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 10 of 20 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›
   901. reech Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:22 AM (#5381543)
This is going to be my mantra for the next 4 years.
   902. gef the talking mongoose, amorphous lefty blob Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:24 AM (#5381544)
Hey, snapper, how does the Church view so-called watersports?
   903. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:25 AM (#5381545)
(And yeah, how? Hell underage girls didn't take Berlusconi down.)


Turns out he was actually born in Kenya. What a twist!
   904. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:25 AM (#5381546)
Hey, snapper, how does the Church view so-called watersports?


On the internet, like almost everyone else...
   905. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:34 AM (#5381548)
Sure, their president-elect might get off on having Russian whores piss in his mouth, but Jason and Clapper are willing to go further and eat #### right from ole' President Pissface's ########. Tribe over all else, baby!
   906. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:40 AM (#5381550)
@JohnnyMcNulty on Twitter:
Dear Trump fans:
Turns out that hot mug of liberal tears you were sipping was something else entirely.
   907. dlf Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:42 AM (#5381551)
#898 - Do you really think that the lawyers arguing a case have more responsibility for the holding than do the clients on whose behalf they are arguing?
   908. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:42 AM (#5381552)
but Jason and Clapper are willing to go further


I think you are being a little unfair to Jason there, but YC? I'm starting to think he's a bot or something.
   909. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:44 AM (#5381553)
I think you are being a little unfair to Jason there, but YC? I'm starting to think he's a bot or something.


Jason has spent the week elsewhere explaining how Meryl Streep is the real enemy in America. Until he proves otherwise, he's got a lip lock on the #### spigot right next to Clapper.
   910. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:49 AM (#5381555)
Is there anything more amusingly ironic than the outrage emanating from Trump Central about fake news? Has there ever been anything more amusingly ironic in the annals of human history?

Amusing?
If I wasn't an American I'd probably find everything political that has taken place in America the past 15 months to be hysterical.

It's not so funny when it's your country, the one you were born in and live in that has gone so unhinged.


Obviously from a serious POV you're absolutely right, but as Greg K says, sometimes you've gotta laugh to keep from crying. And the complete lack of self-awareness exhibited by Team Trump's decrying of "fake news" is certainly worth a guffaw along with the revulsion.

Last night we saw our outgoing president give a farewell address where he challenged us to live up to our best ideals and our most generous instincts. We now have an incoming president serving as a Bizarro World rebuttal to all those ideals and all those instincts. I don't think we can afford to leave any weapon unused in fighting back against the upcoming siege, and humor should have an honorable place in our arsenal.
   911. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:50 AM (#5381556)
10 minutes till piss confere... errr.... press conference time!
   912. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:52 AM (#5381557)
#898 - Do you really think that the lawyers arguing a case have more responsibility for the holding than do the clients on whose behalf they are arguing?


In what sense? Moral responsibility? No. Lawyers have a job to do and have to do it to the best of their ability. Do they have more influence in the outcome? Yes. I think the quality of legal argument has a huge impact on the outcome of a particular case. If the lawyers here want to argue differently, well my mind is open to change. I am not a lawyer and am willing to believe (with a good enough argument) that lawyers don't have much to do with the outcome of their cases I guess.

However, like I said, there can be many arguments about the exact place in the "responsibility chain" for that case, If you want to put judges in one place and lawyers somewhere else? Whatever. But wherever exactly you put Clinton has to be dramatically below where the linked article was putting them.
   913. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:53 AM (#5381559)
Jason has spent the week elsewhere explaining how Meryl Streep is the real enemy in America.


She did turn down that lead role in the film adaptation of 'Everybody Poops', which has set American culture and cinema back generations...
   914. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM (#5381561)
It won't change the election results, but here's one bit of good news.

American voters approve 55 - 39 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, his best approval rating in seven years, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. These same voters disapprove 51 - 37 percent of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president-elect....

The measures of Trump's personal qualities all are more negative than they were in a November 22 Quinnipiac University poll:

53 - 39 percent that he is not honest, compared to 52 - 42 percent November 22;
49 - 44 percent that he has good leadership skills, compared to 56 - 38 percent;
52 - 44 percent that he does not care about average Americans, compared to 51 - 45 percent who said he did care;
62 - 33 percent that he is not level-headed, compared to 57 - 38 percent;
71 - 25 percent that he is a strong person, compared to 74 - 23 percent;
68 - 27 percent that he is intelligent, compared to 74 - 21 percent.
   915. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM (#5381565)

And instead Jared and Trump would go forth anyway and things would unfold as they did for Clinton, which would change things how?

The real point - which you are still missing - is Trump putting his son in law in place is in no way the fault of Clinton.


There are two responses to this:

1. Had the Clintons not created the precedent maybe Trump wouldn't be appointing Jared now. (Maybe. I agree that probably Trump would be, but it's arguable that maybe he wouldn't.)

2. But the stronger argument - and the one more on point - is that had the Clintons not created the precedent then maybe the courts would rule against Trump doing this now.

So to use a baseball analogy, the Clintons raised the mound and then argued for the mound to be raised. The mound was raised. Enter Trump into a situation where the mound has been raised and approved by the courts. It's hard to blame him for now wanting to pitch from the raised mound.
   916. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM (#5381566)
It won't change the election results, but here's one bit of good news.


When viewed in the future Obama will have had the great "fortune" to be bracketed by incompetents and so is now near certain to get pretty good historical ratings, likely beyond even what he otherwise would have gotten.
   917. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:02 AM (#5381567)
I don't think we can afford to leave any weapon unused in fighting back against the upcoming siege,


You certainly didn't leave the "kidnap and torture a mentally disabled guy while shouting anti-Trump/anti-white slogans" weapon unused. Seems to have worked OK, so maybe try doubling down!
   918. JL72 Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:02 AM (#5381568)
The empty-headed evangelical Christians (but I repeat myself) love this guy. Maybe they think he was being baptized in that hotel room? Sprinkling, after all, is one method.


The jokes on Twitter about this have been great. My current favorite is the liberal media ignoring that the episode at the Ritz was only about helping two of the girls who had been stung by jellyfish.

I think most of this is a bunch of garbage (meaning not true). But I am thoroughly enjoying how all those who defended Trump's lying and throwing crap against the wall suddenly getting religion when Trump is the target. Including Trump himself.
   919. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:06 AM (#5381569)
You certainly didn't leave the "kidnap and torture a mentally disabled guy while shouting anti-Trump/anti-white slogans" weapon unused


When did you get kidnapped and tortured? Is there video?
   920. Greg K Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:06 AM (#5381570)
When viewed in the future Obama will have had the great "fortune" to be bracketed by incompetents and so is now near certain to get pretty good historical ratings, likely beyond even what he otherwise would have gotten.

He might also get the title of "guy in charge when it all went to ####\". You never know.

I don't have a great read on current perceptions of American history (nevermind American history itself). Who is the last president of which there is a positive bi-partisan consensus? I get the sense that Eisenhower has some broad support.
   921. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5381571)
So to use a baseball analogy, the Clintons raised the mound and then argued for the mound to be raised. The mound was raised. Enter Trump into a situation where the mound has been raised and approved by the courts. It's hard to blame him for now wanting to pitch from the raised mound.


If only at some point in the last few decades the GOP had ever had any ability to pass laws. If they had maybe they could have closed up this egregious loophole* which the Clinton's revealed those many years ago. Sadly the GOP has been completely powerless and the Democrats have been completely under the evil Clinton spell.

* Unless you want to argue that this is a bedrock constitutional issue and no "regular" law could have been passed to fix this problem. In which case blaming Clinton is extra dumb.
   922. Ron J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5381572)
#907 My position would seem to be close to Mouse's. What matters is that the argument was successful, not who made it.
   923. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:08 AM (#5381574)
1. Had the Clintons not created the precedent maybe Trump wouldn't be appointing Jared now.

I thought for a nano-second Trump was appointing the imprisoned Subway pedophile to some cabinet position. It seemed pretty logical.
   924. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:09 AM (#5381575)
I thought for a nano-second this was the imprisoned Subway pedophile. It seemed pretty logical.


Clown Duce is saving that for sweeps...
   925. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:09 AM (#5381576)
I don't have a great read on current perceptions of American history (nevermind American history itself). Who is the last president of which there is a positive bi-partisan consensus? I get the sense that Eisenhower has some broad support.


That is one of the many reasons you have to wait a long time before you can really evaluate the place of a President. The tribalism for that person fades away and you can be analytical about them.

But yeah Eisenhower is well thought of by most.
   926. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:13 AM (#5381580)
I don't think we can afford to leave any weapon unused in fighting back against the upcoming siege,

You certainly didn't leave the "kidnap and torture a mentally disabled guy while shouting anti-Trump/anti-white slogans" weapon unused.


Gee, by that sort of logic I guess that makes "you" nothing but a bunch of Nazis.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't have a great read on current perceptions of American history (nevermind American history itself). Who is the last president of which there is a positive bi-partisan consensus?

Kennedy, and that's mainly because he was assassinated. If he'd survived through a second term there'd be no such consensus.
   927. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:16 AM (#5381582)
Kennedy, and that's mainly because he was assassinated.

I.... don't know that the Clappers of the world consider JFK a bipartisan candidate for greatness.
   928. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM (#5381586)
I.... don't know that the Clappers of the world consider JFK a bipartisan candidate for greatness.


Heck I don't consider JFK to be all that. The whole narrative - Camelot, youth and charisma, Jackie, war hero, assassination - though does have much power though.
   929. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:22 AM (#5381587)
Kennedy, and that's mainly because he was assassinated.

I.... don't know that the Clappers of the world consider JFK a bipartisan candidate for greatness.


Yes, and David may not be sold on FDR. (smile) I get it. But if you polled the elected Republicans in both houses of congress, I doubt if you'd find too many Clappers when it came to Kennedy. Bi-partisan consensus isn't all about substance, and to many people criticizing a "martyred" president is a bit like criticizing Mother Teresa.
   930. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:27 AM (#5381593)
#907 My position would seem to be close to Mouse's. What matters is that the argument was successful, not who made it.


But this doesn't really make much sense. Lawyers make arguments on behalf of clients who desire a certain outcome. The responsibility for the outcome is therefore largely the client's.

Lawyers don't just show up in court randomly by themselves to make arguments for outcomes they think sound good.
   931. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:27 AM (#5381594)
Gee, by that sort of logic I guess that makes "you" nothing but a bunch of Nazis.


You guys have been saying that for years now. Your problem is that we're not actually a bunch of Nazis, or anything close to it, which is why all your desperate name-calling hasn't worked. But your tribe really does have a significant contingent of violent, hateful thugs. Murdering cops, rioting, burning down cities, promoting racial hatred, engaging in politically motivated kidnapping and torture. That's your base, and you keep defending them. So by all means, keep screaming Nazi while casting a blind eye on the crimes of your side. Keep lying, keep denying, keep refusing to accept responsibility for your crimes and failures. You're doing our work for us, and the best part is that doing so apparently makes you happy!
   932. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:31 AM (#5381599)
The Clown Duce presser is a lot more sad than I figured it would be --

Discussing the inauguration, it seems like he almost wants to go backstage and cry because no one will come to his party while trying to bravely pump up his glitzy exterior.

I mean, who cares about the inauguration (except him, I guess) so it's mostly just enjoying the schadenfreude of a wide variety of people giving him the middle finger -- in increasingly amusing ways... but, for example, I understand the runner-up to one of those reality TV singing shows agreed to perform only if she could do the Billie Holiday "Strange Fruit" song.
   933. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:33 AM (#5381601)
You guys have been saying that for years now. Your problem is that we're not actually a bunch of Nazis, or anything close to it, which is why all your desperate name-calling hasn't worked. But your tribe really does have a significant contingent of violent, hateful thugs. Murdering cops, rioting, burning down cities, promoting racial hatred, engaging in politically motivated kidnapping and torture. That's your base, and you keep defending them. So by all means, keep screaming Nazi while casting a blind eye on the crimes of your side. Keep lying, keep denying, keep refusing to accept responsibility for your crimes and failures. You're doing our work for us, and the best part is that doing so apparently makes you happy!


Hey, your fuhrer just tweeted this AM that we're living in Nazi Germany...
   934. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:33 AM (#5381602)
So let's review. Many years ago Clinton did something that ended up going to court. The courts decided that Clinton did nothing wrong under the existing rules. Then that precedent was left to stand as is since last century. No one bothered to act on that precedent and change the rules. Now Trump is following that long ago precedent and ... Clinton is evil?

You guys have not even showed what is wrong with what Clinton did originally (if anything), why what Trump wants to do is beyond the pale*, to say nothing about how this long ignored precedent is suddenly a huge problem which is all Clinton's fault.

This is all CDS pure and simple. (EDIT: With a dose of TDS in it as well, bipartisan nuttiness!)

* I mean sure as a base assumption anything Trump does should be assumed to be questionable, but you should maybe try to summon some sort of justification before just declaring the action evil.
   935. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:37 AM (#5381606)
Hey, your fuhrer just tweeted this AM that we're living in Nazi Germany...


Thank goodness he's taking action to end our long national nightmare. Interesting that you fled the country rather than live through the liberation. Argentina wouldn't take you? That's the traditional destination for your type...
   936. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:37 AM (#5381607)
Jason has spent the week elsewhere explaining how Meryl Streep is the real enemy in America. Until he proves otherwise, he's got a lip lock on the #### spigot right next to Clapper.
In fairness, aren't you pretty much at war with everyone here for not being nearly as angry banging on the keyboard as you?
   937. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM (#5381609)
If only at some point in the last few decades the GOP had ever had any ability to pass laws.
Vintage Obtuse Mouse. For years he mocked the GOP for passing Obamacare repeal when it had no chance of becoming law, now pretends we won't remember anything he said.
   938. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5381612)
In fairness, aren't you pretty much at war with everyone here


No. I still like Ron. ########.
   939. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:49 AM (#5381615)
Look the dumb soccer analogy was YOURS. Now you don't like it, well that is not my fault.
Uh, I do like it; you just are playing dumb and pretending not to understand it. You first raised a sports analogy; I was just providing a better one.

Do you seriously contend that if Reagan had secured the precedent that Jason would have linked to an article (which would not even have been written, of course) blaming Reagan for the appointment of Trump's SIL?
I am not Jason's spokesperson; he's a gonif. (I will note that nothing in his post blamed the Clintons for the appointment. The headline was quite clear: thanks to the Clintons, it's perfectly legal to appoint Kushner. Not, "Thanks to the Clintons, Trump has decided to appoint Kushner.")

[Rest of your post deleted as just plain dumb.] It's quite simple: there is a statute that arguably forbids Kushner's appointment. There is, however, caselaw that says that the statute does not do so. The Clintons played a key role in the creation of that caselaw. That's it. The rest is just your handwaving to deflect from that simple argument. The idea that a litigator or litigant has nothing to do with caselaw is just insane. If the headline had been, "Thanks to Linda Brown [or Thurgood Marshall], it's perfectly legal for blacks to attend white schools," you wouldn't have said, "What? She had nothing to do with it. It was a court that did it. Are you saying that she was using mind control?"
   940. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:50 AM (#5381617)
Apparently, the long-awaited Clown Duce presser is the political equivalent of Geraldo opening up Al Capone's vault.... and finding... a lawyer to explain how everything is totes magotes!
   941. BDC Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:51 AM (#5381618)
Clown Duce

I move that we adopt Gordon's suggestion of "Cheeto Benito."
   942. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:53 AM (#5381619)
Many years ago Clinton did something that ended up going to court. The courts decided that Clinton
had to defend against a civil lawsuit while in office:

Nevertheless, we are persuaded that it was an abuse of discretion for the District Court to defer the trial until after the President leaves office. Such a lengthy and categorical stay takes no account whatever of the respondent's interest in bringing the case to trial. The complaint was filed within the statutory limitations period—albeit near the end of that period—and delaying trial would increase the danger of *708 prejudice resulting from the loss of evidence, including the inability of witnesses to recall specific facts, or the possible death of a party.15 The decision to postpone the trial was, furthermore, premature. The proponent of a stay bears the burden of establishing its need. Id., at 255, 57 S.Ct., at 166. In this case, at the stage at which the District Court made its ruling, there was no way to assess whether a stay of trial after the completion of discovery would be warranted. Other than the fact that a trial may consume some of the President's time and attention, there is nothing in the record to enable a judge to assess the potential harm that may ensue from scheduling the trial promptly after discovery is concluded. We think the District Court may have given undue weight to the concern that a trial might generate unrelated civil actions that could conceivably hamper the President in conducting the duties of his office. If and when that should occur, the court's discretion would permit it to manage those actions in such fashion (including deferral of trial) that interference with the President's duties would not occur. But no such impingement upon the President's conduct of his office was shown here.


Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 707–08, 117 S. Ct. 1636, 1651, 137 L. Ed. 2d 945 (1997)

Here's the real kicker:

We add a final comment on two matters that are discussed at length in the briefs: the risk that our decision will generate a large volume of politically motivated harassing and frivolous litigation, and the danger that national security concerns might prevent the President from explaining a legitimate need for a continuance.We are not persuaded that either of these risks is serious. Most frivolous and vexatious litigation is terminated at the pleading stage or on summary judgment, with little if any personal involvement by the defendant. See Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. 12, 56. Moreover, the availability of sanctions provides a significant deterrent to litigation directed at the President in his unofficial capacity for purposes of political *709 gain or harassment.42 History indicates that the likelihood that a significant number of such cases will be filed is remote

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 708–09, 117 S. Ct. 1636, 1651, 137 L. Ed. 2d 945 (1997)



Afterall, the POTUS being embroiled in civil litigation while in office has never been a significant concern before:

Only three sitting Presidents have been defendants in civil litigation involving their actions prior to taking office. Complaints against Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman had been dismissed before they took office; the dismissals were affirmed after their respective inaugurations.15 Two companion cases arising out of an automobile accident were filed against John F. Kennedy in 1960 during the Presidential campaign.16 After taking office, he unsuccessfully argued that his status as Commander in Chief gave him a right to a stay under the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of 1940, 50 U.S.C.App. §§ 501–525. The motion for a stay was denied by the District Court, and the matter was settled out of court.17

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 692, 117 S. Ct. 1636, 1643, 137 L. Ed. 2d 945 (1997)
   943. gef the talking mongoose, amorphous lefty blob Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM (#5381621)
I move that we adopt Gordon's suggestion of "Cheeto Benito."


Back off. I came up with "Clown Duce" to begin with, & I get 4 cents every time it's used.
   944. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:56 AM (#5381623)
I move that we adopt Gordon's suggestion of "Cheeto Benito."

Back off. I came up with "Clown Duce" to begin with.


Cheeto Benito is funnier and rolls off the tongue better.
   945. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:58 AM (#5381625)
So let's review. Many years ago Clinton did something that ended up going to court. The courts decided that Clinton did nothing wrong under the existing rules.
No. This is all very passive in tone (if not technically the grammatical passive voice). Things don't just "end up going" to court. Nor do courts just "decide" things. The Clintons argued that the law should be interpreted a certain way; the court adopted the Clintons' position.

You guys have not even showed what is wrong with what Clinton did originally (if anything), why what Trump wants to do is beyond the pale*
Not clear on the use of the second person here; it's your side that is arguing that what Trump is doing is wrong, that appointing Kushner is bad because, inter alia, it's nepotistic.
   946. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:58 AM (#5381626)
Sad.

They key takeaways from this snoozefest seem to be -

1) I'm a germaphobe! So no pee-pee games for me!

2) Military bands have agreed to sing me into the WH!

3) My businesses are awesome and I could so keep being awesome at business and do President stuff in my spare time! If I wanted to... and I could.

4) Now here's a lawyer to say lots of words that sound good to all you nerds.

No wonder network TV is hurting...
   947. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:58 AM (#5381627)
I am not Jason's spokesperson; he's a gonif.
Sigh. It's still not my fault for protecting your beloved scarf from the bowels of the Cask lost and found department.
   948. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 11:59 AM (#5381628)
Cheeto Benito is funnier and rolls off the tongue better.

Agree. Clown Duce has no flow. It may as well be German.
   949. Ron J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:00 PM (#5381630)
#930 I don't buy this. Unless you're arguing that the Clinton case was incorrectly decided.

If that's the case, yeah bad ruling equals a precedent that's not going to be challenged going forward.
   950. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:01 PM (#5381631)
I will agree to adopt Cheetoh Benito if I can get a better licensing deal than the one I got from gef...
   951. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:03 PM (#5381633)
Vintage Obtuse Mouse. For years he mocked the GOP for passing Obamacare repeal when it had no chance of becoming law, now pretends we won't remember anything he said.


Huh? That is apples and Volkswagons. I made fun of the GOP and the endless ACA repeal because it was all political theater. This is the opposite of political theater because Clinton established the precedent and no one cared (AFAICT) for decades, but now suddenly it is a problem.

You are visualizing this as a problem and then projecting your imagined problem on .. surprise! ... Clinton. Because of CDS.

Uh, I do like it; you just are playing dumb and pretending not to understand it.


I understood it just fine, you just got upset when I corrected it by pointing out your player taking a dive wasn't the point, it was later generations of players taking dives and your blaming of the original player - which makes no sense.

It's quite simple: there is a statute that arguably forbids Kushner's appointment. There is, however, caselaw that says that the statute does not do so. The Clintons played a key role in the creation of that caselaw. That's it.


It is quite simple. What Clinton did was legal at the time. And it was so unobjectionable no one bothered to update the rules to stop that sort of thing from happening again. Then decades later someone you find objectionable is trying a roughly similar thing.

And somehow this is the fault of Clinton. Because everything is the fault of Clinton, Obama, or both.
   952. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5381635)
Not clear on the use of the second person here; it's your side that is arguing that what Trump is doing is wrong, that appointing Kushner is bad because, inter alia, it's nepotistic.


My side? Feel free to point out all the times I have railed against Trump's picks for various positions. I - as horrific as I find it - am on Trump's side on this one.

It was Jason (who since he can't mention me with out a derogatory is clearly not on my side) who brought this up. And weirdly it is You, Ray, and Jason arguing with me on this. That ain't my side. I mean I am sure you are all fine fellows and I have nothing against any of you, but still .
   953. gef the talking mongoose, amorphous lefty blob Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5381636)
I will agree to adopt Cheetoh Benito if I can get a better licensing deal than the one I got from gef...


STFU. You'll be able to afford a grande latte any day now with your share of the proceedings.
   954. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5381637)
I think most of this is a bunch of garbage (meaning not true). But I am thoroughly enjoying how all those who defended Trump's lying and throwing crap against the wall suddenly getting religion when Trump is the target. Including Trump himself.

Well, it's not like there aren't consequences for being wrong, or in the case of the BuzzFeed "intelligence report", going with a fairly obvious hoax because you dislike the subject of the hoax. How did Dan Rather insisting he had Bush's National Guard service records, when he was relying on an obvious forgery, work out? The feeding frenzy, here and elsewhere, strives to make BuzzFeed credible, but its report is unsourced, anonymous and layer and layer of hearsay. There are reasons no other journalist would run the story, even though there is no shortage of anti-Trump journalists. Even Mother Jones wouldn't run it. The folks pushing this story are embarrassing themselves.
   955. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:10 PM (#5381639)
Huh? That is apples and Volkswagons. I made fun of the GOP and the endless ACA repeal because it was all political theater. This is the opposite of political theater because Clinton established the precedent and no one cared (AFAICT) for decades, but now suddenly it is a problem.

You are visualizing this as a problem and then projecting your imagined problem on .. surprise! ... Clinton. Because of CDS.
It cuts both ways. Folks on your side are kvecthing about Kushner so why didn't your side pass related legislation at any point over the last 16 years?
   956. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:12 PM (#5381642)
I'm going to stick with President Pissface for a while.
   957. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:12 PM (#5381643)
It was Jason (who since he can't mention me with out a derogatory is clearly not on my side) who brought this up.
Someone didn't read #695.
   958. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:14 PM (#5381645)
Gee, by that sort of logic I guess that makes "you" nothing but a bunch of Nazis.

You guys have been saying that for years now. Your problem is that we're not actually a bunch of Nazis, or anything close to it,


It's always funny to note the neverending elasticity with which you employ "you" and "we". If a handful of internet ranters call all Trump supporters Nazis**, then that "you" becomes every Democrat and liberal from Obama and Clinton on down. But if a a much larger percentage of Trump supporters think Obama was born in Kenya, then "we" don't have anything to do with them.

** As opposed to noting quite accurately that virtually every self-proclaimed Nazi and neo-Nazi white nationalist actually did back him.
   959. Ron J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5381647)
The Clintons argued that the law should be interpreted a certain way; the court adopted the Clintons' position.


And to me the key here is that as long as the case was not wrongly decided then Clinton's position was correct.

Now maybe without the precedent Trump decides against the appointment. But color me doubtful on this score. Trump's certainly not afraid of trying to get his way via the courts. And I see no reason to think the outcome would be different.
   960. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5381648)
I hesitate to ask, but - the Trump dustup aside - how much of "a thing" is this golden shower thing with the general public behind closed doors?
   961. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5381649)
Well, it's not like there aren't consequences for being wrong, or in the case of the BuzzFeed "intelligence report", going with a fairly obvious hoax because you dislike the subject of the hoax. How did Dan Rather insisting he had Bush's National Guard service records, when he was relying on an obvious forgery, work out? The feeding frenzy, here and elsewhere, strives to make BuzzFeed credible, but its report is unsourced, anonymous and layer and layer of hearsay. There are reasons no other journalist would run the story, even though there is no shortage of anti-Trump journalists. Even Mother Jones wouldn't run it. The folks pushing this story are embarrassing themselves.


awful lot of words to say "should have sent it to wikileaks".
   962. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5381650)
Well, it's not like there aren't consequences for being wrong,

Unless the subject is Obama's birth place, or Hillary's imminent death, or all those cheering Muslims after 9/11, or 3 million illegal voters, or....
   963. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM (#5381652)
When it comes to the appointment of Jared Kushner, I'd say nepotism should be the least of our worries.
   964. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM (#5381653)
It cuts both ways. Folks on your side are kvecthing about Kushner so why didn't your side pass related legislation at any point over the last 16 years?


I explained that already, we have been under the evil Clinton mind control.

Seriously though I neither know nor care since I don't think there is a problem. If you don't think it is a problem then great! Join me, plenty of room on the "Presidents should largely be deferred to in their administration staffing" bandwagon.

If you do think it is a problem, OK, there are people on both sides of the aisle that agree there as well. Not as many, since they have not managed to change the law in the many years they have had, but I am sure they have been fighting the good fight every step of the way.

So either it is a problem ... in which case it should have been fixed in the many years since the problem was exposed. Or it is not a problem, in which case why are we blaming anyone?
   965. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:22 PM (#5381654)
So either it is a problem ... in which case it should have been fixed in the many years since the problem was exposed. Or it is not a problem, in which case why are we blaming anyone?
Why must you waste our time then? I said very clearly a hundred or so posts ago that I was responding to MV.
   966. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5381656)
awful lot of words to say "should have sent it to wikileaks".


Or maybe wikitakealeaksonyou
   967. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5381657)
awful lot of words to say "should have sent it to wikileaks".

AFAIK, Wikileaks doesn't just print stuff that come with absolutely no indicia of authenticity. Apparently, they care about their own credibility more than most of the anti-Trump folks.
   968. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5381658)
I hesitate to ask, but - the Trump dustup aside - how much of "a thing" is this golden shower thing with the general public behind closed doors?


I am not sure, since the doors are closed and it is not my thing*. But anyway AFAICT it is a niche thing, but it is certainly not unheard of. In other words if you have interest the internet can solve any needs you might have in that direction without too much work. Other than that I have no idea how to begin to answer your question. Maybe there have been surveys of it and such, but I am not aware of them and don't know how accurate they might be.

* Ick. I mean no judgement, but ick.
   969. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:25 PM (#5381659)
Evidently, Matt Boyle from Breitbart asked Trump the question of what media reforms he would recommend to deal with fake news.

That about sums up how these next four years are going to go ...
   970. zenbitz Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:25 PM (#5381660)
I thought "Wiki Leakes" was the name of the Russian prostitute...
   971. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:26 PM (#5381661)
When it comes to the appointment of Jared Kushner, I'd say nepotism should be the least of our worries.


It just shows how silly the "Trump is an anti-Semite" claims were. His daughter married to a Jewish person, him appointing said Jewish person, the prime minister of Israel looking forward to working with Trump...
   972. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:26 PM (#5381662)
AFAIK, Wikileaks doesn't just print stuff that come with absolutely no indicia of authenticity. Apparently, they care about their own credibility more than most of the anti-Trump folks.


I'm sure you'd know your international cabal's adjunct better than I, so I'll defer to your honesty and expertise in accurately explaining their vetting process.
   973. Ron J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:27 PM (#5381663)
#960 My position on it is a combination of "Ew, gross" combined with, honestly don't care. That may seem contradictory but I'm fine with somebody doing something that I personally would never consider doing.

And my take on it is that if this is what they were thinking was useful blackmail they were wrong. It'd likely be devastating to whoever today's Jimmy Swaggart is, but Trump? Minor embarrassment at worst.
   974. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:28 PM (#5381664)
Why must you waste our time then?


I didn't force David and Ray to jump in, I just felt (and feel) it was silly to drag Clinton into it. You may not have noticed but simple conversations here often branch out past the initial participants.
   975. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:28 PM (#5381665)
The Clintons argued that the law should be interpreted a certain way; the court adopted the Clintons' position.


And to me the key here is that as long as the case was not wrongly decided then Clinton's position was correct.


The point is that people are criticizing Trump for a nepotism appointment. One response to that is that the Clintons set the precedent for what Trump is doing, both factually and legally. The rebuttal to THAT appears to be "hey, the court made a ruling, it's the court's fault and the attorney's fault." But the ruling doesn't happen without the Clintons pushing for it.
   976. zenbitz Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:29 PM (#5381668)
As for germophobia, any good germophobe would know that urine is quite sterile.
   977. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5381670)
It just shows how silly the "Trump is an anti-Semite" claims were. His daughter married to a Jewish person, him appointing said Jewish person, the prime minister of Israel looking forward to working with Trump...


Plus, Roy Cohn!
   978. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:31 PM (#5381671)
I hesitate to ask, but - the Trump dustup aside - how much of "a thing" is this golden shower thing with the general public behind closed doors?


In some places, it's widespread. In others, just dribs and drabs.
   979. Eddo Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5381673)
I hesitate to ask, but - the Trump dustup aside - how much of "a thing" is this golden shower thing with the general public behind closed doors?

Are you asking "how much of the population enjoys golden showers as a sexual kink?" I'm guessing it's somewhere below bondage on the sexual kink spectrum.

EDIT: Sorry, "below" is unclear. I mean it's probably less prevalent than bondage.
   980. Ron J Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:36 PM (#5381675)
#975 Well it is a nepotism appointment. And at the same time one I'd never oppose. I mean he'll clearly function as a senior adviser regardless of title. Why dance around this?
   981. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM (#5381676)
In some places, it's widespread. In others, just dribs and drabs.


The unequal distribution of UTIs and UTI treatments is just another failing of Obamacare.
   982. GordonShumway Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM (#5381677)
Are golden showers the new market inefficiency?
   983. Zonk, Genius of the Stables Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:39 PM (#5381679)
Billy Beane should have never taken that leak.
   984. Eddo Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:42 PM (#5381680)
It just shows how silly the "Trump is an anti-Semite" claims were. His daughter married to a Jewish person, him appointing said Jewish person, the prime minister of Israel looking forward to working with Trump...

Personally, I don't believe Trump actually has any convictions beyond making more money and having more ornamental power, so I don't believe he's racist, sexist, or anti-Semitic any more than a very generic old white man is.

That said, he's gone ahead and put people with histories of such bigotry in prominent positions and fanned the flames of subsets of the population that are fervently anti-black/Jew/woman, which is quite awful.
   985. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:45 PM (#5381682)
I hear Clinton, well and all Democrats, was the real danger to the First Amendment ... Sessions 'isn't sure' that he can promise not to prosecute journalists

"I'm not sure," Sessions stated clearly. "I have not studied those regulations."

Sessions then noted that there is an accepted history of deference to news media, but also left the prosecution of media on the table.

"You could have a situation where the media is really not the unbiased media we see today," he said, "and they could be a mechanism through which unlawful intelligence is obtained. There are other dangers that could happen with regard to the federal government, that often doesn't happen to media covering cases in the states."


Anyway I find it interesting that he hasn't studied those regulations (hope he is a quick study), but even more that he is talking about "the unbiased media we see today". I am guessing because Trump won the media is now unbiased or something? I thought the conservative line was that the media is terrible, bad, no good, and totally biased.

I guess Trump has made the Media Great Again.
   986. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5381683)
That said, he's gone ahead and put people with histories of such bigotry in prominent positions and fanned the flames of subsets of the population that are fervently anti-black/Jew/woman, which is quite awful.


Agreed. As I said before no matter what his personal opinions are he has run a really xenophobic campaign, so whether or not he is personally xenophobic, whether he has Jewish friends or whatever, doesn't really help much IMO.
   987. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:49 PM (#5381686)
Donald Trump Concedes That Russia Probably Meddled in Election

Does this make Ray the last hold out, or are their others here who also scoff at the very notion?
   988. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:49 PM (#5381687)
It just shows how silly the "Trump is an anti-Semite" claims were.


That was more about his supporters being anti-Semites, Ray, and about Trump cynically pandering to them in order to secure their votes.

Trump knows that Kushner is insulated by his wealth and privilege from any potential negative consequences, and Kushner is of a pretty mercenary character himself, so it's not like either one has any real reason to be concerned about the lot of the Jews of America.
   989. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:53 PM (#5381690)
I guess Trump has made the Media Great Again.
Obtuse Mouse is obtuse. Film at 11.

Re-posting a nice-sized chunk of a recent James Risen NYT piece:
WASHINGTON — If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.

Mr. Trump made his animus toward the news media clear during the presidential campaign, often expressing his disgust with coverage through Twitter or in diatribes at rallies. So if his campaign is any guide, Mr. Trump seems likely to enthusiastically embrace the aggressive crackdown on journalists and whistle-blowers that is an important yet little understood component of Mr. Obama’s presidential legacy.

Criticism of Mr. Obama’s stance on press freedom, government transparency and secrecy is hotly disputed by the White House, but many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.

I experienced this pressure firsthand when the administration tried to compel me to testify to reveal my confidential sources in a criminal leak investigation. The Justice Department finally relented — even though it had already won a seven-year court battle that went all the way to the Supreme Court to force me to testify — most likely because they feared the negative publicity that would come from sending a New York Times reporter to jail.

In an interview last May, President Obama pushed back on the criticism that his administration had been engaged in a war on the press. He argued that the number of leak prosecutions his administration had brought had been small and that some of those cases were inherited from the George W. Bush administration.

“I am a strong believer in the First Amendment and the need for journalists to pursue every lead and every angle,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with the Rutgers University student newspaper. “I think that when you hear stories about us cracking down on whistle-blowers or whatnot, we’re talking about a really small sample.

“Some of them are serious,” he continued, “where you had purposeful leaks of information that could harm or threaten operations or individuals who were in the field involved with really sensitive national security issues.”

But critics say the crackdown has had a much greater chilling effect on press freedom than Mr. Obama acknowledges. In a scathing 2013 report for the Committee to Protect Journalists, Leonard Downie, a former executive editor of The Washington Post who now teaches at Arizona State University, said the war on leaks and other efforts to control information was “the most aggressive I’ve seen since the Nixon administration, when I was one of the editors involved in The Washington Post’s investigation of Watergate.”

When Mr. Obama was elected in 2008, press freedom groups had high expectations for the former constitutional law professor, particularly after the press had suffered through eight years of bitter confrontation with the Bush administration. But today, many of those same groups say Mr. Obama’s record of going after both journalists and their sources has set a dangerous precedent that Mr. Trump can easily exploit. “Obama has laid all the groundwork Trump needs for an unprecedented crackdown on the press,” said Trevor Timm, executive director of the nonprofit Freedom of the Press Foundation.

Dana Priest, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The Washington Post, added: “Obama’s attorney general repeatedly allowed the F.B.I. to use intrusive measures against reporters more often than any time in recent memory. The moral obstacles have been cleared for Trump’s attorney general to go even further, to forget that it’s a free press that has distinguished us from other countries, and to try to silence dissent by silencing an institution whose job is to give voice to dissent.”

The administration’s heavy-handed approach represents a sharp break with tradition. For decades, official Washington did next to nothing to stop leaks. Occasionally the C.I.A. or some other agency, nettled by an article or broadcast, would loudly proclaim that it was going to investigate a leak, but then would merely go through the motions and abandon the case.
Having handwaved away this issue for eight years, Mouse has been worried sick over the last eight weeks thinking what Trump might do after he's sworn in. Of course.
   990. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:57 PM (#5381694)
Donald Trump Concedes That Russia Probably Meddled in Election

Does this make Ray the last hold out, or are their others here who also scoff at the very notion?


First, I've never said Russia wasn't behind the hacking. I said we should be shown the evidence before concluding that. I've said that I wouldn't be surprised if Russia was behind it.

Second, fake news. Trump did not concede that Russia probably "meddled in the election" (your phrasing) nor did he concede that Russia was "behind election interference" (The Times's headline). As the body of the article you linked to shows (see below), Trump merely conceded that he thinks Russia may have been behind THE HACKING. There was no meddling or interference in "the election"; that's fake news. No voting machines or processes were shown to have been hacked.

Trump concedes Russia behind election interference

President-elect Trump conceded for the first time that Russia was behind the hacking of Democratic institutions during the presidential election, saying at a news conference that, “I think it was Russia” — though a few minutes later he said perhaps it was another country.

   991. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5381695)
But critics say

I'm surprised the critics weren't saying something else. Are you really SURE that Obama's critics were criticizing him?

Besides, I've heard the NY Times is fake news. Ask Ray, he seems to be the expert.


In other news, The Trump dude in the next office was just singing the Lime in the Coconut song, only using weed in the coconut and singing about Obama and Michelle.
   992. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5381696)
Donald Trump Concedes That Russia Probably Meddled in Election

Does this make Ray the last hold out, or are their others here who also scoff at the very notion?
Pretty sure OJ is the die hard Putinophile here. Ray is just prancing around spraying the phrase "fake news" on everything left of center or antitrump.
   993. The Good Face Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5381697)
In other news, The Trump dude in the next office was just singing the Lime in the Coconut song, only using weed in the coconut and singing about Obama and Michelle.


Ever occur to you that you're being trolled?
   994. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:03 PM (#5381698)
Having handwaved away this issue for eight years, Mouse has been worried sick over the last eight weeks thinking what Trump might do after he's sworn in. Of course.


Your internet psychic powers are failing you. Again. If you try hard though you can blame that on Clinton though I bet.

Trump did not concede that Russia probably "meddled in the election" (your phrasing)


It may surprise you to know that I am not the NY Times, I don't work there, and I don't write their headlines. It is their phrasing, I just linked to it. And yes I remember that my habit of using the words in the headline as the link occasionally bothers you. Sounds like a you problem.
   995. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5381699)
Pretty sure OJ is the die hard Putinophile here. Ray is just prancing around spraying the phrase "fake news" on everything left of center or antitrump.


I will concede you are almost certainly correct on this. Thanks.
   996. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:05 PM (#5381701)
Well, it's not like there aren't consequences for being wrong, or in the case of the BuzzFeed "intelligence report", going with a fairly obvious hoax because you dislike the subject of the hoax.


Clapper will gobble down all of your poop-cicles, Herr Drumpf!
   997. Lassus Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:06 PM (#5381702)
Ever occur to you that you're being trolled?

I wish. That I would have a certain amount of respect for. That ain't what's happening.
   998. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5381703)
I wish. That, I would have a certain amount of respect for. That ain't what's happening.


I don't know, if anyone knows the signs ...
   999. Stormy JE wanted to milk the soft power dividend Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5381705)
Your internet psychic powers are failing you. Again. If you try hard though you can blame that on Clinton though I bet.
Oh? When you have a free moment, please show us when you've expressed alarm over the Obama White House's treatment of the press. No rush, of course.
   1000. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: January 11, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5381706)
Sorry, "below" is unclear.


I think the term of art is "bottom."
Page 10 of 20 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 >  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
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 15 January 2018:Mississippi's anti-gay marriage law is hurting two college baseball teams
(1411 - 12:29pm, Jan 19)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(2701 - 12:26pm, Jan 19)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogComparing a Player Outside His Era | Articles | Bill James Online
(13 - 12:25pm, Jan 19)
Last: nick swisher hygiene

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Kansas City Royals
(13 - 12:24pm, Jan 19)
Last: Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili (TeddyF.Ballgame)

NewsblogAndruw of Center Field
(198 - 12:12pm, Jan 19)
Last: Rally

NewsblogWhy is J.D. Martinez's big bat still available
(4 - 11:59am, Jan 19)
Last: BDC

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 1-19-2018
(8 - 11:33am, Jan 19)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!
(1529 - 11:10am, Jan 19)
Last: bachslunch

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 2011 Discussion
(75 - 10:34am, Jan 19)
Last: caiman

NewsblogBenFred: Everybody can find a story about Musial's magic | Ben Frederickson | stltoday.com
(2 - 10:20am, Jan 19)
Last: Batman

NewsblogThe 2017-18 Offseason: Trend or Anomaly? - MLB Trade Rumors
(7 - 10:12am, Jan 19)
Last: JRVJ

NewsblogRubbing Mud: The Evidence of Price Fixing We Have So Far - Baseball Prospectus
(24 - 10:09am, Jan 19)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

NewsblogHere's why baseball's economic system might be broken
(67 - 6:02am, Jan 19)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogWhat Is Baseball’s Equivalent of the Vikings’ Miraculous Victory?
(69 - 2:16am, Jan 19)
Last: An Athletic in Powderhorn™

NewsblogChristian Yelich can only blame himself for Jeter entanglement | New York Post
(61 - 11:52pm, Jan 18)
Last: Ziggy: The Platonic Form of Russell Branyan

Page rendered in 0.8928 seconds
68 querie(s) executed