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 11, 2018

OTP 2018 June 11: Sports, politics conflicted 50 years ago with mourning of RFK’s death

If you think the intersection – and conflict – of sports and politics is something new, well, you haven’t been paying close enough attention to either for a very long time.

Don’t think so? Check out President Trump’s pardon of the controversial African-American heavyweight champion Jack Johnson, who held the title more than 100 years ago. His reign was consumed by the politics of the day. So it is no surprise that the debate over NFL players and the national anthem remains a divisive topic.

Anything that is going to have the powerful symbolism of sports —and the ability to unite, as we have seen right here in Washington during the Capitals’ Stanley Cup playoffs run — is also going to generate enough passion to divide as well, in death as well as life.

That was the case 50 years ago, as Major League Baseball tried to cope with the proper way to mourn the death of New York Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy on June 6, 1968.

 

I almost linked to a story with the tag line “Miguel Cabrera stands next to Detroit’s “Rally Goose” during the first game of a doubleheader vs. the Yankees on Monday. The Tigers lost the opener but won the nightcap” but opted for history instead of the goose.

(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: June 11, 2018 at 07:41 AM | 1349 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: boxing, death, hockey, off-topic, politics, why can't we all just get along

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 8 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 6 7 8 9 10 >  Last ›
   701. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 06:59 AM (#5691878)
I’ve called Donald Trump “fat” dozens of times.

But you're a clown.


But not sexist.
   702. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 07:08 AM (#5691880)
This is the reverse racism argument, which I figured out was invalid when I was 11 years old


That’s when you started to lobby to change the name of the Boy Scouts for being racially insensitive.
   703. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 07:13 AM (#5691881)
This is really offensive. I mean, why make her fat big boned endomorphic blonde?

Can we discuss how hurtful this depiction of an American conservative is?
   704. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 07:16 AM (#5691882)
You've never put forward a single "serious" one, only reductionist, exaggerated, over-the-top ones no one could possibly take seriously. No one takes DeNiro's or Bee's rants "seriously," either.

This is false, quack. Also, hilarious to call someone else on the board over-the-top and exaggerated.
   705. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 07:51 AM (#5691884)
This is false, quack.


No, it's really not. Sorry. And honestly, if you're offering up his arguments as something "serious," it very much speaks volumes. They're little more than cathartic rants.

EDIT: Oh yeah, not only is he a sexist, but he's also the only one on the board who has delegated himself eligible to unironically use the "n-word" -- which he's done at least a dozen times. That may work within your tribal mores, but outside the tribe it's very much not a good look. I'll re-cite Frank Bruni here:

You permit them to see you as you see Trump: deranged. Why would they choose a different path if it goes to another ugly destination?


The idea that only "Trumpkins" can diagnose TDS and describe it as it is, is yet another tribal illusion -- itself a symptom of TDS.

   706. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:01 AM (#5691887)
The idea that only "Trumpkins" can diagnose TDS and describe it as it is, is yet another tribal illusion -- itself a symptom of TDS.

Tell me more about other people ranting nonsensically.
   707. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:05 AM (#5691888)
Tell me more about other people ranting nonsensically.


You have the illusion of perspective. It happens.
   708. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:41 AM (#5691894)
Tax Reform Still Not Helping GOP; Dems Lead House Ballot By 6

PPP’s newest national poll finds that six months after the passage of tax reform, it’s still not really catching on with voters. Only 31% support it to 38% who are opposed, with 30% not sure one way or the other.

The core problem for Republicans with tax reform is that voters continue to be skeptical it’s actually going to help them on a personal level. Just 30% say they think it will help their family’s finances, to 33% who think it will hurt, and 25% who don’t think it will have an impact either way. 51% think it will mostly benefit the rich to 30% for the middle class, and just 7% for the poor.

Tax reform is a piece of an overall issue for the GOP which is that most people still don’t feel their personal economic situation has improved under the Trump administration. 35% say they’re better off than they were a year ago but 26% say they’re worse off, and 37% say they’re in about the same place. Having investments in the stock market continues to be a big dividing line for whether people actually think they’re doing better or not- among those who do 43% say they’re better off and just 16% worse off. But among those who don’t only 27% say they’re better off to 35% who say they’re worse off.


Seeing as how it is the one major legislative achievement after nearly two years of full control of the government and that Trump and the rest of the GOP inherited a fine economy, I bet it is causing heart burn in certain quarters that their give away to rich people and corporations has not been the magic solution they hoped.

One of the reasons I want Democratic candidates to talk about the policy positions they favor in order to help real people with real problems is that shockingly people care about that stuff. And heck the media at large will exhibit plenty of talk of scandal, impeachment and so on, so it is not like that stuff is going to be buried.

The GOP has nothing to run on, no real accomplishments, Democrats need to contrast that with plans to help the non-rich.
   709. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:46 AM (#5691896)
For those paying attention to foreign policy this is as predictable as water wet - Iran warns North Korea: Trump could cancel deal before getting home

Tehran cited its own experience in offering the advice to Kim a month after Washington withdrew from a similar deal with Iran.

Trump and Kim pledged at a meeting in Singapore on Tuesday to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula while Washington committed to provide security guarantees for its old enemy.

“We don’t know what type of person the North Korean leader is negotiating with. It is not clear that he would not cancel the agreement before returning home,” Iranian government spokesman Mohammad Bagher Nobakht was quoted as saying by IRNA new agency.

Nobakht questioned Trump’s credibility. “This man does not represent the American people, and they will surely distance themselves from him at the next elections,” he said.


Break an international agreement for no good reason and suddenly you get a reputation for breaking agreements. Weird I guess.
   710. Count Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:54 AM (#5691898)
If Cohen has indeed "flipped" it wouldn't be the least bit surprising, so it's hard to figure out what all the cheers from the TDSers are about. They're pursuing him for state crimes. As we know that means that Trump wouldn't be able to pardon him. So if he's looking at serious jail time he would naturally flip.......

.......presuming he has something to sell. It wouldn't be surprising if he has money laundering type crimes by Trump to sell. Whether he has anything collusion related -- which was supposed to be the point of all of this -- remains to be seen.


"They" are prosecutors in the Southern District of New York. Those are federal prosecutors. They are going after him for federal crimes, not state crimes, and Trump is able to pardon him. There were stories yesterday suggesting Cohen was sending signals to the press in an attempt to get Trump to issue a pardon (it would surprise me if Trump actually did that, especially at this early stage).
   711. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:55 AM (#5691899)
Unpopular opinion time: If you are going to make fun of men's appearance/looks, then you should not shy away from doing the same to women.

See above. There are historical and contextual reasons why these are not simply the same thing. It is frankly bizarre to hand-wave that away.

See, Andy? Look what's being talked about now.


Okay, Lassus, you win. I'll admit that my little snarky comment about Sanders was sexist, and of course I knew that when I wrote it. And like a good little boy in the Self-Criticism box, I'll apologize for it. I'll also note that in my real life outside of this little forum, I've never once denigrated a woman in public for her appearance, not because it would be sexist, but because it would be gratuitously cruel. I leave gratuitous cruelty to the likes of Trump and Sessions and the goons who gleefully raid homes looking for people without papers.

Now see how many times you can get Ray or Clapper or (my personal project) JE to simply state in plain English: Donald Trump is a racist. Or is raising that point now also a distraction?

And if the response to that question is "Well, what do you expect out of Trump's parrots?", then I'll ask you another question: Why do you even bother to engage with them,** if you know they consistently pretend that (to quote one of my favorite poets) grits ain't groceries, eggs ain't poultry, and Mona Lisa was a man?

** A question that applies in H-bomb level spades to engaging with SBB.
   712. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 08:59 AM (#5691900)
Now see how many times you can get Ray or Clapper or (my personal project) JE to simply state in plain English: Donald Trump is a racist. Or is raising that point now also a distraction?

Nah. But it's not going to work.


Why do you even bother to engage with them

A lot of life is mystery. (I don't mean that as a dickish comment, just as an observation. Who knows?)


I mean, they'll go on and on and on and on about how awful your posts are, but even admitting error or fault or bias in their posts is beyond their moral compass, something that would not be true about yourself. ;-) (Christ, look at how Dan has lost it in that regard, especially in regards to you.)
   713. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:27 AM (#5691922)
What's the difference between a puzzle and a mystery?

“So it’s a bit of a puzzle,” the chairman mused, somewhat philosophically. “I wouldn’t say it’s a mystery. But it’s, it’s a bit of a puzzle.”


It would be nice - not that I expect it of ANY Fed Chair - if there was some acknowledgment of the continued destruction of organized labor. This past generation's war with public sector unions is bearing the same fruit that such destruction always does - chopping labor into piecemeal bits flattens wage growth. When labor cannot effectively bargain collectively - yes, even to the point of 'getting greedy' (labor should have the very same access to short-sightedness as capital) - wages are inevitably going to stagnate.

I'm not saying its the sole reason, but it is one of the big ones. Productivity stagnation? Sure... but industry has always had its technological breathers, plateaus where the existing technology tops out and there's a bit of probing to find the next Big Thing before it takes hold.

   714. dlf Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:27 AM (#5691923)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders, but when did physical attractiveness become a plus for politicians? Kennedy? It seems that historically, politicians looked serious, solid, grey, perhaps grim, occasionally rugged, but rarely attractive. Abe Lincoln, for example, was famously ugly. But now, being telegenic is important with even DJT, who became a physical caricature in his 70s, a reasonably good looking person as he became publicly prominent from the 1980s until he aged poorly, and his predecessors at least back four decades having only one dud.
   715. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:36 AM (#5691927)
I dunno. Was Ford considered good-looking? Carter? Bush I? (Not as youths, mind you, as President.)
   716. McCoy Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:36 AM (#5691928)
Trump was never what anyone would call reasonably attractive.
   717. McCoy Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5691929)
There should be no unions for government service employees.
   718. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:40 AM (#5691931)

No. If the person is deserving of a pardon executive clemency, then it doesn't matter who made the appeal, celebrity or no.

It may not be an ideal way to do this but any deserving pardon is a good one and not stupid at all.
Sorry, no. That's just not the way it works, and you damn well know you're arguing in bad faith because if the same argument were made in a baseball context you'd mock the manager. If the manager said, "I made this personnel decision because I went to an astrologer last night and she told me that the positions of the planets said I should," then it's stupid, regardless of whether the actual personnel move is sabermetrically a good one.

As a fan you'd be happy with the result, of course, but would not praise the manager or his decisionmaking process. You would condemn those.
   719. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:40 AM (#5691932)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders, but when did physical attractiveness become a plus for politicians? Kennedy? It seems that historically, politicians looked serious, solid, grey, perhaps grim, occasionally rugged, but rarely attractive. Abe Lincoln, for example, was famously ugly. But now, being telegenic is important with even DJT, who became a physical caricature in his 70s, a reasonably good looking person as he became publicly prominent from the 1980s until he aged poorly, and his predecessors at least back four decades having only one dud.


IDK - Washington was a bit of a dandy... I don't know that there's any suggestion he was ever unfaithful to Martha, but he was a helluva dancer, tall (especially for the era), looked dashing in a uniform (essentially how he got command of the continental army), etc.

TV may have accelerated it or emphasized it, but I think it's always been at play. When you look at the nation's one-terms - Adamses, Van Burens, etc - you find pretty unattractive men.... and the Whigs, of course, spent most of their time forever searching for the candidate who looked good in a uniform. Taller men usually beat the shorter men, etc. Contemporary views of 'attractiveness' are different than in the past, of course... and it's obviously never been a deal breaker - but I think if you go back to the founding of the Republic, the contextually attractive have always fared better than the less attractive.
   720. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:47 AM (#5691935)
There should be no unions for government service employees.


I wholly disagree.

Any time a specific sector of the economy has a strong organized labor component that can push benefits and wages, it will inevitably benefit adjacent sectors.

My main beef with public sector unions is that they keep hanging their hats on the all-but-dead pension. I completely understand that their membership drives the choices - and it's inevitably that generous pension plans within sight of older members are something they hold dead... but were I a union strategist, I'd be more open to slow, moderate phase-outs in favor salaries. I think that doing so would not just benefit the unions - especially giving the pension funding problems that are inescapable - but likewise have a significant impact on raising wages outside of their realms, inevitably helping with public image to boot.

   721. Swoboda is freedom Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5691939)
Trump was never what anyone would call reasonably attractive.

That is a little unfair. He was a pretty good looking guy when he was younger. Tall. He has not aged well at all.
   722. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5691940)
By the way, for those who seem to think whataboutism is a characteristic of Republicans, this thread has provided repeated examples from the left. Andy said something really obnoxious and stupid, and when called on it, he and some others on the left (but by no means all) have responded with:

Whatabout what people have said about other politicians?
Whatabout all the obnoxious things Trump has said?
Whatabout how illegal immigrants are treated?

Andy, try this: "Yes, that was stupid and obnoxious, and I shouldn't have said it." Full stop. That's really the only valid response. (Remember, everything before the "but" is ignorable, so no, "I shouldn't have said it, but she's bad because she lies.")

EDIT: I hadn’t seen 711 before I posted. It started out well... but then Andy blew it by feeling the need to go to the “but.” Whether someone else failed to condemn Trump is irrelevant.
   723. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:57 AM (#5691944)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders, but when did physical attractiveness become a plus for politicians?
When they let chicks vote?
   724. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 09:59 AM (#5691947)
Seriously, the facile answer is “tv,” but I don’t know if that’s true. It’s difficult to answer because we can’t apply modern standards of attractiveness to older politicians to assess. Maybe everyone thought Millard Fillmore was hawt?
   725. DavidFoss Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5691950)
When they let chicks vote?

That would be 1920.

Harding was so dreamy! Not even Anna Kendrick could resist!
   726. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5691951)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders, but when did physical attractiveness become a plus for politicians? Kennedy? It seems that historically, politicians looked serious, solid, grey, perhaps grim, occasionally rugged, but rarely attractive. Abe Lincoln, for example, was famously ugly. But now, being telegenic is important with even DJT, who became a physical caricature in his 70s, a reasonably good looking person as he became publicly prominent from the 1980s until he aged poorly, and his predecessors at least back four decades having only one dud.

Zonk's probably right that relative physical attractiveness has never been a negative, all things being equal, but television and the cult of celebrity is what really ratcheted it up, starting with JFK but even somewhat with Eisenhower. Don't forget that "physical attractiveness" has many dimensions that have nothing to do with movie star handsomeness. A physical projection of strength coupled with either known accomplishments (D-Day) or a "masculine" demeanor (Trump**) can often work just as well as looking like Robert Redford.

** Obviously in reality Trump's masculinity is a pose at best and a crude stereotype of masculine traits at worst, but there's no denying that "strength" and "conviction" are two of the qualities his admirers most frequently cite in praising him. The fact that he's neither strong or with any known principles other than self-promotion is neither here nor there, alas.

   727. BrianBrianson Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:04 AM (#5691956)
That is a little unfair. He was a pretty good looking guy when he was younger. Tall. He has not aged well at all.


The guy is in his seventies. He hasn't exactly aged badly. (Unless he really does have some kind of degenerative brain disease, I guess).
   728. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:09 AM (#5691961)
Seriously, the facile answer is “tv,” but I don’t know if that’s true. It’s difficult to answer because we can’t apply modern standards of attractiveness to older politicians to assess. Maybe everyone thought Millard Fillmore was hawt?


Not to repeat myself (but I will) - but I still think you're failing to contextualize.

Views of what makes for 'attractiveness' change with time. I'll reiterate again - this was the Whigs MO for a longtime. Find a guy who looked good in a general's uniform (they succeeded with Harrison and Taylor... failed with Scott, who was fat and paunchy).

It's never been the overriding or veto proof winner - but it's always played a role.

And FWIW - I'd point out that A)Fillmore was relatively attractive for the era, but B)doesn't matter because he never won a Presidential election - he succeeded Zachary Taylor and was not renominated following his filling out of the term.
   729. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM (#5691963)
I guess we may have an answer to why the Trumpkins have so recently been scarce...

Per Rick Wilson, they're all recovering from receiving the brands like the cattle they are.
   730. DavidFoss Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:17 AM (#5691967)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders

I think the issue has actually helped her this year. There was a genuine outpouring of sympathy for her when she was the butt of a poorly delivered Michelle Wolf joke at the correspondence dinner.

The offputting thing for me about Sanders is a combination of her accent and her blunt cadence. She seems to turn half the questions into counterpunches even when it isn't necessary. I like to think I'd feel the same way if that voice came out of someone who looked like Dana Perino, but maybe I'm giving myself too much credit.

Anyhow, Sanders seems to be better at doing what this President is asking his Press Secretary to do than Spicer was. If she's really leaving, who replaces her? Schlapp?
   731. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:18 AM (#5691968)
By the way, for those who seem to think whataboutism is a characteristic of Republicans, this thread has provided repeated examples from the left. Andy said something really obnoxious and stupid, and when called on it, he and some others on the left (but by no means all) have responded with:

Whatabout what people have said about other politicians?
Whatabout all the obnoxious things Trump has said?
Whatabout how illegal immigrants are treated?

Andy, try this: "Yes, that was stupid and obnoxious, and I shouldn't have said it." Full stop. That's really the only valid response. (Remember, everything before the "but" is ignorable, so no, "I shouldn't have said it, but she's bad because she lies.")

EDIT: I hadn’t seen 711 before I posted. It started out well... but then Andy blew it by feeling the need to go to the “but.” Whether someone else failed to condemn Trump is irrelevant.


I totally agree it's irrelevant when it comes to something I said. But while it may be irrelevant to that particular point, those questions are still quite relevant to pose to Trump supporters, and it's also noteworthy that they consistently go unanswered.

I also have a minor confession to make, which some of you probably figured out right from the beginning: My original comment about Sanders was quite consciously posted with the intent of seeing what sort of a reaction it would bring. You might call it a little experiment.

Along those lines, here's a story that I'm sure I've related at some point before, and David or Ray will probably go back to 2008 or 2013 to retrieve it, but what the hell:

During the early stages of the Vietnam anti-war protests, the SDS chapter at Cornell** announced that in protest of the war, they were going to set a dog on fire in the main quad at high noon.

You can only imagine the reaction. Outrage. And as the hour approached, a huge crowd approached the speaker's platform just to see if the SDS was going to go through with their threat.

High noon approached. The dog appeared, in the arms of the SDS speaker. Who set the dog free, and then addressed the crowd, wondering why he'd gotten such a huge turnout to protest the threat of setting a dog on fire, while it had previously been impossible to get a crowd nearly as big to protest the napalming of Vietnamese children.

The crowd left with a mixture of appreciation and sullenness.

** This was in 1965, before SDS went batshit insane
   732. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:24 AM (#5691972)
The offputting thing for me about Sanders is a combination of her accent and her blunt cadence. She seems to turn half the questions into counterpunches even when it isn't necessary. I like to think I'd feel the same way if that voice came out of someone who looked like Dana Perino, but maybe I'm giving myself too much credit.

All you have to do is imagine your reaction to Kellyanne Conway. If it's like my reaction, it wouldn't be any different than your reaction to Sarah Sanders. They're equally obnoxious in both their style and their substance, or lack of it. Sanders could look like Melania or Ivanka and it wouldn't change a thing.
   733. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:26 AM (#5691976)
Per Rick Wilson, they're all recovering from receiving the brands like the cattle they are.


Conservatives like Wilson, Anna Navarro, and Amanda Carpenter give me hope that it may be possible for a sane right of center party in the future.
   734. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:28 AM (#5691978)
Cornell**


Never heard of it.
   735. McCoy Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:30 AM (#5691979)
Any time a specific sector of the economy has a strong organized labor component that can push benefits and wages, it will inevitably benefit adjacent sectors.

There shouldn't be a union since union members also get to be owners in that they vote for the managers. Government employees are working at their own shop.
   736. Omineca Greg Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:30 AM (#5691980)
Next year's Canadian election will be interesting in the looks vs. results department.

The three major candidates:

Justin Trudeau

Andrew Scheer

Jagmeet Singh

Singh is the most stylish political leader I've seen...ever? If you don't believe me, take an extra minute to look at his pictures. He's married to a fashion designer.

Trudeau seems to melt hearts.

And then there's Andrew Scheer.

He was picked because the Conservatives identified Harper's lack of warmth and humanity as the reason for their election loss, so they went with a Harper policy clone...except he's a really nice guy. And enough people say it that must be true, he's respected and well liked by everybody. I don't see it translating very well in the things I've seen with him...he doesn't seem like a jerk, but the type of charisma he has is more wrapped up in an affable personality, which could be helpful in selling conservative policies...but it might not work out that well for him.

I guess we'll see.
   737. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:30 AM (#5691981)
Anyhow, Sanders seems to be better at doing what this President is asking his Press Secretary to do than Spicer was.


That's because of all the sexists patronizing her with their transparent White Knight routine. Oh, they're quick to find the fainting couches and mop the outraged sweat from underneath their fedoras, but meanwhile I haven't heard one single word of denial as to whether she is fat or has a strabismus. How dangerous it is to be a man of constant principle in these dishonest times.
   738. DavidFoss Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:39 AM (#5691987)
one single word of denial as to whether she is fat

I don't know what that has to do with anything. Her dad is fat -- used to be fatter. That wasn't why I didn't vote for him. Barbara Bush was fat and most people liked her. Angela Merkel is bigger than Teresa May -- that doesn't color/colour my view of either world leader. Who cares?
   739. BrianBrianson Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:41 AM (#5691988)
Naw, she's doing better because she's more committed to it. Spicer couldn't walk into the the press room and assert with no hint of doubt that he's nine feet tall. Sanders could.
   740. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:46 AM (#5691994)
I have nothing to contribute on the Sanders bit, because I never have heard her speak. I would no more watch such a White House event than I would set my own hair on fire for fun. I also don't watch TV news.

I am familiar with these people because of what is written, including transcripts. I waste enough of my life in dumb things, I can't imagine wasting more listening to press conferences, political speeches, watching political conventions and so on.

None of which suggests I look down on those who do. How you spend your time is your business, and I have no standing to criticize anyone else for what they watch.

That said, I don't criticize people for how they look, what they wear, their accent or speech patterns, their race, religion, hobbies or so on. Mostly because it is utterly irrelevant to me in most contexts and especially on a politics thread (other than in a discussion on does looks and such matter, to which I would it suggest it always has and likely always will).

When people on either side start throwing out barbs - and yes both sides do it - I roll my eyes and skim past it looking for something relevant (and sometimes it even exists, not usually but sometimes).

But like I said, care about what you want, but for me comments about fat or thin or "Pig in a Pants Suit", or whatever are not really any better (though I admit more socially acceptable) than racial, ethnic, or religious slurs. I think all of them say more about the person saying it than they ever could about the person being attacked.
   741. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:47 AM (#5691996)
NY Attorney General just filed suit against the Trump family over Trump Foundation shenanigans.
   742. stig-tossled, hornswoggled gef the typing mongoose Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5691999)
** This was in 1965, before SDS went batshit insane


Prairie Power, you running dog of capitalist imperialism.
   743. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:53 AM (#5692000)
Yes, the people to "scroll past" would be those pointing out the sexism, rather than the sexist himself (who happens to also lecture this board 12 times a day about the Racism of Jeff Sessions).
Ray is arguing in bad faith again. He has never raised a complaint about alleged "sexism" in his life. (I mean, here on OTP; maybe IRL he's walking around his law office with a #metoo shirt on.) He cares only insofar as he can weaponize the accusation in the defense of Trump. He's far more likely to be found mocking someone else for raising claims of sexism as trivial as this one.
   744. Swoboda is freedom Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:54 AM (#5692003)
NY Attorney General just filed suit against the Trump family over Trump Foundation shenanigans.

Why is the penalty in NY state for shenanigans?
   745. BDC Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:55 AM (#5692004)
I don't criticize people for how they look, what they wear, their accent or speech patterns, their race, religion, hobbies or so on

My father taught speech and theater, and his profession was largely a matter of how people looked, what they wore, and in particular their speech. I grew up hyperconscious of those things, and still if somebody comes on TV looking like – like either Spicer or Sanders, let's say, just to be equal-opportunity – it immediately prejudices me.

Although, again because of my background, this really didn't extend to race or religion, which might seem odd but makes sense. A lot of actors and announcers, including many that my father taught, are black or Jewish or otherwise unWASPy. As long as they made good costume and makeup choices, stood up straight, and delivered their lines clearly, he was indifferent to their ethnicity. So some of that also became instinct for me.
   746. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 10:56 AM (#5692005)
Seriously, the facile answer is “tv,” but I don’t know if that’s true. It’s difficult to answer because we can’t apply modern standards of attractiveness to older politicians to assess. Maybe everyone thought Millard Fillmore was hawt?

Not to repeat myself (but I will) - but I still think you're failing to contextualize.

Views of what makes for 'attractiveness' change with time.
Uh, that's exactly the same thing I just said.
   747. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5692010)
Uh, that's exactly the same thing I just said.


Sorry, I tuned out your words because you're so dreamy :-)
   748. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5692012)
he’d have nothing left to offer except odes to Kelsey Grammer and Jack Klugman.

It certainly wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, but I think you meant Jack Lord, not Klugman.
I can't say what he meant, but Klugman would've been entirely appropriate. Ray's been extolling the virtues of Quincy, too.
   749. Traderdave Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:01 AM (#5692016)

My main beef with public sector unions is that they keep hanging their hats on the all-but-dead pension. I completely understand that their membership drives the choices - and it's inevitably that generous pension plans within sight of older members are something they hold dead... but were I a union strategist, I'd be more open to slow, moderate phase-outs in favor salaries. I think that doing so would not just benefit the unions - especially giving the pension funding problems that are inescapable - but likewise have a significant impact on raising wages outside of their realms, inevitably helping with public image to boot.


I will echo McCoy that there should not be public sector unions.

MY main beef with them is the unions bankroll the campaigns of the people who pay them. They do in these parts anyway.

Example: in the Bay Area town I live in, the firefighters' union is the political elephant in the room. They are by far the largest direct contributor to city council campaigns, as well as large indirect contributions via PACs. They also have signficant GOTV efforts: walking precincts, giving rides to the polls etc. For the almost 2 decades I've lived here there has always been a majority on city council that took there money. At times it's been the ENTIRE council.

This city has a median household income of about 90 grand. Average total comp -- including pension contributions -- for a fireman is more than triple that. They can retire in their 50's with $200,000 pensions for life.

Compare that to our local teachers, whose annual income is pretty close the local median, which frankly is just-scraping-by money around here. Compare that to Federal firefighters in the area, who have a much riskier job fighting wildfires. They make 80 grand-ish a year with modest federal pensions.

These guys are feeding at the trough in a huge way, because they own the people they bargain with, and that story is repeated throughout the state. Firemen all over CA are ridiculously well paid. At the state level, the prison guards union is the wild card. In most years they are the #1 bankroller, and voila, prisons here never close.

Now I plead guilty to being antipathetic to unions in general (and Nieporent will still call me a liberal...) but even Walter Reuther's descendants would be shocked at the corruption of public sector unions & their politician whores/servants/slaves in this state, and I presume in many others.
   750. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:03 AM (#5692018)
Happy to engage any serious claim that Trump is a "racist." Serious claims include definitions of the term, and an analysis of the facts supporting the proposition that the definition is either met or not. It would also include contrasts with people like LBJ or Robert Byrd; in other words, some explanation of what is inherent in someone's character such that their character can be deemed "racist," as opposed to simply having engaged in racist statements or acts.

To date, we've seen nothing of the sort with respect to Trump -- or really anyone else. It's an extremely sloppily used term, and concept. If and when it's ever done, I'd likely engage. The best evidence is that the people who use the word so injudiciously aren't really interested in any kind of rigor or discussion, but merely ranting, virtue signaling, and catharsis. As with a barking dog, there's really nothing to engage there.
   751. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:06 AM (#5692022)
one single word of denial as to whether she is fat

I don't know what that has to do with anything.


Well if it's a statement of fact that's a good deal different than calling someone, oh, let's say a "liberal elitist" (insulting opinion) or "crooked" (insulting opinion) or "weak on immigration" (insulting opinion). Same thing with the strabismus. Former "Men At Work" singer Colin Hay has one, he's one of the best performers I've ever watched live and I don't think pointing it out detracts from how much I respect his work.

But as always I enjoy seeing how quickly the steely-eyed defenders of the harsh truths of reality turn into pink-haired omnisexual SJWs crying "body shaming" when they have the first opportunity to do so. "Oh you hippies, have you no shame," they virtue-signal hysterically in their rush to defend yet another unqualified nepotism hire for the man who has insulted literally everyone who ever had the nerve to question his omniscience, sparing neither woman nor disabled nor the Hawaiian-born.

Very unserious people, these sort.
   752. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:07 AM (#5692024)
Break an international agreement for no good reason and suddenly you get a reputation for breaking agreements. Weird I guess.

I was actually thinking about this yesterday. And bear in mind, it is not just a single international agreement. Iran, Paris, TPP, even going back to Kyoto. I don't see how any other country, or group of countries, could make a deal with the US right now, without getting major major concessions up front. And that is not just going to be true for this President. It is going to be an issue for the next several. Because in a few years, the stupids might put another grievance mongering, self-aggrandizing, narcissistic half-wit in the oval office, who wants to take his ball and go home.

So unless you set up the deal where it becomes beneficial that the US pulls out (i.e. get a lot of what you want upfront, while the US has to wait for what it wants), I don't see why anyone sane would make any kind of deal.
   753. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:10 AM (#5692027)
OH, NOES!!!!!! -- our reputation with Iran has sunk. What, oh what, can we ever do????
   754. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:12 AM (#5692031)
564

and what would America look like if there had been no decline?


Like it did in 1979 with a far better economy and far better fashion sense. As well as some continued advances in individual liberties.


I tell ya, if Bear were to write this version of The Man in the High Castle, I would read it.
   755. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:13 AM (#5692032)
I have nothing to contribute on the Sanders bit, because I never have heard her speak. I would no more watch such a White House event than I would set my own hair on fire for fun.

I sincerely bow down to your sanity. I've seen snippets of Sanders in action a few times, and they lodged in my subconscious like a recurring nightmare. Maybe I'm just in love with her.

I also don't watch TV news.

You should watch the PBS News Hour, where you'll find more real news and serious discussions than you'll find on all the commercial networks put together.

Also, no commercials.
   756. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:13 AM (#5692033)
OH, NOES!!!!!! -- our reputation with Iran has sunk. What, oh what, can we ever do????


Yeah... it's just Iran where our reputation has gone into the toilet. Every other western democracy thinks we're still aces right now.

Idiot.
   757. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5692035)
All of the signs and portents strongly indicate SBB is swinging into one of his classic Muslim hating phases.*

*publicly. He clearly hates Muslims all the time, but he only goes public with it irregularly.
   758. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5692036)

"I'm happy to engage on racism with anyone who does so on my terms on agrees with my definitions."


To date, we've seen nothing of the sort with respect to Trump -- or really anyone else.

That's a rather large bucket.
   759. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:17 AM (#5692038)

I was actually thinking about this yesterday. And bear in mind, it is not just a single international agreement. Iran, Paris, TPP, even going back to Kyoto. I don't see how any other country, or group of countries, could make a deal with the US right now, without getting major major concessions up front.
Well, first, Iran got massive concessions up front -- more than $100,000,000,000.

Second, it's simple: if you want to have a binding agreement with the U.S., sign a treaty. Don't enter into agreements with a rogue president who thinks he was elected god and has the right to do whatever he wants because (not in spite of) Congress won't support him. (And, yes, I am talking about Obama here.)
   760. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:18 AM (#5692039)
I don't criticize people for how they look, what they wear, their accent or speech patterns, their race, religion, hobbies or so on

My father taught speech and theater, and his profession was largely a matter of how people looked, what they wore, and in particular their speech. I grew up hyperconscious of those things...,
In another life, I used to train people to talk on the radio. Because of this, I am driven up the wall by people who do things like make a little "tisk" noise with their tongues, or who say "um" a lot, or who have otherwise useless vocal tics. This means that 95% of the time I hear another human speak, I end up wanting to strangle someone. Unless you talk like you're doing ad voiceover, reciting a poem, delivering a sermon, or starring in an elegant 1930s comedy, I probably hate you.
   761. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:18 AM (#5692040)
I was actually thinking about this yesterday. And bear in mind, it is not just a single international agreement. Iran, Paris, TPP, even going back to Kyoto. I don't see how any other country, or group of countries, could make a deal with the US right now, without getting major major concessions up front. And that is not just going to be true for this President. It is going to be an issue for the next several. Because in a few years, the stupids might put another grievance mongering, self-aggrandizing, narcissistic half-wit in the oval office, who wants to take his ball and go home.

So unless you set up the deal where it becomes beneficial that the US pulls out (i.e. get a lot of what you want upfront, while the US has to wait for what it wants), I don't see why anyone sane would make any kind of deal.


Any sane country at this point should treat the US the way Trump's potential business clients should've treated him all along: Cash up front. Lots and lots of it.
   762. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:18 AM (#5692041)
Yeah... it's just Iran where our reputation has gone into the toilet. Every other western democracy thinks we're still aces right now.


So? We're at an historical inflection point, as the elitist order fades. The old guard is naturally going to resent the new.

   763. McCoy Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:19 AM (#5692042)
Pretty much agree with 759 but, you know, WWI.
   764. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5692046)
In another life, I used to train people to talk on the radio. Because of this, I am driven up the wall by people who do things like make a little "tisk" noise with their tongues, or who say "um" a lot, or who have otherwise useless vocal tics. This means that 95% of the time I hear another human speak, I end up wanting to strangle someone. If you don't talk like you're doing ad voiceover, reciting a poem, delivering a sermon, or starring in a a 1930s screwball comedy, I probably hate you.

You would've been like me in 11th grade, where I once counted the "uhs" of a friend who was reading a report of his in front on our English class. When I announced the (very large) total in a stage whisper at the end of his talk, he wasn't exactly pleased.
   765. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:24 AM (#5692049)
So? We're at an historical inflection point, as the elitist order fades. The old guard is naturally going to resent the new.


Your "new guard" is comprised of autocratic ME monarchies, a Russian kleptocrat, and the world's most brutal and tyrannical dictator whose regime has a higher body count than any other still in power.

Your "elitist" old guard is made up western-style democracies with far better records on civil liberties and human rights.

If you meant to beclown yourself to an absolutely perfect degree, mission accomplished.

The jackboots fit you well, Goebbels... Shall I dig up 1930s era quotes from your intellectual fellow travelers who said exactly the same thing?
   766. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:25 AM (#5692050)
Pretty much agree with 759 but, you know, WWI.

David does make a good point, although I'm not sure why he thinks Trump would adhere to any treaty he didn't like any more than he'd adhere to the Iran deal. What's he going to be afraid of, being taken to some international court?
   767. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:27 AM (#5692051)
I should add to 762 that we probably didn't have to be at an historical inflection point. The elitist order was never super popular, but it certainly had a good record and sufficient political support to keep going.

But it badly overreached when it became so pronouncedly open borders-ish. The mass migrations into Europe in 2015 were a massive overreach, as is the modern liberal open borders insistence in the United States. Those are what put the old order in such potentially mortal peril. The Wall Street bailouts and near meltdown didn't help, but those were survivable.
   768. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:27 AM (#5692052)
as the elitist order fades.

If only the rest of us would join the common men of Columbus Circle and the upper West Side.
   769. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:27 AM (#5692053)
The jackboots fit you well, Goebbels... Shall I dig up 1930s era quotes from your intellectual fellow travelers who said exactly the same thing?

I've got a small library of books filled with just such quotes, from fellow travelers of Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini. The all time champ was George Bernard Shaw, who slobbered over all three of them.
   770. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:28 AM (#5692054)
Not to jump into a discussion of Ms. Sanders, but when did physical attractiveness become a plus for politicians? Kennedy? It seems that historically, politicians looked serious, solid, grey, perhaps grim, occasionally rugged, but rarely attractive. Abe Lincoln, for example, was famously ugly. But now, being telegenic is important with even DJT, who became a physical caricature in his 70s, a reasonably good looking person as he became publicly prominent from the 1980s until he aged poorly, and his predecessors at least back four decades having only one dud.

I think the traditional answer to this question has been the Nixon/Kennedy debates in 1960, which were the first televised presidential debates. But there is some doubt about whether Kennedy's appearance really had the impact attributed to it. From Wikipedia:

The key turning point of the campaign came with the four Kennedy-Nixon debates; they were the first presidential debates ever (The Lincoln–Douglas debates of 1858 had been the first for senators from Illinois), also the first held on television, and thus attracted enormous publicity. Nixon insisted on campaigning until just a few hours before the first debate started. He had not completely recovered from his hospital stay and thus looked pale, sickly, underweight, and tired.[32] His eyes moved across the room during the debate, and at various moments sweat was visible on his face. He also refused makeup for the first debate, and as a result his beard stubble showed prominently on the era's black-and-white TV screens. Furthermore, the debate set appeared darker once the paint dried up, causing Nixon's suit color to blend in with the background which reduced his stature.[32] Nixon's poor appearance on television in the first debate is reflected by the fact that his mother called him immediately following the debate to ask if he was sick.[33] Kennedy, by contrast, rested and prepared extensively beforehand, appearing tanned,[note 1] confident, and relaxed during the debate.[34] An estimated 70 million viewers watched the first debate.[35]

It is often claimed that people who watched the debate on television overwhelmingly believed Kennedy had won, while radio listeners (a smaller audience) thought Nixon had ended up defeating him.[35] However, that has been disputed.[36] Indeed, one study has speculated that the viewer/listener disagreement could be due to sample bias in that those without TV could be a skewed subset of the population:[37]
   771. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:29 AM (#5692058)
The Supreme Court issued two opinions today, the notable one being Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, about a ban on political apparel at polling places. Found to be a 1st Amendment violation in a 7-2 decision by Roberts, with Sotomayor & Breyer dissenting. The Court would have upheld the traditional ban on campaign or candidate-related material, but the state banned everything it considered "political", including anything that touched on an issue a candidate had taken a stance on, or promoting a group with recognizable political views. Those prohibitions were overbroad.

The other decision was by Justice Ginsburg in a unanimous opinion on a procedural issue involving foreign law. Ginsburg writing this decision makes it less likely that she's writing in the remaining significant cases, as she has now authored 6 majority decisions and would have at most one more remaining assignment if opinions were distributed roughly equally, which they tend to be.
   772. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5692060)
Well, first, Iran got massive concessions up front -- more than $100,000,000,000.

Yes, so? I did almost add that to the post. That was smart of them. And should have been enough reason for Trump not to pull out. Since it means the US gives up pretty much everything it was getting from the deal, and Iran does not. There was really no upside to pulling out. But you know, if you make something idiot-proof...

Second, it's simple: if you want to have a binding agreement with the U.S., sign a treaty.

Good luck with that. Considering the Senate could not currently get a 2/3 majority on what kind of toilet paper they want to put in the bathrooms. But even if you somehow manage to get that, I don't see any reason to believe that it makes the deal any safer. The current President has more than clearly shown that he does not care even the slightest about nuances, rules, laws... And congress has more than clearly shown that they lack a backbone to stand up to him. So if I am making any kind of deal with the US, I am making sure my interests are protected and guaranteed.
   773. perros Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:32 AM (#5692061)
Re: RFK

How did Sirhan shoot him three times from behind, including the fatal shot an inch behind the right ear, if he was standing a couple of feet in front of Kennedy?

Perhaps the fatal shot to US democracy.
   774. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:32 AM (#5692062)
will inevitably lead to someone threatening me with their katana

There are likely a few among us here who have studied the Blade.
   775. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:36 AM (#5692065)
The jackboots fit you well, Goebbels... Shall I dig up 1930s era quotes from your intellectual fellow travelers who said exactly the same thing?


Jackboots chaffe bone spurs. The Trumpkins dreams of rescuing aggressive masculinity will all have them wearing jack-orthotics.
   776. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:37 AM (#5692066)
There are likely a few among us here who have studied the Blade.

That is... confusing.
   777. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:40 AM (#5692072)
will inevitably lead to someone threatening me with their katana

There are likely a few among us here who have studied the Blade.


Oh things can get might neckbeardly around here, that's for certain.

While Lassus was trying to comprehend memes, 774 studied the blade.

Nothing personal, kid.

   778. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:55 AM (#5692090)
NY Attorney General just filed suit against the Trump family over Trump Foundation shenanigans.

Why is the penalty in NY state for shenanigans?
That's a funny way to spell "sweeping violations of campaign finance laws, self-dealing and illegal coordination with the presidential campaign".

But it looks like the penalty is a small fine and a potential ban preventing the nepotists from sitting on the board of non-profits, which is probably perfectly OK with Trump. Unless the IRS or FEC take additional action.
   779. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5692092)
The political bourgeoisie is about to leave the stage of history. In its place advance the oppressed producers of the head and hand, the forces of Labor (Arbeitertum), to being their historical mission.


- Joseph Goebbels


Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy. You in America will see that some day.


- Benito Mussolini

We do not believe in government through the voting booth. The Spanish national will was never freely expressed through the ballot box. Spain has no foolish dreams.


-Francisco Franco

When Churchill and Roosevelt state that they want to build up a new social order, later on, it is like a hairdresser with a bald head recommending an unfortunate hair-restorer. These men, who live in the most socially backward states, have misery and distress enough in their own countries to occupy themselves with the distribution of foodstuffs…. We are allied with strong peoples, who in the same need are faced with the same enemies. The American President and his Plutocratic clique have mocked us as the Have-nots-that is true, but the Have-nots will see to it that they are not robbed of the little they have.


- Adolf Hitler

"Fascism is the bourgeoisie’s fighting organisation that relies on the active support of Social-Democracy. Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism.


-Joseph Stalin

   780. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:00 PM (#5692096)
Second, it's simple: if you want to have a binding agreement with the U.S., sign a treaty. Don't enter into agreements with a rogue president who thinks he was elected god and has the right to do whatever he wants because (not in spite of) Congress won't support him. (And, yes, I am talking about Obama here.)


This is silly on multiple levels. I think you have repeatedly suggested treaties are not worth the paper they are printed on, including the NATO treaty, so yeah. Also nations deal with each other continuously on many many levels, from the most formal ratified treaty all the way down to informal wink wink, nudge nudge unspoken agreements.

The idea that acquiring a justified reputation for only holding to treaties and willingly abandoning any and everything else for any random transitory reason(whim) is a positive development is lunacy. The US is the world's foremost power and nations are well aware of this. Our reputation matters more than that of any other, especially since we are the most powerful. If we well and truly can't be trusted then the only rational response for less powerful nations is to band together and otherwise become more powerful.

I don't think we want our current allies banding together against us. Maybe others do, but for me that is a bad outcome.
   781. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5692103)
I don't think we want our current allies banding together against us.


With stalwart patriots like the 3rd Minnesota Zouaves of the Lily-White-Cul-de-Sac ready to defend us against any invasion from the north, we should be just fine.
   782. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:13 PM (#5692106)
With stalwart patriots like the 3rd Minnesota Zouaves of the Lily-White-Cul-de-Sac ready to defend us against any invasion from the north, we should be just fine.


There is no "we" to be had with the likes of you and your Trumpkins.

Should it come to that point - and this slobbering over autocrats and damnation of western democracies reach the boiling point, I'd have every intention of marching in the 5th column.

You can keep your blood and soil until the former just waters the latter.
   783. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:15 PM (#5692108)
There is no "we" to be had with the likes of you and your Trumpkins.


This is the final truth of the matter.
   784. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:18 PM (#5692109)
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
   785. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:19 PM (#5692111)
Should it come to that point - and this slobbering over autocrats and damnation of western democracies reach the boiling point,


Put down the bottle, son.

You can keep your blood and soil until the former just waters the latter.


What on Earth are you talking about?

   786. -- Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:21 PM (#5692112)
Washington Post:

Perhaps the most damaging new revelation in the report, according to multiple people familiar with it, is a previously unreported text message in which Peter Strzok, a key investigator on both the Clinton email case and the investigation of Russia and the Trump campaign, assured an FBI lawyer in August 2016 that “we’ll stop” Trump from making it to the White House.

“[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” the lawyer, Lisa Page, wrote to Strzok.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok responded.
   787. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:22 PM (#5692113)
719

IDK - Washington was a bit of a dandy... I don't know that there's any suggestion he was ever unfaithful to Martha,


Really? According to historical, geographical markers and monuments, Washington slept everywhere. No wonder he's called "The Father of Our Country!" #amiright?
   788. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5692114)
Put down the bottle, son.


Open your eyes, boy.

When the Canadian prime minister gets a special place in hell the same weekend the latest of the Kim tyrants gets a handjob, it's you that needs to forego another tab of acid.
   789. Lassus Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:26 PM (#5692117)
While Lassus was trying to comprehend memes, 774 studied the blade.

I got most of it, but how BLOCKCHAIN fit in definitely went over my head.
   790. Traderdave Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:33 PM (#5692121)
it's you that needs to forego another tab of acid.


He's humorless and completely lacks all self awareness, or any awareness really. A few tabs of acid would do wonders for him.
   791. Omineca Greg Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:34 PM (#5692123)
When the Canadian prime minister gets a special place in hell the same weekend the latest of the Kim tyrants gets a handjob, it's you that needs to forego another tab of acid.

From The Beaverton...

Canada gains numerous concessions from Trump after becoming a ruthless dictatorship pursuing WMDs

OTTAWA – US tariffs on Canadian aluminum and steel have been promptly lifted after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has impressed US President Donald Trump with numerous human rights violations, eliminating any and all dissent, and testing a nuclear bomb.

Canada, now known as The People’s Democratic Republic of Canada, made a quick shift to a hereditary one-party system overnight, which Trump thought was “a strong move.”

The revised history of Canada claims that Supreme Leader Justin Trudeau had inherited the reign from his father in 2015, Supreme Leader Pierre Trudeau.

Reports from inside the large, secretive state indicate that some political opponents were ruthlessly executed with anti-aircraft guns, while Andrew Scheer, Jagmeet Singh, and Elizabeth May have been sentenced to 30 years hard labour in a Winnipeg gulag. Upon hearing the horrifying news, Trump immediately called Trudeau “a strong negotiator” on Twitter.

The once pleasant province of PEI has become a lifeless desert, obliterated by a 50 megaton blast from Canada’s new hydrogen bomb program which received widespread international condemnation especially from Japanese tourists who wanted to see the Anne of Green Gables attractions.

Trump dropped all of his trade complaints against Canada after Trudeau announced that Saskatchewan will be starved for the next 3-5 years so the Shining Canadian Leader can feed his expanding military and spend more on his private collection of Hennessy and designer cigarettes.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Canada’s only media source after every journalist was summarily executed without trial, made the announcement of the heroic trade accomplishment and a renewed relationship between the US and Canada.

“Another great victory for our Glorious Leader!” shouted a plaid-wearing CBC announcer. “Donald J. Trump has conceded defeat in trade negotiations and apologized for insulting our fierce and productive country! He will now accept all of the supply-managed dairy products the People’s Republic has to offer!”

link
   792. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:36 PM (#5692124)
So what I get from the whole Sanders discussion is that Andy can't pull off Don Rickles's shtick...
   793. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:38 PM (#5692125)
From The Beaverton...


The fact that (America's) Dear Leader has been serving up meatballs for a week doesn't change the fact that they've been on fire lately...
   794. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:42 PM (#5692129)
I don't think we want our current allies banding together against us.

In a normal world, of course not. But when they're confronted with a raging maniac like Trump who sucks up to dictators and treats allies like dirt, what alternative is there for them? To act like Paul Ryan and issue a few tut-tuts?
   795. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5692130)
760

I am driven up the wall by people who do things like make a little "tisk" noise with their tongues, or who say "um" a lot, or who have otherwise useless vocal tics.


Add in a thick NY/NJ accent and you will make my picture your dartboard.
   796. Srul Itza Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:45 PM (#5692133)
Running anti-Trump is fine for now.


It worked so well for Hillary
   797. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:47 PM (#5692136)
So what I get from the whole Sanders discussion is that Andy can't pull off Don Rickles's shtick...

Well, at least not when I'm secretly in love with the object of my mockery. That voice of Sanders makes Jane Birkin sound like chalk on a blackboard.
   798. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:50 PM (#5692140)
It worked so well for Hillary


What is the alternative, Srul?
   799. McCoy Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:52 PM (#5692142)
It worked so well for Hillary

Won by millions.

Would be interesting to see what would have happened in 2016 if the Dems weren't trying for a third term in a row.
   800. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: June 14, 2018 at 12:56 PM (#5692145)
Running anti-Trump is fine for now.

It worked so well for Hillary

What is the alternative, Srul?
Not Srul, but I agree with him that Not-Trump (alone) is fraught with peril.

Republicans may express unhappiness with Trump, but when there's a ballot with an R and a D on it, what's *their* alternative? And independents need something more than "not that guy" to motivate them. I'll wager there's plenty of folks out there who are fed up with the whole bickering lot and thinking "screw it, it's not like it matters". Just assuming "notTrump" will win is lazy and begs to be smacked down. The alternative would be to develop some actual positions, communicate them effectively, and rise above the muck.
Page 8 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 6 7 8 9 10 >  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
Traderdave
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(1182 - 8:50am, Oct 19)
Last: BDC

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(356 - 8:40am, Oct 19)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(2301 - 7:44am, Oct 19)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

NewsblogBryce Harper’s Future in the League
(10 - 4:15am, Oct 19)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogMore questions after Astros get free pass on dugout spying
(17 - 4:09am, Oct 19)
Last: Scott Ross

NewsblogDave Littlefield latest candidate to interview for Mets' GM role
(16 - 3:41am, Oct 19)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

NewsblogRed Sox Voice Joe Castiglione Falls Off Chair Calling Game 4 Final Out | Boston Red Sox | NESN.com
(20 - 3:12am, Oct 19)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(688 - 2:24am, Oct 19)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

Sox TherapyAmerican League Champions!!!!
(1 - 12:43am, Oct 19)
Last: The Piehole of David Wells

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-17-2018
(32 - 10:25pm, Oct 18)
Last: bobm

NewsblogFan interference negates Jose Altuve home run
(46 - 10:18pm, Oct 18)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogRustin Dodd on Twitter: "Here’s the space between the yellow line and the first row in right field at Minute Maid Park:… "
(18 - 10:11pm, Oct 18)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogTexas Rangers Asking Taxpayers To Cover 60% Of Bribes Related To New Stadium
(1 - 9:42pm, Oct 18)
Last: ajnrules

NewsblogMLB playoffs 2018: Brewers used a fake starter, Dodgers used Clayton Kershaw - SBNation.com
(70 - 5:51pm, Oct 18)
Last: --

Sox TherapyALCS Thoughts
(94 - 5:37pm, Oct 18)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

Page rendered in 0.7440 seconds
46 querie(s) executed