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

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

OTP 22 August 2017: The myth of baseball’s depoliticalization

The cornerstone of a democratic republic is civic engagement in service of civic virtue, to be aware of fellow citizens’ struggles and to doggedly fight injustice and oppression. In today’s America, much of this engagement is missing, and it is viewed less as a responsibility held by every citizen than the task of few professional groups. But when it comes to Nazism, it should be the duty of every person, doubly so for white people, to vociferously denounce the individuals and the ideals themselves, to stamp them down in every area of society. The silence of white MLB players is thus telling of the way baseball players in the past have interacted with politics and its relationship to the larger degradation of American democracy.

(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: August 22, 2017 at 07:43 AM | 1771 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 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 1 of 18 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5518534)
".....to doggedly fight injustice and oppression."

No individual has a "duty" to do this. No baseball player and nobody else. Unless a law (like a military draft) requires it. Patriotism and civic virtue should be honored, but are not "required." That is one essence of a free society, you are free not to fight oppression. If you live in North Korea this obviously does not apply.
   2. Lassus Posted: August 22, 2017 at 12:58 PM (#5518541)
You mean he'd take a second beating in the rematch to set up a 3rd rematch?

No, I mean he'd agree to take a beating for one rematch even after taking a beating in the first match.


If an egregiously outclassed McGregor took a huge beating in the first fight, I can't think of any reason he'd do the same in the rematch

$$$$$$$$$

(And my hypothetical was based on him losing the first fight but not being embarrassed. In other words, a regular beating and not a huge beating. Your point about the audience potential for the rematch is definitely granted.)


he gets paid the same if he goes down in the 1st or if he sticks around 12 rounds and absorbs a ton of punishment.

I think even McGregor wouldn't just so blatantly fold in that manner (possibly criminally) for such a reason.
   3. GordonShumway Posted: August 22, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5518544)
You mean he'd take a second beating in the rematch to set up a 3rd rematch? I'm skeptical there'd be a market for a single rematch if Mayweather beats the crap out of McGregor in their first fight, let alone a 3rd rematch if the second fight goes the same as the first. If an egregiously outclassed McGregor took a huge beating in the first fight, I can't think of any reason he'd do the same in the rematch; he gets paid the same if he goes down in the 1st or if he sticks around 12 rounds and absorbs a ton of punishment.


[Copied from last week's thread] For three fights, you probably need (1) Mayweather to take a dive in the first fight, but make it look close, and (2) Mayweather to win in the rematch, but make it look close. In the third fight, Mayweather can drop the charade and proceed to beat the crap out of McGregor.
   4. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5518545)
Are you confusing a moral duty with a legal obligation?
   5. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5518546)
Let's move beyond McGregor's cretinism and UFC's barbarism and note that there's no reason to believe the result of this thing will be legit. The possibility of one of them pulling a Butch Coolidge is very high, and we should expect the betting action in Vegas to take on very irregular patterns.
   6. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:05 PM (#5518548)
But when it comes to Nazism, it should be the duty of every person, doubly so for white people, to vociferously denounce the individuals and the ideals themselves, to stamp them down in every area of society.


It is no such thing, particularly when it should be taken for granted. If anything, it is the duty of non-white people not to assume white people approve of Nazism just because they don't vociferously denounce it three times a day or whatnot.

And we must note that white people weren't called on to vociferously denounce Nazis during the Obama administration.
   7. Lassus Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:06 PM (#5518549)
For three fights

I hadn't gone beyond the possibility of what would bring on a second fight.
   8. Morty Causa Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:06 PM (#5518550)
Not all, Morty. Open up an incognito window and go see what you find.

I think we're getting confused. I was referring to the female sex, biologically speaking, not males who are transgendered females.
   9. The Good Face Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5518551)
No, I mean he'd agree to take a beating for one rematch even after taking a beating in the first match.


He gets paid to show up and fight, not to take beatings. He gets paid the same whether he folds early or hangs around absorbing punishment.

$$$$$$$$$


The money is there no matter what happens in the fight.

And my hypothetical was based on him losing the first fight but not being embarrassed. In other words, a regular beating and not a huge beating.


That's really the crux of it. If McGregor believes he has a real chance to win, then sure, I can see him toughing it out. But if he knows he's just going to be a punching bag and will never touch Mayweather, might as well fold early.

I think even McGregor wouldn't just so blatantly fold for such a reason.


Well, people are good at deceiving themselves, so he might convince himself he has a real chance to win. But if he doesn't believe he can win, he's a fool to take any more punishment than he absolutely has to.
   10. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5518552)
It's also people's duty not to look at an event and say, "OMG TEH NAZIS!!!" and throw out all their faculties of reason, in favor of hysteria, just because there are a few scum Nazis gathered round.

Noting the antifa violence in Charlottesville is a moderate position, arrived at by analysis and reason. Moderation in politics is a virtue (*), irrespective of what urges TDS might be generating in its victims.

(*) And immoderation a vice.
   11. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5518555)
David's question from the last page ("when has a sitting President supported a primary against someone acceptable to party leadership....") --

The somewhat answer is FDR. I say "somewhat" because technically, FDR wasn't a Democratic outsider and Big Jim Farley, his party patron, was the running the national party. In addition, of course, by the time FDR undertook these purges against Senators like Millard Tydings and a few others -- the Democrats had enormous super-majorities in the Senate. 69-24 following the '34 mid-terms, reaching a height of 74-17 (with independents, I believe, being of the LaFollette/progressive variety that were allied with FDR) - at which time the attempted purges came.

Tydings was the biggest target of FDR - and the most disliked by the FDR posse - but FDR didn't succeed in unseating any of them, I believe.

Of course, FDR played in it all in his usual savvy political manner -- promising not to get involved in primaries in his fireside chats, but then being sure to get his digs in speeches and chats clearly targeted at them (just not by name).

So - I suppose somewhat, but even back in the pre-internet days - it was no closely held secret that FDR and company were gunning for a clearly known enemies list within the party.
   12. The Good Face Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:11 PM (#5518558)
[Copied from last week's thread] For three fights, you probably need (1) Mayweather to take a dive in the first fight, but make it look close, and (2) Mayweather to win in the rematch, but make it look close. In the third fight, Mayweather can drop the charade and proceed to beat the crap out of McGregor.


Pretty much, although you wouldn't even need to make #1 look close. #2 would be the only tricky part. Mayweather could probably carry McGregor as long as he wants and make the fight look close, but could he do it without making things exceedingly boring?
   13. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:11 PM (#5518559)
Linked for no particular reason at all ... Communication experts agree: Don’t avoid political conversations with family members

The first thing to think about is what are your goals in having this conversation. Is it to change the other person’s mind? Is it to just hear their prospective and gain some information that way?

The second thing is that there are some really basic skills that will enable more effective communication. Avoid all verbal attacks and judgment. You don’t have to validate someone else’s content that you may find inconsistent with your values, but you do need to at least validate their ability to share their feelings and willingness to be open. That is how you move a conversation forward if it ends up that you do not agree with their opinions.

The third is that even if you are the best communicator in the world, you still might not get the outcome you want. You need to have a coping plan for how you are going to deal with the feelings you are going to have when you couldn’t enact the change you wanted. And then, you need to figure out a way that you can keep trying to have these difficult conversations.

   14. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:15 PM (#5518561)
First post-primary poll finds Roy Moore with big lead over Luther Strange in Alabama

JMC Analytics takes a look at Alabama's Sept. 26 GOP primary runoff and gives Roy Moore, the former chief justice of the state Supreme Court, a huge 51-32 lead over appointed Sen. Luther Strange. This is the first poll we've seen of the second round since last week's primary, in which Moore led Strange 39-33. However, Cygnal dropped a mid-August poll of what was then a hypothetical Strange/Moore runoff that gave Moore a 45-34 advantage, while an in-house poll for the conservative blog RRH Elections found Moore with a small 34-32 edge around that same time. We'll need to wait for more data to see if Strange really does start in this deep of a hole with just a month to go.
   15. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5518564)
The first thing to think about is what are your goals in having this conversation. Is it to change the other person’s mind? Is it to just hear their prospective and gain some information that way?


If you're so neurotic that you can't even have a simple conversation without all this neurosis, it's probably best to just keep your trap shut.

And it's not "prospective," it's "perspective," you weirdo illiterate.
   16. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5518565)
It is a bit too early to be counting wins, but it is nice to dream in a "I just bought a lottery ticket" sort of way.

Democrats Could Win 50 House Seats. Here’s How

As Democrats look to the horizon in 2018, they think they see a distant tsunami forming in their favor.

Trump has dreadful approval ratings; Democrats are dominating generic ballot tests, which ask voters which party they want to control Congress; and presidents almost always lose a slew of seats in their first midterm elections.

The last time a president went into his first midterm election as unpopular as Trump is now was in 1946, when Harry Truman lost 55 House seats. The Senate may be out of reach but Democrats say they can almost feel the House Speaker’s gavel in their hands.
   17. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:19 PM (#5518568)
You don’t have to validate someone else’s content that you may find inconsistent with your values, but you do need to at least validate their ability to share their feelings and willingness to be open.


Or maybe you can get some prospective and understand that most people aren't seeking out "validation" from some odd-duck leftist. JFC.

   18. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:19 PM (#5518570)
Yeah, there is no "vociferously denounce" clause in the constitution. There is especially no "vociferously denounce so I can be sure you agree with me and aren't a closet nazi or racist" clause. The right-wing nuts who protested in Charlottesville have a right to free speech just like all nuts, left, right or otherwise. If they become violent they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, as should anyone who would resort to violence to stop them. Their speech defines them, our response does not unless we choose it to.

And no I am not confusing moral and legal obligations. The legal structure of our society is based on a moral understanding of the freedom of the individual (imperfectly conceived as to whom it applied, to be sure). Individuals should be free to express or to not express themselves. A requirement to take a stand isn't freedom. No one should stand in the shoes of one who would rather not participate and judge them.
   19. GordonShumway Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:19 PM (#5518571)
IIRC, FDR also campaigned against Harry Bird, Senator of Virginia and an ardent segregationist and anti New Dealer, in 1934.
   20. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:20 PM (#5518572)
And it's not "prospective," it's "perspective" you weirdo illiterate.


Famed internet psychic uncovers TRUE meaning of journalist's typo! Tell us more.
   21. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:21 PM (#5518574)
Tell us more.


OK -- the person who wrote those paragraphs is socially maladjusted.
   22. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5518575)
The third is that even if you are the best communicator in the world, you still might not get the outcome you want. You need to have a coping plan for how you are going to deal with the feelings you are going to have when you couldn’t enact the change you wanted. And then, you need to figure out a way that you can keep trying to have these difficult conversations.


God, this is just awful -- Onion-level satire, though it's unfortunately real.

Maybe the writer's "coping plan" can be retiring to the puppy and Play-Doh room. Or his/her Thomas the Tank Engine toys from when he/she was 5.
   23. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:24 PM (#5518576)
You need to have a coping plan for how you are going to deal with the feelings you are going to have when you couldn’t enact the change you wanted.


LOL.
   24. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5518580)
Fist through wall. There, I coped.
   25. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5518581)
Uhm

And no I am not confusing moral and legal obligations.


is a weird opening to a paragraph that consistently confuses moral and legal obligations. People should be legally free to express themselves or not, however they like. But that doesn't make all expressions (or lack thereof) moral equals. But since there's no consequence (apart from the impression you make with others - and yourself) for your actions on a moral plane, you're free to do immoral things.

Like - "Yeah, there is no "vociferously denounce" clause in the constitution." is a legal argument in response to a moral argument that there's a duty to do this. It's textbook confusing them.
   26. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5518582)
Yeah this would be a real shame. I mean as someone who is in large part a pacifist I pretty much have to be against war. But in this one case I might just be willing to make an exception, so long as they minimize the real violence.

Trump ally blasts congressional leaders

A top ally of President Donald Trump offered hints Sunday of a coming war on Republican leaders in Congress, a battle presaged by the return of former chief strategist Steve Bannon to Breitbart News.

“There’s a lack of leadership on one side of Pennsylvania Avenue,” said David Bossie, a former Trump campaign adviser, appearing on “Fox News Sunday.”

Bossie, who said he’s spoken to Bannon “many times” in recent days, said Bannon’s departure from the administration will help the administration at “leaning into Congress.” He repeatedly decried a “failure of leadership in the House and Senate.”


In a battle of Trump versus GOP legislative leadership I am on the side of the meteor.
   27. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5518584)
IIRC, FDR also campaigned against Harry Bird, Senator of Virginia and an ardent segregationist and anti New Dealer, in 1934.


Yeah - Byrd was another one... Georgia Democrat Walter George was another one - and unlike Tydings and Byrd, George tended to be fine with large chunks of the New Deal agenda - but against most of the second, more muscular iterations. Like with Tydings and Byrd, FDR never really came close to unseating him.

While he was never a Senator - FDR's first budget director, Lewis Williams Douglas, also became extremely anti-FDR (I think Alf Landon actually wanted him as a running mate in a Liebermanian gambit in '36).

   28. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5518585)
Brian, what I said was there is a moral basis for our legality. I believe I said it in English.
   29. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5518586)
OK -- the person who wrote those paragraphs is socially maladjusted.


The writer or the person being quoted? Most grade school children understand that in a news article there is a journalist writing the piece and (at least in this case) a named contributor who is quoted. You seem deeply confused as to where to direct your childish scorn.

Let's review. There is a writer, who actually composes the article and is likely at fault in specific word choice or in transcription errors, and there is also the expert being quoted who is responsible for the words said and ideas expressed.

Maybe you need to learn how the media works before you critique it. Just a thought.
   30. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:33 PM (#5518587)
FDR would have undertaken almost any means of beating Huey Long, but didn't have to because he conveniently got shot.
   31. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:35 PM (#5518588)
--
   32. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5518589)
Brian, what I said was there is a moral basis for our legality. I believe I said it in English.


Sort of. And they you argued that there's a legal basis for our morality, which doesn't really follow.

In practice, there's a small overlap, in that living in a many-person society, we have a bit of a moral duty to one another to obey laws where feasible in order to allow society to function smoothly. But huge swaths of laws don't really derive from moral principles, and morality doesn't derive from legal principles.

Sure, one is, and should be, legally free to say nothing about Nazis marching about. But that fact tells us virtually nothing about what our moral obligations are.
   33. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5518593)
The writer or the person being quoted?


There's no quotation marks in the stuff you copied. If the writer is simply regurgitating what other people said, than it's the people who said it. If it's an amalgam, then both.

   34. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5518594)
In a battle of Trump versus GOP legislative leadership I am on the side of the meteor.


Until such time as NK gets better ICBM capabilities, I'm in favor of moving the seat of government to Guam.
   35. SteveF Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5518595)
The writer or the person being quoted? Most grade school children understand that in a news article there is a journalist writing the piece and (at least in this case) a named contributor who is quoted. You seem deeply confused as to where to direct your childish scorn.

Let's review. There is a writer, who actually composes the article and is likely at fault in specific word choice or in transcription errors, and there is also the expert being quoted who is responsible for the words said and ideas expressed.

Maybe you need to learn how the media works before you critique it. Just a thought.

Which communication strategy from the article you linked are you employing here? Perhaps it's this one:
Avoid all verbal attacks and judgment. You don’t have to validate someone else’s content that you may find inconsistent with your values, but you do need to at least validate their ability to share their feelings and willingness to be open.

   36. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5518596)
FDR also campaigned against Harry Bird, Senator of Virginia and an ardent segregationist and anti New Dealer, in 1934.

It's Harry Byrd, and his break with FDR came later, as did Roosevelt's efforts to purge anti-New Deal Democrats, which was after his landslide 1936 re-election. As others have noted, FDR's effort to purge his own party, like his attemptt to pack the Supreme Court, was unsuccessful.
   37. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5518597)
But that fact tells us virtually nothing about what our moral obligations are.


But what does tell us precisely nothing about our moral obligations is the degree to which New York Times or immoderate leftists take notice of something.
   38. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5518598)
Which communication strategy from the article you linked are you employing here?


Well, I am clearly a worse person than the expert*. That and the article is about having hard conversations with family about politics and - thankfully - that doesn't apply to ruminating on SBB and his rant-of-the-moment.

* This is very true, though they might** deny it.

** OK, I am virtually certain they would. Though they would validate those feelings.
   39. BDC Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5518600)
enemies list

Speaking of which, one imagines that Richard Nixon wasn't thrilled with Mark Hatfield by 1972, when Hatfield ran for re-election to the Senate. But I can't find any indication that Hatfield had a primary opponent, let alone one supported by Nixon. Hatfield was very popular in Oregon.
   40. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:45 PM (#5518603)
That and the article is about having hard conversations with family about politics


The article says embarrassingly pathetic things. Not my fault. The idea that well-adjusted people are just sitting around waiting for the "validation" of TDSers is, repeating, Onion-caliber satire.

And we should note here that non-TDSers don't seem to need coping therapies and life coaches to interact with TDSers.
   41. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5518604)
When I took up boxing as a wee lad my primary coach at the gym was a grizzled old-timer from the NYC scene of the 1940s. One of the interesting bits of wisdom he imparted on my was that anytime you go to see a card full of boxing bouts, figure 25% of them are not on the level in some way or form. There are fixes, there are dives, there are works, whatever - but the chicanery is as much a part of boxing tradition as the low blow.

McGregor's chance of landing the lucky knockout blow still tops out at 1% in my estimation, and absent that he's going to get a boxing lesson this weekend. Assuming his winning is about as likely as Michael Jordan making the MLB All Star Team out of the NBA, he doesn't actually need to win, or even have a close fight, in order to make a rematch economically viable. If, by some miracle, he manages to actually knock Mayweather down, that might be all it takes.

And let me tell you something - it's much easier to credibly fake being knocked down than it is to fake being knocked out. One cuff on the ear, stumble and drop to a knee, and you've done your job.
   42. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5518605)
Democrats Could Win 50 House Seats. Here’s How

Is this from the same Bitter Mouse who recently whined that judging Democrats by whether they captured the 24 seats needed to control the House of Representatives (less than historical average of 26) was setting an unfairly high bar?
   43. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5518606)
one imagines that Richard Nixon wasn't thrilled with Mark Hatfield by 1972, when Hatfield ran for re-election to the Senate.
Seems logical, but I'm sure there were bunches of times (particularly before the great partisan sorting) in which a president was unhappy with a senator. I was talking about a situation where it was public, though. When the president came out and said, "This guy should be ousted from office," and in particular when it was someone who generally had party support (as opposed to a guy who was generally an embarrassment to his party).
   44. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5518607)
The idea that well-adjusted people are just sitting around waiting for the "validation" of TDSers is, repeating, Onion-caliber satire.


Your ability to not read and not comprehend information is amazing. It basically has to be a deliberate choice on your part, no one could be that consistent in their inability to do something otherwise.
   45. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:49 PM (#5518609)
FDR would have undertaken all most any means of beating Huey Long, but didn't have to because he conveniently got shot.


Long had the misfortune - besides being shot - of also being almost universally disliked (within the party at least, as the cliche goes- he couldn't have gotten the lord's prayer passed in the senate if he had been the sponsor of it).

In any case, I wouldn't put Long in the same class as Tydings/George/Byrd.... Tydings was kind of an eclectic purist - sort of what Rand Paul might be if Rand Paul were actually the mythical Rand Paul. George was a relatively doctrinaire Democrat of the age - but also quite powerful. When FDR turned on him, I think it was actually a rather 'cordial' fight -- FDR gave a speech in '38 backing his primary opponent, but thanking George for his "years of service" and after the speech, I believe they shook hands and posed for photographs together. Harry Byrd was just an ass, virtually top to bottom.

Iowa Democrat Guy Gillette was another one that FDR went after - though, Gillette mostly made his name in opposition to FDR's rearmament programs and was a firm neutrality proponent.
   46. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:49 PM (#5518610)
The idea that well-adjusted people are just sitting around waiting for the "validation" of TDSers is, repeating, Onion-caliber satire.
The idea that you have any insight into what well-adjusted people think is like the idea that Donald Trump can recite Maxwell's equations from memory and then explain them.
   47. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5518613)
Is this from the same Bitter Mouse who recently whined that judging Democrats by whether they captured the 24 seats needed to control the House of Representatives (less than historical average of 26) was setting an unfairly high bar?


Well, no. It is from NBC news. My part is the stuff not in quotes or the link. You know, the part I wrote. You need to go to the same remedial course on "Media, how does it work?" that SBB does.

Note: I also didn't "whine" or any such thing. In fact, other posters pushed back much harder than I did. But then again with poor Clapper's track record on poster identification I suppose this is to be expected.
   48. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:52 PM (#5518614)
Seems logical, but I'm sure there were bunches of times (particularly before the great partisan sorting) in which a president was unhappy with a senator. I was talking about a situation where it was public, though. When the president came out and said, "This guy should be ousted from office," and in particular when it was someone who generally had party support (as opposed to a guy who was generally an embarrassment to his party).


Walter George probably best fits the bill then --

George found far more to oppose during Roosevelt's second term, however, including rigorous regulation of utility companies, the Wealth Tax Act, and Roosevelt's attempt to pack the U.S. Supreme Court with justices favorable to his New Deal policies. Roosevelt—who considered Georgia his "second home," given the time he spent at Warm Springs —undertook to actively try and unseat George. In a famous speech delivered in Barnesville on August 11, 1938, Roosevelt praised George for his service and acknowledged his intelligence and honor but urged voters to choose George's opponent in the upcoming Democratic primary. George shook the president's hand and accepted the challenge. George easily won renomination for his senate seat and, with the Democratic Party firmly in control of Georgia, easily won reelection also.
   49. zenbitz Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:52 PM (#5518615)
ugh missed thread flip:

Can you even make a nuke with 20% enriched uranium? I thought it was more like 95%. I think 20% just a starting point, maybe for a plutonium breeder reactor? Strangely I feel compelled to not google this.
   50. Morty Causa Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5518617)
The legal structure of our society is based on a moral understanding of the freedom of the individual (imperfectly conceived as to whom it applied, to be sure).

I agree with this, but it is only one part of the equation. The other parts begin with the recognition that individuals and groups of individuals are always in conflict. Resolution of the interests in conflict is: considering what's best considering all interests, including what's best for the whole, the society, the community, and finally the State. For we and our hallowed individuality exist in a context, and that is all too often not taken into consideration and is even fobbed off as inconsequential. But that context, that whole--society and, yes, the State--does not, and must not, always take a backseat to the validation of the individual and his precious rights. This is not just good and right for the whole vis-a-vis other outside communities (or foreign states), it's good and right for the individuals within the community as their varying interests, rights, and privileges do not exist and could not be maintained outside that context.
   51. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5518618)
Long had the misfortune - besides being shot - of also being almost universally disliked


I am pretty sure it wasn't really misfortune (in terms of the meaning "bad luck" at any rate). I am not an expert*, but much like Ted Cruz, I think Long worked hard at being that disliked, earning every bit of it.

* Really, no kidding. I read a book once on him and picked up some other stuff along the way. That is it.
   52. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 01:59 PM (#5518619)
Wikipedia says you want ~5% for reactors, ~95% for bombs. But critical mass is also purity dependent. So there's some leeway. Little Boy, for instance, was about 200 pounds at 85%.

I would guess if you can make ~5% U-235 you can make 95% U-235. You just need to be more careful handling it (or not, I guess, if you live far from me).
   53. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:00 PM (#5518620)
More of the continuing, multi-part analysis of demographic trends from The Hill - How The Midwest Slipped Away From Democrats:
In 2016, white working-class voters abandoned Democrats at a greater rate in those states than anywhere else in the country, according to Robert Griffin, a demographer at the Center for American Progress and George Washington University. That shift took a deep political toll on Democrats: In 2012, Obama won 167 counties in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. In 2016, Trump won 110 of those counties.

Democrats were also stung by their inability to turn out core voters who gave Obama such a boost in 2008 and 2012. African-American turnout plunged by 12 percent in Ohio and by 34 percent in Wisconsin. Turnout among those between the ages of 18 and 29 dropped by more than a quarter in Wisconsin and by a fifth in Ohio, according to an analysis compiled by the Democratic data analytics expert Tom Bonier.

In Michigan, the Brookings Institution demographer William Frey found African-American turnout fell by 2 percentage points. Even that smaller decline cost Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton: She received 519,000 votes in Wayne County, the heavily African-American home of Detroit. Four years ago, Obama won 595,000 votes there. The 74,000 missing votes were almost seven times greater than Trump’s statewide margin of victory.

Similarly, Obama won 45,000 more votes than Clinton did in Milwaukee County, Wis., almost twice Trump’s statewide margin there.

Much more at the link.
   54. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:03 PM (#5518624)

I doubt LBJ was terribly happy with Gene McCarthy.

And yeah, I agree Huey Long was unlikely to become president, about as unlikely as Donald Trump. (Or Abraham Lincoln for that matter)
   55. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5518626)
The idea that you have any insight into what well-adjusted people think is like the idea that Donald Trump can recite Maxwell's equations from memory and then explain them.


Well, you have to at least validate my ability to share my feelings and my willingness to be open.
   56. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:08 PM (#5518627)
I am pretty sure it wasn't really misfortune (in terms of the meaning "bad luck" at any rate). I am not an expert*, but much mike Ted Cruz, I think Long worked hard at being that disliked, earning every bit of it.


Good point... definitely "feature, not a bug".
   57. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:11 PM (#5518630)
Really you probably shouldn't even assume cis-genders are heterosexual without evidence. It's not like you get "points" for successfully predicting dating patterns of random folks.
Maybe you don't.
   58. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:13 PM (#5518631)
Pence says Confederate statues are state, local decision

and he calls himself “someone who believes in more monuments, not less monuments.”


"Less monuments"? Really? Personally I would have gone with "more monuments, not fewer monuments", but if he wants "less monuments" I suppose ... ummm ... that is kind of OK too.

Word Fact: Fewer vs. Less
According to usage rules, fewer is only to be used when discussing countable things, while less is used for singular mass nouns. For example, you can have fewer ingredients, dollars, people, or puppies, but less salt, money, honesty, or love. If you can count it, go for fewer. If you can’t, opt for less.
   59. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5518632)
Speaking of coming wars:


Breitbart News issued a scathing response to Donald Trump’s speech on Afghanistan, accusing the president of becoming little more than a puppet of generals in the White House after he pledged to boost troop levels to try to counter the growing strength of al-Qaida and Taliban fighters.

One headline on the far-right news site, which has been re-energized as the de facto mouthpiece of former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, was aimed at a familiar target, the president’s national security adviser: “His McMaster’s Voice: is Trump’s Afghanistan policy that different from Obama’s?”

Bannon left the Trump administration last week, a year after he left Breitbart to supervise Trump’s surge to the White House on a tide of populist, nationalist and isolationist opinion.

On Monday night, Breitbart also made sarcastic reference to “President McMaster” and “General Jared [Kushner]” and warned that Trump’s support base would be the “biggest loser” from the switch in strategy, which it called a clear “flip-flop” that contradicted a campaign pledge to limit US intervention abroad.

Trump’s speech represented the triumph of the Washington “swamp”, meaning the Republican political establishment, editor Raheem Kassam wrote. The speech, according to a report by Adam Shaw, “confirmed the fears of many on the right that without a strong nationalist voice in the West Wing, the president would revert to the same old fare that Americans had voted to reject in November”.

Erik Prince, the founder of the military contractor formerly known as Blackwater and a proponent of a plan to privatize US involvement in central Asia, told the site the troop increase proved that the “presidency by its nature lives in a bubble”.

“When you fill it with former general officers, you’re going to get that stream of advice,” he said. “And so tonight, I would predict, sadly, that we will hear more of the same of the last 16 years and, sadly, exactly what the president campaigned against last year in the presidential election.”


The Graun

No puppet! No puppet! You puppet!

   60. PreservedFish Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:15 PM (#5518634)
and he calls himself “someone who believes in more monuments"


Funny position to take.
   61. Greg K Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:15 PM (#5518635)
Maybe he meant "less monumentalism".
   62. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5518637)
More of the continuing, multi-part analysis of demographic trends from The Hill - How The Midwest Slipped Away From Democrats:


Someone can correct me, but I believe a "trend" requires at least two events... not a single event contrary to a past series of events.

If the argument is "well, Obama is unique... Trump is the new normal"... then I wish the GOP both good luck and may god have mercy on your souls.
   63. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:17 PM (#5518638)
#3268, Andy:
Of course to you, an expert is only certifiably an expert when he gets published in National Review, Commentary, or The Daily Caller, or gets mentioned favorably by Bibi. Everyone else is just soft on terrorism.
Answered in #3271.

***

#3269, zenbitz:
Can you even make a nuke with 20% enriched uranium? I thought it was more like 95%. I think 20% just a starting point, maybe for a plutonium breeder reactor? Strangely I feel compelled to not google this.
Answered in #3272.

***

#3273, Lassus:
NEW THREAD, JASON.
Lassus, you've (finally!) earned your keep. Thank you.
   64. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:19 PM (#5518640)
Maybe we should put up a monument to Yamamoto at Pearl Harbor. Or Karl Doenitz in Norfolk. After all, their actions helped to make us a world power.
   65. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:20 PM (#5518641)
I Steve Mnuchin's wife has staked out a position on the new populism of Trump...

I'm telling ya' -- we're rapidly approaching the point where the steadfast Trump defenders here are going to get their shot at being the famous "both sides of the story" quotes for media of all sorts because there won't be anyone else.
   66. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:22 PM (#5518642)
Someone can correct me, but I believe a "trend" requires at least two events... not a single event contrary to a past series of events.

If the argument is "well, Obama is unique... Trump is the new normal"... then I wish the GOP both good luck and may god have mercy on your souls.


Hey, now it is the beginning of the GOP reign in the Midwest. Some might suggest a reign which will last a thousand years! ;)
   67. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:24 PM (#5518645)
More of the continuing, multi-part analysis of demographic trends from The Hill - How The Midwest Slipped Away From Democrats

Someone can correct me, but I believe a "trend" requires at least two events... not a single event contrary to a past series of events.

Well, we wouldn't need to correct you if you'd just read the linked article:
The Democratic collapse in the Upper Midwest was no Republican tsunami, a one-time fluke disaster from which the party would easily rebuild. Instead, it was a red tide, sweeping a specific kind of white working-class voter away from Democrats and onto GOP shores beginning as early as 2010.

But, yeah, ignore all that.
   68. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:24 PM (#5518646)
The legal structure of our society is based on a moral understanding of the freedom of the individual


Which is why it's immoral for you to demand YR not be allowed to beat you into submission.
   69. Tim D Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5518647)
Well you skipped over the "legal structure" part.
   70. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:29 PM (#5518648)
But, yeah, ignore all that.


I look forward to your feelings about such trends after two cycles with GOP President Trump as your party leader and figurehead.
   71. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5518650)
But, yeah, ignore all that.


I had an excellent teacher... your Trumpkinism is a veritable doctorate in the fine art of ignoring and/or trumpeting the finest of grains as appropriate in service to the party.
   72. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:34 PM (#5518654)
Ultimately, if you want to run nuclear reactors (and unless you're pants-on-head retarded, you do), you need enriched uranium. Once you can enrich it, getting to bomb status ain't that hard.
   73. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:37 PM (#5518656)
#3268, Andy:

by "most independent experts," don't you really mean those individuals working for or bankrolled by the Ploughshares Fund (i.e., *not* independent by any stretch of the imagination)?

Of course to you, an expert is only certifiably an expert when he gets published in National Review, Commentary, or The Daily Caller, or gets mentioned favorably by Bibi. Everyone else is just soft on terrorism.

Answered in #3271. LOL. You were the one speaking of "independent experts" without naming anyone.


I was simply quoting the exact words from the article that you linked to. And I notice that now you don't try to pretend that it mentioned anything about Ploughshares Fund. It's hard to take you seriously when every single comment you make about any foreign policy issue comes down to Everything Obama Did Was Appeasement, and that anyone who disagrees with your take on the Iran agreement is just certifying his state of suckerdom.
   74. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:40 PM (#5518657)
I Steve Mnuchin's wife has staked out a position on the new populism of Trump...


#LetThemWearHermes
   75. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:43 PM (#5518660)
Tydings was the biggest target of FDR - and the most disliked by the FDR posse - but FDR didn't succeed in unseating any of them, I believe.

The irony about Tydings is that he eventually was "purged", but in 1950, not 1938, and not by FDR, but by Joe McCarthy, whose staff printed reams of a fake composite photo that depicted Tydings shaking hands with Earl Browder, the leader of the U.S. Communist Party and a bete noire second only to Stalin. This was the same year that Richard Nixon won his Senate seat by distributing his infamous "pink sheet" against Helen Gahagan Douglas. Some things never change.
   76. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5518661)
#LetThemWearHermes


Ms. Linton?

Pepsi on line one... something about a commercial to bring America together over statues?
   77. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:47 PM (#5518663)
Well you skipped over the "legal structure" part.


What's the law but a leash?
   78. Lassus Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:51 PM (#5518665)
#LetThemWearHermes

My GF, a bit of a (fashion) Francophile, delights in tales of Hermes stores telling various celebrities (Oprah, Madonna) to fuck off, get out, etc. when they want to shop outside of regular business hours or not let other people in while they are shopping. (Of course, less of a "strength to the common man" thing than a "I don't care who the fuck you are, we're Hermes, get out, go buy another scarf somewhere else, we don't care" thing.)
   79. dlf Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:55 PM (#5518667)
First post-primary poll finds Roy Moore with big lead over Luther Strange in Alabama


Odd, to me, is that Big Luther Strange was endorsed by DJT before the initial primary. Moore's brand of bible-thumping conservativism definitely doesn't line up well with Trump, but (a) Moore's complete disregard for public and governmental norms does match the President in style if not in the particular substance and (b) the other GOP candidate in the initial primary, Mo Brooks, currently a Congressman from northern Alabama, is well aligned with the President. Of the three, Strange is closest that the GOPe had to a traditional candidate.

Personal and 100% irrelevant aside: Strange defeated a former law school classmate** of mine to become the Attorney General for the State. Troy King was appointed to fill William Pryor unfinished term when the latter was named to the 11th Circuit. King won re-election once then Strange defeated him when he tried a second time. Troy was, shall we say, not the honor graduate of our class, reportedly being in the bottom 10%. He also made statements during discussions in Con Law that (1) a woman's role is to be subservient and thus any law which provided for equal rights was a violation of god's law and (2) only Christianity - and specifically his brand of it - was correct and a proper role of government is to enforce god's law. Let's just say he wasn't well thought of by most of our class.

**Well, sorta. I started as a member of the class of '94 and he was in my 1L section. Because I was in a hurry to have income so I could afford to get married, I ended up graduating with the class of '93.
   80. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 22, 2017 at 02:57 PM (#5518669)
Big Luther Strange was endorsed by DJT before the initial primary. Moore's brand of bible-thumping conservativism definitely doesn't line up well with Trump, but (a) Moore's complete disregard for public and governmental norms does match the President and (b) the other GOP candidate, Mo Brooks, currently a Congressman from northern Alabama, is well aligned with the President. Of the three, Strange is closest that the GOPe had to a traditional candidate.


Alabama is so ###### up.
   81. PreservedFish Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5518671)
Troy was, shall we say, not the honor graduate of our class, reportedly being in the bottom 10%. He also made statements during discussions in Con Law that (1) a woman's role is to be subservient and thus any law which provided for equal rights was a violation of god's law and (2) only Christianity - and specifically his brand of it - was correct and a proper role of government is to enforce god's law. Let's just say he wasn't well thought of by most of our class.


Glad he lost.
   82. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:04 PM (#5518676)
Trump's approval in Alabama is only about his 3rd or 4th best state...

I'd say that they're in the camp of "He's done some good things, but he didn't go far enough"...
   83. simpleton & childlike gef the talking mongoose Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5518677)


Big Luther Strange was endorsed by DJT before the initial primary. Moore's brand of bible-thumping conservativism definitely doesn't line up well with Trump, but (a) Moore's complete disregard for public and governmental norms does match the President and (b) the other GOP candidate, Mo Brooks, currently a Congressman from northern Alabama, is well aligned with the President. Of the three, Strange is closest that the GOPe had to a traditional candidate.

Alabama is so ###### up.


You're telling me. I'm supposed to take seriously, & for that matter to regard with anything but deep revulsion, a system that supplies choices like these slime molds?

(Apologies to slime molds.)

   84. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:07 PM (#5518679)
Ok ... we need a checklist for tonight's Trump rally in Arizona.

Check it off if Trump:

Criticizes "Flake" Jeff Flake [ ]
Praises "Chemtrail" Kelly Ward [ ]
Praises Joe Arpaio
PARDONS Joe Arpaio
Blames John McCain for failure of health care bill [ ]
Suggest brain cancer/surgery caused McCain's vote [ ]
Praises his great plan, the best plan, for Afghanistan [ ]
Violence on "many sides, many sides" [ ]
Mentions "beautiful statues" [ ]
   85. simpleton & childlike gef the talking mongoose Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:09 PM (#5518680)
Troy was, shall we say, not the honor graduate of our class, reportedly being in the bottom 10%. He also made statements during discussions in Con Law that (1) a woman's role is to be subservient and thus any law which provided for equal rights was a violation of god's law and (2) only Christianity - and specifically his brand of it - was correct and a proper role of government is to enforce god's law. Let's just say he wasn't well thought of by most of our class.


Rumor here in Montgomery toward the end of his time in office was that he was ... uh ... hmmmm ... not the most upstandingly manly fellow around.
   86. Srul Itza Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:19 PM (#5518684)
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
   87. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:19 PM (#5518685)
Re: the solar eclipse, WHOA if true.
   88. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:21 PM (#5518687)
The Trump endorsement of Strange is probably the only thing that kept the finale (well, semifinale... not that Doug Jones really has much a shot) from being Brooks vs Moore.

That's... well... that's some state they've got there.

   89. DavidFoss Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:24 PM (#5518689)
Re: the solar eclipse, WHOA if true.

Did the Steve King tweet get mentioned here yet?

   90. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:25 PM (#5518691)
That's... well... that's some state they've got there.


...
   91. dlf Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:34 PM (#5518695)
Rumor here in Montgomery toward the end of his time in office was that he was ... uh ... hmmmm ... not the most upstandingly manly fellow around.


You mean the stuff about the boy toy he paid to travel around the state with him while the kid was still in college? The same one who received a significantly higher salary than Troy paid the AG's staff attorneys a few years after law school?

Not that there's anything wrong with that.


Paying for it with state funds tends be be frowned upon.

The Trump endorsement of Strange is probably the only thing that kept the finale (well, semifinale... not that Doug Jones really has much a shot) from being Brooks vs Moore.


To circle back to the McGregor - Merriweather discussion, Jones may have a puncher's chance against Moore. Certainly all of the monied folks around Birmingham will give to the former rather than the latter. I suspect Moore wins, but there are a lot of people in Alabama who would rather vote for gef's one-eyed alley cat than the guy who has been removed from office not once, but twice due to not believing in the whole render unto Caesar thing.


   92. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:38 PM (#5518698)
Can you even make a nuke with 20% enriched uranium? I thought it was more like 95%. I think 20% just a starting point, maybe for a plutonium breeder reactor? Strangely I feel compelled to not google this.

That's another flaw of the deal. Most of the work of producing highly enrich uranium is completed by the time uranium is enriched to 4-5 percent. Accordingly, once you're at that level, getting to 90 percent, let alone 20, isn't all that difficult.
So how hard is it? Just saying "easier" doesn't tell us anything.

Most of the work of becoming a starting MLB pitcher is completed by the time a player is called up to the big leagues. Accordingly, once you're at that level, staying in the rotation, let alone on the MLB staff, isn't all that difficult.
   93. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:47 PM (#5518701)
To circle back to the McGregor - Merriweather discussion, Jones may have a puncher's chance against Moore. Certainly all of the monied folks around Birmingham will give to the former rather than the latter. I suspect Moore wins, but there are a lot of people in Alabama who would rather vote for gef's one-eyed alley cat than the guy who has been removed from office not once, but twice due to not believing in the whole render unto Caesar thing.


The only thing I know about Jones is that he was a US attorney, prosecuted a couple of high profile cases, and is at least a lifelong Alabaman...

E-mailed a buddy from Birmingham just before the first primary, when it looked like it might actually be Brooks or Moore vs Jones, and his response was pretty much an eyeroll...

FTR - I've quite enjoyed my trips to Alabama. Attending a Tide football Saturday is something every college gridiron fan needs to make a point of doing...
   94. BrianBrianson Posted: August 22, 2017 at 03:54 PM (#5518706)
So how hard is it? Just saying "easier" doesn't tell us anything.


Iran says they could do it in a week - I'd guess that's a little optimistic, but the success rate if you really give it a go is probably ~100%. F'in' North Korea made nukes despite being largely isolated in science/tech/etc. Almost any country should be able to get it together reasonably quickly if they're keen. If they're already running Uranium purification something or other (a little over a dozen countries do), then it should be fairly quick.
   95. Lassus Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:00 PM (#5518708)
   96. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:01 PM (#5518709)
It's also people's duty not to look at an event and say, "OMG TEH NAZIS!!!" and throw out all their faculties of reason, in favor of hysteria, just because there are a few scum Nazis gathered round.

Noting the antifa violence in Charlottesville is a moderate position, arrived at by analysis and reason. Moderation in politics is a virtue (*), irrespective of what urges TDS might be generating in its victims.


Basically if you saw Trump as a racist then you will see whatever he says or doesn't say as confirming your premise. We saw that on Monday when he was delivering a statement literally denouncing Nazis and he instead was taken as insincere. (Jaw movements, terseness of tone, usage of a bleeping telepromper.)

As to the left and antifa:

Whenever a crowd of people on the left shows up in the future to denounce Nazis and there are some antifa mixed in with the left then I presume that the Very Fine People on the left will disperse and leave the area immediately, not wanting to associate with antifa.

(Same goes for "What do we want, dead cops, when do we want them, now.")
   97. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:01 PM (#5518710)
Village Voice ending print edition.


A tree has fallen in the forest, film at eleven.
   98. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:02 PM (#5518711)
Iran says they could do it in a week - I'd guess that's a little optimistic, but the success rate if you really give it a go is probably ~100%. F'in' North Korea made nukes despite being largely isolated in science/tech/etc. Almost any country should be able to get it together reasonably quickly if they're keen. If they're already running Uranium purification something or other (a little over a dozen countries do), then it should be fairly quick.
So to go back to my original points:

1. No one should be surprised that Iran might be able to make weapons-grade uranium relatively quickly because
2. Any deal that disposes of the tools to make it cannot dispose of the knowledge, meaning
3. Any agreement is only as good as each side's word that they'll stand by the terms.
   99. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:04 PM (#5518712)
Whenever a crowd of people on the left shows up in the future to denounce Nazis and there are some antifa mixed in with the left then I presume that the Very Fine People on the left will disperse and leave the area immediately, not wanting to associate with antifa.
Why should we abandon people who want to oppose fascism? Are you saying fascists are good?
   100. BDC Posted: August 22, 2017 at 04:05 PM (#5518714)
I just read Louise Linton's Instagram rant. Pretty eloquent. But now I am worried – you can post a lot more than 140 characters on Instagram. What if Trump finds out about it?
Page 1 of 18 pages  1 2 3 >  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
Backlasher
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 13 November 2017: Politics, race now touching every sport
(1991 - 11:48pm, Nov 18)
Last: tshipman

Hall of MeritMock 2018 Modern Baseball Committee Hall of Fame Ballot
(76 - 11:33pm, Nov 18)
Last: robd4701

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(1410 - 11:06pm, Nov 18)
Last: don't ask 57i66135; he wants to hang them all

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(197 - 10:58pm, Nov 18)
Last: SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY

NewsblogThe Eric Hosmer Dilemma | FanGraphs Baseball
(37 - 9:34pm, Nov 18)
Last: 6 - 4 - 3

NewsblogOT - November* 2017 College Football thread
(181 - 7:36pm, Nov 18)
Last: Jay Z

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(240 - 5:49pm, Nov 18)
Last: The Honorable Ardo

NewsblogStanton, Altuve capture first MVP Awards | MVP
(51 - 4:35pm, Nov 18)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogJim Palmer on Mark Belanger and Omar Vizquel: The Hardball Times
(98 - 4:33pm, Nov 18)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogFangraphs: Let's Make One Thing Absolutely Clear About Aaron Judge
(22 - 3:42pm, Nov 18)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogThe story of Alex Anthopoulos: From tragedy to prodigy to Braves GM
(1 - 8:30am, Nov 18)
Last: bfan

NewsblogBraves will lose prospects, and possibly a lot more, for violating international market rules
(48 - 1:30am, Nov 18)
Last: Armored Trooper VOTTO

NewsblogJudge, Bellinger named BBWAA Rookies of Year | MLB.com
(86 - 9:25pm, Nov 17)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogDerek Jeter addresses Giancarlo Stanton rumors | MLB.com
(24 - 7:38pm, Nov 17)
Last: Khrushin it bro

NewsblogYu Darvish is out to silence his doubters after World Series flop | SI.com
(9 - 7:15pm, Nov 17)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

Page rendered in 1.2599 seconds
47 querie(s) executed