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

Sunday, March 19, 2017

OTP 20 March 2017: This fighter for civil rights has baseball in her DNA

An interview with Bay Area activist and baseball fanatic Sunny Schwartz.

The S.F. Giants are gutsy and sincerely community-minded. They not only put money where their mouth is but they put their principles in action. They raised awareness of our [restorative justice] program. Graduates from our program stood shoulder-to-shoulder with survivors of violence in the ballpark before a game, saying they’d do the right thing. The Giants also took on AIDS awareness in the early ’90s. Today that doesn’t seem like a big deal, but back then it really was. They’ve also taken on domestic violence. Our first Strike Out Violence Day was in 1998 or ’99.

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

 

BDC Posted: March 19, 2017 at 09:58 PM | 2086 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: activism, ballpark weddings, giants, 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 2 of 21 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›
   101. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:31 PM (#5419899)
Not only that, but the greatest Weezer song ever written was probably this one by Fountains of Wayne anyhow.
   102. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:33 PM (#5419902)
And after several thousands years of investigations into Clinton that turned up nothing,


#VeryFakeNews. The server investigation indeed turned up something.

Comey did not deny that her conduct was covered by the criminal statute as written.
   103. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:39 PM (#5419907)
The greatest Weezer song is "El Scorcho" off of Pinkerton. SBB's comments re music has managed to do the impossible and make him even dumber.
   104. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5419909)
Since Dwight Clark suffering seems to bother SBB someone should put him on a live YouTube feed and broadcast his decline in real time. If viewership drops waterboard him.


Was The Catch in 1979? That would explain much about the direction of our culture and society since then, but alas IIRC it was 1982 or something.
   105. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:42 PM (#5419911)
Re: #101:
For a piece of brutal musical satire on Fountains of Wayne, Weezer and their sonic brethren, try "Fountains of Wayne Hotline"
   106. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5419912)
All of the following seem true:

1. Over the summer Putin tried to tilt the playing field toward Trump by working with WikiLeaks to release the DNC e-mails.

2. As summer turned to fall Putin assumed that Hillary would win and hoped that leaking further embarrassing information would weaken her presidency.

3. After she lost the election, Putin tried to further the notion that he influenced the campaign and Russian officials might have collaborated with Trump associates, thereby weakening his presidency.
   107. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5419916)
In the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores case, when he had to choose between the “rights” of corporations and the rights of women, Gorsuch sided with corporations.

Not only does Warren misstate the Hobby Lobby holding, but she neglects to mention that it was upheld by the Supreme Court. She is essentially arguing that a majority of the Supreme Court shouldn't be confirmed, demonstrating once again that it's the Gorsuch opponents who are out of the mainstream.
   108. Howie Menckel Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5419917)
I live a couple of miles from the former Fountains of Wayne store. You could buy fountains there, no kidding.
   109. Jefferson Manship (Dan Lee) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5419920)
IMHO, the greatest Weezer song of the 21st century was written and performed by Ozma.

edit to add: Weezer's greatest song is, indeed, El Scorcho. Some of their b sides and unreleased demos (Blast Off!, I Just Threw Out The Love of My Dreams) are up there too, but it's El Scorcho and everything else.
   110. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 20, 2017 at 12:54 PM (#5419926)
Voting for Hobby Lobby in Burwell probably should disqualify justices going forward.
   111. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5419933)
All of the following seem true:

1. Over the summer Putin tried to tilt the playing field toward Trump by working with WikiLeaks to release the DNC e-mails.

2. As summer turned to fall Putin assumed that Hillary would win and hoped that leaking further embarrassing information would weaken her presidency.

3. After she lost the election, Putin tried to further the notion that he influenced the campaign and Russian officials might have collaborated with Trump associates, thereby weakening his presidency.


All of that indeed seems likely, and assuming that Trump had nothing to do with it other than openly encouraging the Russians to release all of Clinton's emails,** it was if a giant gift basket was dropped right into his lap.

** Which alone should have caused any honorable Republican to repudiate his candidacy, but that was like expecting a dog to forego a dish of fresh meat for a plate of broccoli.
   112. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:03 PM (#5419935)
All of that indeed seems likely, and assuming that Trump had nothing to do with it other than openly encouraging the Russians to release all of Clinton's emails,** it was if a giant gift basket was dropped right into his lap.

** Which alone should have caused any honorable Republican to repudiate his candidacy, but that was like expecting a dog to forego a dish of fresh meat for a plate of broccoli.


Why? All sorts of people all over the world try to influence elections by releasing damaging info. Hacks everywhere do it. The Access Hollywood tape was a prime example.

Why should we care just because it was done by THE RUSSIANS?
   113. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5419939)
All of that indeed seems likely, and assuming that Trump had nothing to do with it other than openly encouraging the Russians to release all of Clinton's emails,*

It's Stage 5 TDS that Andy keeps pretending Trump's one-liner wasn't purely a throw-away joke, but his obsession fails even on its own terms. Trump didn't "openly encourage" the Russians to "release" anything; he instead joked that maybe the Russians could find the 33,000 emails Clinton disappeared.
   114. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:06 PM (#5419945)
All of the following seem true:


Maybe. I mean all all plausible, sure, but I don't know the why of any of it. And I am willing to wait for more to come out.
   115. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5419947)
Donald Trump, this morning:
James Clapper and others stated that there is no evidence Potus colluded with Russia. This story is FAKE NEWS and everyone knows it!

The Democrats made up and pushed the Russian story as an excuse for running a terrible campaign. Big advantage in Electoral College & lost!


James Comey, a few hours later:
"I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI as part of our counterintelligence mission is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. That includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia's efforts."
   116. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5419949)
All of that indeed seems likely, and assuming that Trump had nothing to do with it other than openly encouraging the Russians to release all of Clinton's emails,** it was if a giant gift basket was dropped right into his lap.

** Which alone should have caused any honorable Republican to repudiate his candidacy, but that was like expecting a dog to forego a dish of fresh meat for a plate of broccoli.


Why? All sorts of people all over the world try to influence elections by releasing damaging info. Hacks everywhere do it. The Access Hollywood tape was a prime example.

Why should we care just because it was done by THE RUSSIANS?


I'll let Jason respond to that one. Maybe he can explain to you the difference between a domestic political opponent and a hostile foreign power.
   117. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5419950)
It's Stage 5 TDS that Andy keeps pretending Trump's one-liner wasn't purely a throw-away joke, but his obsession fails even on its own terms. Trump didn't "openly encourage" the Russians to "release" anything; he instead joked that maybe the Russians could find the 33,000 emails Clinton disappeared.


And the WikiLeaks hacks were of Podesta's emails; they weren't the 33,000 emails that Clinton hid from State, then refused to turn over, then destroyed.
   118. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5419951)
Over on the AV Club's obituary for Jimmy Breslin, one of the commenters had an amusing post about how Breslin's bar rag style of journalism would be received in today's media world; specifically, his famous column about the ordinary man who dug the grave for John Kennedy:
"It turns out, after having an intern exhaustively go through all his social media accounts, the guy who dug JFK's grave was kind of racist once. Or wasn't racist enough. Depending."
   119. BDC Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5419952)
All of that indeed seems likely

I agree. One of the harder things to account for in all this Russian-influence business is WTH the Russian motive would have been. It gets clearer if you posit such motives as ad hoc and continuously shifting. (Within certain overall parameters like "aggrandize Putin" and "#### with people's minds.")
   120. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:10 PM (#5419956)
Trump Still Hasn't Done Very Much

But he hasn’t gotten much done.

Trump signed only one substantive piece of legislation since February 20, repealing a minor Obama administration rule that made it harder for the mentally ill to buy guns. Otherwise, in Month Two his impact on the laws of the United States consisted of renaming a veteran’s health clinic in western Pennsylvania and signing two symbolic bills about the importance of encouraging more women in science and technology fields. His push to repeal Obamacare is stumbling on Capitol Hill; his budget seems dead on arrival; his revised travel ban, like the original, has been blocked by a judge. He made big splashes with executive orders purporting to roll back Obama-era environmental rules, but in reality they merely announced his desire to roll back those rules. He did fill four more slots in his Cabinet, but three slots remain empty, and below those headline jobs the vacancy problem in his administration is becoming extreme: Overall, according to the Partnership for Public Service, he has only filled 20 of the 553 key positions that require Senate confirmation—and has not even picked a nominee for 497 of them.


And yes, despite being incompetent and largely ineffectual what he has manged to say and do (way more say) is offensive. So both offensive and ineffectual, well done GOP. There are still some more foreign powers to annoy and offend, more long standing alliances to weaken, more rivals to cozy up with - we have many more days, weeks and years of this.
   121. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:11 PM (#5419957)
I'll let Jason respond to that one. Maybe he can explain to you the difference between a domestic political opponent and a hostile foreign power.


Concession accepted.
   122. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:14 PM (#5419959)
I'll let Jason respond to that one. Maybe he can explain to you the difference between a domestic political opponent and a hostile foreign power.
It should come as no surprise that Russia tried to influence our election -- we do it all the time -- but yes, the Kremlin is our adversary and the thought that any American, whether it's Ted Kennedy or Roger Stone, would cheer them on is beyond, er, deplorable.
   123. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:14 PM (#5419961)
Funny, but I didn't think that Barry Bennett's new handle was "anonymous". Again, from that same article:

JFC, Andy, neither quote contradicts what we said.


What you said was an assertion that Trump's political plants within his cabinet posts were nothing new,
And nothing in either quote contradicts that.
   124. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:16 PM (#5419965)
Yawn. I am noting - correctly, unlike your naive gibberish - that both sides are playing politics. Both sides are equally disingenuous on this issue. I have never implied otherwise.
Both sides are always playing politics. But in this case, while both sides played politics, only one side was disingenuous about doing so. Republicans were honest about what they were doing; Democrats are not being.
   125. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:17 PM (#5419967)
A critical point made at the House Select Committee via Tapper:
Comey says Russians hacked with "loudness" -- as if they wanted to be discovered so US would publicize it
   126. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5419968)
It should come as no surprise that Russia tried to influence our election -- we do it all the time -- but yes, the Kremlin is our adversary and the thought that any American, whether it's Ted Kennedy or Roger Stone, would cheer them on is beyond, er, deplorable.

If the Soviets had got hold of the Pentagon Papers and leaked them to the Times, that would have been bad?

It's unclear -- cough -- how and why the source of newsworthy material impacts the material's newsworthiness. Ray can certainly speak for himself, but that seems like what he's getting at.

   127. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:21 PM (#5419971)
It should come as no surprise that Russia tried to influence our election -- we do it all the time -- but yes, the Kremlin is our adversary and the thought that any American, whether it's Ted Kennedy or Roger Stone, would cheer them on is beyond, er, deplorable.


Again, why should I care just because it's "the Kremlin"? Anyone in the world can do it. Someone in the world released the Access Hollywood tape, and the end result was that Trump was damaged. Someone in the world released Podesta's emails and the end result was that Hillary was damaged. Why should I care who the "someone in the world" was when the end result is the same? Why is it ok if Trump or Hillary or Breitbart or CBS or Hannity or Rachel Maddow or George Soros or Koch1 or Koch2 releases something, but suddenly not ok just because the Kremlin was behind it?
   128. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:25 PM (#5419976)
It's unclear -- cough -- how and why the source of newsworthy material impacts the material's newsworthiness. Ray can certainly speak for himself, but that seems like what he's getting at.


Indeed it is what I was getting at, and am getting at.

"Because it's a hostile foreign power doing it!" is not a meaningful distinction to me. That something would be just fine and dandy if David Axelrod or KellyAnne Conway is behind it but not if THEKREMLIN is behind it, doesn't compute.

If the end result of something being released is Not Right it should be Not Right no matter who is doing it. If it's fine it should be fine no matter who is doing it. The end result is what's at issue to me, not the source.
   129. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5419978)
It's unclear -- cough -- how and why the source of newsworthy material impacts the material's newsworthiness.

Were you not just freaking the fuck out over the possibility of the how and why of Obama being the source of any material against Trump via wiretap?
   130. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5419979)
If the Soviets had got hold of the Pentagon Papers and leaked them to the Times, that would have been bad?
"Got hold?" My Pentagon Papers history is pretty hazy but I'm pretty sure Ellsberg would've been found guilty of stealing government secrets had FBI agents, acting on the Nixon administration's orders, not tainted the investigation.
   131. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:28 PM (#5419980)
And the whole thing is even stupider when we realize that Vladimir Putin could have simply said every single day of the campaign that he prefers Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, which would have been significantly more "interference" than actually occurred.
   132. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5419982)
"Got hold?" My Pentagon Papers history is pretty hazy but I'm pretty sure Ellsberg would've been found guilty had the investigation not been tainted.

Yes, got hold. Should the Times have published the PP's if they obtained them through a Soviet intelligence agent posted in the US? It's a simple question, with a pretty obvious answer.
   133. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5419983)
Not only that, but the greatest Weezer song ever written was probably this one by Fountains of Wayne anyhow.

That's not really fair though. Saying a band isn't as good as Fountains of Wayne is like saying Jose Bautista isn't as good as Hank Aaron.

I exaggerate slightly...but once a dorm party DJ was taking requests, and my suggestion of Fountains of Wayne was met with general derision. So my response has been a lifelong elevation of them to a higher status than they perhaps deserve (though they certainly deserve a high one!)
   134. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5419984)
What you said was an assertion that Trump's political plants within his cabinet posts were nothing new,


And nothing in either quote contradicts that.

Here's how the article describes what Obama did:

Every president tries to assert authority over the executive branch, with varying degrees of success.

The Obama White House kept tight control over agencies, telling senior officials what they could publicly disclose about their own department’s operations. Foreign policy became so centralized that State Department and Defense Department officials complained privately that they felt micromanaged on key decisions.

After then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. made some political gaffes, Obama aides wanted to install a political aide at the Justice Department to monitor him. But Holder was furious about the intrusion and blocked the plan. During his tenure as defense secretary, Robert M. Gates pushed back against a top official the White House wanted at the Pentagon to guide Asia policy, wary of having someone so close to the president in his orbit.


Note the difference: With one aborted exception, Obama never tried to put political plants in those agencies. When Holder pushed back, Obama backed down. Of course there were times when the White House and the agencies (particularly the Pentagon) were in conflict, but (1) that's normal; and (2) I've already acknowledged that. When Obama (and other presidents) had a bone to pick with an agency's policy moves, he didn't need a mole within the agency to monitor anyone's loyalty. He'd take it up directly with the dissenters.

No matter how you slice it or dice it, what Trump's doing is unique, and wholly indicative of his paranoid nature. You have to go back to Nixon to find another president remotely like him.

   135. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5419985)
Again, why should I care just because it's "the Kremlin"?
You claim to care about very little nowadays.
   136. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5419986)
I exaggerate slightly...but once a dorm party DJ was taking requests, and my suggestion of Fountains of Wayne was met with general derision. So my response has been a lifelong elevation of them to a higher status than they perhaps deserve (though they certainly deserve a high one!)

The popular single killed them for a lot of people. Same with "Closing Time" for Semisonic.
   137. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5419989)
Why should we care just because it was done by THE RUSSIANS?

To keep up appearances. Strong nations fiddle in the elections of weaker nations...if you're a fiddlee rather than a fiddler people will stop asking you to parties.
   138. BrianBrianson Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5419990)
I agree. One of the harder things to account for in all this Russian-influence business is WTH the Russian motive would have been.


We know that Trump (or someone in his campaign, perhaps an M. Flynn?) removed the post-Crimean invasion sanctions on Russia from the Republican platform - it was basically the only input from Trump's campaign into the platform. That alone is sufficient to motive the Kremlin. Whether they expect to get anything else? I dunno. But SBB's assertion that Putin tried to undermine Trump is either his usual trolling or pure wishcasting - there's no evidence of this. Everything we know the Russians did favored Trump. Everything that's hurt Trump has seemed to be own goals.

But of course, it looks like we won't find out anything today, other than the obvious to everyone but SBB at his trolliest that Obama didn't wiretap Trump towers.
   139. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:33 PM (#5419993)
I'll let Jason respond to that one. Maybe he can explain to you the difference between a domestic political opponent and a hostile foreign power.

It should come as no surprise that Russia tried to influence our election -- we do it all the time -- but yes, the Kremlin is our adversary and the thought that any American, whether it's Ted Kennedy or Roger Stone, would cheer them on is beyond, er, deplorable.


I appreciate your effort here, Jason, but as you've subsequently seen, it's like trying to teach a chicken to speak Chinese.
   140. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:33 PM (#5419994)
Yes, got hold. Should the Times have published the PP's if they obtained them through a Soviet intelligence agent posted in the US? It's a simple question, with a pretty obvious answer.
Where are you going with this? How many Soviet intel agents umasked themselves to reporters? A wild guess suggests, um, NONE?
   141. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5419995)
The popular single killed them for a lot of people. Same with "Closing Time" for Semisonic.

Yeah, that was unfortunate.
   142. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5419996)
David N:
Both sides are always playing politics. But in this case, while both sides played politics, only one side was disingenuous about doing so. Republicans were honest about what they were doing; Democrats are not being.


That's so facile. The Democrats are being just as honest about what they're doing: opposing Gorsuch.

They're just making up the flimsy justifications we see today, to serve as a less belligerent excuse.

The Republicans were being honest about what they were doing: opposing Garland.

They just fabricated a flimsy history about "the Biden Rule" and the imaginary grand tradition of letting Year Eight vacancies stew.

If there's a dime of difference, it's that the Democratic obstinance has a far more valid basis, being retaliatory in nature. But some liberal focus group somewhere must have preferred being given the song and dance.
   143. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:35 PM (#5419997)
Where are you going with this?

To the conclusion that the source of news doesn't really matter to whether it's newsworthy. And therefore the "KREMLIN" thing has been successfully rebuffed.
   144. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5419999)
We know that Trump (or someone in his campaign, perhaps an M. Flynn?) removed the post-Crimean invasion sanctions on Russia from the Republican platform - it was basically the only input from Trump's campaign into the platform. That alone is sufficient to motive the Kremlin.
And yet the GOP platform was still tougher than the one put out by the DNC. Sad!

I'm running out the door but yesterday Byron York put out a piece on this issue that should be viewed.
   145. Traderdave Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5420000)
Again, why should I care just because it's "the Kremlin"?


If there were allegations that Russia had helped the Clinton campaign would you, or the rest of your ilk, be so blase?
   146. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:40 PM (#5420005)
And the whole thing is even stupider when we realize that Vladimir Putin could have simply said every single day of the campaign that he prefers Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, which would have been significantly more "interference" than actually occurred.
No. Him openly stating his preferences is not interference. He's entitled to prefer who he wants -- and then the public can take that into account if they want, or not at all. Him engaging in espionage in an attempt to covertly sway people is not legitimate.


If the Soviets had got hold of the Pentagon Papers and leaked them to the Times, that would have been bad?
If the Soviets stole classified information, yes, that would have been bad. Why you can't wrap your head around the idea of separating that from the question of whether the publication of the Pentagon Papers was bad, I'm not sure.
   147. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:41 PM (#5420007)
To the conclusion that the source of news doesn't really matter to whether it's newsworthy.


I love the "newsworthy" as the one and only criteria that matters. I wonder if SBB realizes there is more to it than that? And hey, if Russia meddled in a US election that too is newsworthy. The fact that Trump lied about Obama wiretapping him is also newsworthy.

And of course it does matter if a foreign power successfully meddles in our elections. It does matter if there is an untoward relationship between members of Trump's campaign and a hostile foreign power.
   148. Like Flies On Sherbert Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5420008)
All that stuff is just pure nostalgia. Nothing more.... People just got way better at this stuff after the 1950s. Way, way, way, way better.


My shortcomings on this board are a lack of time and patience to do more than say "you are so very wrong." So I apologize for being blunt.

Complexity does not equal better. 2017 is not better than 1957 just from the passage of time. Yes is not one of the greatest bands in rock history despite technical mastery. Buddy Holly is a major figure in American popular music and Marshall Crenshaw and Weezer of minor significance not because the latter are worse musicians.

Simplicity makes for the greatest art because of its depth and its reach, creativity laid bare so even a child can see and feel, taste and touch. No matter Don McLean's lament, rock 'n' roll can never die.

It's that goddamned simple.
   149. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5420009)
That's so facile.


I would argue it is either a lie or hopelessly naive, but sure facile works.
   150. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:44 PM (#5420011)
Why you can't wrap your head around the idea of separating that from the question of whether the publication of the Pentagon Papers was bad, I'm not sure.


Really? Because I am pretty darn sure I know why.
   151. TDF, situational idiot Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5420017)
All of the following seem true:

1. Over the summer Putin tried to tilt the playing field toward Trump by working with WikiLeaks to release the DNC e-mails.

2. As summer turned to fall Putin assumed that Hillary would win and hoped that leaking further embarrassing information would weaken her presidency.

3. After she lost the election, Putin tried to further the notion that he influenced the campaign and Russian officials might have collaborated with Trump associates, thereby weakening his presidency.
I don't think this is true; isn't the thinking that Putin's motivation was #NeverHillary?
   152. BDC Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:50 PM (#5420021)
Simplicity makes for the greatest art because of its depth and its reach

In Buddy Holly's recording of "Everyday," the percussion is provided by a guy smacking his trouser legs. If the musical idea is good, you don't need a lot of production values.
   153. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5420022)
If there were allegations that Russia had helped the Clinton campaign would you, or the rest of your ilk, be so blase?


Yes; that's what "not caring" means.
   154. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5420024)
No. Him openly stating his preferences is not interference. He's entitled to prefer who he wants -- and then the public can take that into account if they want, or not at all. Him engaging in espionage in an attempt to covertly sway people is not legitimate.


Again, this is just more stating the conclusion. Why is him engaging in "espionage" bad but Steve Bannon doing it is not?
   155. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5420026)
It very much is stating the conclusion.

We didn't get the news from Putin; we got it from Wikileaks. The ultimate source of the info is irrelevant, just as the ultimate source of the Pentagon Papers was irrelevant. We didn't get the Pentagon Papers right from the source either, but instead through a news intermediary.

Russia's de facto state broadcaster is a staple on many/most US cable TV systems -- were their broadcasts "interfering in the elections," too?

We long ago left the world wherein every voice every American hears in an election is American.

   156. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5420029)
Ray is reduced to asking why enemy espionage against a country is bad. That's one of those questions where to ask it is to answer it.
   157. Kiko Sakata Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:02 PM (#5420030)
And the whole thing is even stupider when we realize that Vladimir Putin could have simply said every single day of the campaign that he prefers Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, which would have been significantly more "interference" than actually occurred.


I think Jason's #106 and #125 raise an interesting point with regard to this. One possibility, which I hadn't really considered, but which Jason does a really nice job of laying out here, is that Russia didn't necessarily want Trump to win the Presidency. Rather, Russia wanted whoever won the U.S. Presidency to be severely weakened with scandal hanging over his/her head. The leaks themselves accomplish that for Clinton; the possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign regarding the links accomplish it for Trump.

In either case, the U.S. President lacks a strong popular mandate and is distracted by domestic political scandal, allowing Russia a much freer hand to push its own agenda globally, whether it be with respect to Syria, the Ukraine, or wherever.
   158. zonk Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:02 PM (#5420031)
I don't think this is true; isn't the thinking that Putin's motivation was #NeverHillary?


Putin's motivation is trying to break NATO, the EU, and the transatlantic American-European alliance into manageable bits so he has leave to regain the old Soviet place in the world (in terms of borders, economics, and stature generally) by whatever means he wishes.

Beyond some truly devastating stuff coming out - and I don't think we're gonna get that from the hacking investigation, we probably would need a hella lot more financial/tax records than dumbass has made available if such devastating or disqualifying stuff exists*.

In any case, though - it's less personal preference against Hillary/for Trump than it is a very simple matter of an outrageous, ridiculous boob of a dumbass who has been working his ass off for a good year and half to piss off our most valued and longstanding allies. Such a golden opportunity for a down-on-its-luck, last era power doesn't come along too often.

*For the record here, I'm not even talking about a direct $$$ quid pro quo... Trump has done business with LOTS of shady characters and ever since he went bellyup back in the 90s, the lion's share of those shady characters have been Russian. All it takes is a deal or doing business with any number of Russian oligarchs that were specifically cited in the Crimean sanctions to constitute a crime. I.e., Carter Page is being investigated for doing business with Igor Sechin - specifically cited in said sanctions. If proven, this would be a crime - regardless of whether we're talking fines or prison. Should any Sechins happen to be tied to Trump investments, it wouldn't matter whether it was a matter of "Here's some money - now do what we want" or not... it would still be a crime and still constitute grounds for impeachment.
   159. zonk Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:04 PM (#5420034)
Ray is reduced to asking why enemy espionage against a country is bad. That's one of those questions where to ask it is to answer it.


Well, since he's punted any previously standing on ideas on trade -- he has to get his open borders jollies in some other fashion.
   160. Morty Causa Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5420036)
Simplicity makes for the greatest art because of its depth and its reach, creativity laid bare so even a child can see and feel, taste and touch. No matter Don McLean's lament, rock 'n' roll can never die.

It's that goddamned simple.


I'm inclined to agree. As John Lennon put it (paraphrase) when asked how to write a song: "Say what you mean; make it rhyme; and give it a back beat."

A song, music, is about creating an emotional effect. You don't need complicated instrumental arrangements to achieve that.

What happens, though, and this applies to all artistic mediums probably is that there is an evolution from the simple to the complex. You can't go back and do what the pioneers did without seeming merely imitative and inauthentic. So, there are more complicated, even decadent forms until a point is reached where there is no emotional effect. That's when the form is junked.
   161. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:15 PM (#5420039)
Putin's motivation is trying to break NATO, the EU, and the transatlantic American-European alliance into manageable bits so he has leave to regain the old Soviet place in the world (in terms of borders, economics, and stature generally) by whatever means he wishes.

And he's got some very willing dupes in the RUSSIA! RUSSIA! brigade, to be sure.
   162. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5420040)
What happens, though, and this applies to all artistic mediums probably is that there is an evolution from the simple to the complex. You can't go back and do what the pioneers did without seeming merely imitative and inauthentic. So, there are more complicated, even decadent forms until a point is reached where there is no emotional effect. That's when the form is junked.

I'm currently reading Manifestoes for History, a collection of essays on how to "fix" history as it is currently produced. This sentiment wouldn't be out of place in that book.
   163. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5420042)
Trump has done business with LOTS of shady characters and ever since he went bellyup back in the 90s, the lion's share of those shady characters have been Russian. All it takes is a deal or doing business with any number of Russian oligarchs that were specifically cited in the Crimean sanctions to constitute a crime.

Yawn. Tony Podesta took money from Putin's bank to lobby the US to ease the sanctions.
   164. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:17 PM (#5420044)
No matter Don McLean's lament, rock 'n' roll can never die.

I thought that was Neil Young.
   165. BrianBrianson Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:25 PM (#5420051)
Yawn. Tony Podesta took money from Putin's bank to lobby the US to ease the sanctions.


Well, that's pretty smart. You appear to be trolling for Putin for free, which is dumb. If you're good at something, never do it for free.
   166. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:26 PM (#5420052)
Yawn. Tony Podesta took money from Putin's bank to lobby the US to ease the sanctions.
Don't you mean John Podesta took money from Putin's bank? Er, rather, don't you mean John Podesta's firm took money from Putin's bank? Er, rather, don't you mean the firm John Podesta left but secretly maintains an interest in took money from Putin's bank?

Er, don't you mean, "Look, a squirrel!"
   167. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5420054)
No matter Don McLean's lament, rock 'n' roll can never die.
I thought that was Neil Young.


Don McClean: "The day... the muuuuuuusic died. And we were singin'... etc., etc."
Neil Young: "Hey hey my my rock and roll will never die, better to burn out... etc, etc."
   168. Like Flies On Sherbert Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:30 PM (#5420056)
As John Lennon put it (paraphrase) when asked how to write a song: "Say what you mean; make it rhyme; and give it a back beat."

It's So Easy

Julia Stanley died in a hit-and-run accident four months after Holly's UK tour, in July of 1958, six months before Holly's own death. This froze these songs into emotional crystal for Lennon: two of his most profound mentors, oedipal and professional, were snatched by violent accident in the months surrounding his 17th birthday. In the coming months, Lennon and McCartney (who had lost his mother at 14), named their band after these Crickets, and consciously strove for the self-contained ideal of a group that performed its own material. The B side to this ideal is how Holly branded other peoples' songs, like "Rave On," "Raining in My Heart," "Blue Days Black Nights," "Oh Boy," "I'm Gonna Love You Too," "Fool's Paradise," and "It Doesn't Matter Anymore" with his ineffable hiccups. Even when Holly did other peoples' songs, they seemed like originals, Lennon and McCartney noted.

On early Beatle records, Holly's influence explodes like buckshot in their rhythms. Take those signature triplets from "That'll Be the Day" (across the bar on the repetition of line "You-make-me-cry- hie__you/Say you're gonna leave me"). Ringo works them into the final "yeah" of those colossal "Yeah Yeah Yeah"s in "She Loves You," as well as the clinching cadence of "I Want to Hold Your Hand," both direct Holly quotes. These hiccups across the bar accent the beat by tugging against it; the effect was of emphasis by diminution, a tack the Beatles reworked to their own sensibility.


You can't go back and do what the pioneers did without seeming merely imitative and inauthentic.

Rock 'n' roll forever awaits the teenager who can't play a lick.
   169. zonk Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5420061)
Putin's motivation is trying to break NATO, the EU, and the transatlantic American-European alliance into manageable bits so he has leave to regain the old Soviet place in the world (in terms of borders, economics, and stature generally) by whatever means he wishes.

And he's got some very willing dupes in the RUSSIA! RUSSIA! brigade, to be sure.


Even setting aside the usual dumbassery of your trolling -- how does this even make any sense?

Putin has "willing dupes" among the people - even using your own framing - that are hyperventilating about RUSSIA RUSSIA?!!?

This isn't even drug-induced logical...

It seems the least you could do would be to make your trolling coherent.
   170. BDC Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5420062)
there is an evolution from the simple to the complex. You can't go back and do what the pioneers did without seeming merely imitative and inauthentic. So, there are more complicated, even decadent forms until a point is reached where there is no emotional effect

Yesterday I saw Benjamin Britten's Turn of the Screw (1954) and was struck by the simplicity of the orchestration. This is 100 years after the early big operas of Verdi and Wagner, and it's not musically trite or even particularly melodic, of course. But Britten uses just four woodwind players, a horn player, five string players, a percussionist, a harp, and one person to play piano and celesta (which, weirdly enough, is another instrument that shows up in Buddy Holly's "Everyday" a few years later). Many of the episodes in the opera involve a singer or a duet basically against one instrument, pretty much every one being featured in turn. It's really well-done and complements the creepy story.

I dunno what this has to do with politics either, but Chuck Berry did some pretty simple things too and they were great of their kind, so I wanted to celebrate musical simplicity. RIP.
   171. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:38 PM (#5420063)
These hiccups across the bar accent the beat by tugging against it; the effect was of emphasis by diminution, a tack the Beatles reworked to their own sensibility.

And did Mahler get his proper thank you? I think not.
   172. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:39 PM (#5420064)
Putin has "willing dupes" among the people - even using your own framing - that are hyperventilating about RUSSIA RUSSIA?!!?

This isn't even drug-induced logical...


??

It's totally logical. Putin has wide swaths of the left claiming the presidency is illegitimate, and all he needed to do was leak a few meaningless DNC emails.
   173. Brian C Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:40 PM (#5420065)
If there were allegations that Russia had helped the Clinton campaign would you, or the rest of your ilk, be so blase?


Yes; that's what "not caring" means.

What a crock. Ray's whole defense of Trump during the election was that the every negative thing said or written about the guy was so unfair. He spent literally months being as butthurt about slights against Trump as Trump was. And now we're supposed to believe that he'd have been OK with an adversarial foreign power trying to influence the election against him? No one could possibly believe this.
   174. zonk Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:43 PM (#5420069)
It's totally logical. Putin has wide swaths of the left claiming the presidency is illegitimate.


Pretty sure that the low standing of Trump among people with functioning neurons would be just as low if there wasn't so much as a whiff of borscht to him.

   175. Morty Causa Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5420074)
Even when Holly did other peoples' songs, they seemed like originals, Lennon and McCartney noted.

And that's very much how The Beatles did their covers. Even without their original songs, The Beatles were maybe the best cover band ever. Moreover, they covered a song by following the original very closely, just doing it leaner, harder, meaner.

Rock 'n' roll forever awaits the teenager who can't play a lick.

Great Rock 'n' Rollers undergoing a cataclysmic transformative evolution, sudden but in real time. George Martin talked about how in that recording session for their first album, he could see The Beatles transforming.

And it has to do with an allegiance to a form and style. Again, Lennon: when an interview pointed out that he was not the guitarist that Harrison, Clapton, or Hendrix were, he replied (paraphrase once more) simply and to the point: "Maybe, but I can make it rock." And Martin comments how Lennon always saw a song in the effects it promoted, not in technical instrumentation.
   176. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: March 20, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5420075)
The best analog to Putins electioneering games is, oddly enough, 9/11. Both were done to provoke and prod the enemy (the US.) both resulted in far greater benefit than expected due to the US doing amazingly stupid things (invading Iraq, electing Trump.)
   177. Swoboda is freedom Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:06 PM (#5420077)
"Say what you mean; make it rhyme; and give it a back beat."

As Chuck Berry sang, "It's got a back beat you can't lose it."
   178. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:09 PM (#5420079)
Ray is reduced to asking why enemy espionage against a country is bad. That's one of those questions where to ask it is to answer it.


And yet, still asked and not answered.

Your kitchen sink word "country" suffers from overbreadth. (I'd argue that the word "espionage" is overly sensationalistic as well. DO you have an actual argument?) This wasn't hacking against our government, but against a campaign run by private individuals.

And I'm very not sorry, but if your candidate goes around trumpeting hacked documents of the other side -- such as Hillary did when she ran around with Trump's leaked tax return -- and then when it comes to YOUR documents you throw up a stop sign and stammer "But-but-but-RUSSIA!!!" you can, as Andy would say, cry me a river. If you're using leaked documents from the other side I simply don't care about the "distinctions" you draw when it's done to you; the argument falls on deaf ears to me.

--

(And BTW, your word "enemy" above is doing too much lifting also, while I'm at it. Russia is no more of an "enemy" of ours than Iran is, who we just gave a sweetheart deal and duffle bags of cash too.)
   179. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:11 PM (#5420082)
Russia is no more of an "enemy" of ours than Iran is, who we just gave a sweetheart deal and duffle bags of cash too.)

A quick look at the archives here will show all manner of apologia for Russia's invasions of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Russia only became an "enemy" to the loony left quite, quite recently -- for what are quite obvious reasons.

   180. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:13 PM (#5420083)
Yes; that's what "not caring" means.

What a crock. Ray's whole defense of Trump during the election was that the every negative thing said or written about the guy was so unfair. He spent literally months being as butthurt about slights against Trump as Trump was. And now we're supposed to believe that he'd have been OK with an adversarial foreign power trying to influence the election against him? No one could possibly believe this.


"Adversarial foreign power." It's so scary.
   181. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:17 PM (#5420085)
"Adversarial foreign power." It's so scary.

The use of overwrought and excessive language is typically a substitute for an actual argument, and so it is here.

Someone in Russia sent a phish (?) to some US computers, and J. Podesta was stupid enough to fall for it. Hardly the stuff of cloak-and-dagger OMG TEH ESPIONAGE!!!.
   182. Gaelan Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:21 PM (#5420087)
A quick look at the archives here will show all manner of apologia for Russia's invasions of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Russia only became an "enemy" to the loony left quite, quite recently -- for what are quite obvious reasons.


This is only true if by "loony left" you mean the anti-militarism at all cost left. But for anyone sane Russia has been the enemy for a long time, a greater danger than radical Islam, which is mostly an abstraction without meaning. At a minimum there should be troops on the ground in Ukraine. Russia is the enemy, not only in terms of interest, but on moral grounds. An evil country with corrupt institutions run by a sinister man.
   183. Lassus Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5420089)
181. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:17 PM (#5420085)

The use of overwrought and excessive language is typically a substitute for an actual argument
OH RLY?

That is certainly good to know.
   184. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5420090)
It is always cute when Ray and SBB get all high five about things. They keep going in circles and escalating and congratulating each other.
   185. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:22 PM (#5420091)
Russia is the enemy, not only in terms of interest, but on moral grounds. An evil country with corrupt institutions run by a sinister man.


Sounds a lot like Iran.
   186. madvillain Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:23 PM (#5420093)
Sounds a lot like Iran.


You don't know anything about Iranians then.

Someone in Russia sent a phish (?) to some US computers, and J. Podesta was stupid enough to fall for it. Hardly the stuff of cloak-and-dagger OMG TEH ESPIONAGE!!!.


lol. Way to try and be an expert on something you don't have the slightest clue about. It was not a simple "Nigerian prince" phishing scam. It was a very sophisticated web hook phishing operation targeted at thousands of computers in the West, including the DNC, that originated in Russia.

The phishing scam sent an incredibly well spoofed "Someone has accessed your account, Google password reset" auto notification to Podesta, among others. When he clicked on the link, it took him to the hackers' website which then was able to obtain his "reset" password.

I can guarantee you would have fell for the same exact scheme. The email and reset link they sent looked almost exactly like the ones Google send. It was a clever operation done by a well monied, State sponsored adversary. Not some two bit hustler on Craigslist.
   187. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:25 PM (#5420095)
An evil country with corrupt institutions run by a sinister man.


Heh. Sounds like something Jason would write about Iran, or could have been written about any number of nations in the past or present (and I am sure future) including our adversaries in WWII (who are now our allies, and I guess no longer evil). I admit though I am curious as to what makes a whole country "evil"?

EDIT: Watery coke to Ray. I am sad I did not mention North Korea, which presumably also fits the description.
   188. Brian C Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:26 PM (#5420096)
Someone in Russia sent a phish (?) to some US computers, and J. Podesta was stupid enough to fall for it. Hardly the stuff of cloak-and-dagger OMG TEH ESPIONAGE!!!.

Actually, this seems like pretty exactly what espionage usually consists of. Sorry to ruin all your James Bond fantasies, but by all accounts, spy work is usually pretty dull and unsensational.
   189. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:29 PM (#5420097)
EDIT: Watery coke to Ray. I am sad I did not mention North Korea, which presumably also fits the description.


Yes, but we don't do business with North Korea.
   190. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:31 PM (#5420099)
Yes, but we don't do business with North Korea.


I am not clear why the degree we do business with a country matters for purposes of their being "An evil country with corrupt institutions run by a sinister man", but OK.
   191. Brian C Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5420100)
In order of greatest danger to US:

1) Russia - lots of nukes, adversarial leadership, highly corrupt
2) North Korea - run by a madmen, surrounded by madmen, nukes, highly belligerent, but smaller and heavily resource-constrained

(big gap)

3) Iran - not nuclear (thanks Obama!), adversarial leadership, but absolutely no physical threat to US
   192. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:35 PM (#5420101)
The best analog to Putins electioneering games is, oddly enough, 9/11. Both were done to provoke and prod the enemy (the US.) both resulted in far greater benefit than expected due to the US doing amazingly stupid things (invading Iraq, electing Trump.)

It's interesting...for a while there I've had said that while invading Iraq was stupid, it didn't really produce the intended result of Al-Qaeda. The general Arab revolt against secular rulers didn't happen.

Although some times you just have to have patience. ISIS and Libya have to count as long-range "wins" for the 9/11 perpetrators. ISIS appears to be on the way out, but they had a good run...and the project was built on pretty long odds to begin with.

I'm no international relations expert, but I would suspect that Putin's primary goal is the diminution (or if he's feeling greedy the dismantling) of the EU and NATO. What domestic politics in the US looks like is probably a secondary concern. It's cliché at this point, but I see the parallels between Lincoln and Putin. If he can bust up the trans-Atlantic alliance by de-stabilizing US politics, he'll do it. If he can bust up the trans-Atlantic alliance by covertly supporting the legitimacy of the US President he'll do that. If he can achieve his goal by re-animating the corpse of Buddy Holly as part of a plot to mind control US baby boomers, he'd do that too.
   193. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:35 PM (#5420103)
1) Russia - lots of nukes, adversarial leadership, highly corrupt
2) North Korea - run by a madmen, surrounded by madmen, nukes, highly belligerent, but smaller and heavily resource-constrained

(big gap)

3) Iran - not nuclear (thanks Obama!), adversarial leadership, but absolutely no physical threat to US


Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth, none of those countries are an actual "threat" to us in real world terms, except to the extent terrorism is.

Neither Russia nor North Korea will be engaging nuclear war with us, not in this lifetime, not in the next. But quick - run and hide under your desk and stay there for the next hundred years.
   194. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:39 PM (#5420104)
In order of greatest danger to US:


I don't disagree with your ordering, but there is a factor you are neglecting (maybe). For Russia and Iran it is easy to see how things end up OK. New leaders, a slow thawing, we have some interests in common, we trade to some degree or another and hey we may never be best buddies, but I would not be surprised if in 20 years things are fairly stable and static.

North Korea is a different beast. I don't see a way NK doesn't turn into a massive horror show. The only thing worse than war with North Korea would be winning a war with North Korea, because then you have to deal with it.

I think the chance of massive military and/or humanitarian disaster in North Korea approaches certainty in a way that it doesn't with the other two. Our best hope with North Korea is a really strong and prosperous South Korea AND China together deal with the situation in a way that somehow avoids all the obvious terrible outcomes.
   195. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:39 PM (#5420105)
Neither Russia nor North Korea will be engaging nuclear war with us, not in this lifetime, not in the next.


Russia sure. I'm not so sanguine about DPRK.
   196. SBB, Live from the Alt-Center Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5420107)
Remember when Romney said Russia was our biggest threat, Obama scoffed and said "the 80s want their foreign policy back," and the loony left cheered him on and high-fived his insight?

Now the loony left thinks Russia's our biggest threat again.

Wonder why?
   197. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5420108)
Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth, none of those countries are an actual "threat" to us in real world terms, except to the extent terrorism is.


So Global Warming - not a threat. Russia, North Korea, and Iran - not a threat. Terrorism! THREAT!
   198. Brian C Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:45 PM (#5420109)
Neither Russia nor North Korea will be engaging nuclear war with us, not in this lifetime, not in the next. But quick - run and hide under your desk and stay there for the next hundred years.

I'm not predicting war (although Mouse's points about DPRK in #194 are well-taken). I'm just saying that's the threat level. The unlikelihood of armed conflict with Russia is offset by a large degree by the absolutely catastrophic outcome if it does happen.

At any rate, we don't have to get in a war in order for nukes to pose a threat. The security of the Russian nuke stockpile has been an issue for a long time.
   199. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:47 PM (#5420110)
So Global Warming - not a threat. Russia, North Korea, and Iran - not a threat. Terrorism! THREAT!


You might recall that 3,000 people lost their lives on a peaceful Tuesday morning in September of 2001.

That's 3,000 more people than global warming will kill in the next hundred years.

Then we have San Bernardino, Orlando, Nice, Paris, etc.

I don't claim that any single person is more likely to be struck down by terrorism than they are by lightning, but, yes, terrorism is a greater threat to us than global warming, Russia, and North Korea combined, your unlettered reply notwithstanding.
   200. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 20, 2017 at 03:48 PM (#5420112)
Remember when Romney said Russia was our biggest threat, Obama scoffed and said "the 80s want their foreign policy back," and the loony left cheered him on and high-fived his insight?

Now the loony left thinks Russia's our biggest threat again.

Wonder why?


It's an exercise left to the reader.
Page 2 of 21 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 24 April 2017: Talking politics (and baseball) with the mayor
(766 - 8:05am, Apr 28)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogHarsher punishment for pitchers who throw at hitters’ heads may do more harm than good
(5 - 8:00am, Apr 28)
Last: Jose is El Absurd Pollo

NewsblogIs baseball too slow? The battle lines are drawn -- and MLB is taking a side
(57 - 7:51am, Apr 28)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogDodgers to call up top prospect Cody Bellinger to aid outfield
(12 - 7:38am, Apr 28)
Last: Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama

NewsblogHunter Greene Done Pitching For The Season | BaseballAmerica.com
(14 - 6:27am, Apr 28)
Last: Bug Selig

NewsblogMarlins expecting to finalize $1.3B deal to sell team to Jeb Bush, Derek Jeter group
(130 - 6:24am, Apr 28)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogNoah Syndergaard scratched from start | MLB.com
(14 - 3:08am, Apr 28)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogInside Baseball | Where Potential Sellers Stand Right Now
(16 - 3:04am, Apr 28)
Last: vortex of dissipation

NewsblogI'll have a venti iced OMNICHATTER, please, April 27, 2017
(207 - 1:41am, Apr 28)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogOT - March 2017 NBA thread
(2522 - 1:27am, Apr 28)
Last: Athletic Supporter wants to move your money around

NewsblogRed Sox have no clubhouse issues with Dustin Pedroia, Matt Barnes
(8 - 12:03am, Apr 28)
Last: dave h

NewsblogESPN will cut 100 on-air personalities today
(278 - 10:20pm, Apr 27)
Last: PASTE does not get put on waivers in August

NewsblogOT: March-April 2017 Soccer Thread
(333 - 6:49pm, Apr 27)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(195 - 6:34pm, Apr 27)
Last: Rob_Wood

NewsblogESPN layoffs: A running list of reporters, anchors fired by the network - The Washington Post
(76 - 5:57pm, Apr 27)
Last: 6 - 4 - 3

Page rendered in 0.9825 seconds
47 querie(s) executed