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, April 16, 2018

OTP 2018 Apr 16: Beto strikes out but is a hit at baseball fundraiser

“I guarantee you he didn’t just get three pitches and three strikes like his old man,” said O’Rourke.

He can afford a laugh, since he has dusted Cruz in fundraising by taking in an eye-popping $6.7 million in the first three months of this year. That’s more than twice the $3.2 million gathered by Cruz, whose tally counted money from multiple campaign entities including a political action committee.

O’Rourke won’t take PAC money, a stand that’s expected to put him at a fundraising disadvantage as the general election nears. He said Saturday that he and his supporters are “doing this 100 percent the right way. There are no political action committees, no corporations.

 

“It’s just the people, the people of Texas, and you all look awesome,” O’Rourke told supporters who filled The Long Time grounds with a laid-back vibe as they sipped beer, wine, lemonade or water, sitting on blankets, a small stand of bleachers and scattered chairs; children and amiable dogs milling around.

(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: April 16, 2018 at 08:18 AM | 1328 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics, strikeouts, texas

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 7 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 >  Last ›
   601. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:39 AM (#5656355)
GOP Strategist Predicts Loss of 40-50 House Seats

Alex Castellanos: “Thanks to a map that puts more Democratic than Republican seats at risk, our party will still cling to control of the Senate, but GOP House members lack insulation: They will crawl out from the smoking rubble of a 40- to 50-seat pounding to find they have lost their majority.”
   602. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:41 AM (#5656356)
Today's Kindergarten Question to a Bunch of Elected Republican Majority Congressmen:
"President Trump has announced his bid for reelection in 2020. Will you support him?"

Here are their hilarious answers!

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (TX): "I don't know what the world is going to look like. But let's say it's not something I've given any thought to. I haven't even thought about that election. I'm worried about the midterm election."

Senator Lamar Alexander (TN): "Look, I'm focused on opioids. And I was just reelected myself three years ago. So, I'm focused on that."

Rep. Bill Huizenga (MI): "That's a little loaded. One, we need to make sure that he's actually moving forward and wants to go after this. So when he makes a declaration, then I think that would be a time to determine whether there are others that run or not."
(Fun Fact: Trump has already made his public declaration that he's actually moving forward and wants to go after this!)

Rep. Mark Sanford (SC): "I'm worried about my own race right now."

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (IL): "That's 2020. Pretty far away."

Sen. Rob Portman (OH): "I mean I would assume that he'll run for reelection, but I don't know. Some would say that he's going to get his work done and move back to the private sector, so who knows, who knows? It's just speculative at this point." (Portman says he will endorse the nominee, and assumes it will be Trump.)

The suddenly outgoing Rep. Charlie Dent (PA), #33 on the House Am-scray Scoreboard: "Wait until the midterms. If we get wiped out, the question is going to be: 'Should we do that again?'"

Sen. John Kennedy (LA) does what the last John Kennedy should have done-- he ducks: "I've supported the President in the past, and support him now. But three years from now? I think the midterms are a long ways away, in terms of politics. I don't get involved that far ahead."

Sen. John Thune (SD): "Well, that's a long ways off. I want to get through 2018 first. ...Most of us would probably be behind him [if] he continues to get things done for the American people."

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (FL): "It's premature. I'm focused on working and doing what I do, and so to talk about what might happen in that time I think is premature. We have one President, he's President until the next election, and I will continue to work with him, like I work with everybody else to get things done."

Sen. Susan Collins (ME): "I did not endorse the President for the Republican nomination in 2016. I supported first Jeb Bush, and then John Kasich. So, again, I think it is far too early to make a judgment of that type."
   603. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:42 AM (#5656357)

Our employers do them as they go along - each month, there's a section on my payslip marked "Tax" to show the amount that they've deducted from my wages and sent to the government at gunpoint. I'm guessing this is what's being referred to as "withholding" above, so if you also have that I don't understand why everybody in America seems to have to do their own taxes as well.
Assuming that's a serious question, it's because we don't have a straight flat tax. The amount you actually owe depends on your total income (often your household's total income), which of course the employer wouldn't know, less a whole lot of deductions, of which your employer would know little (number of dependents, yes -- just about everything else, no).
   604. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:45 AM (#5656359)
Better phone Cohen?

How about Pray you pay Jay!

Josh Stein, the attorney general of North Carolina, and Eric Schneiderman, the attorney general of New York, said on Wednesday they would be examining the operations of Jay Sekulow’s group Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (Case).

Stein said in a statement: “The reports I’ve read are troubling. My office is looking into this matter.”

Amy Spitalnick, a spokeswoman for Schneiderman, said in an email: “We’re reviewing their filings.”

The Democratic state law enforcement officials acted following the disclosure that Case and an affiliate have since 2000 paid more than $60m in compensation and contracts to Sekulow, his relatives and companies where they hold senior roles.

Nonprofits are forbidden by law from giving excess benefits to the people responsible for running them. Case’s board is dominated by Sekulow and his family. The group is registered with state authorities to operate and raise funds in 39 states plus Washington DC, according to its last available IRS filing. It is closely entwined with American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), another Sekulow nonprofit


Will Ty Cobb admit he robbed Kaiser Wilhelm's mausoleum and stole his mustache?
   605. manchestermets Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:48 AM (#5656360)
Assuming that's a serious question, it's because we don't have a straight flat tax. The amount you actually owe depends on your total income (often your household's total income), which of course the employer wouldn't know, less a whole lot of deductions, of which your employer would know little (number of dependents, yes -- just about everything else, no).


Well, we don't have a straight flat tax - there are bands, and various adjustments but this is all encapsulated in our tax code* which allows the employer to make the appropriate adjustments without needing to know the exact details.

*Edit: not "tax code" as in the laws, but it's a short letter and numbers code (mine is 1135L) that allows the employer to make adjustments.
   606. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:52 AM (#5656362)
Assuming that's a serious question, it's because we don't have a straight flat tax. The amount you actually owe depends on your total income (often your household's total income), which of course the employer wouldn't know, less a whole lot of deductions, of which your employer would know little (number of dependents, yes -- just about everything else, no).


It is NOT because there is no flat tax. Sigh. That is silly.

There are a variety of reasons - mostly historical, some practical - as to why unlike many first world countries (many without a flat tax, BTW) the US has its citizens do all the tax accounting rather than other possibilities - like send out pre-filled in tax forms with all the data the government already has.

The real reasons (the non-historical/political ones) are around people with complex tax situations (like, for example, me). Investments, rental properties, owning a business, partnerships, and so on require more complexity. For those without that nonsense the government could handle most of the tax accounting, even with many tax brackets, but it doesn't (again historical and political reasons).
   607. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:53 AM (#5656363)
Let's go to local news!

Syracuse [University] suspends engineering fraternity for ‘racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic’ video
“I solemnly swear,” he says, repeating after the standing fraternity member, “to always have hatred in my heart for …” He then says several racial slurs to describe African Americans, Hispanics and Jews.

The six-minute video was originally posted on a secret Facebook group associated with Theta Tau, an engineering fraternity at Syracuse University, according to the Daily Orange, the student newspaper, which made the video public on Wednesday.
In one of the videos, a fraternity member yells at other members to “get in the fuckin' showers,” a reference to Nazis’ gas chambers. In other recordings, according to the Daily Orange, students can be heard mocking women, gay people and people with disabilities.
According to its national website, Theta Tau is the “oldest, largest, and foremost Fraternity for Engineers.” It promotes an “inviting, safe, and social environment” and aims to “develop and nurture engineers with strong communication, problem-solving, collaboration, and leadership skills that we demonstrate in our profession, our community, and in our lives.”
   608. perros Posted: April 19, 2018 at 08:56 AM (#5656364)

I'm a little late with this, but I did want to lay my Ray claim on Barbara Bush's death: I am surprisingly - even to myself - uncaring. I do not feel inclined to lionize nor indict her. I am completely indifferent to her death. I think I was pretty indifferent to her life, that's why.


* * * * *

I watch none [television]. He [former President Bush] sits and listens and I read books, because I know perfectly well that, don’t take offense, that 90 percent of what I hear on television is supposition, when we’re talking about the news. And he’s not, not as understanding of my pettiness about that. But why should we hear about body bags, and deaths, and how many, what day it’s gonna happen, and how many this or what do you suppose? Or, I mean, it’s, it’s not relevant. So, why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that? And watch him suffer.
   609. DavidFoss Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:07 AM (#5656368)
Well, we don't have a straight flat tax - there are bands, and various adjustments but this is all encapsulated in our tax code* which allows the employer to make the appropriate adjustments without needing to know the exact details.

This is all well and good if your employer is your only source of income. When I've been in that situation, the employer does a reasonably good job of withholding the right amount and the refund/owe amount the following April is minimal. But what happens if you have a second job? What about married couples? Deductions apply to your entire income so it is tricky to get all of your sources of income to know about all of them and withhold appropriately.
   610. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:24 AM (#5656370)
Syracuse [University] suspends engineering fraternity for ‘racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic’ video
“I solemnly swear,” he says, repeating after the standing fraternity member, “to always have hatred in my heart for …” He then says several racial slurs to describe African Americans, Hispanics and Jews.

The six-minute video was originally posted on a secret Facebook group associated with Theta Tau, an engineering fraternity at Syracuse University, according to the Daily Orange, the student newspaper, which made the video public on Wednesday.

In one of the videos, a fraternity member yells at other members to “get in the ######' showers,” a reference to Nazis’ gas chambers. In other recordings, according to the Daily Orange, students can be heard mocking women, gay people and people with disabilities.

According to its national website, Theta Tau is the “oldest, largest, and foremost Fraternity for Engineers.” It promotes an “inviting, safe, and social environment” and aims to “develop and nurture engineers with strong communication, problem-solving, collaboration, and leadership skills that we demonstrate in our profession, our community, and in our lives.”

Suspended? Why in the #### should that fraternity not simply be told to pack up its bags and never return to campus ever again? And why are the students associated with that video not being expelled permanently? If Syracuse wants to send a message about that sort of behavior, that'd do the job a lot better than half-hearted measures.
   611. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:29 AM (#5656372)
A message? About what? They don't promote that kind of hippie behavior in Syracuse.
   612. manchestermets Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5656376)
But what happens if you have a second job? What about married couples?


They've thought of that. From the link I included:

What the letters mean
Letters in your tax code refer to your situation and how it affects your Personal Allowance.

...
M Marriage Allowance: you’ve received a transfer of 10% of your partner’s Personal Allowance
N Marriage Allowance: you’ve transferred 10% of your Personal Allowance to your partner
...
BR All your income from this job or pension is taxed at the basic rate (usually used if you’ve got more than one job or pension)
D0 All your income from this job or pension is taxed at the higher rate (usually used if you’ve got more than one job or pension)
D1 All your income from this job or pension is taxed at the additional rate (usually used if you’ve got more than one job or pension)


Re the marriage thing: everybody pays tax as an individual - there's no joint taxation. If one partner in a marriage doesn't work, they are allowed to transfer 10% of their tax free allowance but that's the full extent of how marriage can affect taxation. In short though: you tell HMRC (our equivalent of the IRS) everything that can affect your tax liablity, and they tell your employer(s) what to do. It works.
   613. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:46 AM (#5656377)
This is all well and good if your employer is your only source of income. When I've been in that situation, the employer does a reasonably good job of withholding the right amount and the refund/owe amount the following April is minimal. But what happens if you have a second job? What about married couples? Deductions apply to your entire income so it is tricky to get all of your sources of income to know about all of them and withhold appropriately.


They'd better (do a good job) - since the feds provide them tables and while it takes some bookkeeping, ought to be plug and play!

Many years ago when I was drawing two W-2s - but not making crap, I bumped up the 2nd W-4 to two allowances... Even the payroll person was questioning why I was doing this (single, head of household) - "Don't you want a tax refund?".... Um.... no, I'd prefer not to be making no interest loans, thank you.

Since getting my financial house in order the last five years or so, I've strongly been considering bumping up my allowances and just writing a check in April... it's not like the withholding tables are secret and with modern direct deposit, it would be really simple to just dump my own withholding into a money market or something where at least I'd earn a point or two of interest... but alas, the psychological barrier of writing a big check once a year still holds me back.
   614. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 09:48 AM (#5656378)
Suspended? Why in the #### should that fraternity not simply be told to pack up its bags and never return to campus ever again? And why are the students associated with that video not being expelled permanently? If Syracuse wants to send a message about that sort of behavior, that'd do the job a lot better than half-hearted measures.
Andy doesn’t quite grasp due process. Syracuse is a private university and thus is not bound by the first amendment, but it has contractual obligations. It has to investigate before it can discipline people or organizations. This just came out yesterday.
   615. BDC Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:01 AM (#5656385)
Senator Lamar Alexander (TN): "Look, I'm focused on opioids.

Oh, I bet there are a lot of congressional Republicans who could say that nowadays.
   616. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM (#5656390)
Senator Lamar Alexander (TN): "Look, I'm focused on opioids.


...and how I can get ahold of some.
   617. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:32 AM (#5656407)
Suspended? Why in the #### should that fraternity not simply be told to pack up its bags and never return to campus ever again? And why are the students associated with that video not being expelled permanently? If Syracuse wants to send a message about that sort of behavior, that'd do the job a lot better than half-hearted measures.

Andy doesn’t quite grasp due process. Syracuse is a private university and thus is not bound by the first amendment, but it has contractual obligations. It has to investigate before it can discipline people or organizations. This just came out yesterday.


Obviously they'd have to first investigate to determine whether the video was real, or whether (who knows) any of those students taking that pledge had an off-camera gun pointed at their heads. And there's always a possibility the whole thing might have been a perverted form of a parody that can be explained on some meta-level.

But assuming that none of those alternative suggestions pan out, I was talking about the level of punishment after the guilt had been determined.
   618. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:40 AM (#5656410)
Today's Kindergarten Question to a Bunch of Elected Republican Majority Congressmen:
"President Trump has announced his bid for reelection in 2020. Will you support him?"

Here are their hilarious answers!
Reason No. 5,384,692 why I'd never be a politician. My answer would be something more like, "I'd rather be parachuted naked, carrying nothing but an Israeli flag, and screaming insults about Muhammed, into an ISIS gathering." "I'd rather be forced to cut off my fingers, one by one, with a rusty nail clippers, and then be force-fed them." Or "I'd rather have a three-way with Madeline Albright and Retardo, with Ray doing play-by-play consisting solely of him saying repeatedly that he doesn't care, and with color commentary from FLTB explaining how this is all the fault of Modern Liberals.™"
   619. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:43 AM (#5656412)

But assuming that none of those alternative suggestions pan out, I was talking about the level of punishment after the guilt had been determined.
No, you were ranting that they hadn't done something already.
   620. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:44 AM (#5656413)
Andy doesn’t quite grasp due process. Syracuse is a private university and thus is not bound by the first amendment, but it has contractual obligations. It has to investigate before it can discipline people or organizations. This just came out yesterday.


Regarding the students perhaps, but they could probably smack down the fraternity whenever, however, and for whatever they damn well please (though, it sounds like this one of those specialty fraternities rather than a social frat?)

The barrier is usually alums complaining (a tactic my frat used many, many, many times for our many, many, many suspensions)... we also sued the University at one point - and lost... I had graduated a few years prior, but was on the alum housing board that handled the various financial brick-and-brack (oh yeah - and provided "alumni guidance"... which obviously went well).

The suit was over a quarter suspension from campus and the claim was over the disruption of guys living in the chapter house having to move out for the quarter. Though, I think the University was at least somewhat concerned/perhaps expected it to get dismissed quickly - rather than dismissing out of hand, it was two days in court and after the first day, they offered some kind of token modification of the penalties.
   621. Omineca Greg Posted: April 19, 2018 at 10:44 AM (#5656414)
It's an LBJ! Bird migration is possibly the most amazing of all natural wonders.

I'd never heard of a "little brown job" before, so I was looking on the internet to find out more about them. I was using duckduckgo, not because I approve of their privacy policies, although there is that too, but mainly because I like their logo, so maybe I'm a birdwatcher but I just don't realise it yet.

Anyway, I found a blogpost on the RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) site, all about the Dunnock.The name "dunnock" comes from the old English "dun" (dingy brown, dark-coloured) and the diminutive "ock" (from wikipedia), so in fact, the dunnock is the original little brown job.

Bear with me, your usual programming of "TDS! TDS!" will resume in a moment. So I'm reading the blogpost, "Bigging It Up For The Little Brown Jobs" when I came across this startling passage...

The Dunnocks high spot in history came when a Victorian clergyman the Reverend Morris decided that this bird was the embodiment of virtue, simply due to its humble and uninteresting lifestyle. An image it well and truly shattered in the 1990’s, when Sir David Attenborough came along with the Life Of Birds team and studied them. It turned out that the Dunnock broke very taboo that is possible, including some I had to look up in a dictionary! You name it, a Dunnock does it! Their image of boring little birds destroyed forever!


I was intrigued! First off, there's a groundswell of support to rename the Miami Marlins' stadium "Richard Attenborough Stadium", so it was neat that he keeps on coming up on BBTF again and again. But beyond that...so the Dunnock is a kinky little ######...

I had to know! Maybe it's just The Velvet Underground fan in me (there is no Velvet Underground fan in me, not literally, not like you were thinking, you sicko).

Candy says I'd like to know completely
What others so discretely talk about

I'm gonna watch the blue birds fly over my shoulder

I'm gonna watch them pass me by
Maybe when I'm older
What do you think I'd see
If I could walk away from me

Reed


Anthony Walton at RSPB (and BTW, if you're one of those women, oh, who I'm I kidding, if you know a woman, who likes fancy plumage on her hats, then you let them know, there's a whole society that would like to have a word with them. And that society has the backing of the Queen, so they will #### you up like it was nothing) was being so circumspect. Anthony Walton was being very discrete, very discrete indeed.

But now I needed to know! What could that cute little birdie do that is so depraved that it can't be mentioned?

I clicked my settings on duckduckgo. I switched safesearch from "strict" to "moderate". No, no. This was going to be some hot stuff.

I turned off safesearch.

Just like Candy (who is a real person by the way, Candy Darling, and yes, that's the same Candy that came from out on the Island, in the backroom she was everybody's darling (see what Lou did there?), but she never lost her head, even...and that's when my search finishes, presumably because duckduckgo is trying to keep me safe).

Anyway, just like Candy, I looked over my shoulder, and typed in the search parameters to find out what Sir David Attenborough found out about the Dunnock's sex life. What could these cute little birdies do that is so unspeakable? What kind of prudes can't openly discuss the mating habits of the Dunnock?

I found the page...I opened it up.

OH MY GOD!

THOSE SICK LITTLE PERVERTS!

FOR THE LOVE OF EVERYTHING THAT'S SWEET, LOVABLE AND HOLY...STOP DOING THAT ####. IT'S DISGUSTING!

Luckily, I couldn't watch the video because my Flash player needs updating, so at least I was spared that indignity.
   622. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:02 AM (#5656424)
621

I found the page...I opened it up.

OH MY GOD!

THOSE SICK LITTLE PERVERTS!

FOR THE LOVE OF EVERYTHING THAT'S SWEET, LOVABLE AND HOLY...STOP DOING THAT ####. IT'S DISGUSTING!



It's funnier if you imagine OG doing this bit in Jon Oliver's voice.
   623. perros Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:18 AM (#5656437)
My favorite Warhol superstar by far is Joe Dallesandro, still going strong in his 70th year. Plus he can act.

Don't click the link if you are at work or a 'phobe, but you should click otherwise.

NSFW
   624. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:21 AM (#5656439)
But assuming that none of those alternative suggestions pan out, I was talking about the level of punishment after the guilt had been determined.

No, you were ranting that they hadn't done something already.


Though it wasn't my intention, I can see where it could've easily been interpreted that way, and you can then take my followup comment as a clarification.

So with that clarification in mind, what punishment do you think should be handed out to (a) the fraternity, and (b) the students who took part in the video, IF the video turns out to be legit, IF the students took part in it voluntarily, and IF it wasn't some sort of a parody whose purpose can be plausibly explained. What then?
   625. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5656448)
Less than a week until the special House election in Arizona, in which Republican Debbie Lesko is expected to beat Democrat Hiral Tipirneni. Roll Call quotes an exultant, unnamed GOP consultant:
“Big whoop, we’re holding Trent Franks’ seat. There’s no glory in that. Debbie will make a fine member of Congress, but she’ll be in the minority for the first time in her career. ...What were people expecting? We lost Alabama, we lost that race in Pennsylvania. If people are expecting this to be a blowout, we don’t have blowouts anymore.”

Republicans have outspent the Democrat 3 to 1 in the race. In a nine-tenths white district, full of senior citizens. That the outgoing Congressman won with over 68% of the vote. To hold the seat for six months.
   626. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:28 AM (#5656449)
The fraternity has already been suspended, FWIW....
   627. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:28 AM (#5656450)
So with that clarification in mind, what punishment do you think should be handed out to (a) the fraternity, and (b) the students who took part in the video, IF the video turns out to be legit, IF the students took part in it voluntarily, and IF it wasn't some sort of a parody whose purpose can be plausibly explained. What then?


I think the concept of "parody" should be broadened to cover, "didn't really mean anything substantive and have no actions in their past showing otherwise," particularly if this was purely private doings.

That would be the principle anyway. How it applies to these facts, I don't know.

But assuming that none of those alternative suggestions pan out, I was talking about the level of punishment after the guilt had been determined.


"Guilt" of what?

   628. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:34 AM (#5656460)

"Guilt" of what?


Hate speech.
   629. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:35 AM (#5656461)
Less than a week until the special House election in Arizona, in which Republican Debbie Lesko is expected to beat Democrat Hiral Tipirneni. Roll Call quotes an exultant, unnamed GOP consultant:


Much as I agree that this is one upset the D's won't be pulling -

I'll just note again that the most recent independent poll actually had the race tied (technically, Tirpirneni up a point, but obviously, MOE deadlock). I saw Tirpirneni was touting another poll a day or so ago also touting a tied race, but I think that one was a candidate-sponsored poll so it's rather salty.

I expect this one will just go into the D "moral victory" column - a few point win for Lesko...

But if Tirpirneni pulls the upset? Yowza.... a couple times over bigger shockwave than PA-18. Losing this one would be a "Holy ####, is ANYONE safe?" moment.
   630. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:39 AM (#5656465)
The new fun Congressional Republican game is asking the Republicans, "Will you support the Republican president's reelection?" You can add Sen. Ron Johnson (WI) to the list of stammering GOP leaders who are requesting an extension:
"It's way too early to be talking about 2020. It could be a completely different world by 2020. We have a 2018 election first. [That's a] gotcha question. It's unusual that members of the media would be talking about the 2020 election in 2018."
   631. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:41 AM (#5656467)
Hate speech.


I don't know all the facts. Was the video captured surreptitiously, then published? If it was just a private gathering, and the words weren't aimed at anyone, I'd be hard-pressed to conclude that it was "hate speech." That principle would punish any private utterance -- count me out of that principle.

If the words were actually aimed at people, then yeah, of course.
   632. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:43 AM (#5656469)
#627:
I think the concept of "parody" should be broadened to cover, "didn't really mean anything substantive and have no actions in their past showing otherwise," particularly if this was purely private doings.


What an idiotic thought.
   633. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:46 AM (#5656472)
In other polling news...

Krysten Simena is up 6 over likely fall opponent Martha McSally (she trounces Chemtrail Kelli and Sheriff Joe by double digits).

The big fear on the AZ GOP side is John McCain's health... Morbid, I know - but not-so-morbid that the AZ GOP-controlled Senate recently tried to sneak through a change in the special election law that would allow the governor to appoint a Senate replacement to fill out the term, rather than require a special election. Current law is flaky, but the prevailing opinion is that a special election would happen in November for a vacancy prior to June, appointment after June.

The thinking is that one or both of the two whackjobs challenging McSally in the GOP primary, basically splitting the nut vote and giving McSally a plurality, would probably jump to the other race.... putting McSally in real danger of losing the primary AND perhaps giving the GOP two whacks in November.
   634. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:55 AM (#5656473)
I don't know all the facts. Was the video captured surreptitiously, then published? If it was just a private gathering, and the words weren't aimed at anyone, I'd be hard-pressed to conclude that it was "hate speech." That principle would punish any private utterance -- count me out of that principle.


The video was made a private 'event' with only frat members present and posted by the frat to a private facebook group... which means they've got no one but themselves to blame (someone - who would obviously also have to be a member) shared it to other people.

I'd oppose jailing them or something like that... but other, non-governmental repercussions? Tough ####. It's not difficult to avoid saying the things that were said, and it's doubly not difficult to avoid capturing and sharing the moments.
   635. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5656474)
Father of Trump Advisor May Have Been Murdered

What is Hillary's alibi? Where was she on the 13th?

Is it wrong to speculate? It would be wrong not to. Has anyone asked Trump consultant Sean Hannity for his thoughts on this latest suspicious death to be linked to Hillary Clinton?
   636. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5656475)
I don't know all the facts. Was the video captured surreptitiously, then published? If it was just a private gathering, and the words weren't aimed at anyone, I'd be hard-pressed to conclude that it was "hate speech." That principle would punish any private utterance -- count me out of that principle. If the words were actually aimed at people, then yeah, of course.

Would you raise up against the University banning the frat from campus affiliation permanently?
   637. Omineca Greg Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:05 PM (#5656477)
Meanwhile, back in Canada...

Syracuse University is actually where Lou Reed (to keep with my personal theme of the morning) went to school, and it got me to thinking what Lou would have thought of the video. I'm sure he'd hate the people in the fraternity, he hated most people already and these guys seem like they'd be no-doubters, but as somebody who said deliberately provocative things for a living, I wonder what Lou would have said.

I promised some Canadian content though, and here it is. Last year, a University of Guelph student association, issued an apology for playing "Walk on the Wild Side" at a university function...

The Guelph Central Student Association, at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, has made a public apology for the inclusion of Lou Reed’s famous song, ‘Walk on the Wild Side’, in a playlist for a university event. The student group described the song as ‘transphobic’, and apologised for the ‘ignorance’ of the executive who included the song, adding: ‘The person making the list did not know or understand the lyrics.’

The student group also released a statement (published on Facebook and then deleted) condemning the lyrics as ‘problematic’. Apparently, by describing his experiences in the company of trans women as ‘walking on the wild side’, Reed was espousing ‘dangerous rhetoric’ that wrongly portrayed the lives of these women as odd or unconventional.

Some people have, indeed, deeply misunderstood the lyrics to Reed’s song – those who are calling it transphobic. ‘Walk on the Wild Side’ describes the characters Reed mixed with in 1970s New York – people on the fringes of society. The song is set in the context of taboo themes like drug use, prostitution and casual sex. What this student group has failed to realise is that the people Reed described in his song not only acknowledged the unconventional nature of their lifestyles, they revelled in it. ‘Lou was open about his complete acceptance of all creatures of the night’, remarked Reed’s friend and back-up dancer Jenni Muldaur. ‘Everyone doing their thing, taking a walk on the wild side… the album was called Transformer. What do they think it’s about?’

Despite Reed being one of the first artists in history to sing, sympathetically and affectionately, about transgender women, he is still vilified for not following a modern PC script. Holly Woodward, the transgender actress who inspired a portion of the lyrics, was delighted by her role as Reed’s muse. ‘Lou Reed made me immortal’, she said.

The funny thing is that the people who used to be shocked by Reed’s lyrics were those living in the polite circles of suburbia. Now, it is young, trendy students who find themselves offended by Reed’s portrayal of trans women. The attempt to censor a piece of music for not meeting a certain moral standard is deeply conservative, and would be more suited to a church meeting than a university event.

The freedom of musicians to take an unflinching look at the world around them and write about it as they see fit must be protected. We should be alarmed at the willingness of this student group to condemn yesterday’s art for not pandering to today’s You Can’t Say That culture. Labelling brilliant pieces of art and culture (like ‘Walk on the Wild Side’) as ‘problematic’ is idiotic. Furthermore, the erasure of such songs or artworks from popular culture would be a huge loss to us all.


link

That is both funny and sad at the same time.
   638. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:06 PM (#5656479)
BTW, YR --

I'm surprised you didn't note the passing of Bruno Sammartino yesterday...
   639. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5656481)
Haven't seen polling on this before, but the new Marist Poll that has the Democrats up 5% on the Generic Congressional Ballot (44%-39%), also asked how they'd vote on a candidate "who wants to move to impeach President Trump"? The pro-impeachment candidate didn't poll nearly as well as Generic Democrat (who does?), trailing by a 42% - 47% margin. Bit of a dilemma for Democratic candidates in the pro-impeachment camp, although a bit of lying might do the trick for them.
   640. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:15 PM (#5656482)
That Lou Reed thing at Guelph rightfully fell under universal, international ridicule at the time in 2017. Even their attempted walkback was ridiculed.
   641. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5656486)
Haven't seen polling on this before, but the new Marist Poll that has the Democrats up 5% on the Generic Congressional Ballot (44%-39%), also asked how they'd vote on a candidate "who wants to move to impeach President Trump"? The pro-impeachment candidate didn't poll nearly as well as Generic Democrat (who does?), trailing by a 42% - 47% margin. Bit of a dilemma for Democratic candidates in the pro-impeachment camp, although a bit of lying might do the trick for them.


Ahhh... the silver lining hunts from Clapper are like nectar!

Since I guess we're doing the congressional ballot rollup, it should be noted that there are three generic ballot polls newer than the Marist one -- Ipsos (+9 D), Morning Consult (+7) and YouGov (+5).

Those same polls also include Trump approvals - Ipsos (39/57), MC (41/55), and YouGov (38/53).

Seems like just last week we were all celebrating Trump getting back to his high-water mark of 42.5 and closing that disapprove to -11.... Wait, it was just last week... alas, Orangina is trending downward yet again.
   642. DavidFoss Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:18 PM (#5656487)
Bit of a dilemma for Democratic candidates in the pro-impeachment camp, although a bit of lying might do the trick for them.

Is it lying to say you'll wait for more information?

"Would you definitely vote for or definitely vote against a candidate for Congress who wants to move to impeach President Trump?"

They say polls are all about how the question was phrased. I'm surprised they only got 10% in the middle on that one.
   643. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5656490)
In sad legal news -

Better Phone Cohen is dropping his libel suits against Buzzfeed and Fusion....

   644. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:25 PM (#5656492)
#627:
I think the concept of "parody" should be broadened to cover, "didn't really mean anything substantive and have no actions in their past showing otherwise," particularly if this was purely private doings.


What an idiotic thought.


Nah, it's a civil libertarian thought, as per my affinities. I'm not in favor of people being punished for things they say in private confab at things like dinner parties or cocktail parties. That seems rather Stasi-esque. I'm anti-Stasi.
   645. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:26 PM (#5656493)
BTW, YR --

I'm surprised you didn't note the passing of Bruno Sammartino yesterday...


Yeah I’m actually out of the country this week at a meeting so I haven’t had much time to get online. I did see that Bruno died and was honestly surprised because even though he was the advanced age of 82 he always seemed so healthy and vibrant when you saw him in public.

#1 Paul Jones also died on the same day. I didn’t watch Mid-Atlantic wrestling growing up but he was a huge draw as a wrestler there for a decade or more, so much so that he immediately was transitioned to a manager role when he injured his neck and was unable to wrestle. As a manager he was pretty lousy by my recollection but his notoriety in the territory kept him viable in the role.

But Hulk Hogan is going to live forever. He won’t even put death over.
   646. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:26 PM (#5656496)
Would you raise up against the University banning the frat from campus affiliation permanently?


No, but I don't really "raise up" against things.

It would depend on the facts. I've laid out the applicable principles. The careful observer will take note that usual suspect types never do.
   647. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:29 PM (#5656498)
631

That principle would punish any private utterance -- count me out of that principle.

If the words were actually aimed at people, then yeah, of course.



Agreed, wholeheartedly.
   648. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:30 PM (#5656499)
Hey, even more, more local, local news! Probably 5-10 miles from where I grew up, no more than 15 from where I live now.

Upstate NY farmer says ICE officers stormed his farm without a warrant, cuffed him, threw his phone
Rome, N.Y. -- John Collins was standing outside the milk house at his dairy farm this morning when he heard yelling coming from inside. He ran in, he says, and saw his worker, Marcial de Leon Aguilar, pinned up against the window by armed men.

The men did not identify themselves and were screaming at Aguilar, Collins said.

"I run and say, 'What the hell is going on in here?'" Collins said.

Then the men told Collins they were officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He asked them for a warrant or some paperwork to explain what they were doing. They had none, he said, so he ordered them to get off his property and leave Aguilar alone.
Adrian Smith, a spokesman for ICE, said he was looking into the situation and would comment when he knew more.

Collins said he followed the officers cross the street and asked them why they were taking Aguilar, but he didn't get a straight answer. He also continued to ask for paperwork, but was not offered any by the ICE officers.
Aguilar and his wife, Virginia, are Guatemalan. Aguilar has worked for Collins for about nine months, Collins said. Aguilar, his wife, and his children live in a home on Collins' property.

Collins said Aguilar had proper documentation to work for him. And he's been paying taxes since working for Collins.

Aguilar's wife, Virginia, and the couple's four children were not in the U.S. until recently. She was caught crossing the border, illegally, with the children. Collins said she has been meeting with ICE officers since she arrived, and is seeking asylum for herself and the children because of the violence in Guatemala. Collins said Virginia met with ICE officers as recently as last week, and has another meeting scheduled for this Friday. At times, Aguilar has accompanied his wife, who is pregnant, to some of the meetings, Collins said.
"ICE needs a warrant. If they go on someone's property without one, they are violating the law," said immigration law expert and Cornell law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr.
Collins attempted to take photos and video with his phone. When he did that, he said, one of the ICE officers grabbed his phone and threw it into the road. Then they handcuffed him and threatened to arrest him for hindering a federal investigation, he said.

But then the officers uncuffed him and left with Aguilar in the backseat of a dark Dodge Caravan.
   649. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:30 PM (#5656500)
Bit of a dilemma for Democratic candidates in the pro-impeachment camp, although a bit of lying might do the trick for them.

Is it lying to say you'll wait for more information?

Exactly. By the time the primaries begin in 2020, we might have lots of information that we don't have now, information that might change some of that 47%'s minds. Not to mention that by the time we get to that stage, whoever the Democratic nominee is might not mind having Trump as opponent in order to keep the enthusiasm at a fever pitch.
   650. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:34 PM (#5656501)
Upstate NY farmer says ICE officers stormed his farm without a warrant, cuffed him, threw his phone

I'm sure that those ICE goons will say they were merely following the law, and that some people here will maintain that they're qualified for their jobs.
   651. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:35 PM (#5656502)
Considering that the supposedly radical far lefties of the OTP are actually - if my counts are accurate - opposed to impeachment at the moment*, I'm not sure exactly why anyone would consider a 42-47 split good news... well, I guess - why a Trumpkin would consider it good news. I mean, I'm well aware my opinion is in the minority on the specific and expedient action - but the fact that 42% of RVs (or is this another all adults?) sample agree - I consider that VERY encouraging.

*Not to leave anyone out, but I think myself and Sam are the only ones on the record in favor at moment...
   652. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:36 PM (#5656505)
.
   653. Omineca Greg Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:42 PM (#5656507)
Hey, even more, more local, local news!

Yeah, you're rocking it today!

I looked up to see if Northern BC has anything going on. This one is actually interesting enough...

A proposal by the City of Terrace to use surveillance cameras in two well-used outdoor spaces has been rejected by B.C.'s Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

The office reviewed the proposal and said it would likely break B.C.'s privacy laws, if implemented.

Acting deputy commissioner Bradley Weldon told Daybreak North host Carolina De Ryk said there is "very little, if any evidence" that cameras would improve personal safety or protect property.

"But the privacy harm, which is us being tracked and monitored in public spaces where we have a right to be as we just go about our daily business, is happening 100 per cent of the time," Weldon said.

He said facial recognition is improving quickly and will soon be available in almost every security camera system. That would allow almost any camera user to track and catalogue park users, "sort of tantamount to a security guard… checking your ID."

Weldon said public bodies should only be using cameras in areas of heightened security concerns — like courthouses — or after hours in places like dumps to prevent illegal dumping.

He said a public space where people have a right to be don't qualify.

The idea of installing cameras was put forward by Coun. Sean Bujtas as a way of addressing concerns about vandalism and mischief in George Little Park and Brolly Square.

Both sites have been hotspots for police with RCMP responding to more than 200 calls at the parks in 2017. The city typically budgets $10,000 annually for repairs to George Little Park due to vandalism and damage.

City spokesperson Karisa Petho said the cameras were merely a suggestion from council and "all options" are on the table for improving downtown security.

She said the surveillance camera idea will be discussed at a future council meeting.

link
   654. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5656508)
While seeing the bright flashing lights of all the negatives of impeachment, both literally and politically, I would be in favor as well.
   655. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:46 PM (#5656509)
*Not to leave anyone out, but I think myself and Sam are the only ones on the record in favor at moment...

Here!


I'm glad there's another - because I fear Sam might object and complain that impeachment is a sissy compromise compared to the full Benito... I try to hold the fragile coalition together by reminding him that Mussolini was first dismissed as prime minister, but it's a struggle sometimes.
   656. BDC Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:47 PM (#5656510)
Impeachment seems so unrealistic, given the current Congress, that I haven't given it much thought. I think there should be a way to impeach a President for gross incompetence ("high misdemeanors" can't entirely refer to things you could be jailed for). I think that Trump has shown gross incompetence, in apparently not understanding much about government or policy. I'd vote to impeach him right now.

But I'd also vote for Congress to give me an unlimited lifetime supply of Vermont Country Store olde-fashioned candy treats, so I am not quite sure if this qualifies as "in favor."
   657. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:50 PM (#5656511)
By the time the primaries begin in 2020, we might have lots of information that we don't have now, information that might change some of that 47%'s minds. Not to mention that by the time we get to that stage, whoever the Democratic nominee is might not mind having Trump as opponent in order to keep the enthusiasm at a fever pitch.

The Marist Poll mentioned in #639 was about 2018 Congressional candidates who favored impeaching Trump, nor his potential 2020 opponents. Seemed clear from the context, but apparently not for all.
   658. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:54 PM (#5656514)
Dammit! I inadvertently zapped my "Here!" (652) Damn cat...

Anyway, I'm in favor, but everything had better be beyond pristine with the case. "If you shoot at the king, you had better not miss."
   659. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:55 PM (#5656515)
I think myself and Sam are the only ones on the record in favor at moment...

Reason enough for a sane person to reexamine his position.
   660. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:56 PM (#5656516)
I think Trump is an embarrassment, but I don't think his shenanigans (that we know about) have risen to the level of impeachment. Yet.

If it turns out that he's a *calculating* manipulative racist as opposed to merely exhibiting tendencies of one as a byproduct of his narcissism, I reserve the right to change my mind.
   661. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 12:57 PM (#5656518)
I'm for impeachment on one condition:

That it not be undertaken unless the prospect of conviction/removal is extremely high. Even if every open Senate seat flips blue, which is pretty damned unlikely, I don't that happens unless there is incontrovertible proof of Trump taking Russian money or something similarly awful that would offend even the most stalwart #### holster.


Edit: why is the word for male chicken nannied out?
   662. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:00 PM (#5656519)
Considering that the supposedly radical far lefties of the OTP are actually - if my counts are accurate - opposed to impeachment at the moment*, I'm not sure exactly why anyone would consider a 42-47 split good news... well, I guess - why a Trumpkin would consider it good news. I mean, I'm well aware my opinion is in the minority on the specific and expedient action - but the fact that 42% of RVs (or is this another all adults?) sample agree - I consider that VERY encouraging.


Care to lay out the articles of impeachment and why they should be voted yes upon?

Or is this just another of those things where the emoting is the entire point.
   663. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:04 PM (#5656520)
Impeachment seems so unrealistic, given the current Congress, that I haven't given it much thought. I think there should be a way to impeach a President for gross incompetence ("high misdemeanors" can't entirely refer to things you could be jailed for). I think that Trump has shown gross incompetence, in apparently not understanding much about government or policy. I'd vote to impeach him right now.


Meh, congress can define "high crimes and misdemeanors" however it pleases... and I've long been on board with Hamilton in the Federalist papers; that a 'national inquest' is sometimes appropriate and the nation need not be saddled with a buffoon for an entire term.

Regardless, much to my joy of certain people who get upset by my referencing it, I'll likewise continue to point out that among the articles of impeachment that passed the House against Andrew Johnson - two of the articles referenced "intemperate/disrespectful speeches given" (Article 9) and "Bringing disgrace and ridicule to the Presidency (Article 11).... Article 11 failed in the Senate 19-35 (one vote short)... and setting aside the historical debate about how the senate came up one vote short (lots of accusations and counter-accusations about bribes, etc on both sides) - doesn't change the fact that if the vote had been 18-36, Johnson would have been gone and that would have been that.

   664. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:05 PM (#5656521)
I am still against impeachment base don what I know now. I reserve the right to change my mind as more information comes in. Personally I would prefer Democrats (not here, but officials in public) would STFU about impeachment for now. Talking about it now accomplishes nothing good.
   665. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:05 PM (#5656522)
Care to lay out the articles of impeachment and why they should be voted yes upon?


Many & repeated violations of the emoluments clause.
Obstruction of justice.
Abuse of power.

When his many financial crimes are released by Mueller, they could be added if they were shown to occur after 1/20/17.
Same for taking Russian cash.



   666. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:06 PM (#5656523)
Many & repeated violations of the emoluments clause.
Obstruction of justice.
Abuse of power.


Care to lay out the articles of impeachment with actual details and reasoning, and why they should be voted yes upon?
   667. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:10 PM (#5656524)
By the time the primaries begin in 2020, we might have lots of information that we don't have now, information that might change some of that 47%'s minds. Not to mention that by the time we get to that stage, whoever the Democratic nominee is might not mind having Trump as opponent in order to keep the enthusiasm at a fever pitch.

The Marist Poll mentioned in #639 was about 2018 Congressional candidates who favored impeaching Trump, nor his potential 2020 opponents. Seemed clear from the context, but apparently not for all.


Fine, and just how many of those Democratic candidates are likely to be pimping impeachment in districts where doing so could cost them votes? You seem to think that there's some rigid Party Line about impeachment that the DNC is going to impose on all of its candidates regardless of local circumstances. Dream on.
   668. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:11 PM (#5656526)
Care to lay out the articles of impeachment and why they should be voted yes upon?


"Enough of this clown" is good enough for me...

But I see no need to draft specific articles at this point in time... Democratic leadership in the house doesn't support it at this time and while he'll gladly score points by allowing niche efforts with no hope of coming close onto the House floor, Paulie Nonuts certainly would never let a serious attempt get a vote. It can wait until January.

Ask me again in a year (or less than a year)... I'll be happy to draft the specifics.
   669. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:12 PM (#5656527)
I think there should be a way to impeach a President for gross incompetence ("high misdemeanors" can't entirely refer to things you could be jailed for). I think that Trump has shown gross incompetence, in apparently not understanding much about government or policy. I'd vote to impeach him right now.

Impeachment on those grounds, or any of the Zonk-faction's "who cares about the grounds just get him out" pretexts, is an extra-Constitutional standard that does far more damage to the Republic than a President who might be unpopular, a poor administrator, or have an offputting personal style. The political process is the mechanism for addressing such claims. Trump seems to bring out a lot of "the end justifies the means" tactics by his opponents, but such reasoning is inappropriate, and actually strengthens his hand. Few have ever benefited more by their political enemies than Trump.
   670. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:16 PM (#5656528)

Care to lay out the articles of impeachment with actual details and reasoning, and why they should be voted yes upon?


They're pretty ####### obvious, aren't they?

But here goes anyway:

Accepting significant sums at his properties from diplomats and other foreigners seeking influence.

He publicly stated that firing Comey was done to take the heat off himself.

Too numerous to mention but here are a couple: Muslim travel ban, extreme nepotism/lack of security clearance, there's more but you frankly aren't worth the keystrokes.

I look forward to your pompous dismissal of those points complete with a diagnosis of TDS.
   671. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:16 PM (#5656529)
I don't think the trolling is the most off-putting part of his posts, the self congratulatory bits are the ones I find the strangest. When stretchy starts dribbling on about "this space" and how sane, observant, correct, knowledgeable and talented he is is sets off huge red flags.
I'm a little unclear on your taxonomy here. Those things you describe are part of his trolling habits. Normal posters are all alike, but every troll is trollish in his own way; nevertheless, the essence of trolling is that they are trying to hijack a discussion and turn it towards themselves. FLTB pretending to accomplishments he hasn't earned here or IRL is one of his techniques.
   672. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:16 PM (#5656530)
I am still against impeachment base on what I know now. I reserve the right to change my mind as more information comes in. Personally I would prefer Democrats (not here, but officials in public) would STFU about impeachment for now. Talking about it now accomplishes nothing good.

This. They also might STFU with their criticisms of Comey, which do nothing but give Trump more cover to keep up his BS about the Witch Hunts he's been subjected to.
   673. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:19 PM (#5656532)
Care to lay out the articles of impeachment and why they should be voted yes upon?
It would take something like:

- Concrete evidence of foreknowledge of any of a number of topics he's repeatedly denied knowing anything about, such as: Manafort changing the Ukraine plank for a quid pro quo, Junior offering considerations for that campaign dirt, Stone/Assange coordination, etc., etc.
- Concrete evidence of financial gain, post-candidacy, w/r/t anything to do with oligarchs

If either of those were to come to light, I don't see much room for debate.
   674. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:21 PM (#5656533)
Impeachment on those grounds, or any of the Zonk-faction's "who cares about the grounds just get him out" pretexts, is an extra-Constitutional standard that does far more damage to the Republic than a President who might be unpopular, a poor administrator, or have an offputting personal style. The political process is the mechanism for addressing such claims. Trump seems to bring out a lot of "the end justifies the means" tactics by his opponents, but such reasoning is inappropriate, and actually strengthens his hand. Few have ever benefited more by their political enemies than Trump.


If in doubt, always fall back on the good, old "ends justify the means" double-standard!

Quite a racket - Trump can do as much "damage to the Republic" because he's President, but heaven forbid anyone opposed to him go down that path... why, it's almost as if...

Regardless, it's probably a good idea for you be testing out defenses out now. You'll need them next year.

FWIW, though - while I support impeachment, my advice to all Democratic candidates on impeachment would be this: "I think he should consider resigning to spare the nation." and leave it at that.

It's far and away the best political course.
   675. bunyon Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:23 PM (#5656536)
If you are currently in favor of impeachment, you should read 661 carefully. Unless iron-clad, unimpeachable (ha! I crack myself up) evidence is brought to light that Trump is guilty of something that would cause GOP senators to vote to convict, it is extremely unlikely that Trump could be removed by that process. A house vote to impeach followed by acquittal leading into 2020 could well be worse than any other option.

Along those lines, many of you put way too much stock in Mueller's investigation. I want to see it come to its conclusion and I'm on record saying I think Trump has done and is doing a lot of shady things that warrant removal. But the Congressional GOP clearly doesn't give a damn. They aren't going to give a damn if Mueller proves it and sends a bunch of Trump cronies to jail (and, just to state the obvious, if Mueller doesn't prove it, they definitely won't vote to convict).


So, forget all the other stuff about Trump's possible criminal behavior. If a majority of the Senate GOP doesn't want him removed, he won't be removed. And they'll (mostly) have the backing of their constituents.

The focus should be clearly and unwaveringly on winning elections in 2018 and 2020. That's the only way through.

EDIT: A lot of comments I missed as I was reading from the top. I would just like to add: I think, even if the Ds take the House and Senate, impeachment is a terrible idea sans a good probability of conviction. Impeachment is terribly destructive. If the new D congress blows all its capital and time on impeaching and trying Trump and fails to remove him, they'll have damaged their chances to hold congress in 2020 and dislodge Trump as well.

Impeachment is politics. Anyone saying anything else is selling something. If you can't remove him, don't start down that road.
   676. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:24 PM (#5656538)
"If you shoot at the king, you had better not miss."


If this refers to the words of one Omar Little, the line is:

[pedant]
Hey yo, listen here Bey ... you come at the king, you'd best not miss.
[/pedant]

Damn, but I need to watch that show again ...
   677. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:24 PM (#5656539)
Impeachment on those grounds, or any of the Zonk-faction's "who cares about the grounds just get him out" pretexts, is an extra-Constitutional standard that does far more damage to the Republic than a President who might be unpopular, a poor administrator, or have an offputting personal style. The political process is the mechanism for addressing such claims. Trump seems to bring out a lot of "the end justifies the means" tactics by his opponents, but such reasoning is inappropriate, and actually strengthens his hand. Few have ever benefited more by their political enemies than Trump.


Ahhh... "extra-constitutional".... that must be why SCOTUS issued a stern warning to congress following Johnson.

Oh wait, it didn't.
   678. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:25 PM (#5656540)
Concrete evidence of foreknowledge of any of a number of topics he's repeatedly denied knowing anything about, such as: Manafort changing the Ukraine plank for a quid pro quo, Junior offering considerations for that campaign dirt, Stone/Assange coordination, etc., etc.


While I believe those OUGHT to be impeachable offenses, could they legally be that? Can a pres be impeached for pre-inauguration conduct?
   679. DavidFoss Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:26 PM (#5656542)
Trump seems to bring out a lot of "the end justifies the means" tactics by his opponents, but such reasoning is inappropriate, and actually strengthens his hand. Few have ever benefited more by their political enemies than Trump.

It's the junior-high-school-style bully tactics. If you end up on the wrong side of it, you have no choice but to submit, let the bully know he doesn't bother you and hope he bores and moves on to easier targets. There is a fundamental unfairness to it all, but if you make a big fuss, the bully just gets worse.

If it was just the unpopular policies, then people just have to suck it up and campaign harder in 2020. That's how elections work. But there certainly seem to be a lot of smoke involved with the Mueller investigation. If things for Trump turn out as bad as they have for Manafort, or how they look to be turning out for Cohen, then we shouldn't have to wait until 2021.
   680. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:27 PM (#5656544)
Many & repeated violations of the emoluments clause.

This is perhaps the best example of just making stuff up and turning the law upside down in an effort to "get Trump". The Emoluments Clause isn't a restriction aimed at the President specifically, it applies to federal government employees generally, and many government employees have owned hotels, motels, inns, or bed & breakfasts*, without ever a seconds concern as to whether a foreign national booked a room. There is no prohibition on a President being in business, and routine arms-length business transactions have never been deemed to violate the Emoluments Clause. It's an absurd argument.

*For example, Obama's Secretary of Commerce was an heir to the Hyatt Hotel chain.
   681. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:30 PM (#5656546)
nevertheless, the essence of trolling is that they are trying to hijack a discussion and turn it towards themselves.
Could there be a more perfect description of Trump's Twitter habits? Puerto Rico, Women's March, Vegas shooting, Chinese shoplifting - there isn't an event that takes place that isn't All About Trump.
   682. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:31 PM (#5656547)
I am still against impeachment base don what I know now. I reserve the right to change my mind as more information comes in. Personally I would prefer Democrats (not here, but officials in public) would STFU about impeachment for now. Talking about it now accomplishes nothing good.


This is where I'm at.
   683. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:31 PM (#5656548)
So, forget all the other stuff about Trump's possible criminal behavior. If a majority of the Senate GOP doesn't want him removed, he won't be removed. And they'll (mostly) have the backing of their constituents.


Impeachment doesn't need a majority of the Senate GOP, it only needs about a 1/3. Depends on what happens this fall, but I think it's a fairly safe assumption that the next Senate probably ends up +/-1 from where it is now. That means you'd need 17-18 GOP Senators.... 20 at most, if one wants to assume a couple of Democratic no's.

   684. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:31 PM (#5656549)
This is perhaps the best example of just making stuff up and turning the law upside down in an effort to "get Trump". The Emoluments Clause isn't a restriction aimed at the President specifically, it applies to federal government employees generally, and many government employees have owned hotels, motels, inns, or bed & breakfasts*, without ever a seconds concern as to whether a foreign national booked a room. There is no prohibition on a President being in business, and routine arms-length business transactions have never been deemed to violate the Emoluments Clause. It's an absurd argument.


Note that I said foreigners "seeking influence." The increase of traffic of such folks to the Presidents (exceedingly tacky) properties is evidence of intent to influence, and his cashing those checks is evidence of acceptance.
   685. BDC Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5656550)
Impeachment on those grounds, or any of the Zonk-faction's "who cares about the grounds just get him out" pretexts, is an extra-Constitutional standard that does far more damage to the Republic than a President who might be unpopular, a poor administrator, or have an offputting personal style. The political process is the mechanism for addressing such claims

There is no damage to the Republic in replacing a president with his/her vice-president.

I guess part of my warrant here is that I prefer impeachment, with its more open and argumentative process, to setting the 25th Amendment in motion. But I can see preferring the mechanism of the 25th, which requires 2/3 of both houses of Congress, while impeachment only requires a majority of the House.

In any case, whether by the 25th or by impeachment, there is a thinkable scenario where the President has committed no crime, but has done things way, way less acceptable than firing the Secretary of War or lying about a blow job. Is not knowing what "trade deficit" means, or what his administration's policy on a given bill is, or being unable to staff or run an administration, such a scenario? It's pretty close, IMO.

But again, Republicans in Congress are supremely unbothered, so it doesn't bear much practical consideration.
   686. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5656551)
I'm a little unclear on your taxonomy here. Those things you describe are part of his trolling habits. Normal posters are all alike, but every troll is trollish in his own way; nevertheless, the essence of trolling is that they are trying to hijack a discussion and turn it towards themselves. FLTB pretending to accomplishments he hasn't earned here or IRL is one of his techniques.


Fair enough. I generally see the true Trollish comments as being the ridiculous statements which are false or mere opinion stated as if they were brought down from the mountain carved in tablets of stone, and the self aggrandizement as being more his real (insecure) personality. It could all be a troll construct though. Thankfully I don't know him IRL*, so I have no basis of determining which is closer.

* Though I did offer to fly to NYC, meet up, and tell him what I thought of him to his face. He demurred.
   687. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:33 PM (#5656553)
While I believe those OUGHT to be impeachable offenses, could they legally be that? Can a pres be impeached for pre-inauguration conduct?
If he's proven to have covered them up - and lied about them - since his inauguration, I would think so. But what do I know...
   688. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:34 PM (#5656554)
Impeachment doesn't need a majority of the Senate GOP, it only needs about a 1/3. Depends on what happens this fall, but I think it's a fairly safe assumption that the next Senate probably ends up +/-1 from where it is now. That means you'd need 17-18 GOP Senators.... 20 at most, if one wants to assume a couple of Democratic no's.


Not even the dead girl/live boy scenario would get 17-20 GOP Senators, which is why I said what I said in 661. Hard, indisputable evidence of serious collusion is the only thing, and IMO that only happens if payola can be demonstrated.
   689. DavidFoss Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:34 PM (#5656555)
Note that I said foreigners "seeking influence." The increase of traffic of such folks to the Presidents (exceedingly tacky) properties is evidence of intent to influence, and his cashing those checks is evidence of acceptance.

The Government of the Philippines is currently holding an event at Trump Hotel DC while lobbying trade policy with the WH at the same time.
   690. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:36 PM (#5656556)
While I believe those OUGHT to be impeachable offenses, could they legally be that? Can a pres be impeached for pre-inauguration conduct?


As much as Clapper tries to throw around meaningless words like "extra-constitutional" -

I'll repeat again... a President can be impeached for whatever reason congress wishes... Majority in the House, 2/3 in the Senate. Done. SCOTUS has already ruled that the entire process is non-reviewable.

The "could" is settled. It's wholly and entirely at the discretion of congress.

All the arguments are over "should"... no matter how much certain folks try to weasel around that basic fact.
   691. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:36 PM (#5656557)
"Enough of this clown" is good enough for me...

But I see no need to draft specific articles at this point in time... Democratic leadership in the house doesn't support it at this time and while he'll gladly score points by allowing niche efforts with no hope of coming close onto the House floor, Paulie Nonuts certainly would never let a serious attempt get a vote. It can wait until January.

Ask me again in a year (or less than a year)... I'll be happy to draft the specifics.


The derangement behind these "ideas" speaks for itself.

You want a duly-elected president impeached, but can't list any reasons why?
   692. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:36 PM (#5656558)
I'll likewise continue to point out that among the articles of impeachment that passed the House against Andrew Johnson - two of the articles referenced "intemperate/disrespectful speeches given" (Article 9) and "Bringing disgrace and ridicule to the Presidency (Article 11)....

If you have to cite the impeachment of Andrew Johnson to justify your argument, you've already lost. The Johnson impeachment has been almost universally condemned as an abuse of the impeachment power, but I suppose it's not surprising that a few "revisionists" have emerged to make an argument in hopes of advancing the Trump-Must-Go cause.
   693. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:36 PM (#5656559)
So with that clarification in mind, what punishment do you think should be handed out to (a) the fraternity, and (b) the students who took part in the video, IF the video turns out to be legit, IF the students took part in it voluntarily, and IF it wasn't some sort of a parody whose purpose can be plausibly explained. What then?
I'm torn. There are two competing principles at work, from my perspective: (1) the IMO-absolute right of a private individual/institution to disassociate itself from people it doesn't like; and (2) free speech. Now, when I say "free speech" I don't mean as a legal concept; as I noted earlier, there are no constitutional bars to punishing them, the way there would be if it were a public institution. But the principle of free speech is broader than the legal doctrine. It makes me uneasy to go around punishing people because they said offensive things privately. (Publicly is a different matter.) To be sure, disassociation isn't necessarily punitive in nature -- but in this case, it clearly would be.

I can certainly say that, based on the limited information I have, I would not feel sorry for these apparent bozos if they were punished. But there are other people who could end up subject to the same type of punishment in the future for whom I might have more sympathy; anyone could be a target of you-offended-me-ism. (Like, I am the epitome of charm, grace, and tolerance, but someone trying hard enough could probably claim something I said was offensive.)
   694. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:38 PM (#5656562)
The Government of the Philippines is currently holding an event at Trump Hotel DC while lobbying trade policy with the WH at the same time.


Indeed, and that's only one of many. And not the Emoluments Clause isn't just a statute, like the Tenure of Office Act was, it is a Constitutional provision, and he's wiping his ass with it.
   695. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:39 PM (#5656563)
Impeachment is politics. Anyone saying anything else is selling something.

I may be naïve, but I actually believe various people have principles, so I can't really agree with this.


If you can't remove him, don't start down that road.

No problem agreeing with this, though, and my assent in #654 is based on that concept, even if it was made clear by bunyon rather than myself. The chances that the Dems don't screw it up completely are at around .0000000000000000000000314%.

   696. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:40 PM (#5656564)
nevertheless, the essence of trolling is that they are trying to hijack a discussion and turn it towards themselves.


No, that has nothing to do with "trolling" or anything else. People write things. If other members of the audience respond, they respond. If they don't, they don't.

There's not much more to it than that.

FLTB pretending to accomplishments he hasn't earned here or IRL is one of his techniques.


That never gets anyone any audience and would never suffice to. You're simply jealous. Your choice.
   697. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:40 PM (#5656565)
Not even the dead girl/live boy scenario would get 17-20 GOP Senators, which is why I said what I said in 661. Hard, indisputable evidence of serious collusion is the only thing, and IMO that only happens if payola can be demonstrated.


I'll boldly predict that while dancing around high 30s/low 40s or ~15 points underwater isn't it -- high 20s/low30s ~20-25 points underwater will look very much like a dead girl/live boy.
   698. Traderdave Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:41 PM (#5656566)
If you have to cite the impeachment of Andrew Johnson to justify your argument, you've already lost. The Johnson impeachment has been almost universally condemned as an abuse of the impeachment power, but I suppose it's not surprising that a few "revisionists" have emerged to make an argument in hopes of advancing the Trump-Must-Go cause.


Have you been instructed by the RNC yet whether impeachment for lying under oath about sexual activity is also an abuse of the power?
   699. -- Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:42 PM (#5656567)
I generally see the true Trollish comments as being the ridiculous statements which are false or mere opinion stated as if they were brought down from the mountain carved in tablets of stone,


If they were false or mere opinion, they could easily be exposed as such.

But that rarely happens. Thus the "troll," "fake lawyer" beclownment. Plain as day.
   700. Lassus Posted: April 19, 2018 at 01:44 PM (#5656569)
what punishment do you think should be handed out to (a) the fraternity, and (b) the students who took part in the video,

a.) Permanent ban from the campus, with possibility for return no sooner than 2043, if anyone's still there, or anywhere.
b.) Seems like the University could expel anyone they want for whatever reason they want, but I would say everyone but the Fraternity officers should get off (from the University) with some kind of required courses, that's it. The frat officers are booted.
Page 7 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 >  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
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRed Sox exorcise their postseason demons to beat Astros and even ALCS
(4 - 8:17pm, Oct 15)
Last: Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB)

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(778 - 8:16pm, Oct 15)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogUmpire Joe West Hit By Throw From Red Sox Catcher Christian Vazquez
(30 - 8:16pm, Oct 15)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(95 - 8:15pm, Oct 15)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(90 - 8:14pm, Oct 15)
Last: BrianBrianson

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(237 - 8:03pm, Oct 15)
Last: Tin Angel

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-15-2018
(15 - 7:53pm, Oct 15)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(467 - 6:52pm, Oct 15)
Last: Athletic Supporter is USDA certified lean

NewsblogAll jokes aside, Bob Uecker seriously loves baseball
(43 - 6:32pm, Oct 15)
Last: spycake

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(984 - 5:43pm, Oct 15)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

NewsblogESPN: Olney: Pine tar in the postseason could put MLB in a sticky situation
(11 - 5:34pm, Oct 15)
Last: Tin Angel

NewsblogProjecting the composition of A's bullpen in 2019
(3 - 3:54pm, Oct 15)
Last: Khrushin it bro

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 8: Hugh Jackman's 'The Front Runner' Confronts The Political Conundrum Of Our Time
(1559 - 3:33pm, Oct 15)
Last: Zonk just has affection for alumni

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(165 - 3:27pm, Oct 15)
Last: Bleed the Freak

NewsblogOT - 2018 NFL thread
(55 - 3:03pm, Oct 15)
Last: McCoy

Page rendered in 0.8782 seconds
46 querie(s) executed