Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Monday, October 09, 2017

OTP 9 October 2017: Trump Tells Pence to Leave N.F.L. Game as Players Kneel During Anthem

Mr. Pence lavishly documented his early departure in a series of tweets and an official statement issued by his office. On Twitter, he declared, “I left today’s Colts game because @POTUS and I will not dignify any event that disrespects our soldiers, our Flag, or our National Anthem.”

While the vice president portrayed his decision as a gesture of patriotic principle, it had the distinct appearance of a well-planned, if costly, political stunt. He doubled back from a trip to the West Coast to take a seat in the stands in Indianapolis, where the 49ers — the team most associated with the N.F.L. protest movement against racial injustice — were suiting up to play the Colts.

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

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 07:53 AM | 2170 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nfl, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

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

Page 1 of 22 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. BDC Posted: October 09, 2017 at 08:44 AM (#5547472)
As somebody tweeted last week, "Who knew that in the great national divorce, the left would get custody of the NFL?"

The GOP is doing its best to propel me back in, but concussions combined with Cowboy ineptitude have so far kept me from watching any pro football this season.
   2. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 09, 2017 at 08:53 AM (#5547476)
The Pence actions and Jerry Jones comments are gross and icky.

But in a sense, we're in Chick-Fil-A boycott territory, although this time the (mostly modern) left is reacting to the political sideshow by embracing the product because of politics.

Sane people are able to keep the political separate from the other characteristics of a person or product. Good lesson for the loony left, still in the odious process of politicizing everything.

   3. BDC Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:03 AM (#5547478)
the loony left, still in the odious process of politicizing everything

As always, back when only white people mattered by default, and a narrow streak of Main-Street Babbittry prevailed in all social and cultural contexts – nothing, somehow, was ever "politicized."
   4. Nero Wolfe, Indeed Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:05 AM (#5547479)
The NFL players are protesting by kneeling during the National Anthem, Pence was protesting by walking out after the NFL players protested.

Both are staged events to elicit attention for their beliefs.

I'm good with both sides.
   5. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:09 AM (#5547482)
One side spent about a quarter of a million bucks of taxpayers money to elicit attention for their beliefs, I am less good with that part.
   6. Nasty Nate Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:11 AM (#5547484)
The NFL players are protesting by kneeling during the National Anthem, Pence was protesting by walking out after the NFL players protested.

Both are staged events to elicit attention for their beliefs.

I'm good with both sides.
But is Pence even admitting that his was a staged event?
   7. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:17 AM (#5547487)
As always, back when only white people mattered by default, and a narrow streak of Main-Street Babbittry prevailed in all social and cultural contexts – nothing, somehow, was ever "politicized."


The "nothing that happened before matters because only white people mattered then" meme is getting tiresome. It's reductionist and false and non-explanatory.

More to the point, it has nothing to do with the degree to which private conduct was politicized.

It's laziness, not convincing argument.
   8. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:24 AM (#5547489)
But is Pence even admitting that his was a staged event?

Before the game, the media pool were told not to even bother going into the stadium with him, as he was probably going to be making an early exit.

Yeah, that wasn't staged.
   9. Nero Wolfe, Indeed Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:25 AM (#5547490)
But is Pence even admitting that his was a staged event?


God, I hope so. The odds of him wandering into an NFL game without expecting the player protest and simply feeling offended seem pretty slim. If he tries to sell it otherwise and anyone buys it, they're too dumb for a mother's tears.
   10. BDC Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:34 AM (#5547494)
the degree to which private conduct was politicized

Insofar as this means anything, you are objecting to nice Sunday sports being shot through with politics, because BITD it was all just fun and games.

Over at the Dugout these days I am posting the occasional note about Negro baseball in the year 1928, gleaned from the archives of the Chicago Defender. The Dugout being the Dugout and OTP being OTP, I am trying to keep those notes mostly to the game on the field. But it ain't easy, because the Defender drew no hard lines between sport and politics. One of the big controversies of the Spring of 1928 was the struggle to keep the Eastern Colored League together, as various owners insisted on Negro teams getting a fair share of gate receipts and a fair deal on stadium rentals, in the face of exploitative practices by other owners. (Promoter Nat Strong, according to the Defender on 4/14/28, paid white players $100 a game and black players $8 a game for interracial matchups.) All this played out on the sports page alongside game stories and season previews. Social justice was absolutely in-e-####ing-scapable for fans of black baseball in those days. I imagine white readers didn't want to hear about it, so all you got on the white sports pages was sweetness and light and Rajah and the Bambino. But that was life in the "non-politicized" era.
   11. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:36 AM (#5547498)
The Pence actions and Jerry Jones comments are gross and icky. But in a sense, we're in Chick-Fil-A boycott territory, although this time the (mostly modern) left is reacting to the political sideshow by embracing the product because of politics.

"What did father use to say? Everything before the word 'but' is horseshit." - Jon Snow
   12. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:39 AM (#5547499)
and a narrow streak of Main-Street Babbittry prevailed in all social and cultural contexts

Milton Babbitt would prefer not to be involved, thank you.
   13. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:39 AM (#5547502)
Pre 1979 if you wanted non politics from the heavyweight champ of the world you were well out of luck.
   14. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:40 AM (#5547503)
One side spent about a quarter of a million bucks of taxpayers money to elicit attention for their beliefs, I am less good with that part.

Drain the swamp!
   15. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:45 AM (#5547508)
Who knew the story of the weekend would NOT be a fairly conservative and decidedly not quotable Tennessee Republican Senator saying that it's sad that the White House has become adult day care?

   16. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 09:55 AM (#5547515)
The Pence actions and Jerry Jones comments are gross and icky. But in a sense, we're in Chick-Fil-A boycott territory, although this time the (mostly modern) left is reacting to the political sideshow by embracing the product because of politics.


First, a "sideshow" implies there's a meatier main stage... with this White House, there is not. The sideshow is the ONLY stage. This is NOT an administration that can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Second, Chick-Fil-A is a ####### fastfood eat shack. This is supposed to be the ####### White House. There should probably be some difference of purpose.
   17. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:00 AM (#5547519)
Pre 1979 if you wanted non politics from the heavyweight champ of the world you were well out of luck.


I'd like a comprehensive recounting of heavyweight titlist political involvement just to make sure. Not fully comprehensive of course, I'd say start with John L Sullivan and go forward from there.
   18. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:10 AM (#5547526)
BDC is kicking Rockwell's ass, whoever Rockwell may be. I have a suspicion but, in what is surely a sign of terrible times, no one on this board seems to stick with a name longer than a couple of months.

Everything is always political. Always has been, always will be. Another thing that is political is that those in power attempt to say that their politics is "normality" while others' politics is depraved disregard of tradition. Politics is the nation. Politics is everything about how we set up our society.
   19. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:11 AM (#5547527)
Sullivan was a drunk and a pretty open racist which was not unknown at the time, he was a life long democrat who attempted to run for congress and spoke out openly against any one who was white and would enter the ring with Jack Johnson. He also , late in life, pulled the classic Saint Augustine and lectured long and hard about the need for temperance laws in the states.
   20. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:14 AM (#5547531)
The GOP is helped a huge amount by the geographic sorting of its supporters - specifically owning rural voters, since their support counts more than urban voters (right or wrong, that is reality).

Trump Loses Support In Rural Areas

The Reuters/Ipsos daily tracking poll finds President Trump’s popularity is eroding in small towns and rural communities where 15 percent of the country’s population lives.

In September, 47% of people in non-metro areas approved of Trump while 47% disapproved. That is down from Trump’s first four weeks in office, when 55% said they approved of the president while 39% disapproved.


Everything Trump is associated with seems to crater in support, so on behave of liberals everywhere I want Trump to keep refusing to work with Democrats in any reasonable fashion and instead tie himself to the GOP as tightly and strongly as possible.
   21. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:15 AM (#5547532)
Second, Chick-Fil-A is a ####### fastfood eat shack. This is supposed to be the ####### White House.


Also Chick-Fil-A is delicious.
   22. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:16 AM (#5547533)
Johnson was a drunk and a pretty open racist which was not unknown at the time


Jack Johnson wasn't a racist, he just refused to defend the title against black challengers.
   23. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:20 AM (#5547534)
Sullivan went further than that snow, he criticized any white challenger of Johnson , Some how I typed "johnson" for "sullivan" in the first post.
His successor Corbett gives me little to work with, he was basically a womanizer who tried to have a vaudeville career appearing in blackface, make of that what you will I suppose.

edited because I clearly need another coffee
   24. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:20 AM (#5547535)
I have a suspicion but, in what is surely a sign of terrible times, no one on this board seems to stick with a name longer than a couple of months.


I think most of the liberals and in fact most posters stick with their basic identifiable handle. I changed my handle after the November election (change your handle, change your attitude), but it is clear I am the same poster. Covfefe - well we all know who he is also (I assume, it is not a secret).

On the right hand and lunatic side (not always the same) there does seem to be a fair amount of churn. Perros and SBB have such clear post style though they can be spotted easily, and it is not even clear they are trying to hide/obfuscate. But maybe they are and they are just really, really bad at it.

So I am not sure that many people here do change handles to obscure their identity. There are several, like Rickey! for example - who accessorize their handle according to their mood, so maybe that is what you are referencing.

Note: Rockwell is SBB, just as an FYI, and yes BDC is taking him to the Texas cleaners.
   25. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:26 AM (#5547536)
For those that care the generic ballot remains a very stable 8 point lead for Democrats. That is a good lead, but not amazing. At that level enthusiasm comes into play - I suppose the upcoming Gov elections and other down ballot elections will give a better idea of how the current GOP control of the government is playing with the public at large.
   26. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:27 AM (#5547537)
"johnson" for "sullivan" in the first post.
His successor Corbett gives me little to work with, he was basically a womanizer who tried to have a vaudeville career appearing in blackface, make of that what you will I suppose.


Corbett was a much more virulent and open racist than Sullivan. Sullivan's racism is largely confined to upholding a tradition against title fights between black and white fighters (a tradition broken in other weight classes around the time Sullivan retired) and making statements such as, "I never thought much of the colored man as a fighter." Corbett actually used racial slurs in casual discussion and really went nuts leading up to the Johnson v Jeffries fight in 1910. He used the "n-word" more often than a rapper!
   27. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:30 AM (#5547540)
Sullivan agreed to appear in a stage version of "uncle toms cabin" only under the condition that Simon Lagree was rewritten as a "hero" .
and he did try to run for congress so he was not apolitical.
   28. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:34 AM (#5547542)
Covfefe - well we all know who he is also (I assume, it is not a secret).

Um, no, I don't know who that is. I'm a simple, some would say, absent-minded, man. I can't keep up with posting style. In so far as it matters who we are here, a consistent name matters. Yes, Mouse, keeping the Mouse in the name keeps you identifiable. I've never thought much about it when someone loses a IRL name. But constant switching usernames that are already anonymous seems like decline to me.

As for Bear, I've long thought he was right about decline. Just not when it started nor who to blame. He (you, Bear, since I know you can see this) strikes me as someone who sees the decline but is desperate to push off the blame onto someone less like himself.

Anyway, I was out of the country, living amongst heathens and freedom-haters for six months where I could walk the streets in peace and drink my fill and not worry about seeing a doctor. While away, I rarely checked in here (at OTP) and I can say I was the better for it so I'll probably be pissing off again. There are baseball games being played. You guys should check that out.
   29. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:35 AM (#5547543)
Covfefe - well we all know who he is also (I assume, it is not a secret).


If you out Covfefe as Zonk, I'm telling Jim....
   30. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:37 AM (#5547545)
Um, no, I don't know who that is.

Zonk, the Voyager-lover.


Also Chick-Fil-A is delicious

I've definitely heard this, but the closest one is in PA, 115 miles away. I've been meaning to try it, but it hasn't come up.
   31. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:38 AM (#5547548)
JIM!!!!!!!
   32. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:39 AM (#5547549)
Ah. Wondered where he'd got to.
   33. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:44 AM (#5547551)
As for Bear, I've long thought he was right about decline. Just not when it started nor who to blame.


Inquiring minds want to know ... what is the decline then, in your opinion? Since it did not start in 1979 and is the the complete fault of the Maligned Modern Liberal.
   34. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:47 AM (#5547552)
From the previous thread:

Two can play that anecdote game.

Uh, only one of us is playing the anecdote game; do words have any meaning for you? I cited statistics; I didn't rely on any anecdotes.


But that immigration official cited in the article most certainly did, citing one incident and implying that local officials in sanctuary cities were deliberately shielding countless dangerous criminals. And of course Trump and his sock puppets have been talking as if all illegal immigrants were nothing but roving bands of M-13 gang members.

(I do like your desperate attempt to move those goalposts: "Well, sure, they're criminals... but did they, like, commit serious felonies? Otherwise it doesn't count.")

Well, every illegal alien in the United States is by definition here illegally, so why not just give ICE a Pentagon-level budget and have them go after all of them? Maybe they could make you an honorary deputy, and you could sport an ICE badge to wear next to your ACLU pin.

But the more relevant point is that most people---police chiefs, for instance---tend to make the sort of distinctions between violent and / or felonious criminals and those convicted of misdemeanors. In his second term Obama recognized this common sense distinction, but Trump's ICE now seems to lump them all together---at least there's no effort shown in that article to make those distinctions, and disclaimers aside, it's obvious by many news reports that ICE officers don't really give a ####.

I also might add that if 92% of those 97,482 immigrants arrested for deportation were convicted of a crime, that leaves 7800 people** who weren't. But hey, 92% is close enough for horseshoes.

** Excuse me, they're not people, they're merely anecdotes.

   35. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:49 AM (#5547554)
BDC is kicking Rockwell's ass, whoever Rockwell may be. I have a suspicion but, in what is surely a sign of terrible times, no one on this board seems to stick with a name longer than a couple of months.

I can guarantee you that this is Sugar Bear. Since he is the only person I have on ignore, and I can't see his posts...

(I hope this is an acceptable time to mention that, I know people get offended when people say who they have on ignore, but it is relevant as evidence here.)
   36. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:49 AM (#5547556)
This is a game where there are only winners! GOP Civil War update: Bannon’s Next Victims

Jonathan Swan: “Steve Bannon and his allies are planning a hostile takeover of the Republican Party. And only one Senator running in 2018 will get a free pass: Ted Cruz.”

“Breitbart’s Washington Editor Matt Boyle writes today that conservatives are ‘running or actively seeking out’ serious primary challengers for every incumbent Republican senator running in 2018 except the Texan.”


And people thought everyone hated Ted Cruz, serial killer and US Senator. But no, he has love and support from his fans.
   37. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:52 AM (#5547557)
As for Bear, I've long thought he was right about decline. Just not when it started nor who to blame. He (you, Bear, since I know you can see this) strikes me as someone who sees the decline but is desperate to push off the blame onto someone less like himself.

Anyway, I was out of the country, living amongst heathens and freedom-haters for six months where I could walk the streets in peace and drink my fill and not worry about seeing a doctor. While away, I rarely checked in here (at OTP) and I can say I was the better for it so I'll probably be pissing off again. There are baseball games being played. You guys should check that out.


To tie those two thoughts together, more than one historian has noted the correlation between the fall of the American empires in Vietnam and the Bronx that took place between 1965 and 1975. I'm not sure how to take it past that point, however.....
   38. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:52 AM (#5547558)
Also Chick-Fil-A is delicious

I've definitely heard this, but the closest one is in PA, 115 miles away. I've been meaning to try it, but it hasn't come up.


It's fast food delicious, which means it's casual dining par and fine.... so if you've eaten at a Fridays, an Olive Garden, a Chilis, etc... welll....
   39. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:53 AM (#5547560)
Since he is the only person I have on ignore, and I can't see his posts...


As an aside I think this brings up an important point. Changing your handle, but not getting a new account, is fairly innocuous, since Ignore doesn't care and you can track back since all posts switch to the new handle. Creating a new account is much more problematic and evidence of more troubling personal issues, since the only normal reason to do that is to try to hide who you are.
   40. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:54 AM (#5547563)
Inquiring minds want to know ... what is the decline then, in your opinion? Since it did not start in 1979 and is the the complete fault of the Maligned Modern Liberal.

Bear says it's the fault of the modern liberal, doesn't he? I said I disagreed with him with regard to whose fault.

And I also disagree that it's something that can be simply laid out. It is, broadly, speaking, the fault of us all. We are less engaged in civic life, less likely to know and interact with our neighbors. Politics is entirely an arena of pseudo-entertainment, leaving the real power and action to be, moreso than it was at better moments, anyway, hidden away from us. Look, I'm not idealizing the past. And I'm not saying decline in a curve that was an ascent to a peak and then a fall off. We've always had ups and downs. It seems pretty clear to me that, since 9/11, we've been pretty clearly descending to the point that fractures we thought had healed have come apart again and some new ones shown up.

We are, taken as a whole, richer and more powerful than any nation ever and we're all angry and sad and irritated. That can't be a sign of "peak".
   41. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:58 AM (#5547566)
It seems pretty clear to me that, since 9/11,

By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads. It made us feel vulnerable in a way no American had since, what? 1812? And we dealt with it badly. We say we were united in the days and months after but we weren't, not really. Just like we aren't unified after Sandy Hook or Las Vegas or Benghazi or whatever. Sure, we're united in sadness, anger and an urge to "do something" but we most definitely are not unified on what "something" is. The idea that we are united today is a foolish self-delusion.
   42. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 10:59 AM (#5547567)
BDC is kicking Rockwell's ass, whoever Rockwell may be. I have a suspicion but, in what is surely a sign of terrible times, no one on this board seems to stick with a name longer than a couple of months.

Many people use variants of their original handle (Mouse, Rickey/Sam, me, (((JE))), RDP, etc.), and a few make a one time change (zonk), but AFAIK only SBB and OJ seem to change their handles every few months or even weeks. OJ must be on his 15th name by now.
   43. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:01 AM (#5547570)
The Pence actions and Jerry Jones comments are gross and icky.

But in a sense, we're in Chick-Fil-A boycott territory, although this time the (mostly modern) left is reacting to the political sideshow by embracing the product because of politics.
Who could see it coming that a [purported] boycott by the right would somehow turn out to be the fault of the modern left?
   44. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:06 AM (#5547575)
Bear says it's the fault of the modern liberal, doesn't he? I said I disagreed with him with regard to whose fault.


Right, I was trying to say "Since you think ..., then what is it". I worded it poorly. Sorry.

We are, taken as a whole, richer and more powerful than any nation ever and we're all angry and sad and irritated. That can't be a sign of "peak".


Interesting. You said you were thinking of heading out, so I hesitate to launch into an extended discussion, but if you want to stick around to discuss I would appreciate it. I like engaging in the conflict of ideas with those who disagree with me and are also reasonable.

By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads.


My (former) brother-in-law (works for the Air Force, NORAD Satellite command), said it made the rest of the nation think more like him. I agreed with him, but not in the way he meant. And no I didn't clarify my thinking, no sense in pointlessly stirring things up with the in-laws IMO.
   45. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5547576)
By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads. It made us feel vulnerable in a way no American had since, what? 1812?

Try 1962, when the threat of mass annihilation was infinitely greater than it was on 9/11. An series of atomic missiles launched from Cuba would have wiped out a lot more than a few thousand people.
   46. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:08 AM (#5547578)
Who could see it coming that a [purported] boycott by the right would somehow turn out to be the fault of the modern left?


Is there anything that isn't motivated by the Modern Liberal? According to some, everyone else is just hapless clay in the hands of the left, which says something sad about everyone but the Modern Liberals if you think about it.
   47. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:09 AM (#5547579)
By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads. It made us feel vulnerable in a way no American had since, what? 1812?

Maybe I'm unique, but I was living IN the city, in midtown (attempting to set up an audition at Trinity Wall St. in the week prior), for this whole affair and I really didn't feel any more vulnerable at all in the aftermath. Hell, I felt worse in the 80s when it seemed like the cold war would (and almost did) light the world on fire. I wonder if it made the rest of America feel WORSE than it made New York City feel. I really have no idea.
   48. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:14 AM (#5547582)
Maybe it didn't make us seem more vulnerable. I'm no psychologist. But, whatever it was, our politics have slipped completely off the rails since.
   49. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:18 AM (#5547585)
Hell, I felt worse in the 80s when it seemed like the cold war would (and almost did) light the world on fire.
Maybe you're unique. It didn't seem like that at all to me in the 1980s.


As for 9/11, I may have felt that the country was vulnerable, but I never personally felt vulnerable. (I wasn't working in the city back then, but I don't think it would've changed my views if I had been.) I remember nutty people wearing gloves when opening their mail because of the anthrax attacks, and I just rolled my eyes at the whole thing.
   50. TDF, FCL Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:19 AM (#5547587)
Rural living was great!

Funny, but aside from a couple of times my apartment neighbor was blasting his stereo to the point where I had to call the cops on him, the noisiest nights I've ever spent were in a house a million miles from nowhere in rural southern Illinois, where about 500 different species of wood critters started howling at dusk and never let up until dawn, with no a/c to drown them out.
Back in the '80s (the first time I lived up here) I shared a house with 2 guys. First night there, I slept with my bedroom window open; you could hear the freeway ~ 1 mile away, especially at night. One of the roommates was shocked - "Didn't the noise keep you up all night??"

City folks just don't understand.
   51. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:19 AM (#5547588)
I remember nutty people wearing gloves when opening their mail because of the anthrax attacks, and I just rolled my eyes at the whole thing.

But that sums up our politics since then pretty well: nutty. Weird responses to small things, odd denial of big things.

There are lots of level headed folks who think it's all nutty and dismiss it but, as a body politic, we're doing nutty things over and over again.
   52. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:22 AM (#5547589)
It didn't seem like that at all to me in the 1980s.

There are well-documented tales of near-miss nuclear launch(es?) in that era.
   53. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:22 AM (#5547592)
The 80s with the doomsday clock "if you love this planet" "the day after" "threads" "testament" and about a million other movies on the subject sure did feel like the threat of nuclear war was a very real and front and center issue for a lot of folks.
   54. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:25 AM (#5547593)
And I also disagree that it's something that can be simply laid out. It is, broadly, speaking, the fault of us all. We are less engaged in civic life, less likely to know and interact with our neighbors. Politics is entirely an arena of pseudo-entertainment, leaving the real power and action to be, moreso than it was at better moments, anyway, hidden away from us. Look, I'm not idealizing the past. And I'm not saying decline in a curve that was an ascent to a peak and then a fall off. We've always had ups and downs. It seems pretty clear to me that, since 9/11, we've been pretty clearly descending to the point that fractures we thought had healed have come apart again and some new ones shown up.

We are, taken as a whole, richer and more powerful than any nation ever and we're all angry and sad and irritated. That can't be a sign of "peak".


Meh - I think the last item is easiest to explain... "richer and more powerful" is always relative - and in this case, it's simply a matter of China (thus far) successfully navigating a slow embrace of 'controlled' free markets and its enormous resources, while Europe (or a soft-German takeover of Europe, if you like), for all its increasingly internal divisions, becomes a more 'formidable' international force as a single entity. It's not the US declining so much as the rest of the world just catching up -- aided by/with the undercurrent of globalization that actually isn't all that new, just accelerating on the currents of technology.

Beyond that, though - I'm not sure either the divisions NOR the "politics as entertainment" has changed all that much...

Roughly the first century of America was spent under the basic anti-slavery/pro-slavery division (not ending with the Civil War, but continuing for a good 20 years in the postbellum US). Then - as (surprisingly) SBB said last week in referencing a David Brooks piece, you had the rural/urban divide that was marked by the WJB monetary policy wars continuing with the gilded age, pock marked with more immigration fights, before getting buried under the Great Depression - which essentially just marked an inflection point between the two bookends of World Wars that started and finished a great global reshuffling.

In the grand scheme - the US just happened to be fortunate to be a key player in both bookend wars, while fortunately managing to be both financier and global savior simultaneously. Not to downplay at all the blood and sacrifice - though, again, it's all relative - it's not often that a nation gets to simultaneously reap the ethereal rewards of being the great savior of 'liberty' while ALSO reaping a pretty massive economic windfall from being that savior.

Following that, we're right back to messy, contentious cultural issues - the civil rights era, Vietnam, etc...

I'm very much of the "all of this happened before and all of this will happen again" mindset.... with the one, notable outlier that the US has never before decided on such an unfit buffoon to navigate the unending currents.
   55. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:28 AM (#5547594)
Somebody left home with irony this morning!

Corker on Sunday responded to Trump’s claim that he refused to endorse the senator for re-election by tweeting that “the White House has become an adult day care center.”

“I find tweets like this to be incredibly irresponsible,” Conway said on “Fox and Friends.”


This would be a good time for the Trumpkins to do their "well he started it!" analysis.
   56. PepTech Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:35 AM (#5547597)
“What Trumpeters fail to recognize is that the point of RUSSIA! is not to overturn the election and/or install HRC, but rather to get our collective hands around the concept of illegal conspiracies, and preventing them in the future - because, you know, they're illegal”
-
This might be more convincing if folks hadn’t already given the game away. If Russia were the only objection being raised to the election loss it would perhaps be one thing. But everything in the kitchen sink from sexism to racism to impeachment to the shock of learning that the election was conducted under the electoral college has also been thrown at the election loss.

The point of all of these efforts on the part of the TDSers is to delegitimize trump as president so he’ll get less done and do a worse job and the country will be worse off and so he won’t seek or win re-election. Same reason the hard right said obama was born in Kenya. If trump and his administration have to be jailed to accomplish this they’ll have to be jailed.
This is such a phenomenally ridiculous post on so many levels, it's hard to know where to start. Although normally I hate this style of response, there really isn't any other way to justify it.
This might be more convincing if folks hadn’t already given the game away.
Relatively minor point, but to quite a large number of people, this isn't a "game".
If Russia were the only objection being raised to the election loss it would perhaps be one thing. But everything in the kitchen sink from sexism to racism to impeachment to the shock of learning that the election was conducted under the electoral college has also been thrown at the election loss.
An openly racist POTUS is a bad thing.

An openly sexist POTUS is a bad thing.

Neither of those has anything to do with "the election loss". Hear this again: Trump won legitimately last November. It may even be that his racism and sexism CONTRIBUTED to his victory. However, as a completely independent thought, it is A BAD THING to have a POTUS that has no substance and is demonstrably a petty, immoral, hypocritical, lying clown. Well, in my opinion. Congrats on Gorsuch, whoo!

Dismissing those legitimate concerns by throwing them in with "the shock of learning that the election was conducted under the electoral college" is the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty. Sure, you can find a couple of fringe weirdos who complain about the EC, but those folks crop up after every election cycle. Equating that with the other is clearly attempting to normalize the despicable behavior in the WH. That's disgusting.
The point of all of these efforts on the part of the TDSers is to delegitimize trump as president
Trump does that himself, it doesn't need to be on anyone's agenda.
Same reason the hard right said obama was born in Kenya.
This is a clinical process called "projection". It's what you would do, so you assume that's the motivation of everyone else. Grow up and think beyond your own horizons.
If trump and his administration have to be jailed to accomplish this they’ll have to be jailed.
If crimes were committed, then perpetrators go to jail. If they happen to be in the administration, or were at one point, their prosecution and potential jailing are independent from any other Trump idiocy. Your argument is this:

Axiom: Everyone criticizing Trump or his admin is suffering from TDS. Even investigating the possibility of wrongdoing on the part of any member of Trump's organization is therefore also TDS. Paul Manafort could sell GOP-compiled voter registration info to Russian oligarchs and fear no consequence. QED.

That's pathetic. This is the worst conglomeration of apologia ever compiled in one place, which is a breathtaking accomplishment here. Congratulations would be in order if it weren't, you know, kind of a serious thing.

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

Note: This is an insignificant thread on a less-than-insignificant website (in case Jim is monitoring, hi Jim!) and getting all worked up about this stuff is useless. However, letting this kind of "reasoning" stand unchallenged is a large part of why we're in this mess in the first place. So, onward, I guess.
   57. JJ1986 Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:41 AM (#5547602)
This might be more convincing if folks hadn’t already given the game away.
This would make more sense if Hillary Clinton and her supporters were the ones investigating Russia.
   58. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5547605)
So things look good in Virginia - Northam Maintains Solid Lead In Virginia

A new Wason Center poll in Virginia finds Ralph Northam (D) leading Ed Gillespie (R) in the race for governor by seven points, 49% to 42%.


And of course New Jersey is all but assured to be a Team Blue win.
   59. Morty Causa Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5547606)
By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads.

By the way, I think maybe we'd be better off if we just admitted what is true: 9/11 really messed with our heads. It made us feel vulnerable in a way no American had since, what? 1812?

The messing with our heads is an ongoing neverending state that goes back probably to our very beginning. Most recently, we got 9/11 (N. Korea on a smaller scale), Cold War, Hot War (WWII), very real and deeply pandemic Depression, Indian Wars (going back to colonial times, the French, the Civil War (you think Lee didn't mess with the heads of Unionists and Southerners weren't scared of Sherman?).

There's always something, and there's always an element of the fantastical. It was always thus, even in the tribal state, maybe particularly then.

We should consider that it's the natural state of things, to fear, even to concoct fear.
   60. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:45 AM (#5547609)
This would make more sense if Hillary Clinton and her supporters were the ones investigating Russia.


Personally I am more amused that nothing in it suggests the case provided is not convincing, just that it could be more convincing.

"It would be a more convincing argument that the North won the US Civil War if they had not lost so many battles!"
   61. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:45 AM (#5547610)
The 80s with the doomsday clock "if you love this planet" "the day after" "threads" "testament" and about a million other movies on the subject sure did feel like the threat of nuclear war was a very real and front and center issue for a lot of folks.

That doomsday clock has been close to midnight ever since the concept began, but the Cuban Missile Crisis was the only actual event that brought about specific fears of a possibly imminent nuclear war, in real time and not at some vague point in the future. There may well have been near-misses of the sort that Lassus refers to, but they were under the radar and didn't cause any mass fear at the time.
   62. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5547613)
There may well have been near-misses of the sort that Lassus refers to, but they were under the radar and didn't cause any mass fear at the time.


Growing up it was interesting to realize I was in one of the first generations to know that human life could end on Earth at any minute at our own hands. I am not as convinced now it mattered that much, but I thought it a "fun fact" at the time.
   63. BDC Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5547615)
that the election was conducted under the electoral college has also been thrown at the election loss.

The point of all of these efforts on the part of the TDSers is to delegitimize trump as president


Actually my critique of the Electoral College is in part that it allows the election of a President with a serious legitimacy problem in the first place. When the winner gets 46% of the vote, beating somebody who got 48%, you invite subsequent problems in governing that we've been seeing in action all this year.

Perhaps there's no good way around that, though. Turnout is low to begin with, and systems that require a majority to win don't magically produce a national consensus. But seriously, Trump did not begin with a resounding mandate, and he's only made matters worse for himself. His weakened legitimacy is on him, not on his opponents.
   64. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:51 AM (#5547618)
The fact that "threads" and "the day after" both aired around 1983 at the same time that the issue was very much front and center in the west suggests for a lot of folks the fear was "immenent" rather than just some vague point in the future . "we start bombing in 5 minutes" didnt help either.
   65. Morty Causa Posted: October 09, 2017 at 11:59 AM (#5547624)
Bleeding wars of attrition are the outcome of fears of nuclear war.

Before the Cuban Missile Crisis, there was the Korean War. There was fear, then, of escalation to nuclear conflict. How warranted that was--well, supposedly, Eisenhower got China to be serious about negotiating a truce with thinly veiled threats that use of limited nuclear weapons would not be out of the question in the future. And I think the fear of nuclear escalation played a part in finally resolving--to the limited degree it was resolved--the Berlin Wall Crisis 1958-61.
   66. PepTech Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:02 PM (#5547625)
But that sums up our politics since [9/11] pretty well: nutty. Weird responses to small things, odd denial of big things.
I'm not sure 9/11 was any kind of turning point. Maybe it's my age, casting my first vote in 1984, but style over substance was at least coming into vogue then. The difference strikes me as this - Reagan knew his weaknesses, at some level, and compensated for them. I may not have agreed with all his politics, but he had a vision and sought to achieve it. Bush The Elder, I had no idea what he was standing for other than the progression from VP to POTUS. Clinton had vision, for better or for worse, and incorporated Reagan-like style and charisma to further that vision.

Bush The Younger (to me, anyway) was back to Bush The Elder: No real purpose other than fulfilling some kind of path. Style over substance had worked for 16 of the last 20 years, but since 43 had no style, he and the GOP leaned on empty rhetoric. That became the status quo, along with the kind of nastiness that goes back to Lee Atwater and the Willie Horton campaign. Now, it may very well be that that level of nastiness has been going on forever, but that was the beginning of when the media's *treatment* of events started to be more important than the events themselves. Wiser Older primates than I will have to chime on whether that timeline is accurate.

+1 to another theme above, that being the increasing reliance/dependence on electronic communication has made for a quantum shift in interpersonal relationships that we're far from understanding well, but I think isn't a good thing.
   67. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:02 PM (#5547626)
The point of all of these efforts on the part of the TDSers is to delegitimize trump as president


....in much the same way that turds get delegitmized regularly by people pointing out the smell.
   68. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:07 PM (#5547629)
"we start bombing in 5 minutes" didnt help either.
Now, that is worthy of Ray's "derangement syndrome" label. Given that it was a joke that nobody sane took seriously, and could not have been taken seriously since nobody knew about it until after the fact (you know, after the "five minutes" would have been long up), it couldn't have hurt.

Pretty sure that The Day After tells us that it was an imminent fear in the same way The Walking Dead and World War Z tell us that zombie apocalypse is an imminent threat.
   69. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5547635)
David, the joke was the weak link to respond to, so well done, I suppose.

If you want to equate fear of nuclear war in the 80s to fear of zombie apocalypse now, you're just being dumb on purpose. There were no "near-miss zombie apocalypses", ever. There was at least one documented very-near-miss nuclear conflict in the 80s.
   70. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5547637)
Bleeding wars of attrition are the outcome of fears of nuclear war.

Before the Cuban Missile Crisis, there was the Korean War. There was fear, then, of escalation to nuclear conflict. How warranted that was--well, supposedly, Eisenhower got China to be serious about negotiating a truce with thinly veiled threats that use of limited nuclear weapons would not be out of the question in the future. And I think the fear of nuclear escalation played a part in finally resolving--to the limited degree it was resolved--the Berlin Wall Crisis 1958-61.


And yet the Cuban Missile Crisis dwarfed all those others in terms of the mass fear it induced, because for the first time, there were enemy missiles in place that were actually capable of reaching the U.S. mainland with any degree of certainty. It wasn't just a vague fear of "the Russians have the bomb", or the sort of artificial fears that were induced in the middle of the Korean War by one of the greatest scare media phenomena of all time, which among other things featured allegedly realistic illustrations of New York and Washington under atomic attack.
   71. Don August(us) Cesar Geronimo Berroa Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5547638)
The fact that "threads" and "the day after" both aired around 1983 at the same time that the issue was very much front and center in the west suggests for a lot of folks the fear was "immenent" rather than just some vague point in the future .


War Games too...

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?"
   72. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5547640)
BDC and SBB are both right, each in his own way. It's a common pitfall of historical analysis--by no means a new one, but one that isn't becoming any rarer--to forget the difference between a bird's eye view of processes and systems as observed from the sanctuary of the future and the all-too-close-up lived experience of those who lived in the past. People don't always understand the full implications of what they're doing, either antecedent or consequent. It's therefore very possible for something to be political in a processes-and-systems sense, but for it still to surprise and disturb many of the people involved when that thing is referred to as such. And for that reason, as well as for reasons of authorial ethos and common decency, it's important to avoid portraying actors in the grip of hazily understood forces mainly beyond their individual control as evil, plotting miscreants. That doesn't mean saying that conditions were wonderful in the past, or better in the past than the present. But it means accepting the likelihood that people are not, on the whole, morally better today than they were in the past. Their heads are just filled with different ideas. For the most part, those are morally better ideas, and that's the result of decades of work on the part of those who acknowledged process-and-systems history--they knew that by gradually imparting better ideas to people, they could influence the future development of those process and systems. To do that, they had to engage with individuals on the level of lived experience.

   73. DJS, the Digital Dandy Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5547641)
Actually my critique of the Electoral College is in part that it allows the election of a President with a serious legitimacy problem in the first place. When the winner gets 46% of the vote, beating somebody who got 48%, you invite subsequent problems in governing that we've been seeing in action all this year.

I see this as a feature, not a bug. If the country is very split and polarized, then there *should* be problems enacting legislation that doesn't have a wide base of support.
   74. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:33 PM (#5547643)
There was at least one documented very-near-miss nuclear conflict in the 80s.
If you're talking about the Stanislav Petrov incident, yes, but that wasn't known about at the time, so it couldn't have affected public attitudes.
   75. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:36 PM (#5547645)
Note: Rockwell is SBB, just as an FYI, and yes BDC is taking him to the Texas cleaners.


By pointing to Negro League Baseball in 1928?

Because once there was slavery and Jim Crow, it therefore follows that people who would otherwise eat Chick-Fil-A food should boycott it because of one political leaning of its CEO?

As Jerry said to George when he wanted to be Jerry's latex salesman ... I think not.

But few principles are as ineluctable as the one holding that the circle jerk is as the circle jerk does.

High fives all around!!!
   76. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:38 PM (#5547646)
Actually my critique of the Electoral College is in part that it allows the election of a President with a serious legitimacy problem in the first place. When the winner gets 46% of the vote, beating somebody who got 48%, you invite subsequent problems in governing that we've been seeing in action all this year.
I'm pretty sure the real legitimacy problem comes from the fact that he's an unqualified buffoon. If it had been Cruz, or Walker, or Bush, or Kasich, or Perry, or, you know, pretty much any other Republican on the planet, there would have been a lot of bitterness over a minority winner, but it wouldn't have been crazy like this. Hell, if Trump had actually "pivoted" to become presidential after he became president, it wouldn't have been crazy like this.
   77. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:38 PM (#5547647)
If you're talking about the Stanislav Petrov incident, yes, but that wasn't known about at the time, so it couldn't have affected public attitudes.


Although, somewhat ironically, everything we now know actually says that it very significantly did impact private attitudes of those then in-the-know.

   78. simon bedford Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:44 PM (#5547648)
David is showing his age, the Russians didnt get the joke at all and moved up to "high alert" and quite a few people found the threat of nuclear attack not remotely an appropriate thing to joke about not that that ever stopped Reagan and his stupidity while in office.
   79. Swoboda is freedom Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5547649)
Actually my critique of the Electoral College is in part that it allows the election of a President with a serious legitimacy problem in the first place. When the winner gets 46% of the vote, beating somebody who got 48%, you invite subsequent problems in governing that we've been seeing in action all this year.

That didn't seem to effect George W. Bush too much. He lost the vote by a smaller amount, but still got his tax cut through, as well as the prescription drug benefit and No Child Left Behind. This is in addition to a lot of smaller stuff.
   80. Omineca Greg Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5547650)
If you're talking about the Stanislav Petrov incident...
Станисла́в needs your prayers it's true, but save a few for Василий too...
   81. PepTech Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5547651)
I'm pretty sure the real legitimacy problem comes from the fact that he's an unqualified buffoon. If it had been Cruz, or Walker, or Bush, or Kasich, or Perry, or, you know, pretty much any other Republican on the planet, there would have been a lot of bitterness over a minority winner, but it wouldn't have been crazy like this.
Obviously this can't be proven, but it seems like a pretty safe bet. Bush 43 lost the popular vote, and he had a tax cut signed by June. It's hard to imagine Trump coming up with anything (other than relief packages) that will have any traction. This comes from his inability to Make a Deal, not from TDS - although I'm sure the latter will be a common punching bag/excuse for years to come.

Dammit, another Coke, to Swoboda this time... ;)
   82. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:53 PM (#5547654)
David N,#68:
"we start bombing in 5 minutes" didn't help either.

Now, that is worthy of Ray's "derangement syndrome" label. Given that it was a joke that nobody sane took seriously, and could not have been taken seriously since nobody knew about it until after the fact (you know, after the "five minutes" would have been long up), it couldn't have hurt.



It is neither deranged, nor correct, to pretend that the many, many critics who recoiled from Reagan's quote were taking it as a literal declaration in the decisive moment of action, and not as a foolish signal of Reagan's mindset and/or inappropriate carelessness.

[Irradiated Coke to Simon B.]
   83. bunyon Posted: October 09, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5547656)
I see this as a feature, not a bug. If the country is very split and polarized, then there *should* be problems enacting legislation that doesn't have a wide base of support.

The election of the House is a bigger problem. In an evenly divided nation, the House and Senate should not be decidedly in one party's control. Couple that with the fact that that party got the WH without winning the popular vote and, if that party were competent, you could have a minority of the country dominating the government. In the long run, that isn't sustainable.
   84. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:02 PM (#5547658)
List of nuclear close calls

Good bedtime reading :)
   85. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:03 PM (#5547659)
you could have a minority of the country dominating the government


Could have?
   86. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5547661)
If you're talking about the Stanislav Petrov incident, yes, but that wasn't known about at the time, so it couldn't have affected public attitudes.

Although, somewhat ironically, everything we now know actually says that it very significantly did impact private attitudes of those then in-the-know.

So it depends on whether we're talking about purposely inflamed fears of nuclear war (backyard bomb shelters, that Collier's issue), rational fears based on universally known events (Soviet missiles in Cuba), or very real fears that were limited to the few people who actually knew what was going on. Three completely different types of fear, even if they all were fears of the same ultimate outcome.
   87. Lassus Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:05 PM (#5547664)
If you're talking about the Stanislav Petrov incident, yes, but that wasn't known about at the time, so it couldn't have affected public attitudes.

The argument is not that it affected public attitudes, the argument is that it justified public attitudes that already existed.
   88. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5547666)
Buffoon or not, Trump actually has had no problem getting his agenda through.

People just forget that his only agenda is creating a kayfabe circus of reality TV stupidity.

He really couldn't give two shits about the rest - oh, he wants to repeal Obamacare, but only because it's (the repeal of Obamacare) a 'brand' he wants to acquire... the fact is that he's so profoundly ignorant of every aspect of policy; and we're not talking about intricacies or details - we're talking he truly neither cares about nor understands even the high level bullet points... You can try putting "Trump" somewhere in the bullet points, but that doesn't make it 'understanding', it just puts a coat of paint on it that he does understand and care about.

It's really no different with "tax reform" - it's not like Trump himself is a brilliant tax dodge, he just happens to have accountants who do their jobs.

You think the Cheetoh figured out that having a charity to wash profits and spends for himself/his businesses would be financially brilliant (if morally dubious)? Of course not... some accountant surely laid it all out for him.

What's actually so fascinating is watching the three types of Republicans respond to him... On one side, you've got the Corkers, the Tillersons, the Mattises, the Flakes, etc - people who understand the complexities of sundry policy issues and chafe at Trump's brute force buffoonery approach... AND reject the ass-kissing toady requirements of getting Trump on board. On another, you've got the McConnells and Ryans, who probably share at least the understanding of the former but clumsily try to get with the ass-kissing program and have only a fingernails grasp on their fast-evaporating self-respect as a result. Then, there's the motley crew of the third category -- populated by the Pruits, DeVos's, Cottons,Pences, Mulvaney's and the like. Some of them have the understanding and are perfectly content to debase themselves and kiss ass on demand so long as they can return to their agendas with an appreciative Trump's support. Some are just hazy bullet point warriors who fit Trump like a glove. Others are just natural toadies.
   89. Rickey! the first of his name Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:17 PM (#5547670)
Then, there's the motley crew of the third category -- populated by the Pruits, DeVos's, Cottons,Pences, Mulvaney's and the like. Some of them have the understanding and are perfectly content to debase themselves and kiss ass on demand so long as they can return to their agendas with an appreciative Trump's support. Some are just hazy bullet point warriors who fit Trump like a glove. Others are just natural toadies.


And most all of them realize the Trump disaster moment is their best chance at shoving their reactionary agendas of shoving 50 years of progress back in the box through.
   90. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:17 PM (#5547671)
By pointing to Negro League Baseball in 1928?

Because once there was slavery and Jim Crow, it therefore follows that people who would otherwise eat Chick-Fil-A food should boycott it because of one political leaning of its CEO?

As Jerry said to George when he wanted to be Jerry's latex salesman ... I think not.

But few principles are as ineluctable as the one holding that the circle jerk is as the circle jerk does.

High fives all around!!!


Lonely troll is lonely. Film at 11.
   91. BDC Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5547675)
Here's another interesting item from the Chicago Defender, 14 April 1928 (since people were talking about boxing above). A story in its entirety:

McKeesport, Pa., March 29.—California Joe Gans and Phil Goldstein of New York City, fought a 10-round draw here tonight, according to the judges' decision. According to the fans, Gans beat the New Yorker, but was robbed of the win because he was not white.


Sports reporting from the politics-free Golden Age :)
   92. Omineca Greg Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5547678)
My dad was an officer the Royal Canadian Navy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He was stationed on a destroyer. The ship was constantly being dogged be a Russian sub. It was a little game they would play, even during less intense political moments; the sub would try to hide and take advantage of the undersea conditions that would throw off the surface ship's tracking equipment. The advantage the surface ship had was that it would receive radio transmissions about 30 seconds earlier than the submerged sub. So if war started, the ship would find out first and they would get the first launch opportunity...if they knew where the sub was. If not, well, not so good.

For days at a time, they would play this hide and seek game, knowing that whenever the sub was undetectable, it could mean their lives. Most of the time they were able to keep track of it, say 80% of the time. But the stress was almost unbearable, obviously they were running this thing 24 hours, so everyone was fatigued, and the sonar operators had different levels of abilities. There would be experienced, capable sailors that would almost never lose the sub, and those that were not as experienced and not as capable, and when they were at it, the tension on the whole ship would rise.
   93. PepTech Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:29 PM (#5547679)
But few principles are as ineluctable as the one holding that the circle jerk is as the circle jerk does.

High fives all around!!!

Lonely troll is lonely. Film at 11.
Actually, I interpret this as the lighting of SBB's beacon. Clapper and/or TGF will be along shortly. Failing that, Ray's always available.
   94. Srul Itza Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5547682)
There are so many good and valid reasons to despise Jerry Jones, Pence and Trump, this whole football thing is the ultimate side-show, like listing Hitler's bottle brush mustache among the reasons to hate him.
   95. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5547685)
The beacons! The beacons of Mini Trump are lit! Gasbag calls for aid!

....

....and Broland will answer. Muster the BroHimDon!
   96. Tom T Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:36 PM (#5547686)
Then, there's the motley crew of the third category -- populated by the Pruits, DeVos's, Cottons,Pences, Mulvaney's and the like. ...


Thanks for one of the best summaries of Pence (even if not the focus) that I've seen. Daniels really didn't seem to like him/think much of him of a successor (or as governor, based on a variety of comments Mitch has made while "out" of politics), but Pence probably couldn't have lost his first election even if he'd been caught with the proverbial live boy or dead girl. He was in jeopardy, however, of stumbling in his re-election bid (Gregg being a stunningly viable candidate was a problem for Pence) and jumping on the Trump bandwagon was a fairly simple solution. Of course, Holcomb then won the gubernatorial election relatively easily, if only because he wasn't Pence, and all the normally-reflexive "R" votes could be such, given they were much less apprehensive about voting for an unknown quantity than one for which they had some level of distaste.

The mistake Pence made yesterday was effectively upstaging Peyton Manning (Peyton got pushed off the front page of a lot of papers) ... that hasn't gone over terribly well in Indy or in those portions of the state that are not tied by generation-to-generation loyalties to Da Bears. I believe it was, however, a good illustration of Pence's political "instincts"....
   97. dlf Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5547687)
#92 - My father in law was on a U.S. Navy sub stationed in Key West at that time. One would think that he would have been involved directly in the Cuban blockade, but his was one of the last of the old diesel boats and they were ordered to sail north as fast as possible to get out of the way of those who would actually do the work. It goes to show something of the bureaucratic mind that we'd rather spend $$$ to maintain something useless than to make a decision to retire that portion of the fleet.
   98. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5547693)
WASHINGTON — Senator Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, charged in an interview on Sunday that President Trump was treating his office like “a reality show,” with reckless threats toward other countries that could set the nation “on the path to World War III.”

In an extraordinary rebuke of a president of his own party, Mr. Corker said he was alarmed about a president who acts “like he’s doing ‘The Apprentice’ or something.”

“He concerns me,” Mr. Corker added. “He would have to concern anyone who cares about our nation.”

Mr. Corker’s comments capped a remarkable day of sulfurous insults between the president and the Tennessee senator — a powerful, if lame-duck, lawmaker, whose support will be critical to the president on tax reform and the fate of the Iran nuclear deal.

It began on Sunday morning when Mr. Trump, posting on Twitter, accused Mr. Corker of deciding not to run for re-election because he “didn’t have the guts.” Mr. Corker shot back in his own tweet: “It’s a shame the White House has become an adult day care center. Someone obviously missed their shift this morning.”

The senator, Mr. Trump said, had “begged” for his endorsement. “I said ‘NO’ and he dropped out (said he could not win without my endorsement),” the president wrote. He also said that Mr. Corker had asked to be secretary of state. “I said ‘NO THANKS,’” he wrote.

Mr. Corker flatly disputed that account, saying Mr. Trump had urged him to run again, and promised to endorse him if he did. But the exchange laid bare a deeper rift: The senator views Mr. Trump as given to irresponsible outbursts — a political novice who has failed to make the transition from show business.

Mr. Trump poses such an acute risk, the senator said, that a coterie of senior administration officials must protect him from his own instincts. “I know for a fact that every single day at the White House, it’s a situation of trying to contain him,” Mr. Corker said in a telephone interview.


NY Times

Take a minute to let all of that soak in.
   99. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5547704)
Here is a nice and simple explanation of the issues behind the gerrymander case before the SCOTUS. Not the legal case, but rather the mathematical argument.

How the Supreme Court could limit gerrymandering, explained with a simple diagram

They're going through and finding the "wasted" votes.

So in our diagram, we can cross out every vote that could go away and keep the results the same. In each district, the winners needed at least 50 percent of the vote, plus one additional vote.

Even though we crossed out all those votes, Republicans still control three of four districts. And as you can see, the only "wasted" votes belong to Democrats. This means Republicans used their votes efficiently.
   100. TDF, FCL Posted: October 09, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5547708)
List of nuclear close calls

Good bedtime reading :)
Who said Wargames was fictional?

9 November 1979

A computer error at NORAD headquarters led to alarm and full preparation for a nonexistent large-scale Soviet attack. NORAD notified national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski that the Soviet Union had launched 250 ballistic missiles with a trajectory for the United States, stating that a decision to retaliate would need to be made by the president within 3 to 7 minutes. NORAD computers then placed the number of incoming missiles at 2,200. Strategic Air Command was notified, nuclear bombers prepared for takeoff, and intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) crews were presumably placed on alert. Within six to seven minutes of the initial response, satellite and radar systems were able to confirm that the attack was a false alarm. It was found that a training scenario was inadvertently loaded into an operational computer.
Page 1 of 22 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dock Ellis
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Page rendered in 0.6907 seconds
47 querie(s) executed