won't go on Twitter about it, but they will be vocal in the locker room itself.
   764. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 10, 2014 at 10:59 AM (#4654134)
The response from other players - on twitter and elsewhere - has been universally positive...


Not universally. I saw former QB Shaun King and WR Patrick Crayton say something to the effect of "keep it to yourself."
   765. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:01 AM (#4654138)
20 rounds might be a bit much, since the draft does not go that long


I realized that I had gone with baseball draft configuration right when I hit send...

In the long run though if he performs he will do well, because results matter - see the NFL careers of Michael Vick and Tim Tebow for an example, if you can play everything else will be forgotten.


True. But being part of a defensive line is not the same as being a QB. I hope the NFL is more enlightened than I think it likely is.
   766. Ron J2 Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:02 AM (#4654140)
#708 Jonathan Bernstein looked at the specifics. An awful lot of guesswork there. From what I can tell, there's a very large margin of error and 64% is the upper bounds. Makes for a better story though.



Cook's senate races overview is always the best place to start, and when you break it down by races in play, I think it's currently slightly odds against the Republicans getting the seats they need.

There are only 2 Republican seats remotely in play right now. McConnell and Georgia. There are 9 currently held by the Democrats in play (of which 1 -- West Virginia -- is a likely gain for the Republicans)

Basically to get to 64% you have to assume that Cook is significantly off -- and that's rarely been a good bet.

   767. Random Transaction Generator Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:07 AM (#4654141)
I saw former QB Shaun King and WR Patrick Crayton say something to the effect of "keep it to yourself."


I think the gay players should "keep it to themselves" at the same time when their fellow hetro team mates also stop talking about their sexual conquests.
   768. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:13 AM (#4654150)
The response from other players - on twitter and elsewhere - has been universally positive...


Not universally. I saw former QB Shaun King and WR Patrick Crayton say something to the effect of "keep it to yourself."

But we're clearly heading towards the point where players like King and Crayton will learn to keep opinions like that to themselves and their circle of non-twitwitting friends.
   769. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:14 AM (#4654151)
And really, don't gay athletes "keep it to themselves" for the most part now? Knowing their sexual orientation doesn't mean the dynamics of how a particular player interacts in mixed sexuality environments is going to change. As Deion aptly notes above, Sams may be the first openly gay player, but he's far from the first gay player, and the other guys in the locker room have been aware of this for a long time.
   770. bunyon Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:15 AM (#4654152)
My first thought was that Sams came out now, even though it might cost him draft position and money, because it increases the chance he'll go somewhere where he will be more welcomed than others. My assumption is: he wants to come out, publicly. Having some team who really doesn't like that draft him and then coming out would be both a potential disaster and avoidable. So, you come out before the draft. And far enough before for things to die down some and for a team to be able to talk to its players and get its public image set.

My guess is like others: if he can play, he'll be fine.


   771. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:15 AM (#4654153)
And here you go again, lying about what I said. You are quite a clown.

You clearly and obviously misread SdeB's point at 730 and jumped in to smart-ass it up about how stupid it was to say Cheney "didn't run on a ticket in 2000 and 2004." That was, quite clearly, not what was stated at 730. You got it wrong. He was right. Cheney hasn't run in a primary since 1988.


Post #730 said "Cheney hasn't run in a Republican primary since 1988. And since nobody cares about VP candidates, that was the last real office he ran for as well."

I mocked the VP part of his statement because it deserves a good mocking. I don't care a lick about when Cheney's last primary was and made no response to that part of his statement.

You ain't too bright, are you Ricky? Or are you just so filled with hate you can't think straight?

   772. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:17 AM (#4654155)
I mocked the VP part of his statement because it deserves a good mocking. I don't care a lick about when Cheney's last primary was and made no response to that part of his statement.


Keep spinning. We all know you're lying.

You ain't too bright, are you Ricky?


I'm smart enough to recognize a dead end when I see it. Have a lovely day, Cynthia.
   773. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:40 AM (#4654168)
Your surrender is noted.
   774. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM (#4654173)
Keep spinning. We all know you're lying.


Not so much. I mean the whole conversation is a sideshow, but Rickey! is a bit closer to the heart of the matter than you - and yes I am ignoring the various word and sentence parsing and mind reading that goes on way too much in these threads.

Dick C and his experience is not representative as to the experience of 2016 candidates, suggesting it is is silly.
   775. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:06 PM (#4654182)
I mean the whole conversation is a sideshow

I've seen some picayune things argued here, but this one is right up there.
   776. Lassus Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:07 PM (#4654183)
Sam's draft stock just plummeted. Period.

I'm going to equivocate here and be fine with "fell". I think "plummeted" is an oversell, but I suppose we'll see.
   777. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:10 PM (#4654188)
I mean the whole conversation is a sideshow


Better that than a slideshow, I suppose.
   778. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:12 PM (#4654189)
   779. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:24 PM (#4654204)
Sam's draft stock just plummeted. Period.


It only takes one team to say "this guy can help us and the media circus/gay issue won't matter." The best situation is a team with a long-time/well-respected coach, a good clubhouse leader, a strong organization, and a fairly progressive city. New England, Denver, Seattle all seem like great landing spots. Even a bad team like the NY Giants might be a good fit.

A total shitshow of an organization like Cleveland or Miami or Minnesota would be terrible. A new coach probably would be overwhelmed by the media circus. A young team with no leaders won't be able to keep the homophobes in line.
   780. Shibal Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:40 PM (#4654224)
Not so much. I mean the whole conversation is a sideshow, but Rickey! is a bit closer to the heart of the matter than you - and yes I am ignoring the various word and sentence parsing and mind reading that goes on way too much in these threads.


The problem isn't word parsing as much as Ricky's lies about what I said.

I'm not disagreeing with his points about why Cheney isn't called a RINO. I disagree with post #727's depiction of a RINO being a supporter of gay marriage. RINO's are GOPers for more gun control, higher taxes, pro-abortion, and amnesty regarding immigration. Gay marriage is far far down on the list of priorities for most Republicans. It isn't a big deal anymore.
   781. zonk Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:51 PM (#4654235)
I'm not disagreeing with his points about why Cheney isn't called a RINO. I disagree with post #727's depiction of a RINO being a supporter of gay marriage. RINO's are GOPers for more gun control, higher taxes, pro-abortion, and amnesty regarding immigration. Gay marriage is far far down on the list of priorities for most Republicans. It isn't a big deal anymore.


I think I'd say that many plenty of Republican officeholders and politicos dearly want it far far down the list, and I might even say that for a plurality of Republican voters maybe it's not a big deal...

But - I also think that there a significant number of Republicans, in office and out, who consider it a BFD. The current Indiana governor Mike Pence, for example, is pushing hard to enact a gay marriage ban at the very same time other states see things going in the opposite direction (and the courts have pretty much sounded the alarm that such things are now a waste of time). In fact - the original bill Pence pushed for did more than just outlaw 'gay marriage', it actively went out of its way to specifically outlaw civil unions, too.

Nationally, I'm sure most Republicans just want it to be settled, to go away, and they'll happily accept that... but locally in many places? Significant opposition remains and it continues to be a big issue.
   782. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:54 PM (#4654238)
Gay marriage is far far down on the list of priorities for most Republicans. It isn't a big deal anymore.


National Republicans. Here in Kansas they are currently debating a bill to allow businesses to refuse to serve gay people.
   783. spike Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:56 PM (#4654241)
Gay marriage is far far down on the list of priorities for most Republicans. It isn't a big deal anymore.

Says you. It was a platform plank in 2012. Not a single GOP Presidential candidate was for it besides a lukewarm Ron Paul! - Huntsman didn't come out for it until after the election. Cruz is opposed to marriage equality. Rubio is opposed. Rand Paul is opposed. Jeb Bush and Christie are trying to have it both ways but still opposed.
   784. BDC Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:57 PM (#4654242)
The rhetorical battle in the quotes from Gonfalon's #754 fascinates me. One side is able to bait the other by being sincerely nice and respectful. The other takes the bait by saying (in effect): "How dare you invite us to say we're proud of our proud family member?"

This would remain a historical curiosity if it weren't for how live a problem it still was for Liz Cheney even a few weeks ago.
   785. Bitter Mouse Posted: February 10, 2014 at 12:58 PM (#4654245)
Gay marriage is far far down on the list of priorities for most Republicans. It isn't a big deal anymore.


To add on to what others have said, tell that to the Republicans voting in primaries in Iowa, Carolina, and so on.
   786. Len Lansford, Carney Barker Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:00 PM (#4654246)
Says you. It was a platform plank in 2012. Not a single GOP Presidential candidate was for it besides a lukewarm Ron Paul! - Huntsman didn't come out for it until after the election. Cruz is opposed to marriage equality. Rubio is opposed. Rand Paul is opposed. Jeb Bush and Christie are trying to have it both ways but still opposed.


I'll do you one better. How many states did Rick Santorum win in 2012? How many was he competitive in? How many can he be competitive in 2016, and how good is his shot at winning the nomination?
   787. steagles Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:00 PM (#4654247)
for all the republicans out there, it seems we have a new confirmed case of voter fraud:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) talked to Right Wing News about voting for Ronald Reagan:

"I remember, I was a teenager, had just become a teenager and voted for Ronald Reagan -- limited government, you know, smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense. You knew what you were getting. You knew how a Reagan administration, a Reagan presidency was going to be better for you."

One problem: Blogging Blue notes Walker wasn't old enough to vote in either 1980 or 1984 when Reagan ran for president.
   788. zenbitz Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:04 PM (#4654252)
Don't the vikings have a famously anti gay coach (who got Kleuw fired)? Or is he gone?
   789. Len Lansford, Carney Barker Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:07 PM (#4654255)
One problem: Blogging Blue notes Walker wasn't old enough to vote in either 1980 or 1984 when Reagan ran for president.


To be fair, Reagan put together a stronger platform and smoother campaign than everyone else running for student council.
   790. BDC Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:09 PM (#4654259)
There's a court challenge to the Texas gay marriage ban just underway, but no ballot issues here at the moment.

The bigger controversy in Texas is over federal advocacy for married troops and dependents. An inconceivable amount of money and personnel filter through Fort Hood every year on their way to and from the war zones. There's a sharp contrast between the DoD, now suddenly very progressive, and a state government that lionizes the military, depends on its presence as an economic engine, but can't abide its social policies.
   791. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:09 PM (#4654260)
Don't the vikings have a famously anti gay coach (who got Kleuw fired)? Or is he gone?


I saw a headline within the last week or so noting that he'd been renewed, or was still on staff, or something.
   792. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:10 PM (#4654263)
National Republicans. Here in Kansas they are currently debating a bill to allow businesses to refuse to serve gay people.


No. Not National Republicans. The withered arm of the GOP that is the "Rockefeller Republican" from the NEC, and the establishment Republican in DC who understands the foolishness of fighting last decade's culture war after you already lost it nationally. I suspect that Shibal exists in one or both of those circles. The actual national polity of the GOP, as counted by the states legislatures of deep red states and the voters that put them in charge, are still quite up in arms about the "defense of marriage."
   793. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4654265)
Don't the vikings have a famously anti gay coach (who got Kleuw fired)? Or is he gone?


Special teams coach. Virulent homophobe. Not an outlier, I suspect.
   794. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:44 PM (#4654285)
Regarding Michael Sam -- My guess is that NFL scouts and front office personnel are likely to be a lot less tolerant than the 20-somethings that make up the bulk of the players, due to the age cohorts that each group comes from. This will be increasingly true as the years go on and you get players who don't really remember a world before gay marriage in Massachusetts. Point is that tweets of support by youngish players and anonymous negative comments by older front office types is exactly the split you'd expect in this situation. Old scounts and ex-players remember the manly-man clubhouse of yore, while there's a good chance that a 25-year-old player has known someone who's out and doesn't think it's that big of a deal.

Special teams coach. Virulent homophobe. Not an outlier, I suspect.

I know this isn't what you mean, but from now on I'm going to stereotype special teams as the last refuge from raging bigots.
   795. Ron J2 Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:45 PM (#4654289)
In today's Rob Ford news: Film deal for Crazy Town

Some discussion about who to cast as Ford. Of course Chris Farley would have been spot on. I think somebody put together a bunch of Farley clips that are perfect Ford.
   796. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:46 PM (#4654290)
I know this isn't what you mean, but from now on I'm going to stereotype special teams as the last refuge from raging bigots.


Funny. I'll join in and just start telling people that they're acting like a special teams coach.
   797. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:52 PM (#4654294)
Looks like I'm not the only one who believes the current polling - White House Senate Strategy: Keep Obama Away:
The White House and Senate Democrats are preparing an extensive midterm campaign strategy built around one unavoidable fact: Hardly any candidates in the most competitive states want President Barack Obama anywhere near them.

POLITICO spoke with nearly every incumbent up for reelection and aspiring Democratic Senate candidates across the country, but only a handful gave an unequivocal “yes” when asked whether they wanted Obama to come campaign with them.

Difficult for a President's party to win where he's too unpopular to campaign.
   798. ASmitty Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:52 PM (#4654296)
Mack's prospect status was quite variable before the announcement. He was a good college player, but I always saw him mocked from the third to the fifth. Given that, it will be tough to say with any certainty how his coming out affected his draft position, barring a drop into the seventh round or something similar.
   799. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:53 PM (#4654297)
Point is that tweets of support by youngish players and anonymous negative comments by older front office types is exactly the split you'd expect in this situation.

Consider that just a few short years ago, it was the supporters of gay rights who were largely speaking behind closed doors, while the bigots were loud and open in their bigotry. It kind of speaks volumes that anti-gay bigotry among athletes is fast becoming almost exclusively anonymous.
   800. zonk Posted: February 10, 2014 at 01:54 PM (#4654300)
Regarding Michael Sam -- My guess is that NFL scouts and front office personnel are likely to be a lot less tolerant than the 20-somethings that make up the bulk of the players, due to the age cohorts that each group comes from. This will be increasingly true as the years go on and you get players who don't really remember a world before gay marriage in Massachusetts. Point is that tweets of support by youngish players and anonymous negative comments by older front office types is exactly the split you'd expect in this situation. Old scounts and ex-players remember the manly-man clubhouse of yore, while there's a good chance that a 25-year-old player has known someone who's out and doesn't think it's that big of a deal.


This is true...

To a person - when I think of children of cousins, family, friends, etc that are in their teens and 20s, no matter whether their parents lean right or left -- to a person, they roll their eyes when the 'adults' talk about such things.

Perhaps it's because the liberal entertainment establishment has successfully inoculated them or something, but they truly do not understand why this 'debate' is even necessary.
Page 8 of 36 pages ‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam S
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogTigers' Miguel Cabrera appears to re-injure ankle, leaves game
(9 - 3:35am, Sep 01)
Last: Cooper Nielson

NewsblogBackman named PCL’s top manager
(12 - 2:57am, Sep 01)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

NewsblogBob Melvin calls Athletics 'pathetic' after Angels sweep four-game set
(1 - 2:09am, Sep 01)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(779 - 2:09am, Sep 01)
Last: DJS and the Infinite Sadness

NewsblogJesus Montero gets heckled by Mariners cross checker during rehab stint
(58 - 2:00am, Sep 01)
Last: Weratych

NewsblogAthletics Acquire Adam Dunn
(22 - 1:37am, Sep 01)
Last: 6 - 4 - 3

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-1-2014
(1 - 1:13am, Sep 01)
Last: Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq.

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(90 - 12:53am, Sep 01)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(6296 - 12:32am, Sep 01)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-31-2014
(100 - 12:29am, Sep 01)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogHigh School Baseball Game In Japan Takes 50 Innings, Four Days
(6 - 11:46pm, Aug 31)
Last: Gamingboy

NewsblogBlue Jays Acquire Mayberry Jr.
(2 - 11:41pm, Aug 31)
Last: John Northey

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(42 - 11:33pm, Aug 31)
Last: Robert in Manhattan Beach

NewsblogSherman: How Reds react to second-half swoon will be major factor in offseason
(5 - 9:46pm, Aug 31)
Last: Select Storage Device

NewsblogOrioles Acquire Kelly Johnson
(20 - 9:44pm, Aug 31)
Last: Mike Emeigh

Page rendered in 1.3433 seconds
55 querie(s) executed