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, October 15, 2018

OTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics

Since I’m hinting at it, here’s my shameless plug: if you can sit through four hours of football and its stoppage time, you can’t justify calling baseball boring. October belongs to America’s pastime. I feel that this whole landscape will look different a decade from now, with football at the lower half of the totem pole.

My opinion isn’t entirely biased. This issue with politics bleeding into the discussion is a serious crutch for an otherwise praised NFL, and until that’s no longer a factor, people are going to shift away. The NBA waters are nice these days too, I’m hearing.

(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: October 15, 2018 at 08:26 AM | 1522 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

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

Page 9 of 16 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  Last ›
   801. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:01 PM (#5769051)
Hitler didn't "seize power" either.


Yes, he did. Spineless people technically signed off on the seizure -- see, e.g., the Enabling Act -- but he very much seized far greater powers than those granted under the constitution under which he gained power.

Donald Trump possesses the power granted to him by the Constitution and the courses of dealing of his immediate predecessors. No more. He hasn't even made the first lurch toward acquiring more power than that. Barack Obama "seized" more power than Donald Trump has. Donald Trump kinda, sorta acts authoritarian in his persona, but there's no substance behind it whatsoever. He hasn't even fired Rosenstein, who plotted to dethrone him. Hitler would have killed Rosenstein weeks ago. (Oh, by the way, on your parallel "timetable," we're well past the Night of the Long Knives now.)
   802. McCoy Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:02 PM (#5769053)
Interestingly, you could make a similar description of the British Empire in the 18th and 19th centuries. Avoiding entangling alliances in Europe and having only a limited standing army were the pillars of British foreign policy for a long time.

EDIT: As well as the willingness to bankroll a world police force being somewhat diminished by costly war.


Well, the British had up until the 20th century a navy so big it was mightier than all the other navies combined. So they were spending quite a bit on their armed forces and had quite the standing armed forces. It just wasn't foot soldiers. They were also quite active in diplomacy but as you note it wasn't for permanent alliances but for partnerships that could keep the continental powers from getting too powerful. They also fought a ton of bush wars and quite the big believers in gunboat diplomacy. Fortunately for the Brits after Napoleon nobody on the continent had the combined abilities of resources, manpower, and the ability to fight major wars for a very long time.
   803. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:03 PM (#5769055)
The administration prior to Obama did... you know.. invade Iraq. Which, you know, involved a lot of Muslim-killin'.


Droning Americans and asserting the power to do so at the unilateral whim of the executive is the virtually quintessential "seizure" of power.

That was Sir's doing.
   804. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:03 PM (#5769056)
flip
   805. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:03 PM (#5769057)

You might want to take a look in the mirror, counselor.
Wow. That is one awesome dude in there.
   806. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:04 PM (#5769058)
I’m no historian—in fact I am barely literate—but I sure took home a lot of lessons from William Sheridan Allen’s The Nazi Seizure of Power: The Experience of a Single German Town 1922-1945.

The book, as you can surmise from the title, is in fact the history of a wholly unremarkable small-ish German town. (Population of 10,000; small enough that Hitler never had a rally there.) And Zonk’s post gets it really right: in the early days, the only “Nazis” in town were the angry nihilist destructive men who have always been around, eager for an excuse to bash heads and raise hell. (The types who were first to sign up for the SS.) But they were getting like 1-2% in the polls, they were a joke. Until....and not to get to Gladwellian, but a major fulcrum of change cane when one respected townsman (a teacher, bookstore owner, chair of a few local committees and such) came around and started supporting them, even flying the Swastika outside his bookshop. And after that there was a kinda “Well I thought the Nazis were radicals looking for trouble, but if the Bookstore Owner thinks they’re legit, maybe we’ve had it all wrong.”

And so they get bigger and bigger and bigger (as otherwise a-political people see the Nazis as their ticket to safety and security) and before you know it, it’s too late to resist.

Highly recommend (though, again, I am 10,000 miles from being an historian.)


Absolutely.

Eric Weitz's Weimar Germany: Promise and Tragedy is another good read - with a heavy emphasis on cultural changes and a perspective less from the 'rise of the Nazis' standpoint than a 'how did this happen since most people were not Nazis' standpoint.
   807. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:05 PM (#5769061)

Turns out - the revenue is pretty significant... ~300 million in state tax revenue alone
Hey, I wouldn't kick $300 million out of bed, but that's not really a very big number in this context. For some perspective, the state budget is about $30B, so we're talking 1%.
   808. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:06 PM (#5769062)
The administration prior to Obama did... you know.. invade Iraq. Which, you know, involved a lot of Muslim-killin'.



Droning Americans and asserting the power to do so at the unilateral whim of the executive is the virtually quintessential "seizure" of power. That was Sir's doing.


72.

And your original statement was:

And the wars and the Muslim-killin' didn't abate a bit even under Barack (To Sir, with Love) Obama. Nor did the quashing by the millions of the American dreams of "brown people."
   809. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:07 PM (#5769065)
You can indeed squint a bit and see parallels to Weimar Germany in 2018 America. Neither side, though, is as extreme as the Reds and Browns. There's very little support for overthrowing the American constitution and republic even among the fringes of the two tribes.
   810. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:09 PM (#5769066)
Unfortunately, I am acquainted with people who had to punch Nazis to protect civil protesters from attack.


There are still men willing to do what is right.

I think it's pretty obvious the rot is far deeper than Trump


One of the things Ray gets wrong but wrong with a toe dipped in the waters that might one day lead him to not-wrong, is that 2016 "broke" me. I had, over the years, become comfortable and willing to believe that we were moving slowly beyond the ascendant power of 3%'ers and "Proud Boys." The Obama years gave me a sense of false security that while the moral arc of the universe may not bend towards justice by design, it was being bent so by the weight of accumulated history. The rise of Trump and American fascism put me paid to that naivety. I will not make that mistake again.
   811. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:09 PM (#5769067)
And your original statement was:


??

He didn't invade Iraq, but he got the drones rolling full-time. So the Muslim-killin' didn't really abate much in any serious sense.

You also haven't addressed the millions of "brown people" Sir sent back to the "gangs and domestic violence" even after their long, barefoot treks across the desert.
   812. Greg K Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:10 PM (#5769068)
Well, the British had up until the 20th century a navy so big it was mightier than all the other navies combined. So they were spending quite a bit on their armed forces and had quite the standing armed forces. It just wasn't foot soldiers. They were also quite active in diplomacy but as you note it wasn't for permanent alliances but for partnerships that could keep the continental powers from getting too powerful. They also fought a ton of bush wars and quite the big believers in gunboat diplomacy. Fortunately for the Brits after Napoleon nobody on the continent had the combined abilities of resources, manpower, and the ability to fight major wars for a very long time.

A lot of that could be said about late 20th/early 21st century America too.
   813. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:12 PM (#5769070)
The Obama years gave me a sense of false security that while the moral arc of the universe may not bend towards justice by design, it was being bent so by the weight of accumulated history. The rise of Trump and American fascism put me paid to that naivety. I will not make that mistake again.


That makes some sense -- a lot of sense, actually, since it explains much of the TDS left -- but you can't say you weren't warned during the Obama years. But when people talked about "stakes" then, you called them "racists" and went on your merry way. So you can't really expect much sympathy now, can you?

So, no -- we in the sane, empirical, rational, liberal center/center-left aren't going to bend to your outrage just because you and yours were too dull to discern things properly from 2009-16. The country doesn't revolve around you and yours and your whims and feelz.
   814. BrianBrianson Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:12 PM (#5769071)
Are you calling current affairs far left ironically or genuinely? I've never heard of it.

And - if it pushes the far left on the inconsistency on whether people can define their own identities, great!

And, of course, the excerpt also plays into the idea that affirmative action hires aren't on merit. You can take affirmative action to address diversity and still hire on pure merit (for instance, advertising jobs more widely, and in targetted media, offering interviewing accommodation up front, engaging in "blinding" activities, etc), but if race factors into the hiring decision - it's unlikely your race makes you more qualified for a job (with a few exceptions - actors, for instance).

If you think she handed the (R)s the news cycle - genuinely, not as clickbait trolling, then you're either already going to vote (R), or already going to vote for the Maoist People's Party of Amerikkka candidate, so Warren wouldn't be wise to go after your vote. If she says it's just a baseless smear, it get used against her continuously, and she looks like she can't address it because it's true. If you get attacked on X a lot, and don't respond, you ceed that ground.
   815. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:14 PM (#5769072)
Hitler didn't "seize power" either.

Yes, he did. Spineless people technically signed off on the seizure -- see, e.g., the Enabling Act -- but he very much seized far greater powers than those granted under the constitution under which he gained power.


The Enabling Act passed with a clear majority - the only hinkiness was the exclusion of the KPD seats for purposes of constituting a quorum.

The Nazis certainly attempted to suppress and threaten the SPD - but they ultimately spoke against and voted against the Act anyway.

The main reason it passed?

Hitler gave a speech touting the importance of what amounts to 'cultural Christianity' that appeased the Centre party and Ludwig Kaas signed onto it.

The idea that the Enabling Act passed ONLY because of Nazi suppression of opposition is another over-stated myth.
   816. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:16 PM (#5769074)
You can indeed squint a bit and see parallels to Weimar Germany in 2018 America. Neither side, though, is as extreme as the Reds and Browns. There's very little support for overthrowing the American constitution and republic even among the fringes of the two tribes.


Sure.

Dear Leader just regularly leads rallies - and has literally and continuously since the 2016 election - where "Lock [her|him] Up" is a regular staple.
   817. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:18 PM (#5769076)
Another takeaway from that book (and this one is counter to Rickey so, my apologies, brother) is that the violent counter-demonstrations to the Nazis—in the early days—ultimately did more harm than good. It strengthened the nascent (inevitable?) connection between the legitimate police forces and the Brown Shirts, and it caused huge swaths of the population to opt for apathy, out of just a simple desire to not think about violent political confrontation all day. It weakened the resistance.

(I will acknowledge the obvious bias in my reading, which is that I support only non-violent resistance, no matter what the circumstances.)
   818. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:19 PM (#5769077)

Droning Americans and asserting the power to do so at the unilateral whim of the executive is the virtually quintessential "seizure" of power.

That was Sir's doing.


So was suspending habeas corpus and essentially thumbing your nose at the Supreme Court in the 1860s and interning Japanese citizens in WWII - albeit with the court's blessing - in the 1940s... as was going to war in Vietnam... and expanding it into Laos and Cambodia in the 1960s/70s... and arming the Contras specifically against US Law in the 1980s...

And 73.
   819. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:23 PM (#5769079)

That makes some sense -- a lot of sense, actually, since it explains much of the TDS left -- but you can't say you weren't warned during the Obama years. But when people talked about "stakes" then, you called them "racists" and went on your merry way. So you can't really expect much sympathy now, can you?

So, no -- we in the sane, empirical, rational, liberal center/center-left aren't going to bend to your outrage just because you and yours were too dull to discern things properly from 2009-16. The country doesn't revolve around you and yours and your whims and feelz.


It never stops being amusing when the self-procalimed sane and rational center-left guy keeps basing his arguments almost entirely on the idea that rainbow farting unicorns didn't suddenly appear in vast numbers with the simple snap of a finger.

   820. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:24 PM (#5769081)
So was suspending habeas corpus and essentially thumbing your nose at the Supreme Court in the 1860s and interning Japanese citizens in WWII - albeit with the court's blessing - in the 1940s... as was going to war in Vietnam... and expanding it into Laos and Cambodia in the 1960s/70s... and arming the Contras specifically against US Law in the 1980s...


What's your point here? That chief executives that preceded Trump "seized" power? Concession very much accepted.
   821. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:24 PM (#5769082)
814- genuine, it’s a socialist publication.
   822. BDC Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:26 PM (#5769084)
I have an honest, non-rhetorical question about antifa. Are they proactive, or anti-government (in, let's say, a Weather Underground kind of way) – or do they just show up reactively at Nazi gatherings to punch Nazis?

I ask because Arlington, Texas is not a hotbed of leftwing cells. But for all I know, you drive through Portland or Berkeley or Burlington with a flag decal on your car these days and antifa pulls you out your window and beats you up.
   823. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:27 PM (#5769086)
The idea that the Enabling Act passed ONLY because of Nazi suppression of opposition is another over-stated myth.


The idea is that the Enabling Act was a seizure of power by Hitler.
   824. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:29 PM (#5769088)
It strengthened the nascent (inevitable?) connection between the legitimate police forces and the Brown Shirts, and it caused huge swaths of the population to opt for apathy, out of just a simple desire to not think about violent political confrontation all day.


The pigs are going to out as pigs, regardless. The sheep are going to sheep, regardless. If the choice is submit to evil, or hem and haw to try to soften it's blow. Well. I'd rather die standing.
   825. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:31 PM (#5769090)
What's your point here? That chief executives that preceded Trump "seized" power? Concession very much accepted.


What was it someone said about posters who skirt from point to point whenever they lack either skills or capability to focus on the issue at hand?

You said -

Droning Americans and asserting the power to do so at the unilateral whim of the executive is the virtually quintessential "seizure" of power.


I simply pointed out that "unilateral whim of the executive" is a fairly common thing with US Presidents, even including the hallowed ones remembered fondly.

I'm sorry I cannot sign onto your rainbow farting unicorn platform.

I've consistently said that I'm an incrementalist and pragmatist. There are most definitely elements of Obama's foreign policy I take issue with. But - I never expected him to be Cartoon Gandhi. I just expected him to reverse the broader course of the prior, disastrous administration and point US policy - in the broadest terms - in a better direction. He did that.

If you're unable or unwilling to engage in any honest and relative comparisons of the only three Presidents the US has had in the 21st century, I got nothing for you.
   826. Srul Itza Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:31 PM (#5769091)
Avoiding entangling alliances in Europe and having only a limited standing army were the pillars of British foreign policy for a long time.



You left out the part about having the most powerful Navy in the world, and a large number of "native conscripts" to do the fighting when you needed it.
   827. BrianBrianson Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:34 PM (#5769093)
@821 - Ah, okay. Then, if I were a Warren supporter, I don't think it'd trouble me. Warren's reputation is probably far left of her reality, and so she probably shouldn't play into that. My understanding of the polling data is that college educated women are extremely pumped about politics these days, so the "Yet She Persisted" lady no doubt comes with an existing, energised base. Young people are "relatively" pumped - i.e., 18-29 year olds might turn out at 25%. If she snags the nom, she can think about pulling up the racial/young person demo with a younger Hispanic dude VP (or possibly Beto, who can at least fake it).

Or at least, from my armchair, that seems like the most sensible strategy.
   828. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:34 PM (#5769094)
I have an honest, non-rhetorical question about antifa. Are they proactive, or anti-government (in, let's say, a Weather Underground kind of way) – or do they just show up reactively at Nazi gatherings to punch Nazis?


Depends on where you are and who's there. What is decried by the fascists and their Vichy supporters as "antifa" during their "there are good people are both sides" moral equivocations, is mostly a semi-organized group of groups who show up at focal point events - Charlottesville, for example - and stand physically and willingly between the white nationalist elements and peaceful demonstrators. The Redneck Revolt group, for example, was charged along with the Nazi assailants in Charlottesville. Their "crime" was forming a human shield between the Nazis and peaceful religious counter demonstrators - literally, a group of clergy with signs and silent prayers - and swinging back when the Trumpsters came to do harm to the people behind them.

The folks in NYC this week look to be less organized than that, and were likely more Black Bloc types out looking for a free for all. You definitely get those guys regularly as well.
   829. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:35 PM (#5769095)
I have an honest, non-rhetorical question about antifa. Are they proactive, or anti-government (in, let's say, a Weather Underground kind of way) – or do they just show up reactively at Nazi gatherings to punch Nazis?

I ask because Arlington, Texas is not a hotbed of leftwing cells. But for all I know, you drive through Portland or Berkeley or Burlington with a flag decal on your car these days and antifa pulls you out your window and beats you up.


The problem is that there's no such singular thing as "antifa".

FWIW, I think most of the blackshirted and masked folks - the ones who aren't chanting Jews will not replace us, at least - are more anarchists than anything else.

They're not just anti-government or even anti-THIS-government or even anti-THIS-government-with-its-current-leader -- they're anti-power structures period.
   830. Greg K Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:37 PM (#5769096)
You left out the part about having the most powerful Navy in the world, and a large number of "native conscripts" to do the fighting when you needed it.

Right, but again, you could say something similar about the US. Though admittedly, it would take a bit of massaging "a large number of native conscripts" to mash it into the mold.

[EDIT: ie. something like using client states and proxies]
   831. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:37 PM (#5769097)
FWIW, I think most of the blackshirted and masked folks - the ones who aren't chanting Jews will not replace us, at least - are more anarchists than anything else.


Some. Not all by any means. I'm not sure I'd go with "most" either. Plurality, perhaps. Of course, that said, the organizational processes and principles of anarchist cells are, by definition, unfamiliar and irrational to non-anarchists.
   832. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:42 PM (#5769099)
Though admittedly, it would take a bit of massaging "a large number of native conscripts" to mash it into the mold.


Take a completely disenfranchised dispossessed class. Stoke and drive their culturally sticky racist fears and hatreds. Tell them that they are the last line of defense for Christendom and the American Way. Point them at the deserts full of darkies.
   833. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:47 PM (#5769102)
And I do have to pause for a long while before giving weight to the opinions on the US presidency of one who fled to Canada.


How long should one wait before giving weight to the opinions of someone who proclaimed without equivocation that anthropogenic global warming was a hoax?

I mean at the very least we should all admit that such a person doesn't know how to review and evaluate evidence. And I'm not sure how much deference we should give to the opinions of people who clearly don't know how to review and evaluate evidence.
   834. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:48 PM (#5769103)
I see Bitter Mouse isn't the only who is not intelligent enough to comprehend what he reads. I didn't say Khashoggi was morally guilty of anything; I said he upset the wrong hornets nest and as such I wasn't surprised by his fate.

When you combine scare quotes around "journalist" with the rest of what you wrote, it's impossible not to infer that you see Khashoggi as a morally ambiguous character.

It actually is impossible to infer that. One literally -- and I do mean literally -- has nothing to do with the other.

Jamal Khashoggi and David Brooks are both journalists in the same way that Mike Trout and I are both baseball players. Khashoggi is playing in a different league altogether.

(I leave aside the distinction between opinion columnist and reporter for these purposes as it's not relevant to the issue at hand, but it was my sense from quick research that Khashoggi wasn't really a reporter so much as he was an opinion columnist -- at least as far as his journalism is concerned. He was far more than a journalist, as I've noted.)


Khashoggi was a journalist with strong opinions, like many an editorial writer. All journalists are "more" than journalists. Plenty of our own journalists speak out on human rights issues. Some of them even accept payments for speeches to groups with strong political opinions. They're still journalists, as was Khashoggi.

Your idea of a journalist seems to be either that of a stenographer, or that of a reporter who gives equal credence to all sides, even if one side is generally truthful while the other side constantly lies. This is perfectly in line with your idea that fact-checkers are biased against conservatives, who in their recent incarnation lie 80% of the time they open their mouths.

This is what authoritarian rulers do: Kill their opponents when their opponents begin to embarrass them.

Starting to see yet why Trump is not one?


As others have noted, this is likely more to do with the fact that Trump doesn't have dictatorial powers to match his authoritarian personality. His crowds are perfect reflections of what he'd be like if his constitutional restraints were removed.
   835. BDC Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:49 PM (#5769104)
Interesting – thanks, Rickey, Zonk. One reason I ask is that "antifa" is a dreaded word in Texas, guaranteed to bring on rightwing panic: but I have never seen or even heard of any antifa activity here. Granted, I haven't been in Austin in a few years. But I was walking in downtown San Antonio the other day behind a literally rednecked guy who had WHITE tattooed on one calf and POWER on the other, and nobody was beating him up.

I do have a rightwing neighbor who flies huge BLUE LIVES MATTER banners and patrols the neighborhood in a flagwaving golfcart looking, I guess, for antifa among other things. Actually he lets his seven-year-old grandson drive the golfcart while he surveils.
   836. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:49 PM (#5769105)
Some. Not all by any means. I'm not sure I'd go with "most" either. Plurality, perhaps. Of course, that said, the organizational processes and principles of anarchist cells are, by definition, unfamiliar and irrational to non-anarchists.


Perhaps.

I suppose it depends on how purely we want to define anarchists... I.e., I'm thinking the pre-Trump WTO window breaker types*. A lot of them might voice some hazy marxist or marxist-adjacent "what comes after" vision, but 99% of the focus was on the need to topple the current.

There comes a point where there isn't a lot of practical difference to make it worthwhile examine doctrinal purity.

*FWIW, I've known a few... even in years past, called one a nominal friend. He was always to the left of me, but in the 10 years or so I knew him fairly well, his focus shifted entirely from "what should be" to "what should NOT be"... to the point that the former lost all meaning or purpose.
   837. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5769109)
Taking the peace pipe half full view of things for Warren, what she accomplished, as far as a 2020 presidential run goes, was the ability to say "Asked and answered; I had a professor perform a genetic ancestry analysis and he says I'm part Native American; hey, Whatabout Trump?" And she enabled her supporters to throw up the same frivolous defense.

But the problem for her is, and always will be, what she did 30 and 25 and 20 years ago when she pretended she was Native American so that she could advance her career. The rot from that will never disappear. Like with Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame, the problem isn't what she can do now; it's what she can't do now, which is to erase what she did then.
   838. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5769111)
One reason I ask is that "antifa" is a dreaded word in Texas, guaranteed to bring on rightwing panic: but I have never seen or even heard of any antifa activity here. Granted, I haven't been in Austin in a few years. But I was walking in downtown San Antonio the other day behind a literally rednecked guy who had WHITE tattooed on one calf and POWER on the other, and nobody was beating him up.


Antifa groups don't roam the streets looking for fights. Generally. That's a myth and lie propagated by the right, by the fascists and their toadies, to promote the Trump line that there's equal good and equal evil on both sides. It's a lie, completely and totally. Just like every other utterance from the greasy gasbag ########'s mouth.

The only organized group that I can find quickly, in Texas, is the Space City Redneck Revolt. There might be some less organized John Brown and Surviving Sisters gun clubs around, but they're not promoting that I can see.

Again, the primary purpose and activities of "antifa" groups is to provide a barrier between peaceful counter protesters and right wing militants and neo-Nazis who want to attack them.
   839. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:00 PM (#5769112)
   840. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:03 PM (#5769115)
I'm thinking the pre-Trump WTO window breaker types*


Those guys tend to be Bloc types. The Bloc has traditionally shown up to punch things and break ####. It's sort of their thing. (The Bloc is one of the reasons I drifted away from that scene in the late 90's.) They still exist, and they're still out there doing the thing they do, certainly. But in the post-Trump era, you find a LOT more organization and less "breaking #### is cool" in anarchist subcultures. Some of that is because many of the people who trended that way are now aligning explicitly with the Trump/Proud Boy axis. Nihilist violence cares little for ideology.
   841. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:04 PM (#5769116)
The rot from that will never disappear


Says the Trump toady.
   842. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:07 PM (#5769120)
Socialism in a fundamental sense should come back. No American should be dependent on satisfying the whims of capital in order to be able to eat and otherwise obtain the necessities of life. In addition to that being an inherently unjust arrangement, an American who is so dependent is inherently unequal to an American who is not. That necessitated subjugation to capital and its human representatives is inherently inconsistent with freedom.

This is the primary plank of the Democratic Socialists of America and I support it. Most of the rest of the material I've seen from DSA is, to one degree or another, drivel.
   843. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:09 PM (#5769121)
The rot from that will never disappear

Says the Trump toady.

Who seems to have magically erased over 4,000 lies from Trump's record while saying he'd support him against Hillary and (probably) Warren.
   844. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:09 PM (#5769122)
And, of course, the excerpt also plays into the idea that affirmative action hires aren't on merit. You can take affirmative action to address diversity and still hire on pure merit (for instance, advertising jobs more widely, and in targetted media, offering interviewing accommodation up front, engaging in "blinding" activities, etc), but if race factors into the hiring decision - it's unlikely your race makes you more qualified for a job (with a few exceptions - actors, for instance).

If you think she handed the (R)s the news cycle - genuinely, not as clickbait trolling, then you're either already going to vote (R), or already going to vote for the Maoist People's Party of Amerikkka candidate, so Warren wouldn't be wise to go after your vote. If she says it's just a baseless smear, it get used against her continuously, and she looks like she can't address it because it's true. If you get attacked on X a lot, and don't respond, you ceed that ground.


The question to me is not whether Warren's fake defense will change any votes. It will very likely not, at least not in any significant numbers.

The question to me is what is it about the Democratic Party and platform and leadership that causes it to attract people who:

1. Put up obviously frivolous defenses for Warren's behavior;
2. Turn basic principles of fairness and justice on their head by using an Until Proven Innocent standard for Kavanaugh;
3. Support mobs who chase people who disagree with them out of restaurants and such.

Etc.
   845. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:09 PM (#5769123)
While I grant this is all very easy for me—I’m a white Christian male who lives in the suburbs—but violent resistance to fascism should be avoided not just because it’s sinful (I suspect that doesn’t move the needle much), but also because it’s profoundly dumb on tactical grounds. This isn’t 1920; we are way outgunned by the State. Any serious armed rebellion will be violently shut down by the state—quickly and messily.
   846. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:10 PM (#5769126)
But the problem for her is, and always will be, what she did 30 and 25 and 20 years ago when she pretended she was Native American so that she could advance her career. The rot from that will never disappear. Like with Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame, the problem isn't what she can do now; it's what she can't do now, which is to erase what she did then.


I mean, Trump was sued and had to settle decades ago for racial discrimination at his housing developments; more recently he was caught on tape talking about sexually assaulting a woman; his ex-wife once said in a deposition that he battered and raped her; and there are like 14 allegations of sexual assault/harrassment against him, and, yet, you know he's doing fine. The rot is there but it can be explained away, I guess?
   847. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:12 PM (#5769128)
Who seems to have magically erased over 4,000 lies from Trump's record while saying he'd support him against Hillary and (probably) Warren.


I wouldn't vote for him but would prefer him over Hillary and Warren, I've made fairly clear.
   848. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:12 PM (#5769129)
2. Turn basic principles of fairness and justice on their head by using an Until Proven Innocent standard for Kavanaugh;


The Central Park 5 is, like, wow! We were exonerated by physical evidence and, still, the president says we are guilty. Just as he said we were guilty before we went to trial! The current head of the Republican party attracts the people who are supporters of due process, I guess.
   849. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:15 PM (#5769131)
I wouldn't vote for him but would prefer him over Hillary and Warren, I've made fairly clear.


You'll vote for him, as clearly denoted by your willful expansion of "it's only because they chose someone as bad as Hillary!" to now magically include Elizabeth Warren. The sad part is you're probably lying to yourself as well.
   850. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:17 PM (#5769134)
We were exonerated by physical evidence and, still, the president says we are guilty.


Sure, but (A) they weren't innocent; and (B) the city had no moral obligation to pay them a bunch of money, and properly didn't, until DeBlasio virtue signaled with other peoples' money.

These things are usually not as straightforward as the simple slogans.

None of which is a defense of Trump's behavior in the episode, which I wouldn't defend. The logical mistake you're making is calling Trump and Trumpism the representative of every single objection to the modern liberal perspective. They're not. Michael Bloomberg refused to pay them, and he was right. Michael Bloomberg is not Donald Trump.
   851. BrianBrianson Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:17 PM (#5769135)
It's not a play for high information voters, but they're probably not really a market to target, and a hard target. She has a good, soundbite sized rebuttal, and that probably does insulate her from the attack. Even the handwavey "But she must have benefitted from Affirmative Action somehow!" loses a lot in the face of "Genetics test came back Indian". It's only people who suffer from Affirmative Action Derangement that are convinced she benefitted from it, and no (D) is going to win them over, unless maybe they're a white Southern man.

The high information, non-partisan voters will already note there's no evidence she ever used her Indian ancestry to benefit from affirmative action. So, they won't care. And they'll be far more interested in her economic policies, her foreign policies, etc., anyhow.

Anything, in isolation, probably doesn't sway a ton of voters. But it's given her credability with low information voters, and headed off an attack that would've slowly attritted supporters. If it gives her ~0.5% in the general (which I think is believeable), it was done on the cheap. Ten of those would make you president.
   852. GregD Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:18 PM (#5769136)
I wouldn't vote for him but would prefer him over Hillary and Warren, I've made fairly clear.
If only I could put my finger on something that Hillary and Warren have in common....
   853. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:19 PM (#5769138)
The Central Park 5 is, like, wow! We were exonerated by physical evidence and, still, the president says we are guilty. Just as he said we were guilty before we went to trial! The current head of the Republican party attracts the people into due process, I guess.


If the vast majority of Republicans share Trump's view on this -- and they may; I don't know as I don't follow this issue -- then it would be a valid point. Regardless certainly Republicans have their immoral stances as well. I've not said otherwise. It's why I'm not one.
   854. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:21 PM (#5769140)
I mean, Trump was sued and had to settle decades ago for racial discrimination at his housing developments; more recently he was caught on tape talking about sexually assaulting a woman; his ex-wife once said in a deposition that he battered and raped her; and there are like 14 allegations of sexual assault/harrassment against him, and, yet, you know he's doing fine. The rot is there but it can be explained away, I guess?


Even accepting your premises, what I was pointing out was the stances taken by Democrat *voters* almost en masse, not problems that the president who is a Republican has.

But again, as I've said: Republicans have their issues also on the flip side.
   855. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:21 PM (#5769141)
846: The major difference is that the skeletons in Trump’s closet—the rapes, the adultery, the discrimination against minorities, cheating his contractors, etc—are all still fundamentally in line with the most basic plank of reactionary conservstivism: Support Existing Hierarchies (in this case, Male > Female, White > Black, Rich > Poor).

Warren’s “scandal” (miniscule as it is in comparison to Trump’s many serious crimes and sins) doesn’t jibe with any strains of liberalism or leftism; in fact, it directly contradicts them.
   856. Traderdave Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:21 PM (#5769142)
If only I could put my finger on something that Hillary and Warren have in common....


"Finger, schminger, GRAB it with your whole hand. When you're a star, they let you."

   857. PreservedFish Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:23 PM (#5769143)
The endless season of false equivalencies continues!
   858. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:24 PM (#5769144)
And it breaks my heart because she’s a very good candidate in many other ways.
   859. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:25 PM (#5769145)
The question to me is what is it about the Democratic Party and platform and leadership that causes it to attract people who:

1. Put up obviously frivolous defenses for Warren's behavior;
2. Turn basic principles of fairness and justice on their head by using an Until Proven Innocent standard for Kavanaugh;
3. Support mobs who chase people who disagree with them out of restaurants and such.

Etc.


See, the answers are self-explanatory.

Because they're actually the exact same answers that would apply with just a few word/name changes from the other direction.

My point is not even whattabout; rather - this is why I don't really care anymore and have become perfectly satisfied with rooting for my laundry in the streets:

1. Attempting to differentiate, individually denounce, or otherwise not "own" those elements has been a fruitless endeavor and a waste of time.

2. The "other tribe" gets no such questions asked of it in grandiose terms by the alleged objective non-tribalists - and on the rare occasions they do? There's always an excuse or a minimization of the numbers that does with it.

3. So, what's the point? Especially since - as we've so often been told, most often by you - Trump won.

It's the only rational and logical course of action.

   860. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:27 PM (#5769147)
Warren’s “scandal” (miniscule as it is in comparison to Trump’s many serious crimes and sins) doesn’t jibe with any strains of liberalism or leftism;


Huh? It jibes entirely with affirmative action and identity politics -- the primary strain of modern liberalism.
   861. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:28 PM (#5769149)
The face of "Genetics test came back Indian". It's only people who suffer from Affirmative Action Derangement that are convinced she benefitted from it,


Tried to benefit from it.

and no (D) is going to win them over, unless maybe they're a white Southern man.

The high information, non-partisan voters will already note there's no evidence she ever used her Indian ancestry to benefit from affirmative action.


Other than her voluntarily listing herself as Native American in the years before Harvard, both while at UTexas and while at Penn.

If only she hadn't done things like list herself in the AALS as Native American - but she did, and Harvard is sure to have seen it.

So your "no evidence" is simply a falsehood.

---

If only I could put my finger on something that Hillary and Warren have in common....


"She's a woman" is a failure of analysis, and as a cheap shot. I left open the possibility that of all the prominent D candidates, Kamala Harris might be the one I'd vote for. I'd need a gun to my head but she'd probably be the one I'd vote for. I also did not rule out voting for Warren - I said I'd need to study her communist positions more closely first to see if I could rationalize them away.
   862. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:29 PM (#5769150)
The "other tribe" gets no such questions asked of it in grandiose terms by the alleged objective non-tribalists - and on the rare occasions they do?


There are no representatives of the other tribe on the boards. Face sort of was, but he apparently split. I questioned him a bunch. I've questioned gun nuttery, a sine qua non for membership in the other tribe, at length.

   863. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:29 PM (#5769153)
If the vast majority of Republicans share Trump's view on this -- and they may; I don't know as I don't follow this issue -- then it would be a valid point. Regardless certainly Republicans have their immoral stances as well. I've not said otherwise. It's why I'm not one.


Of course not.

Because being one of them might occasionally require being for something.

It's always far, far easier to just lazily pick-and-choose what you're against, slap a haphazard, single tone of paint on it, and call it a day.
   864. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:30 PM (#5769154)
There's very little support for overthrowing the American constitution and republic even among the fringes of the two tribes.


Wasn't there a prominent Republican pol, Roy Moore maybe, who said that we should have stopped amending the constitution after the bill of rights? That's not exactly supporting overthrowing the government, but it certainly is expressing contempt for our system.
   865. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:32 PM (#5769155)
Huh? It jibes entirely with affirmative action and identity politics -- the primary strain of modern liberalism.


She made a mockery of these policies, unscrupulously using them to her advantage despite not even being a member of a protected class.

But that's not enough for Democrats to stop defending her. She's using Democratic voters like pawns.
   866. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:32 PM (#5769156)
There are no representatives of the other tribe on the boards. Face sort of was, but he apparently split. I questioned him a bunch.


So was Snapper.

Clapper is the absolute purist form of any party stalwart - on either side - that exists in the OTP.

JE was hardly a centrist.

Joey B existed. So did Kehoskie.

Should I keep going?
   867. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:33 PM (#5769157)
Because being one of them might occasionally require being for something.


Yeah, because neither Ray nor I has ever indicated we're "for" anything. It's not like I've argued "for" wide berth for speech or anything. (You might have remembered a bearded weirdo, gay weddings, and cakes).

Or "for" strict gun control. Etc, etc.

I'm against tribalism and street violence and for constitutionalism, the balance of powers, due process, fair trials, etc, etc.
   868. BrianBrianson Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:34 PM (#5769159)
Other than her voluntarily listing herself as Native American in the years before Harvard, both while at UTexas and while at Penn.

If only she hadn't done things like list herself in the AALS as Native American - but she did, and Harvard is sure to have seen it.

So your "no evidence" is simply a falsehood.


No, none of these are evidence that she benefitted or tried to benefit from it (a distinction without an actual difference, here). They're evidence it would have been possible for it to happen, but not evidence it did happen.
   869. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:35 PM (#5769161)
Wasn't there a prominent Republican pol, Roy Moore maybe, who said that we should have stopped amending the constitution after the bill of rights? That's not exactly supporting overthrowing the government, but it certainly is expressing contempt for our system.


Yes.

It was Roy Moore.

Specifically -

In Moore's June appearance, one of the hosts says he would like to see an amendment that would void all the amendments after the Tenth.
"That would eliminate many problems," Moore replied. "You know people don't understand how some of these amendments have completely tried to wreck the form of government that our forefathers intended."
Moore cited the 17th Amendment, which calls for the direct election of senators by voters rather than state legislatures, as one he particularly found troublesome.
The host agreed with Moore, before turning his attention to the 14th Amendment, which was passed during the Reconstruction period following the Civil War and guaranteed citizenship and equal rights and protection to former slaves and has been used in landmark Supreme Court cases such as Brown v. Board of Education and Obergefell v. Hodges.
"People also don't understand, and being from the South I bet you get it, the 14th Amendment was only approved at the point of the gun," the host said.
"Yeah, it had very serious problems with its approval by the states," Moore replied. "The danger in the 14th Amendment, which was to restrict, it has been a restriction on the states using the first Ten Amendments by and through the 14th Amendment. To restrict the states from doing something that the federal government was restricted from doing and allowing the federal government to do something which the first Ten Amendments prevented them from doing. If you understand the incorporation doctrine used by the courts and what it meant. You'd understand what I'm talking about."
   870. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:37 PM (#5769163)
So was Snapper.


Ridiculed his religion a number of times, though didn't go the extra mile like modern liberals and ridicule Catholicism, while embracing Islam. That's the bigotry that ultimately drove him away.

Snapper hasn't OTP'd in at least six months.

Clapper is the absolute purist form of any party stalwart - on either side - that exists in the OTP.


Ridiculed his silly, virtually fact-free stance on Kavanaugh.

JE was hardly a centrist.


Torture. GOPe.

Joey B existed. So did Kehoskie.


I barely acknowledged Joey B and it's possible that I literally never did. I sparred with Kehoskie frequently.
   871. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:38 PM (#5769164)
Moore cited the 17th Amendment, which calls for the direct election of senators by voters rather than state legislatures, as one he particularly found troublesome.


No doubt.
   872. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:39 PM (#5769165)
Even the handwavey "But she must have benefitted from Affirmative Action somehow!" loses a lot in the face of "Genetics test came back Indian".
Uh, it didn't come back Indian. It came back that she's somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1024th Indian, which to pretty much everyone means "Not Indian."

The high information, non-partisan voters will already note there's no evidence she ever used her Indian ancestry to benefit from affirmative action.
Except that she listed herself as an Indian in the publication used by law schools for hiring.
   873. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:40 PM (#5769166)
Yeah, because neither Ray nor I has ever indicated we're "for" anything. It's not like I've argued "for" wide berth for speech or anything. (You might have remembered a bearded weirdo, gay weddings, and cakes).

Or "for" strict gun control. Etc, etc.

I'm against tribalism and street violence and for constitutionalism, the balance of powers, due process, fair trials, etc, etc.


Well golly gee... I'm against all those things, too. And I'm for all those other things, too.

I just don't operate under the delusion that pontificating against modern liberals - or the corollary/equivalent - will do much of anything to stop that which I'm against or bring about that which I'm for.

I also don't operate under the delusion that it's all so simple and there's some assembly template that can just be stamped on anything and everything.

There is, however, a prominent political leader who will be happy to tell you that any given matter is really very easy and simple...
   874. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:40 PM (#5769167)
Are the Trump supporters here, what, of the “Flight 93 Election” persuasion? SlateStar-Codex-esque Grey Tribers?
   875. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:44 PM (#5769169)
I said I'd need to study her communist positions more closely


There you go, Little Lord. Embrace it. You're a Republican and a Trumpholster. Stop lying to yourself. It's the first step.
   876. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:45 PM (#5769170)
Are the Trump supporters here


There aren't any.
   877. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:46 PM (#5769173)
I just don't operate under the delusion that pontificating against modern liberals


I "pontificate" against modern liberals because I don't support modern liberalism. That's kind of how political commentary and participation work, right? If you think a political position is silly, you "pontificate" against it. It's actually worse now, because modern liberalism are doing actual tactical damage to actual liberalism. We saw it with Kavanaugh. We very well might see it in the midterms. Modern liberals still haven't got their #### together after Trump's election. We have a virtual admission by one here this very day.
   878. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:47 PM (#5769174)
Are the Trump supporters here, what, of the “Flight 93 Election” persuasion?


They may tell themselves they are. But they're not. They're just spineless cnvts who'll vote R regardless.
   879. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:47 PM (#5769175)
876- Trump *voters* I meant. Are there any of those either?
   880. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:48 PM (#5769176)
Are the Trump supporters here

There aren't any.


Yup... and there was a surprising scarcity of Hitler supporters in Germany in 1945... and Mussolini in Italy 1943.... and Stalin in the USSR in 1953...
   881. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:48 PM (#5769177)
876- Trump *voters* I meant. Are there any of those either?


I don't think so. Pretty sure, though not positive, that no one on the board voted for Trump.
   882. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:49 PM (#5769180)
876- Trump *voters* I meant. Are there any of those either?


Clapper. TGF seems to have vanished, for fear of being outed as a Proud Boy or something. Former BTF personalities Joey B. and Kehoskie absolutely voted for the fascist. Happily. Ray probably pulled a 3P level in New York because it was a meaningless gesture that lets him continue to tell himself that he's not *really* a republican, even though he clearly is. If he voted in Ohio or Florida, he'd vote R down the line. David voted Libertarian. Who the hell knows what the voices in Dan's head said do that day.
   883. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:50 PM (#5769182)
No, none of these are evidence that she benefitted or tried to benefit from it (a distinction without an actual difference, here). They're evidence it would have been possible for it to happen, but not evidence it did happen.


They are certainly distinctions with actual differences; you need to pretend they're the same so that you can conflate the two issues and fool the rubes such as Andy and BM.
   884. Lassus Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:52 PM (#5769184)
like modern liberals and ridicule Catholicism, while embracing Islam.

All religion is pointless and horrifying, from Baha'i to Zoroastrianism, with everything in between, including Catholicism and Islam. I'll give a special shout-out to Buddhism for screwing a friend of my so far into the ground he's never coming back. Fuck the Buddhists with whatever giant Buddha is currently the biggest.
   885. Lassus Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:53 PM (#5769187)
Am I really the only one who remembers Mister High Standards? Yankee fan?
   886. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:54 PM (#5769189)
No, none of these are evidence that she benefitted or tried to benefit from it


You mean beyond listing herself as one in a key hiring source document?

How exactly did you expect a white woman to "network" with other Indians, the cover story? Wouldn't it be kind of clownshoes to show up at an event aimed at actual Indians and then have everyone there realize you're actually white?

"Nice to meet you, Ms. Warren -- you sounded a lot ... taller ... in the guidebook."
   887. Ray (CTL) Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:54 PM (#5769190)
Uh, it didn't come back Indian. It came back that she's somewhere between 1/64th and 1/1024th Indian, which to pretty much everyone means "Not Indian."


It's 98.438% white to 99.902% white.

No liberal would stand for a rich white conservative taking advantage of diversity programs on that basis. The notion is preposterous.
   888. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:54 PM (#5769192)
I "pontificate" against modern liberals because I don't support modern liberalism. That's kind of how political commentary and participation work, right? If you think a political position is silly, you "pontificate" against it. It's actually worse now, because modern liberalism are doing actual tactical damage to actual liberalism. We saw it with Kavanaugh. We very well might see it in the midterms. Modern liberals still haven't got their #### together after Trump's election. We have a virtual admission by one here this very day.


Your confusion between "political position" and anecdotal interpretation on a specific individual or news event is so enormous that I lack the skills to help you.

But, just to throw you a bone - I will say this.

Trump has not changed or altered a single, solitary one of my "political positions".

All Trump has done is altered my perception of how those positions - or more accurately, the inverse of those positions - are bought and sold, defended and advanced, and the efficacy and value of various tactics and gambit therein.
   889. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:56 PM (#5769194)
Clapper. TGF seems to have vanished, for fear of being outed as a Proud Boy or something. Former BTF personalities Joey B. and Kehoskie absolutely voted for the fascist. Happily. Ray probably pulled a 3P level in New York because it was a meaningless gesture that lets him continue to tell himself that he's not *really* a republican, even though he clearly is. If he voted in Ohio or Florida, he'd vote R down the line. David voted Libertarian. Who the hell knows what the voices in Dan's head said do that day.


To be fair, IIRC - Ray doesn't vote.

Which is probably what I like most about his politics.
   890. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 03:59 PM (#5769195)
All Trump has done is altered my perception of how those positions - or more accurately, the inverse of those positions - are bought and sold, defended and advanced, and the efficacy and value of various tactics and gambit therein.


Modern liberalism has become indistinguishable from its present tactics and tribal perceptions.
   891. Lassus Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:01 PM (#5769198)
You're indistinguishable from every self-important small-town high school teacher I ever had.
   892. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:04 PM (#5769199)
Am I really the only one who remembers Mister High Standards? Yankee fan?


Sure I remember him.

No liberal would stand for a rich white conservative taking advantage of diversity programs on that basis. The notion is preposterous.


Provide proof she took advantage of a diversity program and I will attempt to summon the right amount of outrage. And not that you seem to have noticed, but I am hardly a Warren supporter.
   893. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:04 PM (#5769200)
Modern liberalism has become indistinguishable from its present tactics and tribal perceptions.


Yes.

I'm well aware that to a hammer, everything does look like a nail.

It's a fairly common cliche steeped in a significant amount of truth.

   894. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:05 PM (#5769202)
Trump has not changed or altered a single, solitary one of my "political positions".


QFT
   895. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:05 PM (#5769203)
Trump hasn’t changed my policy positions one jot or tittle.

The only thing he’s changed for me is ending my decision to vote or campaign for a 3rd party in elections where the Democrat suuuucks. The fear of encroaching fascism has moved me to “Vote for Blue no matter who.”
   896. PepTech Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:05 PM (#5769205)
Is this battle playing out anywhere else in the country this time around?
The coalition urging a “no” vote on I-1634 includes groups such as the American Cancer Society and American Heart Association. They argue that local governments should have the option of taxing sugar-laden soda and that the taxes can be effective at steering people toward healthier habits.

Indeed, other jurisdictions that have enacted such taxes, including Berkeley, California, saw consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages decrease after the start of a local sugary-beverage tax. Meanwhile, consumption of untaxed drinks (including water) went up.

Similar results have been reported in Philadelphia, where Drexel University researchers found residents said they were 40 percent less likely to drink soda after the local tax went into effect.
....
Washington voters shouldn’t allow a deceptive campaign paid for by soda giants to override local decision-making when it comes to how to best combat obesity in local communities.


They should vote no on I-1634.
No taxes on food in Washington State, but the City of Seattle put a 1.75 cents per ounce "excise tax" on sody pop and other sweetened drinks. Coke, Pepsi, Red Bull, and Dr Pepper have spent millions on ads featuring grannies concerned over "how they're going to reach into our grocery bags next". The ads are an insult to thinking people's intelligence (no other locality is considering any similar move, this wouldn't repeal the current tax, milk isn't taxed like the ads imply, no actual *food* item can be taxed in any way, etc.), and the sheer volume of it all is pretty overwhelming.

And this is just one state. How much must Coke, et. al, be making that they consider the millions spent here a drop in the bucket?

   897. . Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:07 PM (#5769207)
QFT


BS. The modern left has become significantly more radical on immigration, for example, since the election of Agent Orange. And on a guy making a pass at a woman/sexual harassment/rape, for another example.

So have the people here purporting not to have.

To start regaining a foothold in sanity, it's best to dispense with the nonsense.
   898. Lassus Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:12 PM (#5769210)
And on a guy making a pass at a woman/sexual harassment/rape, for another example.

For people who consider cat-calling to be making a pass at a woman, sure.
   899. Zonk Rocks You Like a Sharpiecane Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:14 PM (#5769211)
Is this battle playing out anywhere else in the country this time around?


It played and fizzled in Chicago - though almost entirely while I was NOT in Chicago - about a year ago.

And it's unfortunate (that it fizzled out).

It's one of the primary reasons that Toni Preckwinkle is currently my mayoral choice. It was a good idea, I'm sorry it got repealed, and I applaud Preckwinkle for supporting it, defending it, and then ultimately, surrendering on it when there was nothing practical she could do to stop its repeal.
   900. Davo Posted: October 17, 2018 at 04:14 PM (#5769212)
flip
Page 9 of 16 pages ‹ First  < 7 8 9 10 11 >  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
Vegas Watch
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRed Sox on track for $13M luxury tax despite mediocre record
(3 - 3:34am, Sep 15)
Last: Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle

NewsblogJustin Upton Done For Season | MLBT
(10 - 3:31am, Sep 15)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogDOES DAVE STIEB DESERVE ANOTHER CHANCE AT THE HALL OF FAME?
(16 - 2:51am, Sep 15)
Last: Booey

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (Playoffs through off-season)
(6715 - 1:39am, Sep 15)
Last: Booey

Gonfalon CubsTaking the current temperature
(383 - 1:37am, Sep 15)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogAt 43, Lew Ford's Never-Ending Career Keeps Rolling as Player-Coach
(6 - 1:17am, Sep 15)
Last: Itchy Row

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for the weekend of September 14-15, 2019
(22 - 12:55am, Sep 15)
Last: QLE

NewsblogOT - August/September 2019 College Football thread
(318 - 12:41am, Sep 15)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogHow many bad teams would it take to beat the Astros, Dodgers or Yankees?
(7 - 10:45pm, Sep 14)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - A New Season is Upon Baldrick
(768 - 10:41pm, Sep 14)
Last: Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle

NewsblogRookie infielder Donnie Walton was the 65th player the Mariners used this season.
(8 - 10:31pm, Sep 14)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogReport: Las Vegas also inquired about Arizona Diamondbacks
(7 - 8:22pm, Sep 14)
Last: My name is RMc and I feel extremely affected

NewsblogOMNICHATTER needs two tickets to paradise, for Sept. 13, 2019
(55 - 4:54pm, Sep 14)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogJustin Verlander, Gerrit Cole put on the greatest pitching show in baseball
(19 - 3:25pm, Sep 14)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogTheo Epstein speaks for all Cubs fans as he sums up the frustrating season to date
(44 - 12:38pm, Sep 14)
Last: Tin Angel

Page rendered in 0.8276 seconds
48 querie(s) executed