Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, January 08, 2017

OTP 9 Jan. 2017: What’s next for sports, politics, and TV in 2017?

Cyclical trends may obscure the connection at times, but you can’t permanently disentangle sport from politics:

“Sport in 2017 will con­tinue to be a resur­gent and resounding plat­form for athlete-​​led social activism,” says Dan Lebowitz, exec­u­tive director of Northeastern’s Center for the Study of Sport in Society. “If his­tory repeats itself, 2017 will be this generation’s 1967, a year in which promi­nent ath­letes held a social jus­tice summit to call out insti­tu­tion­al­ized inequity, con­front it, and cat­a­pult a con­ver­sa­tion that America still needs to hear, embrace, and lead.”

Today we have football’s Colin Kaeper­nick, whose national anthem protest cap­tured the nation’s atten­tion, and col­lege basketball’s Bronson Koenig, who protested the Dakota Access Pipeline and then reflected on his expe­ri­ence for The Players’ Tribune.

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

 

BDC Posted: January 08, 2017 at 09:10 PM | 1952 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: activism, kaepernick, politics, social justice

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 12 of 20 pages ‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 >  Last ›
   1101. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:17 PM (#5381905)
The Trump Admin is almost certain to be such a godawful trainwreck that the Dems will gain seats/support in 2018 no matter what they do... Yes I know that's not much of a silver lining. (Kind of like Kansas: Brownback being such an unmitigated disaster has transformed Kansas Dems from dead to "mostly dead")
Given that Democrats were counting on Brownback's alleged missteps to give them the state house in 2014, but he was actually reelected, I hope you can find a better silver lining than that. ("We didn't lose as badly in 2014 as we usually do." That sounds like pewter at best.)
   1102. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:18 PM (#5381906)
The only thing that saved him on election day was the electoral college system, and he's about to enter the White House with approval ratings of minus 14 per cent.

That's not all that good, but Hillary's Favorability Rating is even worse, 55.3% Unfavorable - 40.3% Favorable, or a net -15%.
   1103. Morty Causa Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:21 PM (#5381908)
I'm not sure if I had to decide choose party stood in better stead as of now with Presidential elections that I wouldn't choose the Democratic Party, the party that won by 3 million votes. Yeah, its candidate did lose, but it's like the favored sprinter being far ahead and losing a foot race because he tripped. That doesn't mean he or she (taking the "he or she" to mean the Democratic Party) wasn't the better runner or that she wouldn't win if the race were re-run. And it doesn't mean that DP couldn't have the stronger candidate next time based on how well their candidate this time did in the popular voting.
   1104. Omineca Greg Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:22 PM (#5381910)
I'll never able to listen to Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers again.
   1105. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:23 PM (#5381912)
We gave up true democratic republicanism a ways back, probably with the foundation of a national security state tasked with unelected power to do as it will. Trump ran to take these folks on, and they started fighting back immediately. Things will likely intensify as of next Friday.


Heh...

Yes, yes... I'm sure that's it.



   1106. Morty Causa Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:24 PM (#5381913)
I'll never able to listen to Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers again.

You mean you listened to them before?
   1107. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:24 PM (#5381914)
   1108. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:25 PM (#5381916)

Is this happening to anybody else?


Well the Ukraine girls really knock me out
They leave the West behind
And Moscow girls make me sing and shout
That Georgia's always on my mind

Aw come on!
Ho yeah!
Ho yeah!
Ho ho yeah!
Yeah yeah!
   1109. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:26 PM (#5381917)
The Trump Admin is almost certain to be such a godawful trainwreck that the Dems will gain seats/support in 2018 no matter what they do...

The Dems are the opposition party, so they will benefit from any Trump Administration failures, but that's about all they have going for them. The 2018 Senate map is just brutal for the Democrats - 25 seats up compared to 8 for the GOP, 10 Dems seats in states Trump won, 5 of them by 19% or more. If Trump is anything close to an average president, the Congress, especially the Senate, may not be in play until 2020.
   1110. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:28 PM (#5381918)
Any good outcomes for the Dems in the 2016 elections? Any silver linings?


Tammy Duckworth curb-stomped Mark Kirk. I think she's going to be a pretty good Senator, and it's nice to see her rewarded for her service to the nation.
   1111. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:29 PM (#5381919)
That's not all that good, but Hillary's Favorability Rating is even worse, 55.3% Unfavorable - 40.3% Favorable, or a net -15%.


Certainly bad news for her chances of being re-elected pretend President, to say nothing of what it means for party's chances of retaining their pretend majorities.

OTOH, it's excellent news for the pretend responsibility you and yours will surely take for the oft-repeated sweeping control you have of government at all levels.
   1112. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:30 PM (#5381922)
Unclear. It might have helped if people hadn't called him Hitler. Because - again - once you're at that point, you've hit him with everything under the sun including so many things fake and so people who aren't deranged over him no longer know where reality ends and fiction begins nor do they feel like bothering to find out where the line is.

I wish I could say this was the problem, but the dude has never been able to complete ten sentences in a row, he lies like a rug, and he's writing emotional tweets at 3 AM. There's the line, and there's no work involved.


Except that the He's Hitler people forfeited their credibility and thus their privilege to be taken seriously.
   1113. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:31 PM (#5381925)
You mean you listened to them before?


I can take or leave Kenny Rogers, but Dolly Parton is legitimately great. Smart, talented, hard-working, and a good person to boot.
   1114. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:33 PM (#5381926)
Except that the He's Hitler people forfeited their credibility and thus their privilege to be taken seriously.


So now we're looking for guidance on what should or shouldn't be "taken seriously" from people who voted for Donald Trump?
   1115. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:33 PM (#5381927)
How deep does it go?

Premium digital rate for the Financial Times: $10.52 a week

With 6-day newspaper delivery thrown in: Add $1.52 a week

Too bad they don't have much of a sports section, or I might be tempted. Or too bad you can't get the print only version for that $1.52.
   1116. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:33 PM (#5381928)

No ####, they aren't going to waste time just to waste time. Despite what our own Assange, OJ thinks, the US intelligence agencies think this dossier is pretty important.


You are way around the bend on this one*. What part of 'none of it substantiated' do you not understand? But hey, man, you've set yourself up perfectly to swallow the next Iraq war.

*You and Sam and Shipman**, but again, same as it ever was.

**Zonk will see you on the dark side of the moon.
   1117. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:34 PM (#5381929)
The American electoral college preferred this to an establishment girl. That's about it.

Ding! We have a winner.

So a question I have been meaning to ask undecided and Democratic voters, the sort that might presumably vote in the next Democratic Primary.

Will the gender of the nominee play into your 2020 primary vote decision? Will you be less likely (or more likely, I guess) to vote for a Democratic woman in the 2020 primary based on what happened to HRC in the 2016 general election?

From a "How electable is this candidate?" standpoint, did 2016 put you (potentially) off of voting for a women for Democratic nominee? I am not saying it is fair or unfair, I am just asking the question.

My Answer: Yes it does, sadly, count as a minus that is appears the glass ceiling is firmly in place. All things being equal I think a man is more electable than a woman, and that would be a factor in my vote, since electability is a factor I consider in primaries.


Keep thinking that Clinton lost to Trump because of sexism and let's see how you folks do in the next election.

Otherwise, a bit of reflection on reality may be in order.
   1118. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:35 PM (#5381930)
But hey, man, you've set yourself up perfectly to swallow the next Iraq war.


That's the one where we're going to take the oil this time and then stick around more than a decade, right?

I lost my Berlitz guide to speaking Cheetoh Benito.
   1119. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:40 PM (#5381934)
Ukraine efforts to saboutage Trump backfire

Unlike Russia, Ukraine is weak. Ukraine is feeble. It backed a woman for POTUS, for crissakes.

I believe it's time to put the hurt on Ukraine...
   1120. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:43 PM (#5381938)
To be clear I am not building that specific narrative, and of course every election (and candidate) is different, but I must admit (though it seems I am the only one) 2016 made me at least consider the idea that the glass ceiling was thicker than I thought or hoped.


Remember when you pointed out that she got more votes than Trump?

Yeah, maybe that.

A lying liar with a large amount of historical and familial baggage and being under FBI investigation for actions that she took while Secretary of State which made it clear that she was either unwilling or unable to properly handle classified information got more votes than the Fake Hitler winner of the election. And you run that through your processor and come out with "She lost because she was a woman."

I mean, okay. Go with that.
   1121. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:44 PM (#5381939)

Otherwise, a bit of reflection on reality may be in order.


First they need to follow the example of that Clinton hack who committed himself election night and treat the psychosis.

Don't hold your breath.
   1122. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:48 PM (#5381941)
Keep thinking that Clinton lost to Trump because of sexism and let's see how you folks do in the next election.

As I've said prior, I spoke with more rust-belt and Texan voters in October than you have in your entire life. To a person they expressed distaste at Trump and said to a man they couldn't vote for a woman for President. Not THIS woman. A woman.

I've also said I don't think Hillary lost for any ONE reason, it was a ton of things all clicking wrong all across the board. I have no problem based on my anecdotal travels that sexism was a very, very significant factor, within the top three. -shrug-


A lying liar with a large amount of historical and familial baggage and being under FBI investigation for actions that she took while Secretary of State which made it clear that she was either unwilling or unable to properly handle classified information got more votes than the Fake Hitler winner of the election.

No one I talked to mentioned the FBI investigation, but one mentioned the fact that the Clintons left he White House last time with furniture they should have left there.
   1123. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:50 PM (#5381942)
Unlike Russia, Ukraine is weak. Ukraine is feeble. It backed a woman for POTUS, for crissakes.


How much vodka was this one worth? Couple dozen milliliters?
   1124. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:51 PM (#5381944)
You are way around the bend on this one*. What part of 'none of it substantiated' do you not understand? But hey, man, you've set yourself up perfectly to swallow the next Iraq war.


Confirmation bias is a helluva thing. They want it to be true so badly that when the tasty bait comes drifting in front of their noses, they snap it up hook, line and sinker. Of COURSE Trump is a Manchurian Candidate, wholly owned by the KGB. And those stories about freaky sex stuff involving pee and dead hookers? They just MUST be true, because he's Hitler or something!
   1125. BDC Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:51 PM (#5381945)
Hillary's Favorability Rating is even worse

How're Al Gore and Walter Mondale doing, while you're at it?
   1126. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:52 PM (#5381946)
Any good outcomes for the Dems in the 2016 elections? Any silver linings?

The Trump Admin is almost certain to be such a godawful trainwreck that the Dems will gain seats/support in 2018 no matter what they do... Yes I know that's not much of a silver lining.


It's amazing. At every turn Trump's critics predict he will fail, and when he doesn't fail they predict it again, and when he doesn't fail again they again predict it again.

I mean, eventually he could fail, but at any point do the people predicting this over and over again consider that it might be time to wake up and perceive the world as it actually is?
   1127. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:54 PM (#5381947)
Keep thinking that Clinton lost to Trump because of sexism and let's see how you folks do in the next election.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say "I don't know how we can tell this one way or the other".

What I think we can know is that she didn't get as many Republican or suburban white women to vote for her as we'd thought. But even knowing that, how can we separate sexism from ideology and / or a susceptibility to believe 25 years of right wing attacks, on the grounds that "there must be something there" even if the actual evidence suggests that there wasn't.

Also, how do we know that the "sexist" votes for Trump weren't balanced by an equal number of "I'm supporting her because she's a woman" votes, from women (or even a few men) who would otherwise have voted for Trump over a male Democrat. It's the same question that arose about Obama's race in 2008 and 2012.

I just don't see how you can sort all this out. Love her or loathe her, Hillary was indeed a unique candidate.

But I also think that it's entirely possible that many women we've never heard of are going to be inspired by her example, and start getting into politics themselves. It also may be possible that Donald Trump in the White House might give them an extra bit of motivation. Hillary was the first woman to run for president, but she won't be the last, and the next one won't be bogged down by 25 years worth of junkyard dog style attacks.
   1128. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:55 PM (#5381948)
There's a lot of smoke here. It's been smoldering since the primary. This dossier is just the latest in a series of data points that point towards a "special" relationship between the Russians and Trump.


There is 100x more evidence of Trump being in the pocket of Putin than ever existed for malfeasance re: BENGHAZI!!! or #BUTWHATABOUTHEREMAILS??!
   1129. Omineca Greg Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:56 PM (#5381950)
I can take or leave Kenny Rogers, but Dolly Parton is legitimately great. Smart, talented, hard-working, and a good person to boot.


Yep, gotta stand up for Dolly. She is great.
   1130. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:58 PM (#5381953)
It's amazing. At every turn Trump's critics predict he will fail, and when he doesn't fail they predict it again, and when he doesn't fail again they again predict it again.

I mean, eventually he could fail,
It's almost like in Ray's world the guy doesn't have multiple bankruptcies on his record.
   1131. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:59 PM (#5381954)
Trump ran to take these folks on


That, and economic populism. And neo-monarchism. And...well, what do the idiots want to claim he ran on next? This goal post moves at the speed of thought!
   1132. Morty Causa Posted: January 11, 2017 at 04:59 PM (#5381955)
I can take or leave Kenny Rogers, but Dolly Parton is legitimately great. Smart, talented, hard-working, and a good person to boot.

What's that got to do with singing?
   1133. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:00 PM (#5381956)
It's amazing. At every turn Trump's critics predict he will fail, and when he doesn't fail they predict it again, and when he doesn't fail again they again predict it again.

I mean, eventually he could fail,


It's almost like in Ray's world the guy doesn't have multiple bankruptcies on his record.

In fairness to Ray, I'm pretty sure his sole definition of failure is "losing the electoral college".
   1134. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:01 PM (#5381957)
What I think we can know is that she didn't get as many Republican or suburban white women to vote for her as we'd thought.


That's because you "thought" that arguing that Trump called a beauty contestant Miss Piggy twenty years ago resonated more with people than arguments about how you were going to put food on their table.

Remember when Hillary and the left thought she was so brilliant for unveiling Alicia Machado at the end of that debate? You were following an imaginary ball, like when the quarterback fakes the handoff to the runningback but you go after the runningback instead.
   1135. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:02 PM (#5381958)
There is 100x more evidence of Trump being in the pocket of Putin than ever existed for malfeasance re: BENGHAZI!!! or #BUTWHATABOUTHEREMAILS??!


How about Obama being a jungle savage from the heart of the jungle gifted with a forged identity? How does that rank on the credibility scale? You'd have to be pretty stupid to take anyone making such claims seriously, don't you think?
   1136. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:03 PM (#5381959)
It's amazing. At every turn Trump's critics predict he will fail, and when he doesn't fail they predict it again, and when he doesn't fail again they again predict it again.


I've never shown much acumen for predicting the winner of Dancing with the Stars, either.

I think my mistake was believing the electorate was either different or if not different, put more thought into an election than they do calling in to cast their DWTS votes.

Live and learn.
   1137. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:04 PM (#5381960)
But I also think that it's entirely possible that many women we've never heard of are going to be inspired by her example, and start getting into politics themselves. It also may be possible that Donald Trump in the White House might give them an extra bit of motivation.


Uh, you made this form of argument BEFORE Trump got into the White House. You argued that the very prospect of Trump being president would cause women to put Hillary in. Remember? What have you learned from being wrong about that?

Hillary was the first woman to run for president, but she won't be the last, and the next one won't be bogged down by 25 years worth of junkyard dog style attacks.


She won't be the last, and she wasn't even the first. (WTF are you talking about, she was the "first woman to run for president"?) But yes, keep thinking that mishandling classified information was just a "junkyard dog style attack." That'll serve you well, I'm sure.
   1138. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:05 PM (#5381961)
resonated more with people than arguments about how you were going to put food on their table.

What was Trump's argument for that, exactly? Can you point me to it?

EDIT: I can see perhaps where you meant it was the argument Hillary DIDN'T make rather than one Wrestlemania President did.
   1139. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:06 PM (#5381962)
What I think we can know is that she didn't get as many Republican or suburban white women to vote for her as we'd thought.

That's because you "thought" that arguing that Trump called a beauty contestant Miss Piggy twenty years ago resonated more with people than arguments about how you were going to put food on their table.

Remember when Hillary and the left thought she was so brilliant for unveiling Alicia Machado at the end of that debate? You were following an imaginary ball, like when the quarterback fakes the handoff to the runningback but you go after the runningback instead.


The truth is that you don't have any more idea of how Alicia Machado or that groping tape affected the outcome than you do about any one of a dozen other possible factors. In fact I think it's pretty reasonable to say that if Trump had tripled down on his economic populism and dropped his sexism and nativism, he might well have won by a bigger margin, at least if you can believe what those white voters in the Rust Belt were saying.
   1140. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:07 PM (#5381963)
It's amazing. At every turn Trump's critics predict he will fail, and when he doesn't fail they predict it again, and when he doesn't fail again they again predict it again.

I mean, eventually he could fail,


It's almost like in Ray's world the guy doesn't have multiple bankruptcies on his record.


I'd argue that bankruptcy isn't "failing" but we can set that aside, as I was of course speaking of political failures.
   1141. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:10 PM (#5381966)
What was Trump's argument for that, exactly? Can you point me to it?


Seriously? Trump talked about jobs. Like, a lot. He was going to create jobs, he was going to bring jobs back, he was going to prevent jobs from leaving. He was going to re-negotiate our trade deals to get Americans more and better jobs. I know, I know, it's an article of faith on the left that it was all lies, cynical lies! But when the alternative to that was, "Check your white privilege, globalism and outsourcing jobs is awesome, and if you don't agree you're a racist!", well, you saw for yourself what happened.
   1142. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:10 PM (#5381967)
Mark Hunt is suing the UFC, president Dana White and former heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar alleging racketeering, among other things.

He alleges that the UFC has “affirmatively circumvented and obstructed fair competition for their own benefit, including being complicit in doping proliferation.”

I bring it up here because that's a pretty persistent complaint about Bud Selig.

Hunt's going after Lesnar because Lesnar failed a test before the fight (result came back to late to cancel the fight) and one after the fight. (and supposedly because he thinks that Lesnar does not want to go through discovery and can be pressured into a settlement)


The new owners of the UFC really bought themselves a bill of goods. The fighters are just starting to realize they've been treated like field hands just as the Fertita brothers and the rest of ownership fled the scene with billions.
   1143. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:11 PM (#5381968)
resonated more with people than arguments about how you were going to put food on their table.

What was Trump's argument for that, exactly? Can you point me to it?


Sure. "I'm going to keep your jobs here rather than allowing companies to take them overseas. I'm going to have a tariff. I'm going to make it a priority for American citizens to have jobs rather than having illegal immigrants come and take those jobs. Hillary wants to put coal miners out of business."

(Note that I don't comment here on the validity of his argument. You asked what his argument was, and that's what it was.)
   1144. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:13 PM (#5381969)
But I also think that it's entirely possible that many women we've never heard of are going to be inspired by her example, and start getting into politics themselves. It also may be possible that Donald Trump in the White House might give them an extra bit of motivation.

Uh, you made this form of argument BEFORE Trump got into the White House. You argued that the very prospect of Trump being president would cause women to put Hillary in. Remember? What have you learned from being wrong about that?


Reality sometimes has a way of persuading more people than hypotheticals. I'll leave it at that.

Hillary was the first woman to run for president, but she won't be the last, and the next one won't be bogged down by 25 years worth of junkyard dog style attacks.

She won't be the last, and she wasn't even the first. (WTF are you talking about, she was the "first woman to run for president"?)


Oh, for Christ's sake. She was the first woman to be nominated by a major party. How pedantic can you get?

But yes, keep thinking that mishandling classified information was just a "junkyard dog style attack." That'll serve you well, I'm sure.

That overblown email "scandal" accounted for approximately 20 months out of those 25 years. But more germane to the point, do you think that the next female candidate is going to have to deal with Whitewater or a raunchy husband or an email server?
   1145. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:14 PM (#5381972)
(Note that I don't comment here on the validity of his argument. You asked what his argument was, and that's what it was.)


At some point, the validity, practicality, and actual implementation/results of those arguments are going to matter, though, right?

I realize I'm a bit of an anachronism in thinking that those things should actually matter when to comes to the election, but surely, we can all agree that at least those things matter AFTER the election and we get down to the point of WHY we have elections to begin with... right?
   1146. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:15 PM (#5381973)
I'd argue that bankruptcy isn't "failing", but we can set that aside

Some might call it a form of rent seeking, but we can set that aside.

as I was of course speaking of political failures.

I'll take an old fashioned 6 oz. Coke, with real sugar. See #1133.
   1147. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:16 PM (#5381974)
Seriously? Trump talked about jobs. Like, a lot. He was going to create jobs, he was going to bring jobs back, he was going to prevent jobs from leaving. He was going to re-negotiate our trade deals to get Americans more and better jobs. I know, I know, it's an article of faith on the left that it was all lies, cynical lies! But when the alternative to that was, "Check your white privilege, globalism and outsourcing jobs is awesome, and if you don't agree you're a racist!", well, you saw for yourself what happened.


Right. It's hard to believe they don't understand this, still.

I love how telling white people in the rustbelt who are barely making ends meet to stop focusing on their white privilege and to start focusing on multiculturalism, globalism, sexism, and advocacy for illegal aliens was supposed to move them to vote Democrat AND YOU'RE ALL BIGOTS IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH US F### YOUR CONCERNS LIKE YOUR JOB AND FEEDING YOUR FAMILY WE HAVE SEXISM TO FIGHT!!!
   1148. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:17 PM (#5381976)
If Trump is anything close to an average president, the Congress, especially the Senate, may not be in play until 2020.


If Trump is anything close to an average President I will be flabbergasted.

He will not be "average" - Trump is right about one thing, he is exceptional, no one remotely like him has ever been POTUS
   1149. PepTech Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:22 PM (#5381979)
Trump talked about jobs. Like, a lot. He was going to create jobs, he was going to bring jobs back, he was going to prevent jobs from leaving
That's why his statements about the states voting for him being the ones that will get the jobs are sheer brilliance. All he needs to do to coast in 2020 is protect Wisconsin/Michigan/Ohio/Pennsylvania and the Dems are better off not bothering with a nominee.
   1150. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:22 PM (#5381982)
Of COURSE Trump is a Manchurian Candidate, wholly owned by the KGB. And those stories about freaky sex stuff involving pee and dead hookers? They just MUST be true, because he's Hitler or something!


Or, for those of us that are not using him as a vassal (eg most of the GOP) we have arrived at this point through a serious of adjustments due to the amount of evidence continuing to pile up that links Russia and Trump.

Personally I didn't think much about him not realeasing his tax returns, or even saying basically "bring it on" to Russian DNC hacks, it was just Trump being Trump. HOWEVAH! The more I read, the more that comes out, the more smart people, like Shindler and McCain, that continue to press the issue -- it makes us that aren't partisan hacks think pretty hard and critically about his connections to Russia.

It turns out that those "still waters" run pretty deep. It appears that the turbulence is now visible at the top, and soon the entire dam may break -- if you believe Schindler, this is only the start for Trump, and it only ends one way.
   1151. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:26 PM (#5381984)
What's that got to do with singing?


That's the "talented" part. The "smart" and "hard-working" bits have also served her well on the financial end of the music biz, which is why she can afford to be so charitable.
   1152. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:30 PM (#5381988)
The first woman president will be Republican.
   1153. Omineca Greg Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:34 PM (#5381990)
Not Stealers Wheel! Gerry already had to see that awful ear-cutting scene...and now this! "Look what they've done to my song, ma." At least he's dead now so he won't have to endure this indignity.

Well, the money's why I came here tonight
I got the feeling that something ain't right
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down those stairs

Clown Duce to the left of me, братва to the right,
Here I am, stuck in the piddle with you
Yes, I'm stuck in the piddle with you,
And I'm wondering what it is I should do
It's so hard to keep the pee on your face,
Losing control, and I'm all over the place
Clown Duce to the left of me, братва to the right,
Here I am, stuck in the piddle with you

Well, you started off with plenty,
But you say that you're a self-made man
And your friends they all come crawling,
Slap you on the back and say,
Please, please
   1154. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:35 PM (#5381991)
HOWEVAH! The more I read, the more that comes out, the more smart people, like Shindler and McCain


If McCain is so smart how come he got captured by the enemy?
   1155. BDC Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:51 PM (#5381995)
Every Presidential candidate since the year Dot has talked about jobs. If Trump's boilerplate resonated with some voters in '16, it was largely, I think, because they saw him as a captain of industry who knows how to create jobs. Ironically, Trump's job creation has consisted largely of positions for bellhops, croupiers, caddies, floorwalkers, flunkies, and Romanian Putzfrauen. But he is known for firing people on TV so he must know how it's done.

And so we get Republicans bemoaning the fact that under Obama the only jobs the salt of the earth can get are flipping burgers, while talking reverently about Hardee's Guy at the Labor Department as an experienced "job creator."
   1156. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:55 PM (#5381997)
Every Presidential candidate since the year Dot has talked about jobs. If Trump's boilerplate resonated with some voters in '16, it was largely, I think, because they saw him as


...someone who was prioritizing jobs over what names a beauty contestant from 1996 was called.
   1157. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:59 PM (#5381999)
...someone who was prioritizing jobs over what names a beauty contestant from 1996 was called.


of course misogyny isn't an issue for you. Or racism. I wonder what it could be, about you, in particular, that allows such a myopic point of view. Wait, I have it right here: it's that you're a white male!
   1158. zonk Posted: January 11, 2017 at 05:59 PM (#5382000)
If McCain is so smart how come he got captured by the enemy?


Because John Kerry handed him over to the vietcong.

Duh.
   1159. gef the talking mongoose Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:00 PM (#5382001)
It turns out that those "still waters" run pretty deep. It appears that the turbulence is now visible at the top, and soon the entire dam may break -- if you believe Schindler, this is only the start for Trump, and it only ends one way.


Which of course would leave Pence as president. Which evidently is what the GOPe wants anyway (& very understandably so).
   1160. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:03 PM (#5382002)
Ukraine efforts to saboutage Trump backfire
Where's my Coke Zero, Philby?
   1161. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:05 PM (#5382003)
There is 100x more evidence of Trump being in the pocket of Putin than ever existed for malfeasance re: BENGHAZI!!! or #BUTWHATABOUTHEREMAILS??!
Say it, don't spray it.
   1162. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:06 PM (#5382004)
The first woman president will be Republican.


And, as such, and idiot.
   1163. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:07 PM (#5382005)
Which of course would leave Pence as president. Which evidently is what the GOPe wants anyway (& very understandably so).
Ex-cel-lent!
   1164. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:07 PM (#5382006)
Say it, don't spray it.


Do you drink Trump piss directly, or like, mix it in with a protein shake or something?
   1165. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:07 PM (#5382007)
The first woman president will be Republican.
Meh. It's just as likely Ivanka runs as a Democrat.
   1166. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:08 PM (#5382009)
Ex-cel-lent!


As long as the incoming admin is willing to bomb Palestinians that refuse to call it "the Temple Mount" Jason's all in.
   1167. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:13 PM (#5382010)
The Trump Admin is almost certain to be such a godawful trainwreck that the Dems will gain seats/support in 2018 no matter what they do...


The truism that whichever party holds the White House always always always (*) loses the midterms is going to collide head-on with the hard math of 2018.

Considering that the Republican majority could easily pick up another 6 Senate seats based on the 2018 playing field, I think the midterm rule is lookin' shaky this time. How hard would Trump have to flop to slash his party's fortunes down to "just" a 2-seat pickup?

(* "Always" being something like 46 out of the last 50 midterm elections, with some of the exceptions merely being break-even years.)



It appears that the turbulence is now visible at the top, and soon the entire dam may break -- if you believe Schindler, this is only the start for Trump, and it only ends one way.


The GOP is tactically disciplined and has an iron grip on all of the levers. But their tweeting mouthpiece has a 37% incoming approval rating, which is 10% less than his own second-place popular vote finish, and at least 25%-30% lower than Mr. Any Other Generic Newly-Elected President.

And those are Donald Trump's presidential honeymoon numbers.

Barack Obama went down 10% from his post-inauguration approval numbers by summer '09, GWB went down 10% by late spring '01, and Clinton was down more than 10% by late spring '93. So that's another mano-a-mano, "neither can live while the other survives" clash of two political normalities, like the 2018 midterms.

Interesting times. If Trump really is into pee, there are going to be a whole lot of pants in Congress to suit his tastes.
   1168. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:23 PM (#5382013)
someone who was prioritizing jobs over what names a beauty contestant from 1996 was called.
Uh, Hillary mentioned that for about 2 minutes at the debate and it prompted a week's worth of rants and tweets from Trump where he continued to call her names in 2016.
   1169. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:34 PM (#5382014)
Here again McCain admits that he had no idea if the information was credible or accurate:

Sworn Donald Trump enemy John McCain admitted Wednesday that he passed the dossier of claims of a Russian blackmail plot against the president-elect - calling it 'what any citizen should do'.

McCain - a longstanding anti-Trump Republican who had disassociated himself from the candidate's campaign weeks before the election - cast himself as an innocent and concerned member of the public as he justified his move.

He claimed he had no idea whether it was accurate or not - but that he believed the FBI should have it because it was 'sensitive'.

'I did what any citizen should do. I received sensitive information and handed it to the FBI,' he told CNN - the network which broke the story that the document existed. It was then published in full by Buzzfeed.
'That's why I gave it to the FBI. I don't know if it is credible or not but the information I thought deserved to be delivered to the FBI, the appropriate agency of government.'

He added: 'It doesn't trouble me because I don't know if it is accurate or not. I have no way of corroborating that.

'The individual gave me the information. I looked at it. After receiving that information I took it to the FBI.'

He added that he was now aware from media reports that the FBI was apparently already in possession of the information. '

The Arizona senator had issued a public statement amid mounting questions of his exact role in the affair - and how a document riddled with errors and unverifiable claims came to be published.

'Late last year, I received sensitive information that has since been made public,' he said.

'Upon examination of the contents, and unable to make a judgment about their accuracy, I delivered the information to the Director of the FBI.

'That has been the extent of my contact with the FBI or any other government agency regarding this issue.'

   1170. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:35 PM (#5382015)
of course misogyny isn't an issue for you.
Or most voters, because misogyny is a silly made-up thing. Continually upping the ante on the label over the years ("male chauvinism" -> "sexism" -> "misogyny") as the phenomenon disappears impresses nobody but the activist left.

Did Trump treat some women badly? Very much so. That makes him an #######, and maybe a sexual assaulter, but not a misogynist. No rational person - I leave out feminists - think he hates women.


ETA: But I'm sure that doubling down on this argument by claiming that Betsy DeVos supports rape because she gave some money to a civil liberties group will really be a winning strategy.
   1171. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:41 PM (#5382018)
...someone who was prioritizing jobs over what names a beauty contestant from 1996 was called.


of course misogyny isn't an issue for you.


An election is about prioritizing. And sane people understand that putting food on the table is more important than most of the pet issues that the left is all wrapped up in.

The left really couldn't understand that globalism, multiculturalism, deifying illegal immigrants, and sexism weren't the sum total of what most voters were concerned with as their top priorities.
   1172. simon bedford Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:42 PM (#5382019)
For those scoring at home, add "misogyny" to the list of words david does not understand.
   1173. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:44 PM (#5382020)
Did Trump treat some women badly? Very much so. That makes him an #######, and maybe a sexual assaulter, but not a misogynist. No rational person - I leave out feminists - think he hates women.


yikes.

Here again McCain admits that he had no idea if the information was credible or accurate:


The intelligence community believes the gist of the memo, if not every exact claim. I've posted numerous quotes today illustrating that. If you don't believe anything the US intelligence community does is worthwhile or genuine then I'd suggest, like I did to OJ, to just post that instead of anything else, because if you don't at least think they are serious people that for the most part do serious work (with the odd mistake, as we are prone) then what you're really saying is that you don't believe in the US Government, at all, and that nothing the government does can ever be effective. This is such a ludicrous assumption (but needed to dismiss the Trump-Russian smoke) but of course this is the logic of Trumpkins.
   1174. simon bedford Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:46 PM (#5382021)
deleted
just not worth it
   1175. Bitter Mouse, Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:46 PM (#5382022)
Or most voters, because misogyny is a silly made-up thing.


So you are claiming misogyny is silly and made up? That it literally doesn't exist in the real world at all?

I am just making sure you were not just blathering or being euphemistic. I want to be sure before I make fun of you and your naive little bubble.

Note: I am not and have not said either Trump was such or that it cost HRC the election. I am talking about the concept of misogyny, which it sounds like you just wrote doesn't exist.

Noun: dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.
   1176. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:50 PM (#5382025)
For those scoring at home, add "misogyny" to the list of words david does not understand.
Have you found that video of the Muslims celebrating yet?
   1177. Bitter Mouse, Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:51 PM (#5382026)
The truism that whichever party holds the White House always always always (*) loses the midterms is going to collide head-on with the hard math of 2018.


Yeah at the dinner table last night I was discussing it with the boys and I informed them Democrats were very likely to lose Senate seats in 2018 because of the worst map ever. The House though, we definitely could win seats there, and of course there are non Federal elections between now and 2020 as well.
   1178. simon bedford Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:52 PM (#5382027)
David
Doubling down on stupid seems to be your new past time. Any other made up words you want to decry while you are on a roll?
   1179. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:52 PM (#5382028)
M-W has the definition of misogynist as one who "hates" women. That's clearly not Trump.

But other sources have an expanded definition, such as dictionary.com: "a person who hates, dislikes, mistrusts, or mistreats women." Which basically covers the gamut, like "global warming" was changed to "climate change" to account a range of effects that people wanted to include in the definition so that everything and anything could qualify, basically washing away the usefulness of the definition. In this case you have the broadening of "hates" ("dislikes") and the added "mistreats," but also "mistrusts" women can mean anything, and so anything can be projected on to the canvas.
   1180. Bitter Mouse, Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 06:53 PM (#5382029)
The left really couldn't understand that globalism, multiculturalism, deifying illegal immigrants, and sexism weren't the sum total of what most voters were concerned with as their top priorities.


Hard to believe Hillary won millions of more votes than Trump with such a terrible agenda. Oh wait that wasn't anyone's agenda, other than the voices in your head.
   1181. madvillain Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:00 PM (#5382031)
But other sources have an expanded definition, such as dictionary.com: "a person who hates, dislikes, mistrusts, or mistreats women." Which basically covers the gamut, like "global warming" was changed to "climate change" to account a range of effects that people wanted to include in the definition so that everything and anything could qualify, basically washing away the usefulness of the definition. In this case, "mistrusts" women can mean anything, and so anything can be projected on to the canvas.


the mind of a conservative white male in 2017, unfiltered, live from the USA! I have to say, I never anticipated AGW entering this conversation.
   1182. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:02 PM (#5382032)
So you are claiming misogyny is silly and made up? That it literally doesn't exist in the real world at all?
Sure. In Afghanistan.

Do you ask whether I really mean literally no one in the U.S.? Of course I don't mean that. There are 320,000,000 million people here; you can find a few hundred who think the world is flat (and I don't mean Thomas Friedman!) and the moon landing was faked. They're within a rounding error of zero, though. And they have as much significance to our political campaigns and public life as ClownHitler's proverbial 400 pound guy who's living in his mother's basement, who hates women.
   1183. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:02 PM (#5382033)
Hate science hate America.
   1184. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:04 PM (#5382034)
Doubling down on stupid seems to be
your religion. But you will find those videos soon; I'm sure of it.
   1185. simon bedford Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:10 PM (#5382035)
David
You really have turned into SBB all you need to do now is start rhapsodizing about 1979.
Your inability to provide evidence of a bunch of crap you were spewing is your issue. You were wrong and we both know it. But hey keep making jokes about something that is totally unrelated cause you know that worked in a south park episode once.
   1186. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:18 PM (#5382039)
The intelligence community believes the gist of the memo, if not every exact claim. I've posted numerous quotes today illustrating that. If you don't believe anything the US intelligence community does is worthwhile or genuine then I'd suggest, like I did to OJ, to just post that instead of anything else, because if you don't at least think they are serious people that for the most part do serious work (with the odd mistake, as we are prone) then what you're really saying is that you don't believe in the US Government, at all, and that nothing the government does can ever be effective. This is such a ludicrous assumption (but needed to dismiss the Trump-Russian smoke) but of course this is the logic of Trumpkins.


People who live in glass houses...

Seriously, the leaps of logic, the argument from authority, the blind assertions... you are one confused puppy.

My point is any serious intelligence work is covert (hidden) from the likes of you, and that what you want to believe and what's actually true are poles apart. I'm not sure what anonymous quotes you refer to, but nobody is willing to stand behind this report as tbe least bit accurate.

At least CNN and BF have mercenary reason for rushing to publish inaccurate/misleadung disinformation -- what's the excuse for your foolishness?

You make one good side point -- I have no patience to engage your childish understanding of how government and politics work.

Good luck, Ray.
   1187. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:19 PM (#5382041)
no rational person - I leave out feminists

Separate from the main discussion, a libertarian/objectivist claiming the rational high ground against feminism is worth repeating. And pointing and laughing at.
   1188. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:21 PM (#5382043)
That BuzzFeed "intelligence report" that so many here lapped up isn't doing very well on the evening news shows tonight. ABC News reported that David Cohen hadn't been out of the country when he was alleged to have been meeting the Russians in Prague, and that contrary to the report his father-in-law was not a developer with close ties to Putin (same name, no relation). NBC News reported the intelligence agencies considered the report a "smear job" and only included it in an appendix document as an example of "disinformation", and did not raise it while briefing Trump. Probably more coming, but don't let that stop you guys from beclowning yourself.
   1189. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:29 PM (#5382047)
At some point, the validity, practicality, and actual implementation/results of those arguments are going to matter, though, right?

No.


I love how telling white people in the rustbelt who are barely making ends meet to stop focusing on their white privilege and to start focusing on multiculturalism, globalism, sexism, and advocacy for illegal aliens was supposed to move them to vote Democrat AND YOU'RE ALL BIGOTS IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH US F### YOUR CONCERNS LIKE YOUR JOB AND FEEDING YOUR FAMILY WE HAVE SEXISM TO FIGHT!!!

This interpretation of the Democratic platform, from the person crying FAKE NEWS three times a page, is literally hysteria.
   1190. Theo^J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:36 PM (#5382048)
Meh. It's just as likely Ivanka runs as a Democrat.


Like Democrats are smart enough to run her, or she's stupid enough to bother.

I like you Wolfowitz. Coke zero anytime. I promise not to spike it and videotape the results.
   1191. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 07:38 PM (#5382050)
This interpretation of the Democratic platform, from the person crying FAKE NEWS three times a page, is literally hysteria.


Adam Carolla had a guest on just after the election, a liberal, I forget now who. And the liberal started in on Carolla for his "white privilege."

This is a guy, Carolla, who grew up with divorced parents who had nothing, did almost nothing, weren't invested either emotionally or financially in raising him or his sister. Carolla was working construction, carpentry, and carpet cleaning and barely making ends meet - living in a run down apartment with roommates, no health insurance, no money to pay for even a parking ticket - from 18-30 before he soon thereafter started to make inroads into a career, for one thing putting himself through improv school by the construction work and teaching boxing, etc.

White privilege, indeed. The guest started from his conclusion that since Carolla is at a certain station in life now - he's wealthy - it was due to white privilege.

If only.

You can also see the work ethic and ingenuity in creating revenue streams that Carolla has, which he made; it certainly wasn't passed down to him.
   1192. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:01 PM (#5382057)
My records could be wrong, but I think it's Lassus's turn to try explaining "white privilege" to Ray.

   1193. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:05 PM (#5382059)
Yeah at the dinner table last night I was discussing it with the boys and I informed them Democrats were very likely to lose Senate seats in 2018 because of the worst map ever.


Did you tell the boys that because America is a sexist, misogynist place you'll be voting for a male candidate over a female candidate in the 2020 primaries if the two candidates are roughly equal?
   1194. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:09 PM (#5382060)
No rational person - I leave out feminists - think he hates women.


I think it's reasonable to say Trump hates women *with agency.* Pissface sees women as ornaments and sex toys, nothing more. He doesn't see women as human beings with their own agency. That makes him a misogynist, and clearly so. You arguing otherwise is just you being a daft pedantic moron, as you are occasionally want to be.
   1195. Rickey! No. You move. Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:10 PM (#5382061)
Adam Carolla had a guest on just after the election


Perhaps part of your blinkered ignorance is due to the fact that you apparently watch Adam ####### Corlla.
   1196. Joe Bivens, Floundering Pumpkin Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:11 PM (#5382062)
1192---It's a black and white world, isn't it.
   1197. Joe Bivens, Floundering Pumpkin Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:12 PM (#5382063)
1194----it's "wont".
   1198. DJS, the Digital Dandy Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:16 PM (#5382065)
Doubling down on stupid seems to be your new past time. Any other made up words you want to decry while you are on a roll?

The word, for those that speak English, is "pastime."
   1199. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:17 PM (#5382066)
I think it's reasonable to say Trump hates women *with agency.* Pissface sees women as ornaments and sex toys, nothing more.


That wouldn't explain why he put women in high positions in his private business, including at least as far back as the 80s, or why he's put Ivanka in high positions both in his business and in his campaign/president-elect-cy.
   1200. Joe Bivens, Floundering Pumpkin Posted: January 11, 2017 at 08:20 PM (#5382068)
Flip
Page 12 of 20 pages ‹ First  < 10 11 12 13 14 >  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
Shooty is obsessed with the latest hoodie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 16 Jan. 2017: The ‘honor’ Trumps politics in scheduling Cubs’ White House visit
(1325 - 12:20am, Jan 20)
Last: Renegade (((JE)))

NewsblogWhat the Hall of Fame elections will look like through 2022
(84 - 12:17am, Jan 20)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogPredicting every Hall of Fame class through 2045 | ESPN.com
(14 - 11:49pm, Jan 19)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogJayson Stark: Casting my 2018 Hall of Fame ballot ... today
(21 - 11:41pm, Jan 19)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

Sox Therapy2017 in Review
(6 - 11:15pm, Jan 19)
Last: Jose is El Absurd Pollo

NewsblogOrioles, Mark Trumbo agree to deal | MLB.com
(6 - 11:06pm, Jan 19)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogMarlins Acquire RHP Straily from Reds
(5 - 11:02pm, Jan 19)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogHall of Fame's Rule of 10 should be changed | MLB.com
(8 - 10:52pm, Jan 19)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT - December 2016 NBA thread
(1178 - 10:48pm, Jan 19)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogAlex Rodriguez to host CNBC reality show featuring cash-strapped former athletes
(28 - 10:16pm, Jan 19)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

Newsblog2017 Baseball Hall of Fame election results | MLB.com
(188 - 10:11pm, Jan 19)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOn the Polo Grounds: When Fans Were Fans
(41 - 9:39pm, Jan 19)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Newsblog2017 Top 10 Catching prospects | MLB.com
(2 - 7:16pm, Jan 19)
Last: cardsfanboy

Sox TherapySox In The Hall
(8 - 6:30pm, Jan 19)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

NewsblogJosh Hamilton Prepared to Earn Spot on Rangers' Roster
(42 - 5:55pm, Jan 19)
Last: Dan

Page rendered in 1.0628 seconds
49 querie(s) executed