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, August 07, 2017

OTP 7 August 2017: Women’s Rights, Baseball And Politics: 12 Talks Not To Miss At Martha’s Vineyard Book Festival

“Tweets, Leaks, and Turmoil: Covering the Trump White House”

This sold-out opening panel (the only event that requires paid tickets) features the subject that has embroiled the nation and every corner of social media: the White House.

Ashley Parker (Washington Post) and Glenn Thrush (New York Times), highly regarded White House correspondents from dueling papers, will discuss covering the administration in a period of uncontrolled leaks, Twitter feuds and shake-ups. Specific details will likely be determined by whatever President Trump tweets that day.

 

(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 07, 2017 at 07:39 AM | 2147 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: books, 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 20 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 18 19 20 21 22 > 
   1901. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:58 AM (#5512228)
FWIW the klan and nazis are tiny groups, so I am sympathetic to the notion that we should not be paying them this much attention except insofar as is necessary to prevent violence. The bigger issue is that there are several white nationalists in the WH and a political party that has decided to accept white nationalists as part of their base (note that most republicans are not white nationalists and most white nationalists are not klansmen or nazis; indeed, the vast majority of republican officials, unlike trump, were able to clear the very low bar of appropriately condemning the scum in VA).
   1902. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:00 AM (#5512231)
Post 1876, reposted in its entirety. The first paragraph is Ray's commentary:

Legally permissible, though, for McAuliffe, flanked by the police chief and the mayor, to say this? He's Making No Law but he's threatening people who are exercising their 1A rights to protest no matter how despicable their cause:

“"I have a message to all the white supremacists and the Nazis who came into Charlottesville today. Our message is plain and simple. Go home. You are not wanted in this great commonwealth. Shame on you. You pretend that you are patriots, but you are anything but a patriot. You want to talk about patriots, talk about Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, who brought our country together. Think about the patriots today, the young men and women, who with wearing the cloth of our country.

“Somewhere around the globe they are putting their life in danger. They are patriots. You are not. You came here today to hurt people. And you did hurt people. My message is clear, we are stronger than you. You have made our commonwealth stronger. You will not succeed. There is no place for you here. There is no place for you in America.”


Ray, you're a liar. (The alternative is that you have no ####### clue what the word "threatening" means.) There is nothing in that entire passage from McCullough that can be remotely construed as a "threat."
   1903. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:01 AM (#5512232)
1899. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:56 AM (#5512226)
Mayor Menino told Chick-Fil-A they weren't welcome in Boston, I believe, which may have been inappropriate but obviously had zero legal force. I would not read that much into McCauliffe's comments by themselves.
That's not quite right, though. Menino didn't merely say that they weren't welcome; he said that he would try to stop them from opening restaurants there, by, e.g., blocking necessary permits and licenses. Simply expressing his personal view has no legal force, but denying licenses does. (He later walked back those threats after, I assume, his lawyers pointed out the problem.)


Ah, that would obviously be wrong by Menino and illegal. Granted sometimes politicians are willing to make their states/localities eat the legal cost of defending clearly unconstitutional bars on speech (see the Westboro Baptist Church's long history of litigation).
   1904. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:03 AM (#5512234)
Ray, you're a liar. (The alternative is that you have no ####### clue what the word "threatening" means.) There is nothing in that entire passage from McCullough that can be remotely construed as a "threat."


The liar here is you. I wasn't relying merely on the passage. I stated very clearly in the post you quoted that an element of this was that he was standing there flanked by the police chief and the mayor.

"Go home. You are not wanted in this great commonwealth." Said while standing next to a police chief with a gun.

Had he said that to Black Lives Matter while standing there next to the armed police chief, you wouldn't characterize it as threatening?

I call bullshit.
   1905. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:05 AM (#5512235)
The liar here is you. I wasn't relying merely on the passage. I stated very clearly in the post you quoted that an element of this was that he was standing there flanked by the police chief and the mayor.

"Go home. You are not wanted in this great commonwealth." Said while standing next to a police chief with a gun.

Had he said that to Black Lives Matter while standing there next to the armed police chief, you wouldn't characterize it as threatening?

I call bullshit.


OK, liar. What is the threat that is being expressed, exactly?

EDIT: Also, add "liar" to the list of words you don't know the meaning of.

ALSO EDIT: Your newly-adopted civil libertarian drag is cute, but doesn't really fit you.
   1906. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:06 AM (#5512236)
Menino didn't merely say that they weren't welcome; he said that he would try to stop them... He later walked back those threats after, I assume, his lawyers pointed out the problem.


Menino was obviously just joking, with his tongue firmly in cheek. Only the most unhinged MDSers refused to see this.
   1907. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:08 AM (#5512237)
The threat is his words combined with the police chief standing there. It's the equivalent of "Shame if anything were to happen to you."

If he was speaking to BLM and not to white supremacists would you think his words while standing next to the police chief were threatening? That's not a rhetorical question. I await your answer.
   1908. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:09 AM (#5512238)
EDIT: Also, add "liar" to the list of words you don't know the meaning of.


Nope. You said "There is nothing in that entire passage..." But I wasn't relying merely on his words, as I stated in the post you quoted.
   1909. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:10 AM (#5512239)
The threat is his words combined with the police chief standing there. It's the equivalent of "Shame if anything were to happen to you."

Uh huh. Which threatens what specific consequence, exactly?
   1910. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:10 AM (#5512240)
I can't keep up with all of your edits following edits but please do get around in between edits to answer the question I posed in 1907.
   1911. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:12 AM (#5512241)
Uh huh. Which threatens what specific consequence, exactly?


Well, what do people armed with guns and the power of the state typically do when people don't do what they say?
   1912. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:15 AM (#5512243)
1906. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:06 AM (#5512236)
Menino didn't merely say that they weren't welcome; he said that he would try to stop them... He later walked back those threats after, I assume, his lawyers pointed out the problem.


Menino was obviously just joking, with his tongue firmly in cheek. Only the most unhinged MDSers refused to see this.


I laughed. Menino was also famous for misspeaking, of course (in the sense of jumbling words).
   1913. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:16 AM (#5512244)
Well, what do people armed with guns and the power of the state typically do when people don't do what they say?

You tell me, since you're so certain what McAuliffe said constituted a "threat."

To answer your question more directly: Depends on what color they are.
   1914. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:19 AM (#5512245)
Not a 1A expert: my assumption is that McAuliffe's comment by itself (with or without cops) does not come close to violating the 1A, BUT if the state of Virginia played some role in barring these groups from marching or protesting (not sure exactly how, since these are usually permitting questions at the local level) his comment would be cited in court filings and could be considered by a court.
   1915. greenback wears sandals on his head Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:20 AM (#5512246)
Well, I guess a "politicians shouldn't shame Nazis" discussion is a step up from a Soros thread.
   1916. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:21 AM (#5512247)
You tell me, since you're so certain what McAuliffe said constituted a "threat."


It's interesting to me that despite being a lawyer you're not able to see a fact pattern dispassionately; you can't get past the fact that the content at issue is white supremacy. To me that's irrelevant to the analysis of the 1A question. (What do you do when clients call you up with a legal issue? "He did what? OH MY GOD!!!" It would be like a doctor looking at a patient's medical chart and then screaming out loud at a problem.)

I'm still waiting for your answer to 1907. One who is interested in participating in a good faith discussion would answer it.
   1917. PreservedFish Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:42 AM (#5512250)
The threat is his words combined with the police chief standing there. It's the equivalent of "Shame if anything were to happen to you."


That's pretty weak. I see your point, but it's certainly not the equivalent of a threat.

Ray, do you actually think that it WAS a threat? Ie, do you think he told his police chief "you've got my permission to rough up these ########?" Or are you just trying to make a point of some sort?
   1918. PreservedFish Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:15 AM (#5512253)
Again, if people turn this around and envision him saying this to Black Lives Matter, I think they'd very quickly be able to see the validity of my question.


BLM is a ridiculously inflammatory example to use here, for entirely obvious reasons, and it as such doesn't really speak to the validity of your question. If you envision McCauliffe and the oh-so-intimidating police chief saying the same things to the attendees of a quilting convention or guests at a chili cook-off, are you still worried about the constitutionality of the threat?
   1919. Lassus Posted: August 13, 2017 at 05:42 AM (#5512254)
Chance of nuclear war in the next 20 years:
Zero.


This assessment of zero probability from this particular source - given his history - has to be a very, very dark joke, right?
   1920. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 07:16 AM (#5512255)
Police should have just cordoned off the loser racist scum, let them have their silly demonstration, then ordered them to disperse and go home -- forcibly if necessary. The two groups should never have been permitted to come into close physical proximity, much less for as closely and for as long as they eventually did.

Seems on its face like a very poor performance by the police.
   1921. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 13, 2017 at 07:56 AM (#5512256)
My guess is that since McCauliffe isn't threatening to put people in jail what he's doing isn't prohibited, but he _is_ sort of threatening people under some reasonable definition of "threatening" by telling them to go home because they're not welcome and standing up there with an armed police chief.


I only he had said "I hope you go home and never come back You are not wanted in this great commonwealth."

Funny how Ray can see veiled implied threats by Democrats but not by Trump.

   1922. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:06 AM (#5512258)
Good morning hippies, since I know you need to see it, here are your hot takes of the day from Stormfront.. Big reveal - the Jews were involved.

Bonus TDS take:

Trump comments were good. He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us.

He said that we need to study why people are so angry, and implied that there was hate… on both sides!

So he implied the antifa are haters.

There was virtually no counter-signaling of us at all.

He said he loves us all.

Also refused to answer a question about White Nationalists supporting him.

No condemnation at all.

When asked to condemn, he just walked out of the room.

Really, really good.


Feels good man.
   1923. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:11 AM (#5512259)
Nobody cares what those losers say and it's unclear why you would rebroadcast it and help what they say get a broader audience.

As to the substance, you didn't need to go to Stormfront to find anti-Semitic filth being loudly uttered; the loser racist scum in Charlottesville were saying the same things. At least from the Times' reporting, the gathering was far more anti-Semitic than anti-Af Am.
   1924. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:14 AM (#5512260)
Hot take from fake lawyer!

Spicy!
   1925. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:16 AM (#5512261)
Hot take from fake lawyer!


Dude, you spend your time frequenting racist websites and message boards. And then repeating what the racists say on other message boards.

Why?

Are you going to regale us with what the pedos are saying on pedo websites next?

   1926. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:18 AM (#5512262)
You're not the only idiot worthy of mockery, you narcissist.

Are you going to regale us with what the pedos are saying on pedo websites next?


No hot takes this morning, I think they're all at church.
   1927. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:30 AM (#5512263)
Regarding those ######### protestors, they also cheer on the atrocities of Assad and his principal sponsor, the murderous Islamic Republic of Iran:
"Assad did nothing wrong" - Baked Alaska at UVA tonight. "Barrel bombs, hell yeah!"
   1928. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:39 AM (#5512265)
No hot takes this morning, I think they're all at church.
The bigotry of these white nationalist protestors is obvious to all. Of course, one day folks might begin to ask why Palestine flags and "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" shouts seem to be everywhere at Antifa events.

Or at least we can hope.
   1929. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:42 AM (#5512266)
I was out all evening, but these are my takes on Charlottesville and its aftermath:

Those antifa protesters, to the extent they were the instigators of violence, are the dumbest and most politically stupid group of leftists currently around. I can totally sympathize with the wish to put the Richard Spencers of the world in gas chambers, which would be only a fitting way to end their worthless existence, but no matter how cliched it may sound, the strategies of Martin Luther King work a hell of a lot better in the long run than the nihilism of the Weathermen and their "Days of Rage".

And for those who don't understand that last reference, learn a little history.

Trump is Trump, and why anyone would expect him to specifically condemn his most loyal and enthusiastic base is beyond me. He ran as the de facto candidate of the white man's party, and he's about as likely to condemn white nationalists as Mr. (((JE)))) is to call him a despicable person. There are certain lines that some people are constitutionally unable to cross.

That said, it's nice to see that at least some (many) Republican leaders draw their lines at a different point in the sand than the despicable creature who currently occupies the White House. Hopefully this will be the start of a greater awakening on their part.

What happened yesterday was in many ways the logical outcome of a literal and dogmatic adherence to the first and second amendments. Letting Nazis and Nazi sympathizers march is one thing, but letting armed Nazis, armed Nazi sympathizers, and armed antifa counterdemonstrators gather in public within shouting distance of each other is a sign of insanity that makes me wonder if we've really learned anything at all. And spare me the hollow cliches about how this is "the price we have to pay for liberty". This has about as much to do with liberty as Trump University has to do with a university.

   1930. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:45 AM (#5512267)
Letting Nazis and Nazi sympathizers march is one thing, but letting armed Nazis, armed Nazi sympathizers, and armed antifa counterdemonstrators gather in public within shouting distance of each other is a sign of insanity that makes me wonder if we've really learned anything at all.


The police should have forcibly enforced even the slightest deviation from applicable gun and weapons laws.
   1931. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:48 AM (#5512268)
   1932. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:04 AM (#5512271)
... as well as any disorderly conduct, disturbing the peace, or menacing laws that may pertain.
   1933. simpleton & childlike gef the talking mongoose Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:38 AM (#5512276)
no matter how cliched it may sound, the strategies of Martin Luther King work a hell of a lot better in the long run than the nihilism of the Weathermen and their "Days of Rage".


Depends on the target & the setting, no? King's approach depended on large part on the other side's innate (if ofttimes deeply buried) decency or at least capacity for shame. When he ran into a marked lack of both in Cicero, he wound up accomplishing nothing.

I suspect that the white nationalists of Charlottesville have a whole lot in common with the racists of Cicero.

As for "the long run," last I looked white nationalists are in place in the White House, & too many white cops are killing too many black people. Would that be the case if Malcolm X's or Robert F. Williams' or the Panthers' (much more apt comparisons in this instance than Weather, IMHO) philosophies had gained more ground than King's? Probably not, but I'm not sure that demonizing them is a useful response.

In the meantime people tend to live in the present, not "in the long run." Sometimes that results in fighting fire with fire.
   1934. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:42 AM (#5512277)
In general the antifa are obnoxious and commit acts of petty violence and vandalism (on a much smaller level than what the weathermen attempted). But it doesn't seem like they did anything in particular yesterday, whereas a nazi rammed a car into a crowd of protestors, so not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.
   1935. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:54 AM (#5512280)
so not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.


Well, that one's easy: Because they commit political violence and speak in favor of it by way of attempting to justify it.
   1936. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: August 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM (#5512282)
But it doesn't seem like they did anything in particular yesterday, whereas a nazi rammed a car into a crowd of protestors, so not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.

Because (((JE))) has never met an issue, for which he didn't think the appropriate response was whatabout-leftism.
   1937. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 10:55 AM (#5512288)
Funny how Ray can see veiled implied threats by Democrats but not by Trump.

MmmmHmmm.

He does have a tendency to lose his usual two-dimensional literal-mindedness when it suits him, doesn't he.
   1938. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:04 AM (#5512289)
BLM is a ridiculously inflammatory example to use here, for entirely obvious reasons, and it as such doesn't really speak to the validity of your question. If you envision McCauliffe and the oh-so-intimidating police chief saying the same things to the attendees of a quilting convention or guests at a chili cook-off, are you still worried about the constitutionality of the threat?

It is bog-standard bad-faith RDP argumentation, for all the reasons stated.

In any case, I repeat: "Depends on what color the folks not doing what the powers that be + people with guns want them to spare." I'll leave it at that, and see if our resident android can divine from that whether his "OMG TeH THREAtz" hyperventilating would hold in his hypothetical.

Ray thinks he's drawing an "all else being equal" hypo that serves as an effective gotcha (if anything provokes our boy's arousal, it's spotting perceived liberal hypocrisy), but of course all else, particularly in the example he chose, is not equal. Obviously.
   1939. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:16 AM (#5512290)
"Antifa" is the group of counter protesters who Clapper is mentioning in passing as well (when he says "groups who want to incite violence at right wing rallies to advance their own cause," ect.) Antifa is a loose coalition of antifascist groups who are more hands on than others. They are currently the "Black Panthers denying white people access to the voting booths" of right wing bedwetting.


It bothers me that "Antifa" and the various groups of shitheels that comprise our alt-right funfest are viewed equivalently by some. It seems pretty clear that the alt-right has coherent goals-getting rid of brown people to be first among them, then maybe messing with the LGBTQetc folks and then the Jews and then whatever other people don't comply with their Christian America. In researching the Antifas (and it's telling that as somebody who's reasonably active in my community and holds leftish views that I've never encountered a formal Antifa in Chicago or elsewhere) it seems their goals are not as well defined. This project was of course complicated by the host of dead links on the Rose City Antifa page. Antifa claims that its a more proactive form of resistance to "fascist", but when you research what they've actually done, you find that their actions are reactive for the most part.

I'm sure JE would be incensed if I equated Terror Neged Terror with Hezbollah and said, "See, both sides do it, and they have an equal effect."
   1940. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:18 AM (#5512292)
   1941. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:28 AM (#5512295)
White supremacists beating a black kid with poles at yesterday's protest.

Trump's America.


Outrageous that such antifa thugs are allowed to just attack defenseless poles of white supremacists like that.
   1942. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:35 AM (#5512296)
Also, crucially: McAuliffe's comments were clearly couched in terms that focus on the actual injuries inflicted by these trailertrash pieces of subhuman filth on actual human beings, not the "content of their speech," such as it was. That's not in the same zip code as infringement on anybody's First Amendment rights.
   1943. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:41 AM (#5512298)
When he ran into a marked lack of both in Cicero, he wound up accomplishing nothing.
\

Well, maybe yes and maybe no. But here I am this fine Sunday morning in Cicero, Illinois, where the population includes a whopping 9.4% non-hispanic White. So something happened.
   1944. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:49 AM (#5512299)
That's not in the same zip code


Uh oh, now you've done it!
   1945. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM (#5512301)
I haven't seen TGF post in a couple of days, and I'm getting a bit worried for him. Does anyone know if he returned home safely from Charlottesville?
   1946. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:02 PM (#5512302)

What happened yesterday was in many ways the logical outcome of a literal and dogmatic adherence to the first and second amendments. Letting Nazis and Nazi sympathizers march is one thing, but letting armed Nazis, armed Nazi sympathizers, and armed antifa counterdemonstrators gather in public within shouting distance of each other is a sign of insanity that makes me wonder if we've really learned anything at all. And spare me the hollow cliches about how this is "the price we have to pay for liberty".
What on earth are you talking about, Andy? Did I miss news reports of people being shot?
   1947. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5512305)
It bothers me that "Antifa" and the various groups of shitheels that comprise our alt-right funfest are viewed equivalently by some.


Nobody's doing that, and your comment simply further points out the binary reductionism to which social media seems to invariably funnel everything.

The loser racist scum have effectively equal 1st Amendment rights to groups like the NAACP and ... gasp! ... even me. That in no way is "viewing" them "equivalently." Rest assured that I'm far superior in every way to those trailer crackers.
   1948. PreservedFish Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:09 PM (#5512306)
Are there any successful, productive, responsible neo-nazis or white supremacists? My impression is that these are all true losers, dorky pathetic losers. YR, please comment.
   1949. BDC Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:11 PM (#5512308)
"Antifa" and the various groups of shitheels that comprise our alt-right funfest are viewed equivalently by some

Nobody's doing that


Aside from the President of the United States.
   1950. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:14 PM (#5512309)
Former KKK leader David Duke struck out at President Donald Trump for condemning the violence at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

In a series of tweets Duke questioned why the president, whom he usually supports, is attacking white Americans who put him "in the presidency."

After violence erupted at the "Unite the Right" rally, Trump tweeted, "We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!"

In response, Duke tweeted:

So, after decades of White Americans being targeted for discriminated & anti-White hatred, we come together as a people, and you attack us? https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/896420822780444672 …

I would recommend you take a good look in the mirror & remember it was White Americans who put you in the presidency, not radical leftists. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/896420822780444672 …
   1951. simpleton & childlike gef the talking mongoose Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:15 PM (#5512311)
Are there any successful, productive, responsible neo-nazis or white supremacists? My impression is that these are all true losers, dorky pathetic losers. YR, please comment.


His head supposedly is on the presidential chopping block (though apparently that's been the case before, & so far he's survived), but for now Steve Bannon holds a position of some responsibility. Also that buttoned-down little creep whose name I forget at the moment probably fits the bill; for obvious reasons I can't look him up & check.
   1952. tshipman Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5512312)
not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.


Because Jason always makes things into a false equivalency and AntiFa are pro-Palestine.

It's basically just that.

Jason doesn't like feeling bad when people criticize the Republican president for being a fascist, so he pretends that the real issue is that people on an internet message board haven't denounced a minor leftist group with poor message control. He picks on this particular minor leftist group because they are pro-Palestine, so he can find something that someone says at an AntiFa rally and spin it as anti-Semitism.
   1953. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:26 PM (#5512313)
Uh oh, now you've done it!

Heh...is there a meme I'm missing here?
   1954. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:27 PM (#5512314)
Heh...is there a meme I'm missing here?
Yes. HTH.


EDIT: Yeah, read this discussion. And nobody ever accuse me of pedantry without thinking of it.
   1955. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:35 PM (#5512315)
Thanks, David. Heh. (And yes--Pretty rich how Fly calls others out for pedantry in response to his own pedantic explanation of the geometric limitations of zip codes...)
   1956. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:37 PM (#5512316)
no matter how cliched it may sound, the strategies of Martin Luther King work a hell of a lot better in the long run than the nihilism of the Weathermen and their "Days of Rage".

Depends on the target & the setting, no? King's approach depended on large part on the other side's innate (if ofttimes deeply buried) decency or at least capacity for shame. When he ran into a marked lack of both in Cicero, he wound up accomplishing nothing.


Two years after those fair housing marches were staged in Cicero, the nation's first fair housing bill was signed into law. King's campaign in itself petered out with no positive results, but you can't always measure results right away.

I suspect that the white nationalists of Charlottesville have a whole lot in common with the racists of Cicero.

No argument there. The only difference is that our current crop of white nationalists are better organized, and of course are being fortified by Trump and Sessions and their ideological allies in power. They're not fooling anybody with claims of being race-neutral constitutionalists. Race-neutral constitutionalists don't consciously go around speaking the language of white nationalists and then pretending that they don't have anything in common with them. Stormfront knows better.

As for "the long run," last I looked white nationalists are in place in the White House, & too many white cops are killing too many black people. Would that be the case if Malcolm X's or Robert F. Williams' or the Panthers' (much more apt comparisons in this instance than Weather, IMHO) philosophies had gained more ground than King's? Probably not, but I'm not sure that demonizing them is a useful response.

I'm not demonizing either Malcolm X or Robert Williams, who escaped from a mob through the house of the parents of my college best friend. And I'm certainly not demonizing the right to self-defense as a legitimate response to racist violence. When I was working for SNCC in Cambridge, MD, it was only the presence of guns in virtually every black household that prevented a massacre when a motorcade of white vigilantes came down Pine Street with guns all a-blazing on the night of July 11, 1963. Their fire was quickly returned, and they got the hell out of there.

BUT---and here's the crucial difference you're missing---neither Malcolm X nor Robert Williams nor the (Louisiana) Deacons For Defense and Justice went around looking for confrontations with racists. This wasn't out of any King-like feelings of human solidarity / Hate Sin But Love The Sinner, but out of the simple fact that they knew that white folks (and the police in particular) had more guns. In this sense, the violent-prone antifas have more in common with the former Communist Workers group in Greensboro that staged "Death To The Klan" marches that ended in tragedy. I knew one of those marchers who was killed and another who was maimed, and no amount of righteousness is ever going to resurrect Marty Nathan or bring Paul Bermanzohn back to his previous state of health.

And at the risk of sounding like a boring old fart, the simplest way (even if it's not really simple) to rid the country of Trump and his enablers is to get people to VOTE, particularly in off-year elections and on the state and local level. Peaceful demonstrations are a great way to energize people and raise public awareness, but unless they start getting translated into real political action, they're little more than feelgood moments for the participants.

And seeking out violent confrontations with white nationalists is again, as stupid and counterproductive move as can be imagined, no matter how much we'd all like to rid the world of them and their fellow travelers.

In the meantime people tend to live in the present, not "in the long run." Sometimes that results in fighting fire with fire.

Sure it does, and again, on an emotional level I totally sympathize with that sort of a reaction, for much the same reason I'd like to see the whole Trump crowd resurrected as a group of illegal immigrants, just to give them a taste of their own medicine. Poetic justice is sweet.

But unfortunately, seeking out violent confrontations, and engaging in violent rhetoric, doesn't work. All it does is to egg along the Alt-Right's already inflated sense of martyrdom. At some point you just have to use your head.

And just to reiterate what I think is the most important local lesson to be drawn from Charlottesville, the idea of letting armed protesters march down the street is as an insane an idea as can be imagined. This is second amendment absolutism in its final reductio ad absurdum stage---Thanks, Virginia! In retrospect, it's lucky that there was only one peaceful demonstrator killed.

   1957. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5512317)
What happened yesterday was in many ways the logical outcome of a literal and dogmatic adherence to the first and second amendments. Letting Nazis and Nazi sympathizers march is one thing, but letting armed Nazis, armed Nazi sympathizers, and armed antifa counterdemonstrators gather in public within shouting distance of each other is a sign of insanity that makes me wonder if we've really learned anything at all. And spare me the hollow cliches about how this is "the price we have to pay for liberty".

What on earth are you talking about, Andy? Did I miss news reports of people being shot?


See #1956. We were lucky----this time.
   1958. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5512320)
Deadspin, as I predicted, has a story and headline demanding that everyone "pick a side." Early on, a commentator says, effectively, "Thanks but no thanks, I'm independent," and proceeds to get hectored and shouted down by dozens of people, most using the silly and lazy, "If you don't denounce something the way we want you to, we deem you to support it" BS.

Can the American republic survive social media and the habits of thought and mind it encourages, if not demands? Probably not.
   1959. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5512321)

I suspect that the white nationalists of Charlottesville have a whole lot in common with the racists of Cicero.
I'm not 750 years old and wasn't around then, but I don't think so. People in Cicero were, as I understand it, "merely" (or at least primarily) personally prejudiced, and were worried about property values and the like. They weren't going around looking for blacks to oppress; they were just protecting their own turf and their own pocketbooks, as they saw it. (This is not meant as a defense of them; they were obviously racist.). But the Charlottesville protesters are ideological racists. They have a much more coherent worldview and are looking to impose it on the country. Just look at the very fact that they were not local Charlottesville residents; they were people coming from all over the country. And why were they there? To worry about property values or schools or whatnot? No: to protest against the removal of a statue of the traitor Lee.
   1960. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5512322)
What on earth are you talking about, Andy? Did I miss news reports of people being shot?

See #1956. We were lucky----this time.
1956 doesn't remotely answer the question I asked. What does the second amendment have to do with the events in Charlottesville?

"This incident where nothing bad happened with guns shows the problem with guns!"
   1961. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5512323)
Rest assured that I'm far superior in every way to those trailer crackers.


Are you sure about that?

I am of genius intellect & cultured, well-educated & creative, well-mannered & refined. I am God’s gift to
humankind where the English language is concerned, and I also happen to have a basic knowledge of
Latin, Greek, French, Spanish, and Italian. I am musical & artistic; I am athletic & possessed of militant
self-discipline; and I am many other things. I have a Cadillac & a poodle, multiple computers & a personal
library; I live in an apartment downtown, right across the street from the courthouse; I have been to Paris
& Vancouver, to Cairo & Dubrovnik, to Mexico City & Siracusa. I dress better than all of you, pronounce
my words perfectly, and have a winning, professional handshake. I am everything you ever wanted to be.
I challenge any of you, then, to accuse me of being a failure in this artificial civilization of yours. For it is
beyond dispute that I have played your petty game, and I have won.


and that's just one paragraph!
   1962. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:55 PM (#5512324)
People in Cicero were, as I understand it, "merely" (or at least primarily) personally prejudiced, and were worried about property values and the like. They weren't going around looking for blacks to oppress; they were just protecting their own turf and their own pocketbooks, as they saw it.


Cicero was a mob town, so I'd wager they did a lot more than protect their turf. There's still a few of those guys around; when I first got into business here, I got a couple of visits, which I ignored.
   1963. BDC Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:56 PM (#5512325)
Sounds like the guy in #1961 won the genetic lottery, all right.
   1964. PreservedFish Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5512326)
Do you think he's ever kissed a girl?
   1965. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:10 PM (#5512328)
Cicero was a mob town, so I'd wager they did a lot more than protect their turf.
I wasn't talking about their tactics when I said that, but their motivation.
   1966. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:12 PM (#5512329)
I wasn't talking about their tactics when I said that, but their motivation.


Ah. Probably true.
   1967. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:13 PM (#5512330)
The loser racist scum carrying weaponry openly added to the potential for violence and they indeed became violent. Quite violent indeed.

The notion that Nazis and Klansmen shouldn't be able to march around public streets as an organized armed militia brandishing weaponry openly is so self-evident that it barely needs explanation.

When I wrote my first comments yesterday, I was unaware that they were so openly armed. It's absurd that the authorities permitted them to be.
   1968. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:15 PM (#5512331)
Do you think he's ever kissed a girl?
Do you think he and SBB are in a club together?
   1969. PreservedFish Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:21 PM (#5512332)
What's the highlight of that comment? The poodle?
   1970. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:21 PM (#5512333)
What on earth are you talking about, Andy? Did I miss news reports of people being shot?

See #1956. We were lucky----this time.

1956 doesn't remotely answer the question I asked. What does the second amendment have to do with the events in Charlottesville?

"This incident where nothing bad happened with guns shows the problem with guns!"


Yes, and Andrew Benintendi will hit two 3-run homers whenever he faces Luis Severino. He did so yesterday, and you can't prove that he won't the next 20 times.

How many times have two large armed groups of demonstrators faced off against each other? Not that many. In Greensboro it resulted in 5 deaths and 6 serious injuries. In Charlottesville they were luckier, but the lack of casualties was scarcely preordained.
   1971. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:25 PM (#5512335)
It's absurd that the authorities permitted them to be.


What they did was legal, AFAICT. But if you try to make it illegal, you'll get waddles quivering throughout the land. And I guess that's ultimately my beef with the way the right is organized in this country. Nobody's ever going to take away your guns or ban abortion. But if you get enough folks convinced that that's the case, you can cut the #### out of some taxes. And the nice thing is that the guns, religion, cultural conservatism is evergreen. You can win elections on it forever, because, at the end of the day, not many people want to go back to the Fifties.
   1972. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5512336)
What's the highlight of that comment? The poodle?


A Cadillac and a personal library.
   1973. Omineca Greg Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5512339)
I am of genius intellect & cultured, well-educated & creative, well-mannered & refined.

Overwhelming, am I not?

Fish, and plankton. And sea greens, and protein from the sea. It's all here, ready. Fresh as harvest day. Fish and sea greens, plankton and protein from the sea. And then it stopped coming. And they came instead. So I store them here. I'm ready. And you're ready. It's my job. To freeze you. Protein, plankton...

I am more than machine. More than man. More than a fusion of the two. Don't you agree? Wait for the winds. Then the birds sing. And the deep grottoes whisper my name. Box... Box... Box...
   1974. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:41 PM (#5512340)
Because Jason always makes things into a false equivalency and AntiFa are pro-Palestine.

It's basically just that.
What's false about it? Does the AntiFa movement not commit violent acts?
Jason doesn't like feeling bad when people criticize the Republican president for being a fascist, so he pretends that the real issue is that people on an internet message board haven't denounced a minor leftist group with poor message control. He picks on this particular minor leftist group because they are pro-Palestine, so he can find something that someone says at an AntiFa rally and spin it as anti-Semitism.
And, wouldn't ya know, the white nationalists are a minor rightist group with poor message control." Funny that.

Except of course, the white nationalist douches have media and leftists pimping them at every opportunity.

Also, what do you think "From the river to the sea" means, shipman? I'll wait...
   1975. tshipman Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:48 PM (#5512342)
And, wouldn't ya know, the white nationalists are a minor rightist group with poor message control.



Wow. You do realize that people died yesterday? This comment is in extremely poor taste.
   1976. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:50 PM (#5512343)
It's absurd that the authorities permitted them to be.
This isn't Russia. "The [so-called] authorities" don't get to violate people's rights because they feel like it.


"This incident where nothing bad happened with guns shows the problem with guns!"

Yes, and Andrew Benintendi will hit two 3-run homers whenever he faces Luis Severino. He did so yesterday, and you can't prove that he won't the next 20 times.
As always, your analogies are terrible. You're lucky you didn't try to go to law school. The fact that there was a good outcome when X happened doesn't prove that there will be a good outcome the next time X happens, and nobody claimed that it does. But it definitely can't be used to show that there will be a bad outcome next time X happens.
   1977. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:52 PM (#5512344)
Sooo...? TGF has a poodle?
   1978. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5512346)
Wow. You do realize that people died yesterday? This comment is in extremely poor taste.
That's your comeback? So lame.

EDIT: And last I checked, the state police deaths were the result of an accident.
   1979. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:00 PM (#5512349)
But it doesn't seem like they did anything in particular yesterday, whereas a nazi rammed a car into a crowd of protestors, so not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.

According to published reports, there were two hours of violent clashes before the car rammed the crowd. I don't know how the blame for that earlier violence gets sorted out, but Andy is right that those seeking to violently disrupt the original demonstration, or similar demonstrations, are wrong. Their tactics are counter-productive and illegal. The "Punch-A-Nazi" crowd apparently punched more than a few non-Nazis yesterday, including a Washington Post reporter. Peaceful protest is allowed for just about any cause, but violence isn't, and those openly advocating it should be called out for their stand, regardless of where they may be on the political spectrum.
   1980. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5512350)
Punching Nazis is legally wrong. It is morally right.
   1981. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:10 PM (#5512351)
Punching Nazis is legally wrong. It is morally right.
No. Punching someone because you disagree with them is not morally right.

(To be sure, if they're beating someone with a pole, then you're punching them to stop the beating; that's a different case.)
   1982. tshipman Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5512353)
Punching Nazis is legally wrong. It is morally right.
No. Punching someone because you disagree with them is not morally right.


I agree more with David.

However, while I don't want to punch Nazis, I am also not sad to see them punched. I want people like Richard Spencer and the rest of these disgusting people to be afraid to be as they are.

With all the amazing good that the internet has brought, it has also allowed people to have much lower social costs to having repugnant views. It used to be that if you were a Nazi, you had trouble dating or finding friends who were willing to put up with your bullshit. The internet has reduced those costs, much to society's detriment.

So while I don't want to punch Nazis, I am glad that they are afraid to show their faces. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite.
   1983. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5512354)
No Favid. You go ahead and try to hug it out hippie. Some of us know what we're dealing with.
   1984. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:20 PM (#5512355)
In somewhat overshadowed news, Elizabeth Warren Takes On Clinton & Other 'Moderate' Democrats:
Senator Elizabeth Warren used a speech to a grass-roots conference Saturday to take direct aim at Democrats’ diminished moderate wing, ridiculing Clinton-era policies and jubilantly proclaiming that liberals had taken control of the party. While not invoking former President Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton by name, Ms. Warren sent an unambiguous message that she believes the Clinton effort to push Democrats toward the political center should be relegated to history.

“The Democratic Party isn’t going back to the days of welfare reform and the crime bill,” she said, highlighting measures Mr. Clinton signed into law as president that are reviled by much of the left. “It is not going to happen.”

Say what you will about Bill, but he went where the votes were. It remains to be seen whether the untapped votes on the left that are central to Warren's vision for her party exist, or can be counted on to turn out.
   1985. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:20 PM (#5512356)
It's a nice little shell game some are trying to play, but I think it's pretty easy to say that yes, the nazis are worse than the people who hate nazis. I think it's pretty simple to say that the KKK is worse than the SJWs. I think it's pretty correct to say that the multiculturalists are better than the white supremacists.

Denounce violence on all sides if you like - but if you can't also agree with the above, I have to question your basic morality.
   1986. Count Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:21 PM (#5512357)
1979. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:00 PM (#5512349)
But it doesn't seem like they did anything in particular yesterday, whereas a nazi rammed a car into a crowd of protestors, so not sure why the antifa are being discussed at all.

According to published reports, there were two hours of violent clashes before the car rammed the crowd. I don't know how the blame for that earlier violence gets sorted out, but Andy is right that those seeking to violently disrupt the original demonstration, or similar demonstrations, are wrong. Their tactics are counter-productive and illegal. The "Punch-A-Nazi" crowd apparently punched more than a few non-Nazis yesterday, including a Washington Post reporter. Peaceful protest is allowed for just about any cause, but violence isn't, and those openly advocating it should be called out for their stand, regardless of where they may be on the political spectrum.


What published reports? In any event, whatever scuffles there were pale in comparison to someone ramming their car into a crowd, so using this as an opportunity to condemn violence on both sides is gross (I am under the impression that you brought up the antifa before the car incident, which is more understandable).

You should not punch Nazis expressing their opinion peacefully, but it was also pretty funny when someone punched Richard Spencer and did not end free speech in america...
   1987. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:24 PM (#5512358)
It's a nice little shell game some are trying to play, but I think it's pretty easy to say that yes, the nazis are worse than the people who hate nazis. I think it's pretty simple to say that the KKK is worse than the SJWs. I think it's pretty correct to say that the multiculturalists are better than the white supremacists.


Depends on size and scope. SJWs are a far bigger threat than the KKK at their current size and scope.

What you're doing here is trying to justify SJWism by saying it's "better" than KKKism which, I guess it is ... but big deal. You may have noticed that KKKism is a very low bar.
   1988. tshipman Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5512359)
SJWs are a far bigger threat than the KKK at their current size and scope.



Dude, who has a Tumblr Blogger killed lately?

Get a hold of reality.
   1989. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:31 PM (#5512360)
Depends on size and scope. SJWs are a far bigger threat than the KKK at their current size and scope.

What you're doing here is trying to justify SJWism by saying it's "better" than KKKism which, I guess it is ... but big deal. You may have noticed that KKKism is a very low bar.


This only underscores my point...

If it's such a low bar and if it's also such a small 'size and scope' - then why do so many people, from the President down to the people here who carry his water, have such a hard time with simple, unencumbered denunciations of them? Why does every such statement have to also include whataboutism?

   1990. Chicago Joe Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:33 PM (#5512362)
SJWs are a far bigger threat


How?
   1991. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:41 PM (#5512363)
I think it's pretty simple to say that the KKK is worse than the SJWs. I think it's pretty correct to say that the multiculturalists are better than the white supremacists.
Well, that depends on who you define as "white supremacists," right? Because it's pretty clear at least one of you thinks Charles Murray is a white nationalist. And heck, before he got shot, I'm nearly certain several lefties here were convinced Scalise wore a Klan hood in his free time.
   1992. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5512364)
Well, that depends on who you define as "white supremacists," right? Because it's pretty clear at least one of you thinks Charles Murray is a white nationalist.


Ahhh, yes -- the "it depends".... the less addled sibling of whataboutism.

EDIT: And updated with a twofer!
   1993. Srul Itza At Home Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:47 PM (#5512366)
(The alternative is that you have no ####### clue what the word "threatening" means.)



Obligatory
   1994. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:47 PM (#5512367)
Ahhh, yes -- the "it depends".... the less addled sibling of whataboutism.
When you conjure up a substantive reply, give me a shout.
   1995. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:49 PM (#5512368)
When you conjure up a substantive reply, give me a shout.


I guess that depends on what you define as a 'substantive response', doesn't it?
   1996. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:55 PM (#5512369)
I guess that depends on what you define as a 'substantive response', doesn't it?
Try again.
   1997. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:57 PM (#5512370)
BLM is a ridiculously inflammatory example to use here, for entirely obvious reasons, and it as such doesn't really speak to the validity of your question. If you envision McCauliffe and the oh-so-intimidating police chief saying the same things to the attendees of a quilting convention or guests at a chili cook-off, are you still worried about the constitutionality of the threat?

It is bog-standard bad-faith RDP argumentation, for all the reasons stated.

In any case, I repeat: "Depends on what color the folks not doing what the powers that be + people with guns want them to spare." I'll leave it at that, and see if our resident android can divine from that whether his "OMG TeH THREAtz" hyperventilating would hold in his hypothetical.

Ray thinks he's drawing an "all else being equal" hypo that serves as an effective gotcha (if anything provokes our boy's arousal, it's spotting perceived liberal hypocrisy), but of course all else, particularly in the example he chose, is not equal. Obviously.


Well, it seems to me that if you concede that the same thing being done to BLM (McAuliffe's press conference with the police chief) may well constitute a threat then your earlier rebuttal of "this couldn't possibly be conceived as a threat" falls. So you need something more. And now we get into a case by case analysis of which circumstances constitute a threat and which don't.
   1998. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: August 13, 2017 at 02:58 PM (#5512371)
Try again.


Maybe you should try, period. First.
   1999. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 03:01 PM (#5512372)
Also, crucially: McAuliffe's comments were clearly couched in terms that focus on the actual injuries inflicted by these trailertrash pieces of subhuman filth on actual human beings, not the "content of their speech," such as it was. That's not in the same zip code as infringement on anybody's First Amendment rights.


Nope. McAuliffe directed his comments to "all the white supremacists and the Nazis who came into Charlottesville today":

"I have a message to all the white supremacists and the Nazis who came into Charlottesville today. Our message is plain and simple. Go home. You are not wanted in this great commonwealth. Shame on you. You pretend that you are patriots, but you are anything but a patriot. You want to talk about patriots, talk about Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, who brought our country together. Think about the patriots today, the young men and women, who with wearing the cloth of our country.

“Somewhere around the globe they are putting their life in danger. They are patriots. You are not. You came here today to hurt people. And you did hurt people. My message is clear, we are stronger than you. You have made our commonwealth stronger. You will not succeed. There is no place for you here. There is no place for you in America.”
   2000. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 03:14 PM (#5512375)
.pilF
Page 20 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 18 19 20 21 22 > 

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
Sheer Tim Foli
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Sox TherapyA Container of Milk, A Loaf of Bread and a Dude Who Can Hit Home Runs
(15 - 11:38pm, Dec 11)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 12-11-2017
(21 - 11:21pm, Dec 11)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogOTP 11 December, 2017 - GOP strategist: Moore would have 'date with a baseball bat' if he tried dating teens where I grew up
(353 - 11:20pm, Dec 11)
Last: greenback wears sandals on his head

NewsblogJack Morris, Alan Trammell elected to Hall | MLB.com
(144 - 11:19pm, Dec 11)
Last: kwarren

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!
(347 - 11:13pm, Dec 11)
Last: Downing Almost Deserves It

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(327 - 11:05pm, Dec 11)
Last: Bleed the Freak

NewsblogDerek Jeter's defense of Giancarlo Stanton trade was weak | SI.com
(14 - 10:43pm, Dec 11)
Last: stevegamer

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(1907 - 10:40pm, Dec 11)
Last: JC in DC

NewsblogThis will be Giancarlo Stanton’s biggest New York adjustment | New York Post
(1 - 10:28pm, Dec 11)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

NewsblogTexas Rangers: Shohei Ohtani or not, Rangers still considering nontraditional 6-man, 4-man rotations next season | SportsDay
(12 - 10:04pm, Dec 11)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogYankees in talks on Giancarlo Stanton trade
(198 - 9:32pm, Dec 11)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogMets have talked to teams about trading Matt Harvey: sources - NY Daily News
(7 - 6:49pm, Dec 11)
Last: JJ1986

Gonfalon CubsLooking to next year
(318 - 6:48pm, Dec 11)
Last: Andere Richtingen

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(313 - 5:03pm, Dec 11)
Last: SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY

Hall of MeritBattle of the Uber-Stat Systems (Win Shares vs. WARP)!
(375 - 3:36pm, Dec 11)
Last: Carl Goetz

Page rendered in 0.6616 seconds
49 querie(s) executed