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

Monday, December 11, 2017

OTP 11 December, 2017 - GOP strategist: Moore would have ‘date with a baseball bat’ if he tried dating teens where I grew up

“I grew up in Mississippi. Every father I knew, if he saw a guy like Roy Moore in his 30s trying to date his 16-year-old daughter, he would have had a date with a baseball bat,” Stevens, a former aide to Mitt Romney’s campaign, said on CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360.”

Stevens, who worked on former Alabama Gov. Bob Riley’s (R) primary campaign against Moore in 2006, said Moore has violated the “decency standard” of civil society in his previous alleged pursuit of teenage girls.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:53 AM | 2653 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: bats, bats are afraid, 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 21 of 27 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 >  Last ›
   2001. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:50 AM (#5593182)
So Hillary whines something stupid and it's SBB's fault?


It's pointless, and will fall on deaf ears, but whatever. For the sake of attempting to maintain a tenuous grasp on reality, Hillary was *asked a question* about this "Kenyan Precedent" and she answered "I don't really know that much about it, but the US doesn't have anything like that." So what she actually did was tell the questioner "uh, yeah, we don't really do that here." Which is in line with her conceding immediately when the votes were tallied and participating like a trooper in the laughing stock of seeing Donald Trump "sworn in" as "President."

Of course, in the Clinton Derangement Lands occupied by SBB and Ray, her answering the question (negatively) means she was really floating a trial balloon to her minions in the Deep State to have them look into overthrowing the government and installing her Dictator for life.
   2002. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:50 AM (#5593183)
.
   2003. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:50 AM (#5593184)
The question isn't (for me anyway), social media: good or bad? But what influence social media will have on politics and society. This is a question that can be answered in the long-run or in the short-term. Both are valid approaches to history, but some people live their entire lives in the short-run.


Agreed. Though from a historical perspective we all live in the short run (or if not, I want your secret).
   2004. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:51 AM (#5593185)
Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?


Because obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense.
   2005. . Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:51 AM (#5593186)
BTW, I had no clue what the "Kenyan Precedent" even was.


Do you expect that any of us would be surprised by that?
   2006. Count Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:51 AM (#5593187)
Keep in mind that the official rationale for firing Comey, which only lasted a couple of days, was that Comey had bungled the Hillary investigation by, among other things, announcing no charges would be brought instead of just giving findings to prosecutors; having a press conference where he released derogatory information about the subject of an investigation in which charges were not brought; and (implicitly) it was inappropriate to issue that letter right before the election.
   2007. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:53 AM (#5593191)
Courtesy of RCP here's Dershowitz last night on FOX, supporting Clinton.

I do love his last sentence there, which is a doozy as a coda:

Dershowitz: Comey Was Not Clinton's Friend, The 'Extremely Careless' Statement Caused Her To Lose

DERSHOWITZ: Let's look at the big picture. Does anyone want to live under a judicial system where one's freedom depends on whether the conduct was grossly negligent or extremely careless? Those are the vaguest possible terms. If you asked a hundred potential jurors which is worse: being grossly negligent or extremely careless? They'd split 50/50. These rules are absurd the way we criminalize conduct using terms like that that endanger everyone's civil liberties.

Also, let's look at the other big picture. Comey's decision to make this statement, calling her extremely careless, may very well have contributed to her losing the election. Comey was not her friend. Comey was perceived to be somebody who was trying to strike an appropriate balance.

What I think happened here is ultimately Comey, not anybody else, made the decision on balance that she should not be prosecuted. And that's why the words were changed because if he had said that she was grossly negligent, people would say, 'Oh, my God, that's a crime.'

But he had already made the decision based on the fact that nobody had already been prosecuted who was in a position of authority like Hillary Clinton for conduct anyway similar -- that was in his statement. So I do think it was the right decision not to prosecute her criminally and I think the change of the language was designed to simply support that decision. Now look, no decision should ever be made until an investigation is complete.


   2008. BrianBrianson Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:53 AM (#5593193)
She was the Democratic nominee. It seems that you and yours are the ones who gave her an audience.


Me? I'm not a Democrat.

But - when she was the (D) nominee, giving her an audience made some sense. Now, not so much.
   2009. . Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:55 AM (#5593195)
Hillary was *asked a question* about this "Kenyan Precedent" and she answered "I don't really know that much about it, but the US doesn't have anything like that." So what she actually did was tell the questioner "uh, yeah, we don't really do that here."


That isn't even close to all she said.
   2010. Greg K Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:56 AM (#5593198)
Agreed. Though from a historical perspective we all live in the short run (or if not, I want your secret).

Well it depends. Self-conceptually, you also live in the long-arc of history. That's kind of an exclusive privilege of the modern world.

Not that pre-modern people didn't understand history per se, but the long arc is a pretty modern way of looking at it. I think most pre-modern views of history tended to be cyclical or teleological. Or the good old, "things were once great and they'll get progressively more #### forever". Which, now that I think of it, is a sort of take on the long-arc thesis.
   2011. Count Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM (#5593200)
Right, the idea that the President can't be impeached for exercising constitutional powers makes no sense. Presidents can be impeached for abuses whether or not they're exercising a constitutional power. For example, if the President's son committed murder and it was a solely federal crime and the President pardoned him, he could certainly be impeached for that. Or if the President fired his FBI director to obstruct an investigation into his campaign and associates (and to add a crazy hypothetical, let's say the President then admitted that's why he did it and then to add an even crazier hypothetical, let's say the President knew that one of the people under investigation had lied to the FBI).

   2012. . Posted: December 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM (#5593201)
Does anyone want to live under a judicial system where one's freedom depends on whether the conduct was grossly negligent or extremely careless? Those are the vaguest possible terms. If you asked a hundred potential jurors which is worse: being grossly negligent or extremely careless? They'd split 50/50. These rules are absurd the way we criminalize conduct using terms like that that endanger everyone's civil liberties.


I get the civil liberties issue posed here, and I generally agree with Dershowitz's concerns. I would simply note that this isn't a statute of wide applicability, but one that applies to a special, very limited category of people -- those entrusted with the nation's secrets. That very much mitigates the issues he poses.



   2013. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:02 AM (#5593204)
1894

Electricity requires the will to make some schmuck bicycle for you on your coconut machine.


GILLLLLLIIIIIGGGGGAAAAAAAAANNNNNN!
   2014. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:04 AM (#5593205)
It's pointless, and will fall on deaf ears, but whatever. For the sake of attempting to maintain a tenuous grasp on reality, Hillary was *asked a question* about this "Kenyan Precedent" and she answered "I don't really know that much about it, but the US doesn't have anything like that."


I'll be charitable here and not call you a liar. Simply put, the above is false. Hillary was not "asked a question about this Kenyan precedent." She was asked a question about what the means to challenge the US election would be, if she thought it should be challenged. She then brought up Kenya, conceding that the US doesn't have such means.

Here's the interview in question.

Of course, in the Clinton Derangement Lands occupied by SBB and Ray, her answering the question (negatively) means she was really floating a trial balloon to her minions in the Deep State to have them look into overthrowing the government and installing her Dictator for life.


I didn't say she was doing anything except whining about how unfair it all was that we couldn't overthrow presidents here like they do in Kenya.
   2015. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:05 AM (#5593206)
So Hillary whines something stupid and it's SBB's fault?
No; what's SBB's fault is lying about what she said. She very clearly contrasted the U.S. to Kenya, saying that while Kenya ordered a do-over election, there's no provision for that in our constitutional system. She did not suggest that it was a "precedent" for what we could do here. (One could infer that she wishes that our system provided for such, but there's nothing stupid about considering alternate systems.)
   2016. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:08 AM (#5593207)
Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?

Because obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense.


He can't obstruct justice simply by exercising his constitutional powers, with nothing more. If he bribed witnesses or forged documents he could obstruct justice, but not simply by pardoning someone -- even someone who might finger him in crimes. Bush's pardon of Caspar Weinberger provides factual precedent, which doesn't mean it has to be considered persuasive by a court but it's on point.
   2017. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:11 AM (#5593210)
Right, the idea that the President can't be impeached for exercising constitutional powers makes no sense. Presidents can be impeached for abuses whether or not they're exercising a constitutional power. For example, if the President's son committed murder and it was a solely federal crime and the President pardoned him, he could certainly be impeached for that.


He "could certainly be impeached" for watching Star Wars. Whether that's a valid approach to impeachment is the question. And most certainly pardoning his son in your scenario would not be.

Or if the President fired his FBI director to obstruct an investigation into his campaign and associates


This wouldn't be obstruction.

(and to add a crazy hypothetical, let's say the President then admitted that's why he did it


Purely a hypothetical yes, but this wouldn't be obstruction either.

and then to add an even crazier hypothetical, let's say the President knew that one of the people under investigation had lied to the FBI).


OTOH this point is indeed problematic for the president.
   2018. Count Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:11 AM (#5593211)
I suppose H.W. Bush could have been impeached between December 24, 1992, and January 20, 1993. Great precedent.
   2019. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:12 AM (#5593212)
Not that pre-modern people didn't understand history per se, but the long arc is a pretty modern way of looking at it. I think most pre-modern views of history tended to be cyclical or teleological. Or the good old, "things were once great and they'll get progressively more #### forever". Which, now that I think of it, is a sort of take on the long-arc thesis.


Decades ago in a class I took our professor opined that the break point (for Europe anyway) occurred essentially with Sir Isaac Newton. The Calculus wasn't something rediscovered from the ancient Greeks or Arab world or wherever, but was a fabulous new thing. That was his marker for modernity.

I don't know that I necessarily 100% agree, but it is a point of view.
   2020. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:12 AM (#5593213)
I'm seeking improvements and expansions to these mashups so unsuspecting lurkers can have a better idea of what they're getting themselves into.

SBB = Jim Ignatowski + Maj. Hochstetter. All the manic crazy of the Reverend, plus the righteous "authority" of the (comic relief) SS.
YC = Alex Keaton + Gen. Burkhalter. Hogan's Heroes does double duty; Burkhalter is more benevolent and world-aware. Keaton provides the earnestness and sense of purpose.
JE = Alex Keaton + Ted Baxter. Speaking of double duty, Keaton's politics are too perfect not to invoke twice, plus the combination of gravitas and comedic touch from WJM's anchorman
RDP = Frasier Crane + Col. Klink. Back to Stalag 13. All the ivory tower pomposity of his idol suffused with the fist-shaking, monocled combo of utter certainty and utter unawareness (invoked as needed, *and* in a meta sense).
DMN = Dwight Schrute + Mr Spock. Loves him some justice system, logical facade...
Andy = Cosmo Kramer + Fox Mulder. Nutty conspiracy theorist bouncing off the walls. Or is this Sam? :)
   2021. Count Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:14 AM (#5593214)
2017 - of course the President could be impeached for pardoning his son for murder. If you can't rectify that with your standard for impeachment then your standard for impeachment doesn't work.
   2022. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:16 AM (#5593216)
Okay, the guy the Senate Judiciary Committee was considering Wednesday really is unqualified. Matthew Petersen is a veteran lawyer, but he has never been a litigator, and he couldn't answer basic softball questions from Sen. John Kennedy (the Republican from Louisiana, not the dead Democratic one from Massachusetts), like "What's the Daubert standard?" or "What's a motion in limine?"


I think that means my 4 or so years of covering circuit & chancery court in Little Rock left me knowing more about the law than this braindead idiot. Perhaps he's #fakelawyer SBB in real life?
   2023. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:16 AM (#5593217)
He can't obstruct justice simply by exercising his constitutional powers, with nothing more.


You repeating Dershowitz' stupidity doesn't make it less stupid, Ray.
   2024. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:20 AM (#5593219)
NRO Editors:

Everything that has happened in the Trump probe stands out against a backdrop of leniency in the Clinton investigation. While Mueller has prosecuted two Trump associates for lying to the FBI, the Obama Justice Department gave a pass to Mrs. Clinton and her subordinates, who gave the FBI misinformation about such key matters as whether Clinton understood markings in classified documents and whether her aides knew about her homebrew server system during their State Department service. Mueller’s team conducted a predawn raid at gunpoint in executing a search warrant on Paul Manafort’s home while Manafort was cooperating with congressional committees. When it came to the Clinton case, though, the Justice Department not only eschewed search warrants, or even mere subpoenas, but they never even took possession of the DNC server alleged to have been hacked by Russian operatives.

The irregularities in the Clinton-emails investigation are breathtaking: the failure to use the grand jury to compel the production of key physical evidence; the Justice Department’s collaboration with defense lawyers to restrict the FBI’s ability to pursue obvious lines of inquiry and examine digital evidence; immunity grants to suspects who should have been charged with crimes and pressured to cooperate; allowing subjects of the investigation to be present for each other’s FBI interviews and even to act as lawyers for Clinton, in violation of legal and ethical rules; Comey’s preparation of a statement exonerating Clinton months before the investigation was complete and key witnesses — including Clinton herself — were interviewed; and the shameful tarmac meeting between Obama attorney general Loretta Lynch and Mrs. Clinton’s husband just days before Mrs. Clinton sat for a perfunctory FBI interview (after which Comey announced the decision not to charge her).
   2025. . Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:22 AM (#5593221)
She very clearly contrasted the U.S. to Kenya, saying that while Kenya ordered a do-over election, there's no provision for that in our constitutional system.


She did no such thing.
   2026. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:23 AM (#5593223)
Primey for 1951.
   2027. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM (#5593224)
#2024. Yes, we know, it is all Hillary's fault. We get it.
   2028. . Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM (#5593225)
She then brought up Kenya, conceding that the US doesn't have such means.


She didn't even do that definitively, because she claimed that some people think we do.(*)

And of course she's the one who interjected the Kenya overturn -- which she was "just beginning to delve into" -- into a discussion of the election's so-called "illegitimacy" in the first place. And then outlined some utterly delusional theory about some private entity allegedly involved in UK election shenanigans making Trump hire Bannon and Conway.

Her template of delusion in the interview was clearly:

1. The election was illegitimate because of Russia (and likely because of FBI interference)
2. Some people think there are ways to have a redo (but I don't -- nosiree, not me)
3. Such a thing wouldn't be unprecedented or even odd -- after all, Kenya just did it
4. I'm looking at the Kenyan decision because it might be somehow applicable

(*) "Basically I don't believe there are. There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don't think they're on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don't think we have a mechanism. "

In fact, of course, no one whatsoever "has arguments" that there would be grounds to redo the election. I doubt anyone sane had even "made" them.
   2029. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM (#5593227)
Changing into fresh, unsoiled diapers - our intrepid heroes embark on yet another of keeping an unappreciative world safe.... From Hillary!
   2030. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:29 AM (#5593229)
I suppose H.W. Bush could have been impeached between December 24, 1992, and January 20, 1993. Great precedent.


I don't recall any talk of this being an impeachable offense, regardless of the practicality.

At any rate, he could have been charged with obstruction at any time -- particularly after he had left office.
   2031. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:32 AM (#5593231)
Primey for 1951.
Can't think of De Havilland without remembering Joan Fontaine's alltime quote: “I married first, won the Oscar before Olivia did, and if I die first, she’ll undoubtedly be livid because I beat her to it!”
   2032. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:32 AM (#5593232)
Worth noting: There is zero legal significance to Roy @MooreSenate refusing to concede #ALSenate race. It's a violation of social norms, but doesn't stop @alasecofstate from certifying @GDouglasJones' as winner.


The whole “Roy Moore isn’t conceding” story is a true nothing burger.
   2033. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:35 AM (#5593233)
This is why many people are saying the #FailingNFL will be out of business soon.

Those uniforms are indeed quite hideous.
   2034. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:36 AM (#5593234)
The whole “Roy Moore isn’t conceding” story is a true nothing burger.


True - but the Kenyan Precedent means we still have three months left on the clock to talk about it.
   2035. GordonShumway Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:37 AM (#5593236)
Okay, the guy the Senate Judiciary Committee was considering Wednesday really is unqualified. Matthew Petersen is a veteran lawyer, but he has never been a litigator, and he couldn't answer basic softball questions from Sen. John Kennedy (the Republican from Louisiana, not the dead Democratic one from Massachusetts), like "What's the Daubert standard?" or "What's a motion in limine?"


Even if he's not a litigator, he could have studied an MBE outline before appearing before Congress. Frankly, he doesn't seem serious about learning about the basics of the job for which he's been nominated.
   2036. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:39 AM (#5593237)
(*) "Basically I don't believe there are. There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don't think they're on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don't think we have a mechanism. "
This construct works more effectively when it's "only the best people" making the arguments. Sane readers of this space are very much left to the reader not making this up. Decline!
   2037. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:40 AM (#5593238)
Frankly, he doesn't seem serious about learning about the basics of the job for which he's been nominated.


That's OK - neither is the guy that nominated him.
   2038. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5593239)
Andy = Cosmo Kramer + Fox Mulder. Nutty conspiracy theorist bouncing off the walls. Or is this Sam? :)

No idea who Fox Mulder is, but about the only conspiracy I believe in is the alien conspiracy that programmed 63,000,000 pod people to vote for Trump.
   2039. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5593240)
The whole “Roy Moore isn’t conceding” story is a true nothing burger.


Well it is funny, so there is that.
   2040. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5593242)
No idea who Fox Mulder is,


The male FBI agent on X-Files. As ever, your studied ignorance of popular culture is impressive.

(Note: I'm not much -- if at all -- better with anything from the last 15 or so years.)
   2041. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:53 AM (#5593243)
The whole “Roy Moore isn’t conceding” story is a true nothing burger.


TURN THOSE MACHINES BACK ON!
   2042. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:54 AM (#5593244)
So...?

Hannity...?

Anything...?

Or does he just have a tick?
   2043. BrianBrianson Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:55 AM (#5593245)
Do we actually know that Clinton lied to the FBI about anything, or are people just assuming that because she made false or misleading statements publicly?
   2044. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:55 AM (#5593246)
Jonah Goldberg notes an interesting poll that doesn't exactly bode well for Trump:

Which brings me to those poll numbers. Suffolk University and USA Today released a poll this week, which found that among people who trust Fox News the most, the president’s approval rating has been sinking. His favorability among Fox devotees in June was 90 percent. In October, it was 74 percent. This week? Fifty-eight percent. If that trend continues, he will be underwater with the Fox audience long before the 2018 midterms.


I just don't know how you can look back at his first year in office and not see it as an absolute political loss for him. And that's including all the judicial and regulatory victories he's gotten (which any republican president would have gotten too).
   2045. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 15, 2017 at 11:58 AM (#5593248)
No idea who Fox Mulder is,

The male FBI agent on X-Files. As ever, your studied ignorance of popular culture is impressive.


Thanks for the info, but how is ignorance of a particular TV show "studied"? Different strokes for different folks is all it amounts to. Are you in studied ignorance if you can't identify most of the characters who ever appeared in Seinfeld? Test me on that one.** (smile)

(Note: I'm not much -- if at all -- better with anything from the last 15 or so years.)

Hey, that's what google is for.

** The names of the characters, not the names of the actors. I'm mostly studiously ignorant about them.
   2046. DavidFoss Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:00 PM (#5593251)
Hannity...?

Anything...?


He went boom on The Hill story about Lisa Bloom (Gloria Allred's daughter) allegedly arranging payments for Trump accusers at the end of last year.
   2047. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:01 PM (#5593253)
Different strokes


What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis?
   2048. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:03 PM (#5593255)
(deleted for stupidity and blatant partisanship)
   2049. Lassus Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:03 PM (#5593256)
Which brings me to those poll numbers. Suffolk University and USA Today released a poll this week, which found that among people who trust Fox News the most, the president’s approval rating has been sinking. His favorability among Fox devotees in June was 90 percent. In October, it was 74 percent. This week? Fifty-eight percent. If that trend continues, he will be underwater with the Fox audience long before the 2018 midterms.

When are the poll numbers being released on the dumbfucks who voted for him?
   2050. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:05 PM (#5593257)
Different strokes

What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis Sly?


FIFY
   2051. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:06 PM (#5593259)
Which brings me to those poll numbers. Suffolk University and USA Today released a poll this week, which found that among people who trust Fox News the most, the president’s approval rating has been sinking. His favorability among Fox devotees in June was 90 percent. In October, it was 74 percent. This week? Fifty-eight percent. If that trend continues, he will be underwater with the Fox audience long before the 2018 midterms.

When are the poll numbers being released on the dumbfucks who voted for him?


They already were: can't you hear the shouts of OMG! FAKE NEWS! FAKENEWSFAKENEWSFAKENEWS! where you are?
   2052. BDC Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:07 PM (#5593260)
Fox devotees in June was 90 percent. In October, it was 74 percent. This week? Fifty-eight percent

I assume this is people deciding that Trump has sold out to the liberal establishment.
   2053. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5593261)
On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

This is Jack's underappreciated comment.
   2054. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:09 PM (#5593263)
I'd have thought Fox Mulder had entered the broader cultural lexicon even for those that never watched the show...

Regardless - though I loved PEAK X-Files* - you can probably blame at least some of today's Alex Jones/Trump/FakeNew/conspiracy theory nonsense on it. I.e., it was the 90s - when the Clintons were murdering people and running coke... and there's this television cultural phenomenon about put-upon agents uncovering government conspiracies; conspiracies that include their own bosses and masters, often at the hands of secretive cabals.

In a way, X-Files is to Alex Jones/rampant conspiracy theorizing as 24 is pro-torture.

*I'd probably put the peak right about the time of the first movie - maybe a season after it. The latter movies were all dreadful - and the attempt to slide out Duchovny and Anderson with replacements was a flop. I haven't seen the reboot yet - not sure if I'll get around to it or not.... Just saying that it was one of my favorite shows once-upon-a-time, but I think there's a bit of rancid underbelly that it fostered. Not intentionally and perhaps not directly through fault of its own, but cannot help but think it fed into what became today's modern problems.
   2055. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:11 PM (#5593265)
2046

Hannity...?

Anything...?

He went boom on The Hill story about Lisa Bloom (Gloria Allred's daughter) allegedly arranging payments for Trump accusers at the end of last year.


OK, not the Earth-shattering KA-BOOM! he promoted, but still a fairly large and pretty crappy story.
   2056. Lassus Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5593266)
5:30 tickets for Last Jedi purchased. Yay!

I wonder how that film will work into the theory that the Rebels are the bad guys.
   2057. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5593267)
The latter movies were all dreadful - and the attempt to slide out Duchovny and Anderson with replacements was a flop.


I presume you mean "seasons," as only 2 movies have been done. (The 2nd was quite ordinary; Chris Carter's promises about how terrifying it would be were simply flat-out lies.)

Actually, IMHO, the last couple of seasons were pretty solid. I was pleasantly surprised. And the recent limited reboot was quite decent as well.
   2058. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:20 PM (#5593268)
5:30 tickets for Last Jedi purchased. Yay!


A Star Wars-worshipping younger friend of mine finally realized how silly it all was after he endured Phantom Menace, which he'd assured one & all was going to be the best movie EVAR. So there's hope for you & some of the children here yet.
   2059. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:21 PM (#5593269)
5:30 tickets for Last Jedi purchased. Yay!


Cool. I am going Sunday. I have a busy weekend.
   2060. Morty Causa Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5593271)
   2061. Lassus Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5593272)
A Star Wars-worshipping younger friend of mine finally realized how silly it all was after he endured Phantom Menace, which he'd assured one & all was going to be the best movie EVAR.

A movie that's 20 years old that sucked that was made by someone else is pretty awful logic for not seeing this one.
   2062. Swoboda is freedom Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:28 PM (#5593274)
Fox Mulder

I never watched the X files, or if I did, did it once. Not a big fan of the conspiracy genre. I had hear of Fox Mulder before and thought it was the partnership. He was Fox, she was Mulder. Upon looking it up, she was actually Scully, which I kind of remember now.
   2063. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5593275)
[2044] But his overall approval rating hasn’t really budged in the last 5 months. That means that he’s making up for lost Fox News viewers with non-Fox News viewers? Or that more people who disapprove of him have started watching Fox News? None of this makes sense.
   2064. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5593276)
She very clearly contrasted the U.S. to Kenya, saying lamenting that while Kenya ordered a do-over election, there's no provision for that in our constitutional system.

FTFY.
   2065. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5593277)
Actually, IMHO, the last couple of seasons were pretty solid. I was pleasantly surprised. And the recent limited reboot was quite decent as well.


Perhaps I'll give it a go.

I tried to give the post-Mulder and Scully (at least, as the omnipresent focal points) a go - but season 7 was the last one I enjoyed. Gave 8 a shot, watched 9 sparingly - just enough to get to the 'finale'... Was rather surprised because when the departures or at least lessening of Duchovny/Anderson seemed imminent, I thought it was actually the stories I loved.... but turned out it was at least much the chemistry of the leads.

   2066. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5593278)
She very clearly contrasted the U.S. to Kenya, saying that while Kenya ordered a do-over election, there's no provision for that in our constitutional system.

She did no such thing.
Sure, Baghdad Bob. Pay no attention to those tanks in the background of the video behind you.
   2067. baravelli Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:31 PM (#5593279)

[Count] Again, the GOP could forestall pardons and firing Mueller if they announced that it was a red line that would lead to impeachment.

[RDP] Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?



[Slate] If the president can basically fire anybody he wants in the government, or he can fire many, many, many people, then it seems like at a certain point then, if those are the people investigating him for one of the things you’re putting forward, your argument seems to dissolve and become a distinction without a difference, no?

[Dershowitz] No, it’s a big difference, because he can be impeached for that. He can be impeached for firing people. The criteria for impeachment is much looser than the criteria for being charged with a crime. And impeachment doesn’t violate the separation of powers. It’s part of our system of checks and balances.


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/12/an_interview_with_alan_dershowitz_on_trump_and_the_mueller_investigation.html
   2068. Greg K Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5593281)
Decades ago in a class I took our professor opined that the break point (for Europe anyway) occurred essentially with Sir Isaac Newton. The Calculus wasn't something rediscovered from the ancient Greeks or Arab world or wherever, but was a fabulous new thing. That was his marker for modernity.

I don't know that I necessarily 100% agree, but it is a point of view.

It is a running theme in late-medieval/early modern Europe. Is knowledge out there to be empirically discovered, or did the Greeks and Romans know everything and we just need to look to them.

James Burke uses Theodoric of Freiberg and his glass/rainbow experiments in the 13th century to make a similar point. Like anything else in intellectual history I think clear hinges in time are tough to pin down. There were plenty of early modern ideas floating around in the medieval world, and plenty of medieval ideas still quite powerful in the early modern world.

Newton likely works as well as anyone else in highlighting the shift.

The general point that we're dealing with entirely different understandings of something as basic as history is one worth making.

We could go off on a whole tangent about periodization! But that would likely only interest me.
   2069. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5593283)
(deleted for stupidity and blatant partisanship)
Hey! Why should your posts be any different than anyone else's? Put it back! ;)
   2070. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:35 PM (#5593284)
We could go off on a whole tangent about periodization! But that would likely only interest me.


It might interest Roy Moore.... or is periodization not about that special time in life when a girl becomes a woman?
   2071. dlf Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:35 PM (#5593285)
Christmas Day tradition: go to a movie and have Chinese food. This year it will be the new SW film for the third year in a row. The Lucas directed prequels simply don't exist. Never happened and if you try to tell me otherwise, I'll know you are peddling fake news. The last two have been fun little adventure movies, but nothing really memorable and we went - and will keep going - 99% out of a sense of nostalgia for my youth, a long time ago. With the changes in technology and the incredible explosion in visual entertainment options, I wonder if there can ever be a cultural phenomenon quite like the original was for kids of today who are around the age I was back then (turned 10 the year SW came out).
   2072. Swoboda is freedom Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:36 PM (#5593286)
(deleted for stupidity and blatant partisanship)
Hey! Why should your posts be any different than anyone else's? Put it back! ;)


Maybe he was deleting my posts.
   2073. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:38 PM (#5593287)
(turned 10 the year SW came out).


I was 17, just graduated from high school. Probably too old to make a religion out of it the way quite a few younger people did & have (at that time my aforementioned friend was about 5 years from being born).
   2074. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:39 PM (#5593288)
[Count] Again, the GOP could forestall pardons and firing Mueller if they announced that it was a red line that would lead to impeachment.

[RDP] Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?


[Slate] If the president can basically fire anybody he wants in the government, or he can fire many, many, many people, then it seems like at a certain point then, if those are the people investigating him for one of the things you’re putting forward, your argument seems to dissolve and become a distinction without a difference, no?

[Dershowitz] No, it’s a big difference, because he can be impeached for that. He can be impeached for firing people. The criteria for impeachment is much looser than the criteria for being charged with a crime. And impeachment doesn’t violate the separation of powers. It’s part of our system of checks and balances.


I love when people post something without comment as if it's a mic-dropper.

I'm not seeing the gotcha. Dershowitz is saying he can be impeached for that. I agree. I asked why he SHOULD be impeached for that.

   2075. Greg K Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5593289)
It might interest Roy Moore.... or is periodization not about that special time in life when a girl becomes a woman?

It is basically the same principle.

How can one day make a difference!

There's also the similar tension of requiring bright lines to create distinct categories, but the knowledge that where exactly those bright lines are drawn can are essentially arbitrary. But they have to be drawn somewhere.
   2076. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5593290)
The last two have been fun little adventure movies, but nothing really memorable.


Rogue One was awesome. It is the rare prequel type movie that makes the next movie (in this case Star Wars, obviously) even better. The Force Awakens was, IMO, meh. Well done but super derivative.
   2077. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:41 PM (#5593291)
I never watched the X files, or if I did, did it once. Not a big fan of the conspiracy genre. I had hear of Fox Mulder before and thought it was the partnership. He was Fox, she was Mulder. Upon looking it up, she was actually Scully, which I kind of remember now.


The X Files is just good TV, although it feels pretty dated in 2017 at times. I'd suggest watching at least through season 4. Things go off the rails a bit after that but the show hits a really good stride about midway through season 2 and IMO the show has great production values. It was one of the first shows to 'feel like a movie" that way. Sorta similar to Breaking Bad.
   2078. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:42 PM (#5593292)
I wonder if there can ever be a cultural phenomenon quite like the original was for kids of today who are around the age I was back then (turned 10 the year SW came out).


I am honest enough to admit I cannot rationally analyze the original Star Wars. It is a seminal event in my childhood (12 when I saw it the first time).
   2079. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:42 PM (#5593293)
Tick Tock in less than 2 hours. ...
8:39 AM - 15 Dec 2017

Fewer.

This is an interesting puzzle. Fewer is used for countable things, so the question is how countable is time?
Both are (either is?) correct, because like so many things, it depends. If your emphasis is all about the number of hours, it would be fewer. If you're trying to point out that the elapsed time is not as long, it's less.
   2080. Greg K Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5593294)
How about, the President should be impeached when he loses the confidence of a critical mass of legislators.

Governance through tautology.
   2081. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5593295)
Christmas Day tradition: go to a movie and have Chinese food. This year it will be the new SW film for the third year in a row. The Lucas directed prequels simply don't exist. Never happened and if you try to tell me otherwise, I'll know you are peddling fake news. The last two have been fun little adventure movies, but nothing really memorable. With the changes in technology and the incredible explosion in visual entertainment options, I wonder if there can ever be a cultural phenomenon quite like the original was for kids of today who are around the age I was back then (turned 10 the year SW came out).


Do I lose all my sci-fi cred if I admit that I first saw Rogue One just a month ago?

I rather liked it - in fact, liked it probably as much as any SW film besides Empire. Reviews sort of poked at the under-developed characters - and while that's true, I'll say that I was intrigued enough that I was saddened that they all (well, do I need to spoiler alert a ~2 yo movie?) died.... but it was pretty clear from the way the plot was progressing that was coming. Still - loved it.

I have two minds of thought on the Force Awakens - in a vacuum, strictly speaking as entertainment - I thought it was "Meh+"... call it a gentlemen's B. Within the realm of what it was clearly trying to do - be a reboot, try to recapture some of the kind of 'magic' of the first film, I thought it hit the target spectacularly well. I suppose part of that was seeing it with my GF's niece and nephew - they loved it.
   2082. dlf Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:44 PM (#5593296)
I asked why he SHOULD be impeached for that.


I don't know how much simpler this can be: when the President takes action primarily for personal gain or avoidance of personal harm, he should be impeached whether that action is technically legal or not.
   2083. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:45 PM (#5593297)
Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?

Because obstruction of justice is an impeachable offense.

How would pardoning Flynn down the road obstruct justice? He's already plead guilty, and is cooperating with Mueller. Presumably, if there is any proceeding in which he testifies, that will come before he's sentenced. If Trump wanted to stop Flynn from cooperating, he would have had to act earlier. When things wrap up, if Trump decides Flynn's punishment is outweighed by his prior military service or otherwise unblemished record, pardoning him would be similar to many actions dispensing mercy for various reasons, but it wouldn't have any effect on Mueller's investigation.
   2084. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5593299)
He should be impeached for obstruction of justice.
   2085. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5593300)
Ray (RDP) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:39 PM (#5593288)

...

I love when people post something without comment as if it's a mic-dropper.
Yeah, like in 2024, on this very page. And, on the average, probably once a page for the last two years.

You literally cannot make this stuff up.
   2086. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5593302)
Of course, we all know Any GOP President could be caught handing the nuclear codes to Russia while ####### the dead body of a boy he'd just raped to death and Clapper would find a way to defend him and argue against impeachment.
   2087. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5593303)
2069

(deleted for stupidity and blatant partisanship)

Hey! Why should your posts be any different than anyone else's? Put it back! ;)


I'm claiming MFC exceptionalism...
   2088. DavidFoss Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5593304)
she was actually Scully

On a baseball-note, X-Files creator Chris Carter has said that he named her character after Vin. He grew up in LA and always heard his voice on the radio during the evenings.
   2089. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:49 PM (#5593305)
How about, the President should be impeached when he loses the confidence of a critical mass of legislators.

Governance through tautology.


I've argued this before - and still stand by it.

I think the history and precedent - and the exact wording and how it came about in the constitution - puts impeachment safely beyond the sort of "no confidence" parliamentary system that the founders seem to have tried to avoid.... but in one of the Federalist papers - Hamilton, I think, makes the case we obviously shouldn't just be a stuck with an unfit idiot and that impeachment could and should serve as a sort of public inquest.

That's a high enough bar to get past simple partisan opposition.... especially at the 2/3 level.

Surprise, surprise - I also think Trump long since zoomed right past it.

   2090. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:50 PM (#5593306)
I don't know how much simpler this can be: when the President takes action primarily for personal gain or avoidance of personal harm, he should be impeached whether that action is technically legal or not.


The problem even under this standard is that if Trump didn't collude with Russia -- and Trump is uniquely suited to know that -- then he could very reasonably decide that the sham Mueller investigation is harming the country.
   2091. Morty Causa Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5593307)
Many people think Trump is so grossly incompetent that America can't afford to have him finish his term, all other #### to one side. This applies both to skills having to do with politics and statesmanship but also basic elementary skills necessary for interacting in human relationships. Is this grounds for impeachment? Why not? It would be grounds to oust a leader in any other walk of life. And we're not just talking about running of the run-of-the-mill incompetent. We're talking about someone entirely off the scale.
   2092. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5593308)
Yeah, like in 2024, on this very page.


2067 was unlike 2024 at all -- you know, since 2067 quoted me and then Dershowitz as a rebuttal -- but do carry on.
   2093. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5593309)
The problem even under this standard is that if Trump didn't collude with Russia -- and Trump is uniquely suited to know that -- then he could very reasonably decide that the sham Mueller investigation is harming the country.


Ha!

I am the state!
   2094. Srul Itza Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:54 PM (#5593310)
I wonder if there can ever be a cultural phenomenon quite like the original was for kids of today who are around the age I was back then (turned 10 the year SW came out).


Senior year of college.

As a long time science fiction fan, got blown away by it. Pre-CGI, it used computers to bring special effects to a new level.

Brought the space opera very much back into vogue.

Does Star Trek get its first motion picture and franchise re-boot without it?

Does Battelstar Galactica get made?
   2095. PepTech Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:54 PM (#5593312)
I am honest enough to admit I cannot rationally analyze the original Star Wars. It is a seminal event in my childhood (12 when I saw it the first time).
OK, it's more than a little disturbing that I was also 12 in 1977.

Oddly enough, my son was 12 when he asked me why people in the Star Wars universe counted so funny. I asked what he meant, and he said, well, their numbering system goes 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 7, 3.9, 8, 3.5, 9...
   2096. JJ1986 Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5593313)
The problem even under this standard is that if Trump didn't collude with Russia -- and Trump is uniquely suited to know that -- then he could very reasonably decide that the sham Mueller investigation is harming the country.
It's almost as if Mueller is only investigating Trump and no one else's transgressions matter at all.
   2097. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5593315)
Why would the president exercising his constitutional powers be something that should be impeachable?


The President has the constitutional authority to order nuclear strikes. If a president ordered a nuclear strike on London because he was miffed that the PM criticized him, and people suggested he be impeached for that, no one, not even you would suggest he shouldn't be because he was merely exercising his constitutional powers.

And before you go all off on my derangement for comparing this hypothetical to nuking an ally without cause, that's not my point. My point is that merely saying "exercising constitutional power" is not an answer, because my example showed a valid case for impeachment for exercising constitutional power. Your argument needs to stand on its own merits, not on some vague term which can mean anything or nothing.
   2098. DavidFoss Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5593316)
The problem even under this standard is that if Trump didn't collude with Russia -- and Trump is uniquely suited to know that -- then he could very reasonably decide that the sham Mueller investigation is harming the country.

If he cooperates and has nothing to hide then the investigation won't harm the country. Pressuring people to drop and investigation, firing people for not dropping the investiation... Trump has done this to himself.
   2099. Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose) Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5593317)
I tried to give the post-Mulder and Scully (at least, as the omnipresent focal points) a go - but season 7 was the last one I enjoyed. Gave 8 a shot, watched 9 sparingly - just enough to get to the 'finale'... Was rather surprised because when the departures or at least lessening of Duchovny/Anderson seemed imminent, I thought it was actually the stories I loved.... but turned out it was at least much the chemistry of the leads.


I skipped Season 8 not only because of the departures but also because my life was becoming insanely chaotic. (Why, yes, an individual of the female persuasion was involved ... how did you guess?) A year or so later I caught back up via early morning reruns on some cable station, which positioned me to start watching Season 9 as it aired.

Trying to find the Season 8 (or maybe it was 7?) episode that lured me back in. Something about a kid disappearing from a playground. Delightfully grim.

   2100. Lassus Posted: December 15, 2017 at 12:56 PM (#5593318)
On a baseball-note, X-Files creator Chris Carter has said that he named her character after Vin. He grew up in LA and always heard his voice on the radio during the evenings.

The Negro Leagues X-Files episode is a masterpiece.
Page 21 of 27 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
JPWF13
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogNetanyahu? OMNICHATTER hardly knows hu!, for September 18, 2019
(43 - 3:38pm, Sep 18)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - A New Season is Upon Baldrick
(828 - 3:38pm, Sep 18)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

Gonfalon CubsApproaching the Finish Line
(50 - 3:31pm, Sep 18)
Last: Pops Freshenmeyer

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2019)
(183 - 3:30pm, Sep 18)
Last: manchestermets

NewsblogThe bizarre brilliance of Derek Dietrich’s 2019 season
(11 - 3:25pm, Sep 18)
Last: My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-18-2019
(21 - 3:24pm, Sep 18)
Last: The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie)

NewsblogFelipe Vazquez Arrested
(50 - 3:18pm, Sep 18)
Last: Cris E

Newsblog37 MLB Players Destined to Become 'Guys' Who Will Be Remembered
(20 - 3:18pm, Sep 18)
Last: Bourbon Samurai, what price fettucine?

NewsblogEven Gary Thorne is getting frustrated with the Orioles
(2 - 3:07pm, Sep 18)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogTwins set MLB record as 5th player reaches 30-home run mark
(9 - 3:03pm, Sep 18)
Last: Cris E

NewsblogFrom 319 transactions to No. 1 overall: Sacramento River Cats win third Triple-A championship
(5 - 2:36pm, Sep 18)
Last: Wayne Newton's pet monkey (gef, talking mongoose)

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (Playoffs through off-season)
(6754 - 2:26pm, Sep 18)
Last: jmurph

Newsblog100 losses no novelty this year; same with 100 wins
(2 - 2:21pm, Sep 18)
Last: donlock

NewsblogNew bowl game at Fenway Park to match teams from ACC, AAC
(17 - 2:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogCraig, Cavan Biggio become second father-son duo to hit for the cycle in MLB
(4 - 12:49pm, Sep 18)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

Page rendered in 0.7984 seconds
46 querie(s) executed