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, June 12, 2017

OTP 12 June 2017: McCain Stays Up Late to Watch Baseball

The obvious baseball/politics tie-in of the week:

Arizona Sen. John McCain is blaming his convoluted line of questioning at Thursday’s James Comey testimony on his decision to stay up late the night before to watch a baseball game.

Many on Twitter were left scratching their heads after the 80-year-old Republican senator grilled Comey during the hearing about why the FBI closed its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, while continuing its probe of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

McCain responded by releasing a statement that read: “I get the sense from Twitter that my line of questioning today went over people’s heads. Maybe going forward I shouldn’t stay up late watching the Diamondbacks night games.

I just see this as McCain setting good priorities.  Prepare to investigate threats to our democratic way of life, or watch baseball?  Seems like one of the easier choices a politician could face.

(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.)

 

BDC Posted: June 12, 2017 at 06:08 AM | 1635 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: diamondbacks, politics, why are nl west games on so late

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 17 of 17 pages ‹ First  < 15 16 17
   1601. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5478672)
And the Court wasn't mealy-mouthed about the principle it was enforcing. Last sentence of the Court's opinion:

It offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.


Great day for actual liberalism, and for America.
   1602. Ray (RDP) Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5478673)
Carrie Fisher had multiple drugs in her system when she suffered a heart attack days before her death, an autopsy revealed.

The "Star Wars" actress, who died in December, had cocaine and ecstasy in her body when she arrived at the hospital after going into cardiac arrest during a Dec. 23 flight from London to Los Angeles, according to the autopsy report released Monday by the L.A. County Coroner. Traces of heroin were also detected in Fisher's system.

Fisher died in L.A. at the age of 60 four days after her heart attack. It's unclear if the substances in her system contributed to her death.
   1603. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5478674)
The troll is apparently back.
   1604. Morty Causa Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5478676)
Ray still doesn't admit that the simple fact that the intelligence communities say Russia interfered in the election is sufficient to give rise to an investigation, even one by a special counsel. That's sufficiently retarded and dishonest right there. And, further, that he can't see or won't admit that this in and of itself justifies investigating Trump's people and Trump's role himself (the man who called for Russia to queer the election by hacking into the Clinton computers and releasing all the bad stuff about her) in all that is simply a double-down on the retardedness and the dishonesty. When, Ray, was the last time one side--their candidate leading the charge--has called for the other side's candidate to be "locked up"?
   1605. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5478677)
Carrie Fisher had multiple drugs in her system when she suffered a heart attack days before her death, an autopsy revealed.


And? Carrie Fisher's coked up rotting corpse is more qualified to be POTUS than your ########.
   1606. Greg K Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5478682)
Hey, according to an NPR interview I was listening to recently, we're at the point where the Siamese cats in Disney's Lady and the Tramp are offensive to some.


People have been finding that movie offensive since the last days of the disco era.
   1607. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5478683)
Also, in another unanimous decision, the Court overturned a North Carolina law banning registered sex offenders from using Facebook (because there are kids on Facebook).



Carrie Fisher...had cocaine and ecstasy in her body when she arrived at the hospital after going into cardiac arrest during a Dec. 23 flight from London to Los Angeles, according to the autopsy report released Monday by the L.A. County Coroner. Traces of heroin were also detected in Fisher's system.


It's as if millions of red blood cells suddenly cried out in euphoria and were suddenly silenced.

   1608. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:52 PM (#5478684)
The troll is apparently back.


You're overmatched, my man. Deal with it.
   1609. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5478686)
But no matter how the point is phrased, its unmistakable thrust is this: The Government has an interest in preventing speech expressing ideas that offend. And, as we have explained, that idea strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.” United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U. S. 644, 655 (1929) (Holmes, J., dissenting).


Ric Flair-level takedown of a fundamental modern liberal premise.

The other bedrock principle of the First Amendment is that speech can't be compelled, so hopefully the oppressed Oregon cake baker can afford appeals.
   1610. Lassus Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:56 PM (#5478688)
And the Court wasn't mealy-mouthed about the principle it was enforcing. Last sentence of the Court's opinion:
It offends a bedrock First Amendment principle: Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.
Great day for actual liberalism, and for America.


Does this mean you're going to finally STFU about the Washington Redskins?
   1611. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5478690)
Does this mean you're going to finally STFU about the Washington Redskins?


I'll happily trade that name for not handing over the First Amendment to modern liberals and Hillary Clinton.

People should be far happier about this decision than sad about the US withdrawing from the climate change "treaty," that's for sure.
   1612. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 19, 2017 at 01:59 PM (#5478691)
Unanimous decision - those trying to prevent others from speaking won't have much luck using the government in their efforts.

Says the whiny little preening ##### who complains that people aren't civil to him these days. #### off.

I haven't complained that poor pathetic Sam can't contribute anything to this thread beyond silly name-calling and insults that would be embarrassing on even a middle-school playground. I've merely noted his obvious limitations, and mocked the weakness of his posts. His lack of civility reflects poorly on him, but he is what he is. Sad.
   1613. Lassus Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5478693)
I'll happily trade that name for not handing over the First Amendment to modern liberals and Hillary Clinton.

Your boogeymen (and women) are as hilarious as Ray's.
   1614. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5478694)
His lack of civility reflects poorly on him, but he is what he is. Sad.


He's not civil because he knows he's overmatched. Classic defense mechanism of the second-rate.
   1615. BrianBrianson Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:02 PM (#5478696)
You're overmatched, my man.


It's easy to win arguments when you're only arguing with the voices in your own head.
   1616. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5478699)
It's easy to win arguments when you're only arguing with the voices in your own head.


It's hard to win arguments, which is why only a few are able to actually do it.
   1617. Lassus Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5478700)
It's easy to win arguments when you're only arguing with the voices in your own head.

Are you kidding? Those are the ones I can never seem to win. That dude knows all my tricks.
   1618. PepTech Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:10 PM (#5478702)
It's hard to win arguments, which is why only a few are able to actually do it.
What were your arguments in defense of your statement "Obama embraced Islam to an unhelpful degree"? Remind us.

Helpful hint: "He's a garden variety modern liberal" is not an argument.
   1619. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:10 PM (#5478703)
I haven't complained that poor pathetic Sam can't contribute anything to this thread beyond silly name-calling and insults that would be embarrassing on even a middle-school playground. I've merely noted his obvious limitations, and mocked the weakness of his posts. His lack of civility reflects poorly on him, but he is what he is. Sad.


It's regrettable you don't get out to practice that much any more.
   1620. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:21 PM (#5478707)
Does this mean you're going to finally STFU about the Washington Redskins?

Don't bet on it. He's a regular Dave Zirin when it comes to that topic.
   1621. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:24 PM (#5478709)
SBB, #1609:
The other bedrock principle of the First Amendment is that speech can't be compelled, so hopefully the oppressed Oregon cake baker can afford appeals.


More fish tank gravel than bedrock, when you look at the case history and the legal 0-fer all of these defendants have taken hard in the shorts.

Much of that case history has been laboriously batted about, but I don't remember (and may have missed) seeing a shoutout to Pruneyard Shopping Center v Robins:
Most important, the shopping center, by choice of its owner, is not limited to the personal use of appellants. It is instead a business establishment that is open to the public to come and go as they please. The views expressed by members of the public in passing out pamphlets or seeking signatures for a petition thus will not likely be identified with those of the owner. Second, no specific message is dictated by the State to be displayed on appellants' property. There consequently is no danger of governmental discrimination for or against a particular message. Finally, as far as appears here, appellants can expressly disavow any connection with the message by simply posting signs in the area where the speakers or handbillers stand. Such signs, for example, could disclaim any sponsorship of the message and could explain that the persons are communicating their own messages by virtue of state law... Appellants are not similarly being compelled to affirm their belief in any governmentally prescribed position or view, and they are free to publicly dissociate themselves from the views of the speakers or handbillers... Persons solicited could not reasonably have believed that the petitions embodied the views of the shopping center merely because it owned the ground on which they stood.

The case isn't an exact match, being more of a commercial property rights case with a First Amendment aspect than the other way around-- but it's not your bedrock, either.

Besides, bedrock doesn't agree with you, either.
   1622. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5478711)
I agree with the decision, but "Yay, we can say hateful things!" in kind of a stupid thing to celebrate.

I disagree, because I think "Yay, we can say even things some people find hateful" makes perfect sense.
Right, and this case -- litigated by my former boss -- is a perfect example. This was Asians who wanted to use a supposedly anti-Asian slur. They were not trying to be hateful, nor were they going for shock value. They liked the word, and perhaps wanted to "reclaim" it. And yet because some random paper pusher at the USPTO decided that some people would find it offensive, they were denied the right to register the mark.
   1623. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5478712)
Right, and this case -- litigated by my former boss -- is a perfect example. This was Asians who wanted to use a supposedly anti-Asian slur. They were not trying to be hateful, nor were they going for shock value. They liked the word, and perhaps wanted to "reclaim" it. And yet because some random paper pusher at the USPTO decided that some people would find it offensive, they were denied the right to register the mark.


C.W.A? G.W.A?!
   1624. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:32 PM (#5478716)
The case isn't an exact match,


You're a veritable master of understatement. The case isn't remotely on point.

A case actually on point is Wooley v. Maynard (1977), holding that New Hampshire couldn't make its citizens sport license plates with the "Live Free or Die" motto.

We are thus faced with the question of whether the State may constitutionally require an individual to participate in the dissemination of an ideological message by displaying it on his private property in a manner and for the express purpose that it be observed and read by the public. We hold that the State may not do so. ...

We begin with the proposition that the right of freedom of thought protected by the First Amendment against state action includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all.

   1625. Swoboda is freedom Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:35 PM (#5478718)
seeing a shoutout to Pruneyard Shopping Center v Robins:

What a stupid name for a shopping mall. Pruneyard? What is it, for geriatrics?
   1626. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5478722)
I agree with the decision, but "Yay, we can say hateful things!" in kind of a stupid thing to celebrate.


It would be far less worthy of celebration if the modern liberal interpretation of "hateful" was "actually hateful," but it is of course no such thing.
   1627. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: June 19, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5478733)
You're a veritable master of understatement. The case isn't remotely on point.


Of course it isn't, counselor. Of course it isn't.

   1628. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:01 PM (#5478736)
Right, and this case -- litigated by my former boss -- is a perfect example. This was Asians who wanted to use a supposedly anti-Asian slur. They were not trying to be hateful, nor were they going for shock value. They liked the word, and perhaps wanted to "reclaim" it. And yet because some random paper pusher at the USPTO decided that some people would find it offensive, they were denied the right to register the mark.


Hey, I just listened to a podcast on "Planet Money" on this story. It was about a band in Portland made up of Asians who wanted to trademark their name "The Slants", and were denied because the term was offensive.

The Unspeakable Trademark
   1629. Lassus Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:11 PM (#5478737)
Someone at the Trademark office really picked the wrong hill on that one.
   1630. Ray (RDP) Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:11 PM (#5478738)
Ray still doesn't admit that the simple fact that the intelligence communities say Russia interfered in the election is sufficient to give rise to an investigation, even one by a special counsel.


Russia did something "bad" so Trump should be investigated for it?

No.

And again -- even if Trump HAD "colluded" with Russia it would have been legal.

(I use the term "bad" in scare quotes. I don't think Russia "interfering" in our election -- that's a broad weasley word in itself that means no effect need be shown -- is any worse than anyone else doing it.)

That's sufficiently retarded and dishonest right there. And, further, that he can't see or won't admit that this in and of itself justifies investigating Trump's people and Trump's role himself (the man who called for Russia to queer the election by hacking into the Clinton computers and releasing all the bad stuff about her) in all that is simply a double-down on the retardedness and the dishonesty.


Trump told a joke, so he should be investigated. Okay. Sounds to me like "he's under investigation for winning the election" fits just fine.

When, Ray, was the last time one side--their candidate leading the charge--has called for the other side's candidate to be "locked up"?


I don't know.

When's the last time a presidential candidate grossly mishandled thousands of items of classified information over a period of several years and then lied about it multiple times to the point where in order to believe her which was impossible anyway given her multiple versions we had to conclude that despite being Secretary of State she had no idea what classified information even IS?
   1631. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:17 PM (#5478739)
Someone at the Trademark office really picked the wrong hill on that one.


If a "hateful" term is put into circulation, it doesn't matter if the circulator is of the same race as the term. The impact on listeners is no different. If "n___a" coarsens listeners, it does so equally if every user is black or every user is white. Indeed, reading the word or hearing it on the radio gives the reader or listener no indication of the race of the writer or speaker.

This is what modern liberals always miss with their drivel about "cultural appropriation" and "reclaiming."
   1632. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:18 PM (#5478741)
I don't know.


This is the most honest thing you've said in a long time.
   1633. Lassus Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:20 PM (#5478743)
If a "hateful" term is put into circulation, it doesn't matter the circulator is of the same race as the term. The impact on listeners is no different. If "n___a" coarsens listeners, it does so equally if every user is black or every user is white. Indeed, reading the word or hearing it on the radio gives the reader or listener no indication of the race of the writer or speaker. This is what modern liberals always miss with their drivel about "cultural appropriation" and "reclaiming."

Your views on race are total garbage, and hold negative value for anyone who has the misfortune of hearing them.
   1634. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5478744)
Your views on race are total garbage, and hold negative value for anyone who has the misfortune of hearing them.


Do you have anything serious to offer? What I said is 100% true.
   1635. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: June 19, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5478745)
Page 17 of 17 pages ‹ First  < 15 16 17

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogAfter Yasiel Puig tried and failed to avoid Javy Baez's tag, Baez teased him and they both laughed | MLB.com
(1 - 9:00am, Oct 18)
Last: Rickey! the first of his name

NewsblogNick Cafardo: Brian Cashman and the Yankees followed the Red Sox’ blueprint — and may have done it better
(72 - 8:58am, Oct 18)
Last: Rally

NewsblogYankees even ALCS with late rally vs. Astros | MLB.com
(10 - 8:54am, Oct 18)
Last: bunyon

NewsblogLCS OMNICHATTER for October 17, 2017
(363 - 8:53am, Oct 18)
Last: John DiFool2

NewsblogOTP 16 October 2017: Sorry, Yankee fans: Trump’s claim that he can ensure victory simply isn’t true
(792 - 8:44am, Oct 18)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT: New Season August 2017 Soccer Thread
(1148 - 8:39am, Oct 18)
Last: I am going to be Frank

NewsblogDodgers aren’t showing any shortcomings even without Corey Seager | LA Times
(3 - 8:38am, Oct 18)
Last: Rally

NewsblogEXPANSION COULD TRIGGER REALIGNMENT, LONGER POSTSEASON
(110 - 8:20am, Oct 18)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(294 - 1:25am, Oct 18)
Last: cmd600

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-17-2017
(9 - 11:47pm, Oct 17)
Last: KJOK

NewsblogThe Cubs could really use 2016 Javier Baez right about now - Chicago Cubs Blog- ESPN
(40 - 10:59pm, Oct 17)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(682 - 10:31pm, Oct 17)
Last: PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina

NewsblogPerrotto: Managerial Rumors and Rumblings
(18 - 8:50pm, Oct 17)
Last: PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina

NewsblogAstros' Lance McCullers will start Game 4 of ALCS - Houston Chronicle
(36 - 8:10pm, Oct 17)
Last: Walt Davis

Gonfalon CubsFive minute Los Angeles Dodgers Preview
(49 - 7:24pm, Oct 17)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.2842 seconds
47 querie(s) executed