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, November 20, 2017

OTP 20 November 2017: Sheriff’s official suspended 10 days over Cubs World Series sneak-in

A high-ranking official in Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart’s office had to pay a price for allowing others to avoid having to pay the price of admission last year to a Cubs World Series game at Wrigley Field, newly obtained records show.

Mike Anton, a deputy chief with the sheriff’s police who makes about $120,000 a year, was suspended for 10 days for giving security IDs to two people so they could get in to a 2016 Cubs World Series game, the records show.

(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: November 20, 2017 at 08:01 AM | 1172 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off-topic, politics, world series

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

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

Page 7 of 12 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 >  Last ›
   601. BDC Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:12 PM (#5580188)
patriarchy has been in decline for several centuries and civilization has shown no sign of stopping

That seems to me a key point. There are degrees of patriarchy as there are of any other social tendency, but if patriarchy were truly inextricable from civilization it wouldn't tend toward retreat.

Of course there's a way of defining "patriarchy" so reductively that it doesn't retreat, as in SBB's observation that men are stronger. It's true, men are stronger than women. Though stretchy bands have greatly evened the field.

And there's also the move that Sam points out: just define the ebb of civilization as beginning when the first woman spoke in a Quaker meeting, or whenever.

But patriarchy – if you define it as a system where the family is the basic social unit and the head of the family assumed to be (even if not 100% in practice) a male who is literally father to many in that family, and patron to others – has long been in retreat in the West and even worldwide, in favor of the individual classical-liberal subject as the basic social unit. And many, especially on the right, would say that the idea of the classical-liberal subject is inextricable from capitalism and thus from the advance of civilization.
   602. manchestermets Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:13 PM (#5580190)
McGarry.


And I think the backdrop to the discussion was the mobilisation of troops on the India/Pakistan border. Although IIRC Marbury hadn't been appointed ambassador by then.
   603. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:14 PM (#5580191)
And I will point out that Ray states such misrepresentations more often than most around here. Yet he is always the first to scream 'liar!' While always refusing to hold himself to the same standard that he demands of others.

Which is why I have stayed out of this primary school nonsense. There are certainly posters here, who I would have defended if they had been treated the way Ray was here. But given his own past behavior, and the utter childishness of his replies, my sympathy was more than a little muted.


Can't rape a slut, right?
   604. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:14 PM (#5580192)
Of course there's a way of defining "patriarchy" so reductively that it doesn't retreat, as in SBB's observation that men are stronger.


My observation wasn't a "definition," it was a fundamental underlying and precipitating cause. Women will never be able to subjugate men. Indeed, women still effectively exist at the sufferance of men. It's obviously very much in the interest of men that they do, but that doesn't change this fundamental primal reality.

Civilization has taken us up from this primal reality, but hasn't eliminated it in the least.
   605. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:15 PM (#5580194)
Aside from the fact you're begging the question, your conclusion doesn't address my claim. Or are you claiming that Western civilization today is completely free of Patriarchy?


Your claim is that Patriarchy in an inextricable part of civilization. And yet you refuse to deny that in civilizations across the world patriarchy is diminishing even as the civilization flourishes. Only an idiot would say that doesn't address the question at hand.

And dummy diminishing is not the same as completely free. I wold hope even a dullard like you would understand that, but sadly it appears not. Or are you pretending that the patriarchy is as strong as it was 200 years ago? Is that what you are going with?
   606. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5580195)
And yet you refuse to deny that in civilizations across the world patriarchy is diminishing even as the civilization flourishes.


Western civilization is "flourishing"?

Citation very much needed. (In actuality, of course, Western civilization is in decline.)
   607. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM (#5580198)
Women will never be able to subjugate men.

And, again, this has its roots in biology. As does woman's answer to this: no, I can't do it directly, but I can persuade some men to subjugate other men.

And, if you think about it, this has to have a bearing on the respective psychologies of the sexes.
   608. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:25 PM (#5580201)
which is that he lies about what people think routinely
1. He detests Israel.
Classic.
   609. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:28 PM (#5580203)
That seems to me a key point. There are degrees of patriarchy as there are of any other social tendency, but if patriarchy were truly inextricable from civilization it wouldn't tend toward retreat.


Yeah.

Men are stronger, more aggressive, and are not sidelined during peak periods of adulthood by pregnancy. So there is a tenancy for a more male dominated culture at the stages of development when those factors matter a great deal. When progressing to "civilization" (however one wants to define it) a society must be able to survive, including surviving all the depredations of the neighboring societies. Assuming a patriarchal society is likely to be more aggressive that could easily protect the early cultures, whereas a less aggressive society might fall prey to more aggressive ones.

Those two factors would lead on to believe that the vast majority of civilizations have patriarchal roots, as is the case. That doesn't mean patriarchy is inextricable from civilization though (the original claim). And I would argue that as technology progresses the biological differences matter less and less and in fact a very strong patriarchy is at a civilizational disadvantage. The reason is simple, the most important factor in modern civilizations is brain power. And systematically disadvantaging half of your population puts your civilization at a strong disadvantage when competing against civilizations that either don't do it or do it to a lesser degree.

This explains why there has been a steady decrease in the power of the patriarchy over time. Civilization is evolving, reacting, to these pressures - adapt or die. Heck Saudi Arabia is even showing signs, for example recent measures involving women and driving.
   610. spycake Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5580204)
He shoved his tongue down her throat after manipulating the situation by writing a kiss into the scene. He then posed for the photo. Between that point, she says, he harassed her for two weeks.

While an unwanted kiss is not sexual assault, it's not a "bad joke" either.


You're getting off-subject, and rehashing old points. My post was simply to say your "list of people OJ didn't murder" analogy was a poor one, in this instance.
   611. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5580206)
Indeed, women still effectively exist at the sufferance of men.

You should work this one into your "there's no such thing as rape culture" lecture, they'll eat it right up.
   612. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5580207)
Today's left-leaning NY Daily News front page: I'M WITH PERV

Today's right-leaning NY Post front page: I'M WITH THE PERV!
   613. Greg K Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:38 PM (#5580211)
Then, of course, there is the elephant in the room that is always ignored in these discussions: "it's the pregnancy, stupid." Women wanted protection for themselves and their children from other men. Men didn't want women who were passed around like a doobie. They wanted to know who their children were. Women don't have that problem. They always know. This shouldn't be ignored in discussing the history of the role of the sexes in societies. It shouldn't be ignored that that has changed and is changing even more, even more quickly.

This is one of the dominant threads you have running through the history of masculinity. The sheer insecurity of it all.

It really jumps out in the early modern world. You have a social/political system in which (in their different contexts) both patriarchs and monarchs were supposed to wield unchallengeable authority. But in practice they both operated in a cloud of deep insecurity as they quite obviously didn't have the ability to play that role. A lot of behaviour (both at the level of the state and individual men) looks like a lot of running around making grandiose claims of authority that neither they, nor their audiences, actually believe. But everyone has to pretend that rhetoric matches practice, or the whole world will fall apart.
   614. Ray (CTL) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:42 PM (#5580214)
And I will point out that Ray states such misrepresentations more often than most around here. Yet he is always the first to scream 'liar!' While always refusing to hold himself to the same standard that he demands of others.

Which is why I have stayed out of this primary school nonsense. There are certainly posters here, who I would have defended if they had been treated the way Ray was here. But given his own past behavior, and the utter childishness of his replies, my sympathy was more than a little muted.


People with principles stand up even for those they despise when a wrong has occurred.

Especially for those they despise.
   615. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5580215)
As I recall, by Ray's definition, Misirlou is not "lying" if he (Misirlou) believes what he is saying. So if in Misirlou's *opinion* Ray supports Moore, then that's Misirlou's opinion, and therefore not a lie.

This despite Ray stating multiple times (unequivocally) he condemns Moore.
   616. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5580216)
The reason is simple, the most important factor in modern civilizations is brain power. And systematically disadvantaging half of your population puts your civilization at a strong disadvantage when competing against civilizations that either don't do it or do it to a lesser degree.


This is another of your absurd banalities. Islamic culture is highly patriarchal and has if anything, demoted "brain power" on the list of culturally-valued things since the mid-1970s. It is now stronger than it was then.

The ascendance of "brain power" tends to actually diminish cultural loyalty and indeed that's exactly what's happened in the West.
   617. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:44 PM (#5580217)
This is one of the dominant threads you have running through the history of masculinity. The sheer insecurity of it all.

There's definitely an amount of interesting, sordid, and awfully graphic history about early men going through endless desperate ploys to have children.
   618. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:45 PM (#5580218)

Find more advocates.
Look, it's a list of a bunch of things that didn't happen and that don't have anything to do with net neutrality!
   619. spycake Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5580219)
I would vote for Jones to help keep Moore out of the Senate. That's what NeverMoore means.


Thanks for the direct response. I had not seen you state that before, just generally state that you didn't support Moore. Which didn't seem substantially different than your non-support statements about other politicians, including ones you consistently defend like Trump. I appreciate the clarification.

I'm still not clear how you can blanket condemn Democrats who once supported Clinton, but allow yourself to thread the needle of defending Trump while not supporting Moore, but that's a larger discussion.
   620. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5580220)
You should work this one into your "there's no such thing as rape culture" lecture, they'll eat it right up.


Concession accepted.
   621. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:49 PM (#5580221)
That's what NeverMoore means.

On a scale of Poe to Simpsons, this usage falls somewhere below a precocious 14-year-old screaming NEVERWHORE! out a school bus window at streetwalkers in the 80s.
   622. Omineca Greg Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5580224)
There's a woman who works in the Bakery, who is Gitxsan, which is a matrilineal society. It wouldn't be fair to call it matriarchal, not really, but it's not really patriarchal either. There's still division of labour and responsibility along gender lines, but it seems more egalitarian than traditional Western society. Women's roles are just plain valued more, and the men don't have any special monopoly on leadership roles.

They have all sorts of clans and houses, and depending on the closeness of a person's relationship to you, you have differing duties and expectations of them. Sometimes it makes instinctive sense why they do things a certain way, other times it seems inexplicable, and even she can't tell me exactly why they do things that way, except to say they've always been done like that for as long as anyone can remember, and they have enough confidence in the value of their society to not change things.

It's very interesting to talk to her, I wish I knew more about feminism so I could ask the right questions of her to coax some insight into how the basic matrilineal structure of their Nation changes things for feminist issues.
   623. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5580225)
This despite Ray stating multiple times he condemns Moore.

Yes, there's what you say literally and what is implicit from other things you say, not so expressly. A man can claim to never having been unfaithful, but if he's often seen in secluded intimate settings with women that are not his wife, we at the very least have sanction to question the truth and sincerity of those expressions of faithfulness. It may be something that can be explained, but it maybe should have to be explained if it is central to the argument.
   624. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:54 PM (#5580226)
That's what NeverMoore means.


On a scale of Poe to Simpsons, this usage falls somewhere below a precocious 14-year-old screaming NEVERWHORE! out a school bus window at streetwalkers in the 80s.


Hey now, Ray said he would vote! That alone is kind of interesting from him. Who he would vote for or against is almost besides the point.
   625. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5580227)
Your claim is that Patriarchy in an inextricable part of civilization. And yet you refuse to deny that in civilizations across the world patriarchy is diminishing even as the civilization flourishes. Only an idiot would say that doesn't address the question at hand.


Again you're begging the question, but yes, you didn't address my central point at all. Is there still patriarchy in our civilization? If the answer is yes, you haven't refuted it.

Here, let me dumb it down for you.

Me: All X has some Y in it.
You: Oh yeah? Here's some X that has less Y in it than some other examples of X. In your face!
Me: /facepalm
   626. BDC Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:56 PM (#5580228)
everyone has to pretend that rhetoric matches practice, or the whole world will fall apart

As a character in China Miéville's The City & the City notes of that imagined world's peculiar structure:

It works because you don't blink. … No one can admit it doesn't work. So if you don't admit it, it does.


A highly-recommended speculative-fiction/detective-novel, to follow some themes that come up here occasionally.
   627. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:57 PM (#5580229)
Misirlou's emotion-based assertion and tenacious repetition in the face of contradiction are straight out of the "you're unhinged"/"you're a liar"/"he's a homophobe"/"he was plotting to have sex with her"/"they want to overturn an election"/"I don't care because I can tell so I know" playbook. They do Misirlou no credit.
   628. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:58 PM (#5580231)
This is an interesting bit from the Wiki entry on the Mosuo:
Dogs

While some Asian cultures practise the custom of eating dogs, this is strictly forbidden to the Mosuo. In Mosuo culture, a myth describes that long ago, dogs had life spans of 60 years while humans had life spans of thirteen years. Humans felt their life span was too short, so they traded it with the dogs in exchange for paying homage to them.[8] Therefore, dogs are valued members of the family. They are never killed, and they most certainly are never eaten. During the initiation rites into adulthood, Mosuo adolescents pray before the family dogs.
   629. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5580233)
I found this article interesting, especially as she focused on bread and butter issues in contrast to her opponent. “You can’t just say, ‘I hate Trump, vote for me’”: Danica Roem on her historic win

Her Republican opponent, incumbent Del. Robert Marshall, didn’t hesitate to try to turn Roem’s gender identity into a campaign issue. He once called himself Virginia’s “chief homophobe” and refused to debate Roem. Inthe runup to Election Day, the Virginia Republican Party paid for campaign flyers repeatedly referring to Roem with male pronouns and displaying a header that read: “Danica Roem, born male, has made a campaign issue out of transitioning to female.”

Roem said she was of two minds about the ads. As a transgender woman, they were hurtful. But as the head of a campaign, the Republican attacks were a gift.

“That was their closer, and I’m like, ‘Okay, I can win that fight. That’s easy,’” Roem said. “So message to Republicans: Discrimination will backfire in your face. Stop doing it and start focusing on infrastructure.”

It’s a fitting summary of her campaign: a history-making candidate who tried not to dwell on the ways she’d make history, focusing exclusively on local issues in a race that captured the nation’s attention.

“You can’t just say, ‘I hate Trump, vote for me,’” Roem said. “That doesn’t win you the House of Delegates. If you can’t speak fluently about your local issues, you’re just not going to win, period.”

   630. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5580234)
A highly-recommended speculative-fiction/detective-novel, to follow some themes that come up here occasionally.

Mieville drives me nuts because I really feel like I should like his work more than I do.
   631. Ray (CTL) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5580235)
Thanks for the direct response. I had not seen you state that before, just generally state that you didn't support Moore. Which didn't seem substantially different than your non-support statements about other politicians, including ones you consistently defend like Trump. I appreciate the clarification.


You know, what you've seen me state doesn't change the fact that I condemned Moore in the strongest possible terms many times. I said he was a child molester and an unethical judge. I said he didn't belong in the Senate and should step down. Then after Trump supported him yesterday I immediately condemned Trump's support of him. Then I said I would vote for Jones to try to help see to it that Moore wasn't elected. Each time someone gave me a next challenge about Moore I denounced Moore in line with said next challenge. And yet I was still lied about.

Nobody else on this board has gone to these lengths, over and over again, to denounce Moore. And yet Misirlou told lie after lie after lie after lie regarding my statements about Moore, and wasn't called to account by the community. He didn't just not believe me; he completely misrepresented my position, as the opposite of what it was. Example:

419. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 21, 2017 at 09:59 PM (#5579891)

The preferred choice of President Trump and The Yankee Clapper for the open U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, Roy Moore,

And Ray.


That is disgusting behavior on his part and shouldn't be accepted by folks here, even if they hate me. And part of the reason they hate me -- especially those lurking from time to time -- is because people smear me like he does. Once again: I say enough things people can criticize that it shouldn't be hard to show just how contemptible you think I am without making things up to smear me with, such as that I support a child molester for the Senate. Misirlou can think I don't believe it, but he shouldn't be able to lie about what I say about it over and over and over again without being called out by the community.

So really, what you've seen me say about Moore doesn't change what I've in fact said, over and over and over again.
   632. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5580237)
There's definitely an amount of interesting, sordid, and awfully graphic history about early men going through endless desperate ploys to have children.

Yep, and yet 80% of women have children whereas only 40% of men do. Think that might have a bearing on respective character, psychology, and actions?

Is there anything good about men?

And other tricky questions for you to ignore:

The second big motivational difference between the genders, he went on, involves the kind of social relationships sought by each sex. While other researcher have argued that women are more “social” than men – more helpful and less aggressive towards others — Dr. Baumeister argued that women can be plenty aggressive in the relationships that matter most to them, which are intimate relationships. Men are more aggressive when it comes to dealing with strangers, because they’re more interested than women are in a wider network of shallow relationships.
   633. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5580238)
People with principles stand up even for those they despise when a wrong has occurred.

Especially for those they despise.

What if my principle is "turnabout is fair play"?

But no, everybody picks and chooses when they want to stand up and defend people. The reason I chose not to, is that the "wrong" committed here against you is fairly trivial. And something you have done to many others, many times. Despite the fact that you want to blow it up into something worse than apparently some of the wrongs Trump has admitted to committing for example. I simply have no interest in helping you do that.
I know you have a huge victim complex (you will probably call me a liar for saying that, but ok), but I just honestly feel no desire to feed it for you. You are not a huge victim, you are not a martyr. Somebody chose to read your past actions in the most unflattering way for you*. Get over it.

And I also especially didn't feel a need to defend you, since I suspect that half of the reason for trying to blow it up to the level of an international scandal, is to try and deflect attention away from your hero, the #####grabber-in-chief. And the sexual assaults he has admitted to, that you have shown no care for, while simultaneously demanding Franken be hung, drawn and quartered for much less.


* (note, I don't even think he was lying. I suspect he honestly believes or believed those were your views, based on your history, in spite of what you said)
   634. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5580239)
If Ray didn't exist, they'd have to invent him.

And, well ... they have.
   635. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5580241)
Again you're begging the question, but yes, you didn't address my central point at all. Is there still patriarchy in our civilization? If the answer is yes, you haven't refuted it.


You are really dumb. There are elements - ever decreasing but still extant - of patriarchy in western civilization. So what? I never said or suggested otherwise. The patriarchy is decreasing and has been decreasing for well over 200 years, and all the while civilization continues to grow in scope and strength. That doesn't exactly paint the picture that patriarchy is inextricable to civilization.


You have not given any mechanism for why you think patriarchy is inextricable to civilization, all you have are examples of correlation, and interestingly that correlation is ever decreasing. And yet still you cling to it in desperate insecurity.
   636. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5580242)
Some good discussion here on the last couple pages. Ray let it go man we all know you're a partisan but you're not THAT partisan. We get it.
   637. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:05 PM (#5580243)
Misirlou's emotion-based assertion and tenacious repetition in the face of contradiction are straight out of the "you're unhinged"/"you're a liar"/"he's a homophobe"/"he was plotting to have sex with her"/"they want to overturn an election"/"I don't care because I can tell so I know" playbook. They do Misirlou no credit.
+1.

Add "not a good look" to the list of overused, tired phrases that have come to detract from the argument they purport to "support" - essentially virtroll signalling.
   638. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5580246)
#633 almost describes me. Mostly I just don't care enough to parse through all the posts in order to find the true victim. Normally I wouldn't post a declaration of not caring, but for some reason I think it fits in this case.
   639. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5580247)
Nobody else on this board has gone to these lengths, over and over again, to denounce Moore.

Ahh...maybe they're going to replace Chris Columbus' statue in Columbus Circle with RDP for the latter's denunciation of the Republican candidate for the open Alabama Senate seat. The lengths he says he's gone to denounce surely deserve a large monument. Is 20 feet enough? 30? Don't want to get this one wrong.
   640. BDC Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5580248)
Mieville drives me nuts because I really feel like I should like his work more than I do

I felt that way about Embassytown. A science-fiction novel where the science is linguistics, and with some really intriguing ideas – and yet the author seems to run out of interest in his characters and plot directions halfway through, and much of the rest of the book seems perfunctory.

The City & the City is not as ambitious, though, and is well-structured and not overly long. Though even there, the detective (who narrates) is a bit of a blank slate. He serves as a device to get the world built and the story told, but he's not very interesting. I recommend the book much more for its really amazing concept.
   641. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:12 PM (#5580250)
For some reason I have several Mieville books sitting on my shelves. I never seem to muster the energy to read them, even though they come well recommended. And yes I have several dozen unread books laying about. I can't go near a used bookstore without buying something and as the years pass I have less and less time - plus I occasionally reread books which slows the whole process down.
   642. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:14 PM (#5580251)
Mieville drives me nuts because I really feel like I should like his work more than I do
Misread that as Melville, and I was like, "Hmm. Don't think I've really ever heard someone say that about him before."
   643. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:16 PM (#5580252)
Embassytown... The City & the City

Yeah, I've read the latter and keep MEANING to read the former but can't quite get around to it - MM's statement above about mustering energy (specifically in regards to Mieville) is about correct. Your summary of the latter is pretty accurate, to my recollection.
   644. Greg K Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:16 PM (#5580253)
From the article in #632:
The basic social insecurity of manhood is stressful for the men, and it is hardly surprising that so many men crack up or do evil or heroic things or die younger than women. But that insecurity is useful and productive for the culture, the system.


Masculine insecurity as providing a social function is an interesting idea. It certainly seems prevalent enough that you would assume it has some function. Sort of like humour...it seems pretty universal, it must be doing something useful.

It does seem to lend itself to a certain kind of insecurity, I don't know, an "active" insecurity. Where you know you should be doing something, but what? And how will you be judged?

Female insecurity (historically anyway) seems to be more passive. To borrow from Morty's link, while the men go off and do dangerous things to prove their worth, the women play it safe and wait for opportunity to come to them. Seems like it might breed a kind of Calvinist predestination anxiety type of insecurity. What does fate have in store for me? We'll see...
   645. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5580255)
There are elements - ever decreasing but still extant - of patriarchy in western civilization. So what? I never said or suggested otherwise.


I'm glad you've decided to agree with my point and given up on your incredibly foolish line of argument. It's embarrassing you even made it in the first place, but it's never too late to start making better decisions.

The patriarchy is decreasing and has been decreasing for well over 200 years, and all the while civilization continues to grow in scope and strength.


Citations needed. I see a civilization weakening, riven with discord and internal dissent, utterly lacking in cohesion or asabiyyah, struggling to breed at replacement levels, losing control of its borders, and increasingly unable to win wars or maintain its empire.

all you have are examples of correlation, and interestingly that correlation is ever decreasing.


Sigh. For your statement to be true, there'd have to be at least one example of a non-patriarchal civilization. But there isn't. You're really, really bad at this. I've always known you don't know how to communicate effectively in writing, but it's like you have no idea what words actually mean at all.

   646. Zonk cooks his superfish with raisins Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:19 PM (#5580256)
Women will never be able to subjugate men.

And, again, this has its roots in biology. As does woman's answer to this: no, I can't do it directly, but I can persuade some men to subjugate other men.


Except - and hence my comment about SBB's fear of technology - has any one group ever subjected another solely due to superior biological strength? I doubt it - maybe waaaayyyy back when we were all just grunting and throwing rocks.

While I'm probably not educated enough to write the definitive work on subjugation, my guess would be that subjugation always occurs when the subjugator possesses superior technology, super strategic/tactical expertise, and/or super numbers. Probably in that order.
   647. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5580260)
419. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 21, 2017 at 09:59 PM (#5579891)

The preferred choice of President Trump and The Yankee Clapper for the open U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, Roy Moore,

And Ray.

That is disgusting behavior on his part and shouldn't be accepted by folks here, even if they hate me. And part of the reason they hate me -- especially those lurking from time to time -- is because people smear me like he does.
It's entirely plausible (I'm not going to go back and check the timeline) that when Misirlou posted 419, he was thinking along the lines of spycake in 619^. Misirlou posted a half a dozen times AFTER 419 that he now believes you *don't* support Moore (starting with 454). To the extent that any "hating" is going on, it's not due to what other people say about you, it's about that aspect of your persona that is so hung up on 419 while pretending 454 doesn't exist.

^At the very least, you should realize that your definitions of "support" and "defend" w/r/t Trump are... interesting. For example, you condemn the Access Hollywood tape, but would still vote for the guy (even now) if sufficiently pressed. Until your NeverMoore statement, it wasn't at all "clear" that you did not hold the same dichotomy w/r/t Moore.
   648. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5580262)
For some reason I have several Mieville books sitting on my shelves.

Okay, after googling I now realize that these weren't all just typos. Carry on.
   649. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5580263)
Except - and hence my comment about SBB's fear of technology - has any one group ever subjected another solely due to superior biological strength? I doubt it - maybe waaaayyyy back when we were all just grunting and throwing rocks.


Yes, men, over women. I do think that physical power is the root of political power. It's usually phrased "compel" in poli sci theory circles. Like, the men "compelled" the women to go gather berries or Athens compelled the rival city states to tithe and provide slaves.
   650. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:23 PM (#5580265)
Nobody else on this board has gone to these lengths, over and over again, to denounce Moore. And yet Misirlou told lie after lie after lie after lie regarding my statements about Moore, and wasn't called to account by the community. He didn't just not believe me; he completely misrepresented my position, as the opposite of what it was.


You'll be a lot happier if you just take my advice; stop trying to win the respect of people that hate you. It's up to you whether to return their hatred or not, but nothing good will come from engaging them in good faith or trying to make concessions.
   651. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:24 PM (#5580266)
^At the very least, you should realize that your definitions of "support" and "defend" w/r/t Trump are... interesting. For example, you condemn the Access Hollywood tape, but would still vote for the guy (even now) if sufficiently pressed. Until your NeverMoore statement, it wasn't at all "clear" that you did not hold the same dichotomy w/r/t Moore.

Well, Jones may be a Democrat, but for Ray there's only one Hillary.
   652. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:24 PM (#5580267)
Citations needed. I see a civilization weakening, riven with discord and internal dissent, utterly lacking in cohesion or asabiyyah, struggling to breed at replacement levels, losing control of its borders, and increasingly unable to win wars or maintain its empire.


It's bizarre indeed that he thinks he's remotely demonstrated that our civilization is "growing in scope and strength." Must be more "look how great Play Station 4 is and, oh, we have gay marriage now."

Except - and hence my comment about SBB's fear of technology - has any one group ever subjected another solely due to superior biological strength?


???

How do you think "the Patriarchy" created and enforced itself?
   653. spycake Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5580269)
So really, what you've seen me say about Moore doesn't change what I've in fact said, over and over and over again.


Ray, I just scanned the thread. Your "NeverMoore" response to me was the first time that term was used in this thread. It was the first time you said the word "vote" in this thread too. I can't speak for anyone else, but up until that point, it was not clear to me that your stated non-support of Moore was practically different than your oft-stated "non-support" of Trump.

I note you ignored the rest of my comment, about how you allow yourself a path to selectively support/defend/condemn individuals with changing times and circumstances that you don't allow to your ideological opponents. Has the Trump/Moore experience perhaps softened your strident judgments of liberals who once supported Clinton?
   654. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5580270)
You'll be a lot happier if you just take my advice; stop trying to win the respect of people that hate you.


The hatred of the two sides for each other is almost entirely a product of the internet and the Era of the Internet.
   655. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5580274)
I see a civilization weakening, riven with discord and internal dissent, utterly lacking in cohesion or asabiyyah, struggling to breed at replacement levels, losing control of its borders, and increasingly unable to win wars or maintain its empire.

At least you've maintained your lack of bias in the face of such challenges.

I am legitimately curious which specific war we should have won or should currently be winning.
   656. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5580275)

The hatred of the two sides for each other is almost entirely a product of the internet and the Era of the Internet.
...said nobody ever who was alive before the Internet era.
   657. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5580278)
I'm glad you've decided to agree with my point and given up on your incredibly foolish line of argument. It's embarrassing you even made it in the first place, but it's never too late to start making better decisions.


<yawn> I never said or suggested otherwise. You are just desperate to move the goalposts because even a dullard like you realized your initial assertion was insupportable.

Citations needed. I see a civilization weakening, riven with discord and internal dissent, utterly lacking in cohesion or asabiyyah, struggling to breed at replacement levels, losing control of its borders, and increasingly unable to win wars or maintain its empire.


So your claim is that over the last 200 years civilization, specifically western civilization, has weakened? Um, OK then. That is a ... um ... fascinating conjecture*. I am glad that you don't dispute that the Patriarchy has decreased over those same 200 years, right?

Sigh. For your statement to be true, there'd have to be at least one example of a non-patriarchal civilization. But there isn't. You're really, really bad at this. I've always known you don't know how to communicate effectively in writing, but it's like you have no idea what words actually mean at all.


You really, truly don't understand correlation and causation, do you? We have - at least loosely and ignoring the many examples others have brought up - established that patriarchy is present within most civilizations. That doesn't at all prove - in any sense - that patriarchy is inextricable from civilization, especially in light of the fact that patriarchy within our civilization is decreasing and has been for 200 years or so.

* I guess the new "peak" was ... what ... 1817 or so? 1979 is so very sad right now.
   658. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5580281)
I am legitimately curious which specific war should we have won or currently be winning.


Ideally one wins all wars one chooses to engage in. But if your point is that we've recently engaged in wars we shouldn't have engaged in, I couldn't agree more. Do you find engaging in foolish, poorly thought out wars (and then losing them) to be the sign of a flourishing civilization?
   659. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:44 PM (#5580287)
Ideally one wins all wars one chooses to engage in. But if your point is that we've recently engaged in wars we shouldn't have engaged in, I couldn't agree more. Do you find engaging in foolish, poorly thought out wars (and then losing them) to be the sign of a flourishing civilization?

Man, wading through the crap you make up is exhausting. Too bad it isn't for you, maybe you'd do it less.

I'm solely asking what you were referring to specifically when you said "unable to win wars". It strikes me as a specific claim about actual wars. Maybe not.
   660. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:48 PM (#5580288)
Lassus, TGF will never answer any questions, except under terms of his own amusement. See 650.
   661. Ray (CTL) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:48 PM (#5580289)
You'll be a lot happier if you just take my advice; stop trying to win the respect of people that hate you. It's up to you whether to return their hatred or not, but nothing good will come from engaging them in good faith or trying to make concessions.


Given how this community has treated Misirlou's repeated lying and smearing, there's a solid argument for that.

I signed on completely with his view of Moore -- and he lied about what I said anyway.
   662. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5580291)
Man, wading through the crap you make up is exhausting. Too bad it isn't for you, maybe you'd do it less.

I'm solely asking what you were referring to specifically when you said "unable to win wars". It strikes me as a specific claim about actual wars. Maybe not.


I geniunely didn't know what you were trying to say. My understanding of your post was as I said in 658. Since you've clarified, I'd submit Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as all examples of failed wars, even if we didn't technically declare war. Now would you care to answer my question? Or would you prefer to defend those wars on their merits?
   663. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5580292)
Given how this community has treated Misirlou's repeated lying and smearing, there's a solid argument for that.
Several posters have tried engaging with you today on the topic of how bad Misirlou hurt you yesterday, but all you seem to be doing is talking to TGF about how you both feel about liberals.
   664. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: November 22, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5580294)
Vanity Fare: “KELLY HAS CLIPPED HIS WINGS”: JARED KUSHNER’S HORIZONS ARE COLLAPSING WITHIN THE WEST WING:
It’s perhaps hard to remember now, but it wasn’t long ago when Trump handed Kushner a comically broad portfolio that included plans to reinvent government, reform the V.A., end the opioid epidemic, run point on China, and solve Middle East peace. But since his appointment, according to sources, [John] Kelly has tried to shrink Kushner’s responsibilities to focus primarily on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict... In the early days of the administration, sometimes with the help of a small cadre of Ivy League whiz kids who staff his Office of American Innovation, Kushner dreamed up scores of business “councils” that would advise the White House. “The councils are gone,” one West Wing official told me. With some of their purview being whittled away [by Kelly], “they seem lost,” the official added.

As Kushner’s Russia troubles mount—last Friday the Senate disclosed that he had not turned over e-mails about WikiLeaks, a claim his attorney, Abbe Lowell, denied—insiders are again speculating...about how long Kushner and Ivanka Trump will remain in Washington. Despite Kushner’s efforts to project confidence about Robert Mueller’s probe, he expressed worry after the indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates about how far the investigation could go. “Do you think they’ll get the president?” Kushner asked a friend, according to a person briefed on the conversation.

According to two Republicans who have spoken with Trump, the president has also been frustrated with Kushner’s political advice, including his encouragement to back losing Alabama G.O.P. candidate Luther Strange and to fire F.B.I. Director James Comey, which Kushner denies. (For what it’s worth, Kushner’s choice of Strange prevented Trump from the embarrassment of inadvertently supporting Roy Moore.) [Note: This was published at the same time Trump did just that.] Trump, according to three people who’ve spoken to him, has advocated for Jared and Ivanka to return to New York in part because they are being damaged by negative press. “He keeps pressuring them to go,” one source close to Kushner told me. But as bad as the Russia investigation may be, it’s not clear a New York homecoming would be much better for Kushner, given that his family’s debt-ridden office tower at 666 Fifth Avenue could be headed for bankruptcy.
   665. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5580295)
Several posters have tried engaging with you today


Yes, several versions of, "Eh, you deserve it for being such an asshole". Stupid, whiny Ray just can't bring himself to accept such gracious olive branches though. That's why he deserves what he gets.
   666. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5580298)
Yes, several versions of, "Eh, you deserve it for being such an #######\". Stupid, whiny Ray just can't bring himself to accept such gracious olive branches though. That's why he deserves what he gets.

TGF is the kinda guy, who thinks the moral of the boy who cried 'wolf', is that the silly villagers shouldn't take priors into account when they hear the boy cry 'wolf' again.

}:-> ↪
   667. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:07 PM (#5580299)
Find more advocates.

Look, it's a list of a bunch of things that didn't happen and that don't have anything to do with net neutrality!


Look, another glibertarian who doesn't understand what net neutrality is! "Something something Obamacare for the internet!"
   668. Barnaby Jones Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:07 PM (#5580300)
it was exactly the opposite of the problem that advocates pretend to be worried about.


No it wasn't. It showed that ISPs can pick and choose winners to the detriment of the consumer. That's exactly the problem people are worried about.
   669. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:10 PM (#5580301)
I'd submit Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as all examples of failed wars, even if we didn't technically declare war.

What would winning these undeclared wars have consisted of in such a way that it would have caused you not to write "unable to win wars"?


Now would you care to answer my question?
But if your point is that we've recently engaged in wars we shouldn't have engaged in, I couldn't agree more.
That was not my point.
Do you find engaging in foolish, poorly thought out wars (and then losing them) to be the sign of a flourishing civilization?
This requires me to agree with your position on wars in general, which I'm sure I do not. The entirety of history is full of foolish, poorly thought-out, losing wars. Basically all of them, from one side or another. I do not consider our adventures in Afganistan, Iraq, and Libya unique enough to discern them from any other war of similar scope and don't consider their existence to be any kind of proof of the gain or fall of what you consider civilization.

   670. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:12 PM (#5580302)
TGF is the kinda guy, who thinks the moral of the boy who cried 'wolf', is that the silly villagers shouldn't take priors into account when they hear the boy cry 'wolf' again.


Nah, he said it himself, he is uninterested in a real conversation. He is here just to "score points". Which I have never understood since ... seriously it is an obscure website, what points is he scoring? Why bother?
   671. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:17 PM (#5580304)
On further review it looks like Women's suffrage (at least in the US) began to gain steam in the 1840s, so I assume that is roughly where TGF would put his new peak of civilization. So I apologize for the 200 years comment, it looks like it has only been 180 years or so (though probably I could find earlier women's movements internationally if I tried).
   672. Ray (CTL) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:26 PM (#5580308)
Nah, he said it himself, he is uninterested in a real conversation. He is here just to "score points". Which I have never understood since ... seriously it is an obscure website, what points is he scoring? Why bother?


You might ask that about Misirlou's performance here. I harshly condemned Moore but that wasn't enough for Misirlou, who decided since he's nuts that he was going to try to "score points" by lying about my position on Moore..

Which I have never understood since ... seriously it is an obscure website, what points is he scoring? Why bother?
   673. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:30 PM (#5580312)
I'd submit Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as all examples of failed wars, even if we didn't technically declare war.

What would winning these undeclared wars have consisted of in such a way that it would have caused you not to write "unable to win wars"?


We entered into those wars without ever defining what victory would look like, which is a big part of my critique; that's not a good indication of a strong, confident, flourishing civilization. But then we got outcomes that were really bad, even by the low standards set forth above. We still have troops in Afghanistan over 15 years after the war began and the place is still a lawless, violent shithole, rife with terrorism and Islamic nutjobs. Iraq is something between a failed state and an Iranian puppet. The best thing you can say about the failed state formerly known as Libya is that it's a good place to buy cheap slaves. We are not succeeding. That is not success.

The entirety of history is full of foolish, poorly thought-out, losing wars. Basically all of them, from one side or another. I do not consider our adventures in Afganistan, Iraq, and Libya unique enough to discern them from any other war of similar scope and don't consider their existence to be any kind of proof of the gain or fall of what you consider civilization.


Ah, the old Lassus classic; argument by incomprehension. There's no difference between entering into stupid wars then losing them and entering into non-stupid wars then winning them! None of that can possibly tell us anything about the people and civilizations responsible for such acts!
   674. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:30 PM (#5580313)
Nah, he said it himself, he is uninterested in a real conversation. He is here just to "score points". Which I have never understood since ... seriously it is an obscure website, what points is he scoring? Why bother?

99% of internet activity is collecting fake points. Upvotes on reddit, likes on facebook, ignores on BBTF...
   675. Lassus Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5580314)
Do you find engaging in foolish, poorly thought out wars (and then losing them) to be the sign of a flourishing civilization?

Your initial statement (which was about winning wars, not engaging in them) implies that winning these wars would indicate a flourishing civilization. Is that not accurate?


Ah, the old Lassus classic; argument by incomprehension. There's no difference between entering into stupid wars then losing them and entering into non-stupid wars then winning them! None of that can possibly tell us anything about the people and civilizations responsible for such acts!

More making things up. As I said initially, I would need to agree with whatever your assessment of a stupid war is vs. a non-stupid war, and I most certainly do not.

Anyhow, good luck next time. Break out the victory dance.
   676. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:42 PM (#5580318)
Nah, he said it himself, he is uninterested in a real conversation.


I didn't say that.

He is here just to "score points". Which I have never understood since ... seriously it is an obscure website, what points is he scoring? Why bother?


I've never said I'm here to score points, although I'm delighted that you managed to fabricate a statement on my part and then confused yourself with it. Anyway, I HAVE said, repeatedly, that I'm here to amuse myself.
   677. BDC Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5580320)
Both Ray and Misirlou seem like good guys to me and I hope they work this out.
   678. The Good Face Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:49 PM (#5580321)
Your initial statement (which was about winning wars, not engaging in them) implies that winning these wars would indicate a flourishing civilization. Is that not accurate?


Nope. Losing wars, especially against inferior opponents, is not indicative of a great, flourishing civilization. That does not foreclose the possibility that entering into stupid wars and winning them is also not indicative of a great, flourishing civilization.
   679. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:49 PM (#5580322)
Miserlou's "You must denounce Trump exactly as I prescribe, or else you're responsible for him and rape culture, and you're an enabler of Nazis" act has grown exceedingly tiresome.
   680. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:50 PM (#5580325)
Female insecurity (historically anyway) seems to be more passive. To borrow from Morty's link, while the men go off and do dangerous things to prove their worth, the women play it safe and wait for opportunity to come to them. Seems like it might breed a kind of Calvinist predestination anxiety type of insecurity. What does fate have in store for me? We'll see...

The stakes have been different. Women know they'll be ###### by somebody. They just have to wait, and in many cases they get to choose. Males are not so lucky. They do not know if they will have access to the garden of #######, and many don't, then and now. That is their existential struggle. Females struggle comes in making the best decision she can by leveraging that to her interest and benefit. That's a qualitative difference.
   681. BDC Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:50 PM (#5580326)
The hatred of the two sides for each other is almost entirely a product of the internet and the Era of the Internet
...said nobody ever who was alive before the Internet era


I guess there's a sense in which the current polarization of conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats involves a degree of hatred, and happens to coincide with the rise of social media and the instant, commentary-heavy news cycle.

But there was a wee bit of hatred going around in the 1960s, and the 1930s, and the 1890s, and the Civil War was a thing :)

I think you can generalize that at certain "consensus" junctures in American history, maybe the 1950s really were such a case, that Republicans and Democrats, the nominal right and nominal left (though the parties "crosshatched" considerably, to borrow a term from China Miéville's), had a kind of gentlemanly mutual regard. There wasn't a dime's worth of partisan difference on so many issues, as George Wallace noted. But there was plenty of hatred going around that wasn't along partisan lines …
   682. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:55 PM (#5580327)
Nope. Losing wars, especially against inferior opponents, is not indicative of a great, flourishing civilization.


This is self-evident. Other than maybe 1812, the US didn't lose a war between the Revolution and Vietnam. It hasn't won a serious war since, and has lost or stalemated in a bunch of ridiculously stupid ones. This has obvious deeper cultural and civilizational meaning.

The most recent Iraq war was a civilizational embarrassment, undertaken to accomplish something even its crafters knew we didn't have the civilizational stomach to accomplish. The Keystone Cops could have executed it better.

A confident and robust civilization, of course, would have occupied Iraq and vastly reduced the influence of political Islam there. And then used that as both example and warning.

Our civilizational reaction to 9/11 has also been timid and weak and self-abnegating and self-flagellating. Not remotely the reaction of a flourishing civilization.
   683. Ray (CTL) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:57 PM (#5580328)
Both Ray and Misirlou seem like good guys to me and I hope they work this out.


He says I disgust him almost as much as Moore and Trump do. So we have Moore, who is a child molester and a judge who has been twice removed from the bench for not doing his job. And we have Trump, who has mistreated women and has ACTUALLY affected peoples' lives, by doing so many things that Misirlou deeply opposes (such as immigration policy). And yet me, a law abiding taxpayer with views Misirlou disagrees with -- though not when it comes to Roy Moore, although Misirlou was happy to tell lies about that -- but who has affected nobody's life through his views, disgusts Misirlou almost as much as Moore and Trump do.

That's one reason why Misirlou was called a nut, above.
   684. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5580330)
681

People have always argued and taken adversarial positions. If smaller, closer communities, you always are aware of who your adversary is (not to mention his close ones). This is governor on any tendency toward turmoil. But, the internet gives a wider, much more anonymous venue that allows for venting with impunity. You don't have the same consequences you once feared, thus mitigating your behavior.
   685. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5580331)
Miserlou's "You must denounce Trump exactly as I prescribe, or else you're responsible for him and rape culture, and you're an enabler of Nazis" act has grown exceedingly tiresome.
So is the "you silly people are all Modern Liberal symbols of the Decline" schtick; doesn't stop you from posting it fourteen times a day... ;)
   686. Morty Causa Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:11 PM (#5580333)
It hasn't won a serious war since, and has lost or stalemated in a bunch of ridiculously stupid ones. This has obvious deeper cultural and civilizational meaning.

I think this true. It's definitely an ingredient our national malaise and personal despair. By always holding the USA to standards it can't meet, then contemptuously disparaging its efforts, we're striking at the heart of what makes a community--all in name of WHAT'S RIGHT!. We're in a cannibalizing ritual that has us spiraling, but as long as this one part, MY PART, is waxed and buffed, it's okay. I'm torn between fearing the frothing patriots and suppressing my gag reflex at the disgust I feel for the cynicism and self-destructive impulses of the modern progressive.
   687. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:25 PM (#5580336)
it was exactly the opposite of the problem that advocates pretend to be worried about.

No it wasn't. It showed that ISPs can pick and choose winners to the detriment of the consumer. That's exactly the problem people are worried about.


I think it's even more pernicious than that. It showed that, given opportunity, ISPs will look for internet-based businesses and immediately engage in rent-seeking behavior as soon as they identify a sufficiently profitable one. Given their monopolistic territorial model (I moved to Boston last year, and for the first time in my life have a choice of two broadband ISPs) and absent net neutrality prohibitions, there are a whole host of ways an ISP could milk a cow at both ends with little recourse.

Interesting to note that when the current crop of dimwits entered the White House and their stooges at the FCC started making noise about eliminating net neutrality, Netflix actually said they didn't care! Their stated rationale was that they were big enough to pay whatever tolls were put upon them by ISP - and if they couldn't pay it, nobody could because they were the biggest player in the game.

THAT is particularly disturbing and addresses your point about how ISPs can pick and choose winners through demands for payment. Naturally once this hit the internets people exploded and Netflix quickly walked back their position and is now a firm ally of net neutrality.
   688. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:29 PM (#5580338)
Is there anything the GOP does that isn't a corporate giveaway? Ending net neutrality is even MORE politically unpopular than their awful tax and healthcare bills.
   689. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:34 PM (#5580341)
Ray, why on god's green earth do you support Moore? What is wrong with you?


So this guy was on trial for rape, but he told his lawyer that he didn't do it. He denies it. That's all I can tell you. And, by the way, he totally denies it.
   690. PepTech Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:35 PM (#5580343)
Arctic Wildlife Refuge Drilling rider included in tax cut:
What does drilling in a protected habitat have to do with cutting the corporate tax rate? Nothing, in the real world.

But in Congress-world, the two are related because Senate Republicans have said the federal receipts from the drilling will be used to help pay for the tax cuts. They make this connection though drilling is projected to only bring in $1 billion in federal revenue in 10 years — which, as Cantwell points out, is “just seven-hundredths of 1 percent of the $1.4 trillion tax-cut package.”

“It’s a way to jam through an environmental policy that can’t stand on its own,” Cantwell said.

Republicans, led by Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, say they’re drilling only the coastal-plain portion of the refuge, not the whole thing. The legislation mandates two oil sales covering a minimum of 1,250 square miles. Republicans say newer drilling technologies will protect the famed caribou herds as well as the rest of the environment.
I really hate this side of DC. Both sides pull this crap. New boss, same as the old boss.
   691. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:35 PM (#5580344)
No it wasn't. It showed that ISPs can pick and choose winners to the detriment of the consumer
How is transferring economic rents from content producer to access provider to the detriment of the consumer?
   692. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:37 PM (#5580345)
But in Congress-world, the two are related because Senate Republicans have said the federal receipts from the drilling will be used to help pay for the tax cuts.
Argh! You don't "pay for" tax cuts. You pay for spending.
   693. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:38 PM (#5580346)
No it wasn't. It showed that ISPs can pick and choose winners to the detriment of the consumer

How is transferring economic rents from content producer to access provider to the detriment of the consumer?


Well it sounds a fair bit like extortion. How is this any different than teamster goons blocking trucks from delivering your goods unless they get a cut of the sales?

And what does the content provider do when they are suddenly faced with the sudden appearance of a novel profit-draining fee from the access provider? What does your well-honed glibertarian sense of economic consequences tell you will happen here?
   694. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:41 PM (#5580347)
How is transferring economic rents from content producer to access provider to the detriment of the consumer?


The whole premise of ending net neutrality is a lie: you can't switch ISPs any more easily in 80% of the country then you could switch your electricity utility. This is not about consumer choice or "the invisible hand of the market" it's about letting monopolies use monopolistic behavior.

It's an awful ####### idea and the more I read about the FCC head and his ties to Verizon and Comcast the more I get angry. It's a ####### corporate giveaway that will screw over the entire country's infrascturure, making us even less competitive in the future. I can't wait until Comcast decides that MLB.tv is more important than springfieldk12.edu and little jonny can't pull up his homework assignment.

This is what's going to happen it's so ####### predicable. FFS.

Ironically, it also DISINCENTIVES infrastructure improvements. Yea, build a bigger pipe? Why the #### would you do that? Just block the content you don't want in the pipe, it's cheaper, and in most places consumers won't have any recourse -- they are stuck with whoever owns the end of line pipe in their neighborhood.

   695. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:45 PM (#5580349)
This is what's going to happen it's so ####### predicable.


Innovation? It's innovation isn't it?*

*Innovation will include ISPs inserting advertising between web page views now that they've also gained the right to mine your browsing and internet access habits for sale to the highest bidders.
   696. SteveF Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:51 PM (#5580353)
How is transferring economic rents from content producer to access provider to the detriment of the consumer?

The market for access provider functions more like a monopoly than the market for content.
*Coke to madvillain and others!
   697. DavidFoss Posted: November 22, 2017 at 03:53 PM (#5580354)
Argh! You don't "pay for" tax cuts. You pay for spending.

Its a semantic point. A true deficit hawk would only cut taxes if there was a budget surplus. Without a surplus, they would want something to compensate for the implied loss in tax revenue (spending cuts, other revenue sources, or high GDP growth if you think you're in the Laffer range).
   698. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: November 22, 2017 at 04:01 PM (#5580356)
Yea, build a bigger pipe? Why the #### would you do that?


Now, now ... let's be fair ... they'll totally do the CBA as to whether they can extort more with the current-sized pipe, or with a fatter one ...
   699. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 22, 2017 at 04:25 PM (#5580361)
Other than maybe 1812, the US didn't lose a war between the Revolution and Vietnam.


They don't talk about it in high school history class, but the US backed the Nationalists in China against the Communists led by Mao. We were able to hold Taiwan, but lost the mainland.

Sometimes I wonder how history would have unfolded had we put in a full effort to defeating Mao. At the time, we were the only country that had nuclear weapons, so we could have nuked the #### out of Mao without worrying about mutually assured destruction (yes, I realize B-17s and A-Bombs aren't nearly the force of ICBMs and hydrogen bombs). Had Mao been defeated, there would have been no Korean War, no Vietnam War, likely a much shorter Cold War and the Chinese people would never have suffered the Cultural Revolution. But you can never know what could have been.
   700. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 22, 2017 at 04:34 PM (#5580365)
OK, I have been cooking all day and haven't had a chance o respond until now:

419. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 21, 2017 at 09:59 PM (#5579891)

The preferred choice of President Trump and The Yankee Clapper for the open U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, Roy Moore,

And Ray.


Yeah, that was bad. It was a cheap shot, I regret it, and I apologize to Ray. For that and some of the hyperbole, like saying he disgusts me.

By way of explanation, I was wound up emotionally. I have never been more disgusted with Trump and his supporters than last night after he endorsed a child molester. But his bad behavior doesn't excuse mine. So all yall's shots at me are fair. Well, maybe not the mass murderer one.

That said, I fully stand by post #454:

I believe Ray doesn't support Moore and thinks he should step down. I also believe Ray's protestations are meaningless without further condemnation of Trump and Trumpism, which enables deplorables like Moore and his supporters. If that upsets Ray, well #### him.


Ray says he opposes Moore and that he would vote for Jones if he could. Fair enough. But Ray also says he doesn't support Trump, and this I don't buy. When he continually mocks and attacks people who really do, with catchphrases like TDS, and "Trump's being investigated for the crime of winning the election", his objections ring hollow. And I fully believe that support for Trump is at least tacit support for Moore, in that Trump only does what is in his best interest, and if Trump thought endorsing Moore would cost him support, he wouldn't do it, and may have even condemned him like our Ray here has. Thus, by my logic, support for Trump makes it more likely we will have a child molester in the Senate next month.

If that makes me a potential mass murderer, so be it.
Page 7 of 12 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 9 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 June 18: How Life Imitates the Congressional Baseball Game
(328 - 10:17am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (World Cup)
(540 - 10:15am, Jun 19)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogFormer MLB pitcher Kevin Brown reportedly held two mail thieves at gunpoint until police arrived
(146 - 10:14am, Jun 19)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(3731 - 10:14am, Jun 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogDodgers' surprise ace makes All-Star case in win over Giants
(73 - 10:12am, Jun 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogGrumpy Gossage Napalms His Bridges:BWitz:NYT (reg req.)
(71 - 9:54am, Jun 19)
Last: Smitty*

NewsblogJuan Soto Makes His Second MLB Debut Tonight
(17 - 9:34am, Jun 19)
Last: eric

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Summer Potpourri (finals, draft, free agency, Colangelo dragging)
(1209 - 9:17am, Jun 19)
Last: JJ1986

NewsblogDeadspin: Former Blue Jay Kelly Gruber Disinvited From Canadian Baseball Hall Of Fame Festivities
(13 - 9:05am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 6-18-2018
(25 - 9:04am, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

Sox TherapyA Pleasant Trip So Far
(7 - 8:30am, Jun 19)
Last: SandyRiver

NewsblogMetBblog: Mets reportedly ready to entertain trade offers for 'virtually everyone'
(27 - 2:11am, Jun 19)
Last: This is going to be state of the art wall

NewsblogIt's not a crime when OMNICHATTER does it! for June 18, 2018
(77 - 1:40am, Jun 19)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Astros voting thread
(17 - 10:29pm, Jun 18)
Last: . . . . . .

Gonfalon CubsClicking
(48 - 9:27pm, Jun 18)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.7587 seconds
48 querie(s) executed