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

Wednesday, January 02, 2013

OTP - Jan 2013: Jewish Journal:E1: An error in baseball and Mideast politics

Tripon Posted: January 02, 2013 at 02:48 PM | 2805 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: ot, 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 15 of 29 pages ‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›
   1401. McCoy Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:18 AM (#4348084)
flip
   1402. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:24 AM (#4348086)
I think the real question is what one is trying to achieve. If you want a unified hyper energy (and everything else) efficient archology (with under ground mass transit for McCoy) then yes building from scratch is clearly the way to go. If you want the most bang for your buck then clearly leveraging existing cities makes more sense.


The idea of going out in the middle of nowhere and just starting to build massive infrastructure for the "new city" is a very Communist Party of China sort of idea.
   1403. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:35 AM (#4348098)
Do you really think you could just close down Paris and rebuild it more efficiently 200 miles up the river?


Baghdad is basically Ctesiphon/Seleucia rebuilt from scratch 20 miles upriver.
   1404. Bitter Mouse Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM (#4348120)
The idea of going out in the middle of nowhere and just starting to build massive infrastructure for the "new city" is a very Communist Party of China sort of idea.


Every few months I find an article about China building a city somewhere for some reason.
   1405. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:06 PM (#4348129)
You kind of have to wonder what the life expectancy is going to be in China over the next half century if they don't begin dealing with problems like this.
   1406. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:15 PM (#4348134)
Looks very much like photos of Pittsburgh in the 1940s.
   1407. CrosbyBird Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:19 PM (#4348137)
When did I ever say I felt guilty? I don't want to live in a world where I get sent to prison for seven years because cops find me smoking a joint in the park;

In which U.S. jurisdictions is this happening?

Oklahoma, if it's your second offense?

Possession of any amount of marijuana is a violation which is subject to up to one year of incarceration (conditional release may be granted).

A subsequent conviction for possession is a felony which carries the penalty of 2-10 years of incarceration.
   1408. formerly dp Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:23 PM (#4348141)
You kind of have to wonder what the life expectancy is going to be in China over the next half century if they don't begin dealing with problems like this.
It's just fog, nothing to worry about!
   1409. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:32 PM (#4348151)

(CNN) -- An Oregon sheriff says he will not enforce any federal regulation that President Barack Obama lays out in his package of gun control proposals Wednesday.

Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller joins several other public officials across the nation who have decided to square off with the White House even before it outlines what its plans are for expanded measures.

Mueller sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden this week saying he won't enforce any federal regulation "offending the constitutional rights of my citizens." He won't permit federal officers to come to his county to enforce such laws either, he said.

Mueller's defiant stand exploded into a groundswell of support. His letter -- posted on the department's Facebook page -- earned more than 59,000 likes and shares -- and was growing by the minute.

Over the weekend, Sheriff Denny Peyman of Jackson County, Kentucky, said that he too will disobey any directive from the administration. He told residents in a town hall meeting that the sheriff has more power than the federal government.

"They need to go back and study that. We are a commonwealth. I can ask federal people to leave, they have to leave. I can ask state people to leave, they have to leave," he said.

In Texas, a lawmaker said this week that he will introduce legislation that would make it illegal to enforce a federal gun ban.

"At some point there needs to be a showdown between the states and the federal government over the Supremacy Clause," Republican Rep. Steve Toth told WOAI 1200-AM. "It is our responsibility to push back when those laws are infringed by King Obama."


Pops popcorn, gets comfy chair ...
   1410. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:38 PM (#4348157)
boy those states are really going to be pissed when the gov decides #### it not a single tax dollars for you until you abide by what we say!


   1411. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:47 PM (#4348165)
You kind of have to wonder what the life expectancy is going to be in China over the next half century if they don't begin dealing with problems like this.

Looks very much like photos of Pittsburgh in the 1940s.


You see pollution, but I see JOBS!
   1412. McCoy Posted: January 16, 2013 at 12:56 PM (#4348173)
At some point there needs to be a showdown between the states and the federal government

I think we had that already. The federal government won.

In the end I think the feds will do what Reagan did with the drinking age. If you didn't raise the drinking age to 21 you didn't get federal transportation money.

Don't change your gun laws you don't get federal education money or something like that.
   1413. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:04 PM (#4348181)
In the end I think the feds will do what Reagan did with the drinking age. If you didn't raise the drinking age to 21 you didn't get federal transportation money.

Don't change your gun laws you don't get federal education money or something like that.


Exactly, although I'm sure that'll disappoint a few hundred wingnut sheriffs who're probably sitting around fantasizing about a shootout with Big Bad Obama.
   1414. zenbitz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:12 PM (#4348188)
Is Joe complaining that the the Librul Chicago Government wouldn't fire POLICE?!?! The *real* left wing (i.e, left of mainstream democrats like Obama/Feinstein/Reid/Pelosi) are the ones who complain about police. When was the last time a right-winger non-libertarian held the LOCAL police responsible for ANY wrong doing,
   1415. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:15 PM (#4348192)
Pops popcorn, gets comfy chair ...


Two thoughts.

First, these ####### have never actually read the Constitution. They've read snippets, mostly from the Bill of Rights. They have no idea what "constitutional" means.

Second, replace "guns" with "pot" and watch the sides run around the table!
   1416. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:20 PM (#4348198)

In the end I think the feds will do what Reagan did with the drinking age. If you didn't raise the drinking age to 21 you didn't get federal transportation money.

Don't change your gun laws you don't get federal education money or something like that.


Is this really settled in this context? South Dakota v. Dole dealt with congressional action, after all.

And all that depends on the executive orders that survive legal challenges. The orders given related to authority given by the Brady act seem to this layman to be more likely to withstand challenge than the ones given that are related to authority given by the assault weapon ban, in which Congress explicitly set a sunset provision and chose not to renew.

   1417. zonk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:35 PM (#4348227)

Is this really settled in this context? South Dakota v. Dole dealt with congressional action, after all.


It's only "not settled" if one delves into fever swampism around precisely what these 'executive orders' will encompass... I.e., it's pretty clear that any SUBSTANTIAL changes around gun control -- limiting magazine size, eliminating the gun show loophole for background checks, and a ban on assault weapons -- aren't going to come via executive order. Obama already said as much, and everyone with two properly firing neurons, on either side of the debate, knows that Obama cannot just 'executive order' any of these things into law.

I'd bet good money that the EOs are going to be pretty uncontroversial -- changes to existing rules and regs already authorized by law.

90% of the folks wailing in terror over "Executive Orders" have no idea what they are, have never (and will never) read one -- and the other 10% (those that do) are simply doing a deft bit of fear-mongering to play on the existing lack of lucidity in that 90%.

The EOs will hardly be secret fuhrer directives -- perhaps it would be wise to actually get a look at them before hoisting the stars and bars....

EDIT: to Dan's edit in 1416 -- again, while we haven't see the EOs -- Obama's presser made it pretty clear that those 'big ticket items', the assault weapons ban included, aren't something he EO his way into... he stated quite clearly congress has to do those things via legislation.
   1418. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:35 PM (#4348228)
With enough hookers and blow and gambling, you can start a city anywhere. Just ask Vegas.


Phoenix population, 1950: 106,818
Phoenix population, 2010: 1,445,632

Sometimes all you need is sunshine. It doesn't even need to be good sunshine.
   1419. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:43 PM (#4348239)
It's only "not settled" if one delves into fever swampism around precisely what these 'executive orders' will encompass... I.e., it's pretty clear that any SUBSTANTIAL changes around gun control -- limiting magazine size, eliminating the gun show loophole for background checks, and a ban on assault weapons -- aren't going to come via executive order. Obama already said as much, and everyone with two properly firing neurons, on either side of the debate, knows that Obama cannot just 'executive order' any of these things into law.

Sorry, I didn't paste what I was referring to, which was the Kentucky sheriff not enforcing any "directive from the administration."

Obviously, legislation passed by Congress is a different matter entirely. Wasn't really talking about that because I don't expect anything really significant to happen that route.
   1420. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:49 PM (#4348247)
Sorry, I didn't paste what I was referring to, which was the Kentucky sheriff not enforcing any "directive from the administration."


As a local sheriff, it wouldn't be his job to enforce executive orders. He just needs to not get in the way of the FBI if they choose to do so, right?
   1421. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:53 PM (#4348252)
Here's the list of Imperial Diktats handed down by EmperorFuhrerKing ObamaHitler:


Updated at 12:22 p.m. ET] The announcement is over, and Obama is signing the 23 executive actions. These orders are in addition to laws that Obama wants Congress to pass. Here, according to the White House, are what the 23 executive actions will do, without congressional approval:

1. "Issue a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system."

2. "Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system."

3. "Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system."

4. "Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

5. "Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun."

6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."

7. "Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign."

8. "Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission)."

9. "Issue a presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations."

10. "Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement."

11. "Nominate an ATF director."

12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."

13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

14. "Issue a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

15. "Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies."

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

17. "Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."

18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

19. "Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education."

20. "Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover."

21. "Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges."

22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."

23. "Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health."


Going to be interesting to watch various parties contort themselves into a froth over these, but I've no doubt it's going to happen ...
   1422. Morty Causa Posted: January 16, 2013 at 01:59 PM (#4348261)
As a local sheriff, it wouldn't be his job to enforce executive orders. He just needs to not get in the way of the FBI if they choose to do so, right?


Yes. See Orval Faubus and President Eisenhower.
   1423. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:04 PM (#4348264)
Going to be interesting to watch various parties contort themselves into a froth over these, but I've no doubt it's going to happen ...

Yeah, there's nothing really all that weird in there.
   1424. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:06 PM (#4348268)
The reaction by the NRA and others to these will tell us just how crazy these people are
   1425. Tilden Katz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:10 PM (#4348271)
Marco Rubio has already come out against the EO's.
   1426. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:10 PM (#4348272)
The reaction by the NRA and others to these will tell us just how crazy these people are


Do we need further evidence in that regard?
   1427. DA Baracus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:12 PM (#4348274)
Here's the list of Imperial Diktats handed down by EmperorFuhrerKing ObamaHitler:


I thought this said "Imperial Ditkas" which would be awesome and not impossible since Obama is a Bears fan.
   1428. formerly dp Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:15 PM (#4348278)
So Big O passed on banning Call of Duty?
   1429. McCoy Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:17 PM (#4348280)
I've got a sock with a hole in it at the big toe location and no matter how I put my socks on or store them or whatever that sock always ends up on my left foot. How in the hell does that keep happening?
   1430. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:21 PM (#4348287)
I've got a sock with a hole in it at the big toe location and no matter how I put my socks on or store them or whatever that sock always ends up on my left foot. How in the hell does that keep happening?


Obamacare.
   1431. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:22 PM (#4348288)
The reaction by the NRA and others to these will tell us just how crazy these people are

I believe the clinical term for their level of crazy is: batshit.
   1432. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4348290)
I've got a sock with a hole in it at the big toe location and no matter how I put my socks on or store them or whatever that sock always ends up on my left foot.

Have you tried storing the offending sock in the bin?
   1433. McCoy Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:27 PM (#4348293)
Obamacare.

That's what I was afraid of.

On a surprising note I was mildly surprised that the $220,000 government bathroom hasn't been linked to yet by one of our resident anti-Obamanites but I discovered why when I finally read an article on it. The bathroom was renovated during the Bush administration and not during the Obama administration.
   1434. Tilden Katz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:31 PM (#4348300)
Freedom bathroom.
   1435. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:39 PM (#4348312)
Freedom bathroom.


We call those "freedom farts."
   1436. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:41 PM (#4348316)
We call those "freedom farts."

Damn, I've been telling people after I fart that I gave them a taste of France, freedom fart would go over much better.
   1437. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: January 16, 2013 at 02:49 PM (#4348325)
11. "Nominate an ATF director."


That's non-controversial on the surface, but you can guarantee that anyone that Obama nominates is going to be put through the wringer by the NRA and its congressional lapdogs.

16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."


And that one has already triggered Advanced Obama Derangement Syndrome in more than one state legislature, since the doctors in question here are usually psychiatrists.
   1438. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 16, 2013 at 03:18 PM (#4348344)

Old Hoss Radbourn Old Hoss Radbourn ?@OldHossRadbourn

I killed nigh 2,500 Rebs with naught more than a broken cavalry saber and a single-shot pistol. You will be fine, America.
   1439. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 03:46 PM (#4348361)
Old Hoss Radbourn ?@OldHossRadbourn

I hope the administration does not ban my Irish-piercing ammunition
   1440. DA Baracus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 03:48 PM (#4348362)
That's non-controversial on the surface, but you can guarantee that anyone that Obama nominates is going to be put through the wringer by the NRA and its congressional lapdogs.


Obama should force Congress to approve him, at gunpoint.
   1441. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 03:57 PM (#4348370)
I've got a sock with a hole in it at the big toe location and no matter how I put my socks on or store them or whatever that sock always ends up on my left foot. How in the hell does that keep happening?


Darn it!
   1442. zonk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 04:16 PM (#4348381)
Going to be interesting to watch various parties contort themselves into a froth over these, but I've no doubt it's going to happen ...

Yeah, there's nothing really all that weird in there.


The HIPAA stuff might be an area where -- if someone were to raise some questions in a non-inflammatory manner, would be worthy of examining the specifics.... i.e., disclosure of health issues by physicians/care givers DOES have some implications that I wouldn't take lightly.

Not saying it ought to be any cause for alarm or anything... just saying it's one area where a calm discussion on the specifics and some scenario gaming is appropriate.
   1443. Lassus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:00 PM (#4348406)
I decided long, long ago that one of the benefits of employment is immediate disposal of any sock with a hole in it.
   1444. zonk Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:09 PM (#4348416)
Old Hoss Radbourn ?@OldHossRadbourn

I hope the administration does not ban my Irish-piercing ammunition


Anytime someone complains about twitter and what a negative impact it has on the world or otherwise claims it to be irrelevant, annoying, or worthless --

@OldHossRadbourn is generally my go-to retort.
   1445. A Fatty Cow That Need Two Seats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:12 PM (#4348419)
I still marvel at how Fake Tony Schiavone continues to have less than a thousand followers. It's legit great stuff.
   1446. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:15 PM (#4348425)

I still marvel at how Fake Tony Schiavone continues to have less than a thousand followers. It's legit great stuff.


You're not living until you're following Cranky Vince.

Oh, also, everyone should read David Remnick's latest piece on the rising tide of radical Israeli conservativism.
   1447. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:23 PM (#4348431)
Gun show reactions

He's not saying anything anyone disagrees with there," Harris said. "But that's always his ploy."



   1448. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:27 PM (#4348432)
Boy the morons are in full froth this afternoon. The chain emails are flying. Seriously, people still think Obama is a Muslim from Africa sent by international communists to create a Nazi state? Derp?
   1449. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:31 PM (#4348437)
   1450. DA Baracus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:42 PM (#4348443)
"It's easy for him to say," Harris said. "His kids go to school with armed guards carrying assault rifles. They sleep all right."


"I lack the ability to think for myself" he added.
   1451. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:51 PM (#4348449)
   1452. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:57 PM (#4348451)
Twitter Twatter:

Ellen Carmichael@ellencarmichael
The incredible irony of an administration responsible for #fastandfurious telling law-abiding people about their gun rights....

Erick Erickson @EWErickson
The President is surrounded by children, all of whom if born alive following an abortion, he'd be okay with the doctor finishing the job.

Jennifer Rubin@JRubinBlogger
I hate to call off the kabuki play on guns but can we get back to the debt ceiling?

Michelle Malkin @michellemalkin
Obama is mad. Don’t you know only the White House is allowed to use their kids and other kids for political gain!?

John Nolte @NolteNC
Why isn't the media criticizing Obama for giving all that Hollywood violence a pass today? Oh, yeah, cuz that was all a con to grab guns.

Lori Ziganto@snarkandboobs
Crocodile tears Obama invokes right to life, '1st task is keeping children safe'; What about abortion? bit.ly/13DPCzP via @TwitchyTeam

Robert Stacy McCain@rsmccain
Shorter Obama: "Excuse me while I bathe myself in the blood of victims. And shut up, haters."
   1453. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 05:59 PM (#4348455)
The link @1449 goes to a slideshow. The last few slides show a banner at the gun show for "Arsenal Firearms." They might as well have put a picture of Obama in the center of it.
   1454. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:00 PM (#4348456)
@1452 - the nutjobs, they are nutty.
   1455. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:10 PM (#4348460)
CALLER: …on any given day in Americans [sic], more than 3,000 children are killed from abortion and we have no problems with that. We’re OK with that. It’s not an issue.

So you can’t spend 40 years of telling people and telling children that if I make a mistake, if something comes up and this child I don’t want is in the way of my future and in the way of me graduating high school, is in the way of me going to college, is [in] the way of me being happy, is in the way of whatever I want out of life, that it’s OK for me to kill the baby, but later on when I become a disgruntled employee, when I become an unhappy student at school because children are bullying me, that I want to eliminate them and get them out of the way? It’s the same concept.

LIMBAUGH: Well, it’s a good point. You know how to stop abortion? Require that each one occur with a gun.


Maximum Overderp.
   1456. Tilden Katz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:13 PM (#4348461)
These are the same people who praised the guy who murdered George Tiller. And helped Eric Rudolph hide form the police for years after bombing abortion clinics and gay bars.
   1457. DA Baracus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:15 PM (#4348463)
Background checks bad.

Except for Obama's birth certificate.
   1458. Tripon Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:19 PM (#4348465)
That caller was clearly a troll and Rush fell for it. Come on, nobody can think that was a serious call.
   1459. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 16, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4348466)
Poe's Law was invented for Dittoheads.
   1460. Steve Treder Posted: January 16, 2013 at 08:18 PM (#4348531)
An interesting take:

... emerging as the celebrity world’s best gun-control advocate is MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, the man behind the one argument for reform that you should be following.

For the past 24 hours Scarborough’s Twitter stream has featured a takedown of the National Rifle Association’s extremism, 140 characters at a time. On Morning Joe over the past week, he’s slammed the organization as “sick” for, among other things, apparently releasing an iPhone videogame that allows users—age 4 and up—to take target practice. On his Politico blog, he warns the NRA of future extinction if it ignores a public that increasingly wants reform and continues with its “tone-deaf” ways.

... Scarborough ... is a Republican. He is of the same party that so many people on one side of the debate—those for sweeping gun-control reform—consider the bad guys. He is a longtime supporter of the Second Amendment and a believer of the original intention behind the formation of the NRA, calling it a good and “proud” organization that has been “besmirched and diminished” by a few powerful but out-of-touch gun lobbyists.

...

As much as he is decrying the recent spate of gun violence and the current mindset of the NRA, he is encouraging members of the Republican Party, to which the group is closely tied, to force it to reform its ways and make its way back from the edge of alienating and ultimately counterproductive extremism.

His message cites the stats, throwing out recent poll numbers about Americans’ support out “as a wake-up call” to the NRA and the Republican Party in general. “If they keep their feet in cement,” he says, “they’re going to be run over—not by Joe Biden, buy by Middle America, by people that want to protect their children.”

... Scarborough is boiling the debate down to logic, and survival. His take on the gun debate isn’t an opportunistic takedown of an out-of-touch organization, but a much needed canary in the coal mine for a major presence in American politics that doesn’t seem to be paying close enough attention. Quite simply, he says that if Republicans continue to back the NRA as it promotes its current stances, they would be “driving off the cliff into political oblivion.”

   1461. spike Posted: January 16, 2013 at 08:19 PM (#4348533)
@1452, you should include Drudge's sad haiku and emo instagram in your list of tweets.
   1462. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:19 PM (#4348588)
The number one response to that Drudge koan is the first one in the list: "Turn off the Adele."
   1463. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:37 PM (#4348602)
Oklahoma, if it's your second offense?

That law says "two to 10 years." Without some actual examples of people serving 7 years in prison simply for possessing a joint, I'm going to continue to call B.S. on BrianBrianson's claim.

***
18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

Only yesterday, lefties were saying that putting more armed guards in schools was a nutjob idea that only the idiots at the NRA could dream up. But now Obama wants to do it, so I guess it's a great idea. One needs a scorecard to keep up with the changing "principles" on the left.
   1464. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:43 PM (#4348607)
That law says "two to 10 years." Without some actual examples of people serving 7 years in prison simply for possessing a joint, I'm going to continue to call B.S. on BrianBrianson's claim.


So what. 2 years, 7 years, 10 years? Does it really negate he point? Anyone going to jail for any amount of time for merely possessing a joint is a travesty. You want to cut spending, start there.
   1465. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:44 PM (#4348608)
One of those steps, also sought by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, would have the president order the Justice Department to prosecute criminals who provide false information to buy a gun.

The mayor said that in 2010 there were 76,000 cases referred by the FBI to the Justice Department. Only 44 were prosecuted.

source

Good thing Obama cares so much about the children and all that ...
   1466. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:47 PM (#4348613)
So what. 2 years, 7 years, 10 years? Does it really negate he point? Anyone going to jail for any amount of time for merely possessing a joint is a travesty. You want to cut spending, start there.

Yes, actually, when you make it sound like people are routinely doing 7 years of hard time merely for possessing a joint but you can't name any examples, it does negate the point. (And "spending" wasn't the topic.)
   1467. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:54 PM (#4348620)
That law says "two to 10 years." Without some actual examples of people serving 7 years in prison simply for possessing a joint, I'm going to continue to call B.S. on BrianBrianson's claim.


Because the law at the state and federal level is so well known for going lenient on simple drug offenders.
   1468. zenbitz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:56 PM (#4348622)
Relase the Cover Letter!
Organize the Committees!
Prepare the Outreach!
   1469. Tilden Katz Posted: January 16, 2013 at 09:59 PM (#4348623)
Because the law at the state and federal level is so well known for going lenient on simple drug offenders.


Well it does if the offender is white.
   1470. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: January 16, 2013 at 10:05 PM (#4348627)
Well it does if the offender is white.


Conceded.
   1471. DA Baracus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 10:38 PM (#4348643)
Only yesterday, lefties were saying that putting more armed guards in schools was a nutjob idea that only the idiots at the NRA could dream up. But now Obama wants to do it, so I guess it's a great idea. One needs a scorecard to keep up with the changing "principles" on the left.


Because the NRA wanted to stock schools with NRA volunteers. That is just insane. Obama's goal of putting a UN officer in every school is clearly superior.
   1472. RollingWave Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:25 PM (#4348681)
honestly though, i think Obama erred here, these moves are unlikely to be too useful practically, and politically it's predictably divisive.

Would be more useful in both ways to let the state handle all the regulation to any extreme, and the Fed only be involved in cross state affairs. (aka even if you have no restriction on purchase, you can only do it for permanent residence within the state. and some sort of usable journey law. )
   1473. Lassus Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:42 PM (#4348698)
Yes, actually, when you make it sound like people are routinely doing 7 years of hard time merely for possessing a joint but you can't name any examples, it does negate the point. (And "spending" wasn't the topic.)

Patricia Marilyn Spottedcrow, a first-time offender with no criminal record was given a ten year sentence for selling $31 worth of pot. The judge called the sentence "lenient". She was released after two years due to intense public outcry.
   1474. SteveF Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:48 PM (#4348703)
She got 10 years for distribution and 2 for possession. Obviously both sentences seem ludicrous given the amount of marijuana involved.
   1475. Morty Causa Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:57 PM (#4348707)
Yes, it certainly does, but we don't have the case record; we have only news accounts sympathetic to her.

The law as to distribution is much harsher than for mere possession, just as selling cigarettes to minors has a harsher penalty than just giving a kid a cigarette. It's the difference between illegally making beer for your own consumption and being a bootlegger. We don't know what the sentencing investigation came up with. This lady may have been an awful scofflaw. it seems as if she was in business. Still, yes, as a matter of first impression, it seems way over the top. (Judges also don't like the convicted to get all righteous on them either. That doesn't indicate to them that you've learned your lesson, so they're not inclined to cut you slack.)
   1476. Steve Treder Posted: January 16, 2013 at 11:57 PM (#4348708)
Obviously both sentences seem ludicrous given the amount of marijuana involved.

If by "seem" you mean "are f@cking batsh!t insanely," then we agree.
   1477. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:04 AM (#4348714)
I remember when David Lee Roth was picked up for buying $10 worth of marijuana from an undercover cop in New York City. When a reporter asked him what he was doing buying $10 worth of marijuana, Diamond Dave replied, "I only smoke $10 worth of marijuana!"
   1478. spike Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:11 AM (#4348718)
30 days would #### up most peoples lives beyond repair. Imagine what a couple of years does for you.
   1479. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:17 AM (#4348722)
The idea of going out in the middle of nowhere and just starting to build massive infrastructure for the "new city" is a very Communist Party of China sort of idea.
since i'm the person who started that thread of the conversation, let me say that i am not proposing the idea of building a new-new york city in rhode island. rather, what i think is worthwhile to consider would be, well basically an extreme version of what they're doing in the detroit suburbs. the city itself has become dilapidated to such an extent that people just left, and newer communities have popped up in the surrounding areas.


part of that can be chalked up to urban sprawl, but also, it's happened because it's financially beneficial. in this situation, it really is just cheaper (and better) to build new than it is to retrofit (or demolish and rebuild) existing infrastructure that is in poor/mediocre condition.
   1480. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:17 AM (#4348723)
In 1999, State Senator Barack Obama voted “present” on a bill that would require adult prosecution for discharging a gun in or near a school.

That legislation came as a response to the tragic Columbine High School shooting that year.

SB 759 provided that anyone 15 years of age or older charged with aggravated battery with a weapon in school or within 1,000 feet of a school would be charged as an adult.

It passed the Illinois State Senate in a 52-1 vote, with 5 members voting present — including Obama.

source

I guess Obama was against the children, before he was for them.
   1481. Morty Causa Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:25 AM (#4348732)
Aren't you ashamed, Kehoskie?
   1482. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:27 AM (#4348733)
Ashamed of pointing out Obama's shamelessness? No, not at all.
   1483. Morty Causa Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:31 AM (#4348738)
Is that what you're doing? How can we tell?
   1484. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:34 AM (#4348740)
SB 759 provided that anyone 15 years of age or older charged with aggravated battery with a weapon in school or within 1,000 feet of a school would be charged as an adult.
in fairness, the population density in chicago (you know, the district he represented at the time) is such that 6000 people live within 1000 feet of any given school, so that is not exactly a narrow perimeter.


Ashamed of pointing out Obama's shamelessness? No, not at all.
if you believe that, then how do you feel about someone shamelessly bashing another person for doing something they themselves support being done?
   1485. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:40 AM (#4348749)
in fairness, the population density in chicago (you know, the district he represented at the time) is such that 6000 people live within 1000 feet of any given school, so that is not exactly a narrow perimeter.

So what? Don't you care about the children?

Remember, this is the same Obama who supported Chicago's gun ban. He didn't want law-abiding citizens to have guns, but he was apparently opposed to criminals facing harsher penalties not only for possessing guns illegally, but for firing guns in or near a school. It would be comical if it wasn't so pathetic.

if you believe that, then how do you feel about someone shamelessly bashing another person for doing something they themselves support being done?

Huh? As far as I can tell, Obama hasn't done anything to make life tougher for criminals. All he's doing is grandstanding.

As I pointed out in #1465, Obama could have prosecuted over 75,000 people who used false info. while trying to buy guns in 2010 alone, yet he prosecuted just 44 of them. And yet people seem to think the next law is going to make a difference.
   1486. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:49 AM (#4348758)
As I pointed out in #1465, Obama could have prosecuted over 75,000 people who used false info. while trying to buy guns in 2010 alone, yet he prosecuted just 44 of them. And yet people seem to think the next law is going to make a difference.
no. obama did not do any of that. the department of justice did that.

now, if you're going to ask why the department of justice passed on prosecuting 75000 - more or less - minor cases, i might point you to the general defunding of the federal government led by republican congressmen, along with the quite significant waiting list of obama appointees currently being filibustered by republican congressmen.


let's be clear here. what you're saying isn't that you think obama needs to do more, what you're saying is that obama hasn't done enough so you should vote for "us" because "we" will do even less.
So what? Don't you care about the children?
me? not really. i'm generally pro-death (or at least pro-choice, pro-2nd amendment, pro-capital punishment, and pro-euthanasia), so i'd say i care at least as little as you do.

   1487. Lassus Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:52 AM (#4348760)
but he was apparently opposed to criminals facing harsher penalties not only for possessing guns illegally, but for firing guns in or near a school.

So he was the one "no" vote? Egads!
   1488. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 12:59 AM (#4348766)
no. obama did not do any of that. the department of justice did that.

Ha ha. That's funny.

now, if you're going to ask why the department of justice passed on prosecuting 75000 - more or less - minor cases, i might point you to the general defunding of the federal government led by republican congressmen, along with the quite significant waiting list of obama appointees currently being filibustered by republican congressmen.

Even funnier. The U.S. is running trillion-dollar budget deficits but somehow it's being "defunded."

***
So he was the one "no" vote? Egads!

Even worse: In a show of incredible courageousness, he voted "present."
   1489. Tripon Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:13 AM (#4348775)
I don't know what Joe is on, but I want some of that. The hallucinations he's getting must be wild.
   1490. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:17 AM (#4348777)
Even funnier. The U.S. is running trillion-dollar budget deficits but somehow it's being "defunded."
are you drunk, or just an imbecile?


oh, and since this has been a topic of recent conversation, i am not calling you an imbecile, because that would be a slur. what i am doing is merely questioning your sobriety because your current level of comprehension and coherence is really, actually below the level of an imbecile, and it would seem to me that for an intelligent person to give the responses that you are giving, well, if you were an actually intelligent person (there's no judgment there), i would literally fear of you falling into a drug/alcohol induced coma due the sheer volume of mind-altering substances you must currently be on. if you are an actually intelligent person.


if you do not consider yourself to be an intelligent person, then sure, go ahead and consider this an invective.
   1491. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:17 AM (#4348778)
I don't know what Joe is on, but I want some of that. The hallucinations he's getting must be wild.

Well, you obviously don't have the facts on your side when it comes to Obama and guns, so I guess the above is what you're left with.

***
are you drunk, or just an imbecile?


oh, and since this has been a topic of recent conversation, i am not calling you an imbecile, because that would be a slur. what i am doing is merely questioning your sobriety because your current level of comprehension and coherence is really, actually below the level of an imbecile, and it would seem to me that for an intelligent person to give the responses that you are giving, well, if you were an actually intelligent person (there's no judgment there), i would literally fear of you falling into a drug/alcohol induced coma due the sheer volume of mind-altering substances you must currently be on. if you are an actually intelligent person.


if not, then sure, go ahead and consider this an invective.

Ha ha. Which of the five sentences in #1488 were either factually incorrect or incoherent?

The only place in which the federal government is being "defunded" is in your head.
   1492. Lassus Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:19 AM (#4348781)
Even worse: In a show of incredible courageousness, he voted "present."

The great part of all this that is that there's something for Joe to be pissed at and denigrate in all three possible Obama votes on that issue. Faith is truly awesome.
   1493. Morty Causa Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:20 AM (#4348782)
Even funnier. The U.S. is running trillion-dollar budget deficits but somehow it's being "defunded."

are you drunk, or just an imbecile?


Kids, kids. You can each get me a beer.
   1494. Tripon Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:24 AM (#4348785)

Well, you obviously don't have the facts on your side when it comes to Obama and guns, so I guess the above is what you're left with.



....He just declared 23 Executive Orders pertaining to the matters of guns, and asked Congress to pass several other laws pertaining to that subject as well.

If anything, we just been giving more information about his stance on guns in the past 24 hours than we have in the last 4 years of his presidency. Come on Joe, you're better than this.
   1495. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:24 AM (#4348786)
The great part of all this that is that there's something for Joe to be pissed at and denigrate in all three possible Obama votes on that issue. Faith is truly awesome.

Not true at all. "Present" was a gutless vote and "no" would have been dumb, but I would have given him credit for voting "yes."

***
....He just declared 23 Executive Orders pertaining to the matters of guns, and asked Congress to pass several other laws pertaining to that subject as well.

If anything, we just been giving more information about his stance on guns in the past 24 hours than we have in the last 4 years of his presidency. Come on Joe, you're better than this.

This is bizarre. Today's executive orders were little more than grandstanding, an excuse for a photo op, and they didn't tell us much of anything about Obama's position on guns that we didn't know four years ago or eight years ago or a dozen years ago. (If there was anything new, I haven't seen anyone point it out.)
   1496. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: January 17, 2013 at 01:49 AM (#4348794)
setting aside the 'process' here with respect to EO's versus congressional action, and in reading other materials published by the WH, this is simply '94 assault weapons ban 2.0, and as I've stated previously, purely cosmetic. Banning 'military- style assault weapons' doesn't take us any closer to actually defining what these weapons are, as long as these 'bans' continue to use cosmetic distinctions only.

Those of you who support this kind of stuff, you're getting played....again.
   1497. RollingWave Posted: January 17, 2013 at 03:43 AM (#4348815)
@1496:

generally agreed, this seem like a rather bad way to approach this, politically uninspiring and practically not useful.
   1498. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 03:58 AM (#4348818)

Not true at all. "Present" was a gutless vote and "no" would have been dumb, but I would have given him credit for voting "yes."
yes, let us never forget that what matters to republicans is not whether you are right or wrong, but whether you have been consistently right or stubbornly wrong, throughout your entire public life.
   1499. Tripon Posted: January 17, 2013 at 04:06 AM (#4348820)

Not true at all. "Present" was a gutless vote and "no" would have been dumb, but I would have given him credit for voting "yes."


This is bizarre. Today's executive orders were little more than grandstanding, an excuse for a photo op, and they didn't tell us much of anything about Obama's position on guns that we didn't know four years ago or eight years ago or a dozen years ago. (If there was anything new, I haven't seen anyone point it out.)


Well, this is a contradiction. Which is it, that Obama doesn't give a #### or won't vote on the issue, or that we have 'always' known what his position is. You can assume what his position is, but this is the first time during his presidency that he decided to give real credence to gun control. He held back after the Giffords event in early 2011, he held back after Aurora, and he only decided to take the issue seriously after Newton. That certainly suggests he had to be convinced at least that it was 'viable' to pursue gun control legislation.

   1500. steagles Posted: January 17, 2013 at 04:21 AM (#4348823)
Well, this is a contradiction. Which is it, that Obama doesn't give a #### or won't vote on the issue, or that we have 'always' known what his position is. You can assume what his position is, but this is the first time during his presidency that he decided to give real credence to gun control. He held back after the Giffords event in early 2011, he held back after Aurora, and he only decided to take the issue seriously after Newton. That certainly suggests he had to be convinced at least that it was 'viable' to pursue gun control legislation.
and ft hood. and that sheik temple. and george tiller. and that whole bernie goldberg thing.


interestingly, only one of these events has occurred after obama was reelected.
Page 15 of 29 pages ‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogKey question GMs have to weigh with top World Series free agents | New York Post
(30 - 9:27am, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogFor Royals' Game 3 starter, road to World Series has been long and winding | FOX Sports
(1 - 9:26am, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3415 - 9:17am, Oct 24)
Last: Ron J2

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(45 - 9:11am, Oct 24)
Last: haggard

NewsblogWhat's Buster Posey's best trait as a catcher? Here's what his pitchers had to say - Giants Extra
(8 - 9:09am, Oct 24)
Last: Chokeland Bill

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(10 - 8:58am, Oct 24)
Last: Spahn Insane

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(1 - 8:57am, Oct 24)
Last: Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(869 - 8:53am, Oct 24)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(370 - 8:02am, Oct 24)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-23-2014
(14 - 7:43am, Oct 24)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogAJC: Hart says ‘yes’ to Braves, will head baseball operations
(16 - 6:46am, Oct 24)
Last: Flynn

NewsblogGleeman: Royals may bench Norichika Aoki for Game 3
(21 - 3:00am, Oct 24)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogRoyals are not the future of baseball | FOX Sports
(39 - 11:25pm, Oct 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8370 - 11:22pm, Oct 23)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogI hope this doesn't get me fired. | FOX Sports
(23 - 11:17pm, Oct 23)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.8959 seconds
52 querie(s) executed