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 16 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 14 15 16 17 18 >  Last ›
   1501. Greg K Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5551190)
I know nothing of Pep's personal situation, but I would opine that if you are living paycheck to paycheck, hanging out here and debating politics or Barbara Stanwyck films may not be the wisest use of one's time.


Jan: I think you should all spend a little more time thinking about your careers and less time on personal stuff.
Phyllis: Mmmm, I think we're all okay with the balance we've struck
   1502. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5551193)
My friend's ex-wife (or...maybe still wife. I don't think they ever got divorced, but she's been gone for years) used to be one of those people you'd run into.

One of her points of pride was that she could get out of paying for all sorts of things if you just called people and yelled long enough that they figured you weren't worth the hassle.


This woman is a Stanwyck-level monster.
   1503. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:19 PM (#5551194)
Anthony Bourdain isn't buying Hillary's "I knew nothing" defense:

Bourdain – whose girlfriend Asia Argento claimed the fallen movie mogul forcibly performed oral sex on her in 1997 – bashed the former presidential hopeful in a series of tweets Wednesday.

“And I have to say, Hillary’s interview with Fareed Zakaria was shameful in its deflection and its disingenuousness,” the celebrity chef said.

“Know what Hillary Clinton is NOT? She’s not stupid. Or unsophisticated about the world. The Weinstein stories had been out there for years.”

He also added that she gave a “terrible response to questions about a ‘friend’ who’s been tormenting women for decades” – and said her interview was a “real disappointment” and “uninspiring.”

“Secretary Clinton was one of the most intelligent, well prepared, well-briefed politicians ever. So, yes. I’d hoped for a better response,” Bourdain said.

Clinton told Zakaria that she “certainly didn’t” know about Weinstein’s decades of alleged sexual harassment and abuse toward women.

“I don’t know who did, but I can only speak for myself, and I think speak for many others who knew him primarily through politics,” she said.

https://pagesix.com/2017/10/12/anthony-bourdain-goes-after-hillary-over-weinstein-comments/?_ga=2.9307381.176673627.1507588168-672892426.1507588168
   1504. Chicago Joe Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5551201)
I don't know why, but those commercials absolutely infuriate me.


The narrator is worse than the ####### song.

Not such fine people either.
   1505. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5551203)
I sold my last car to one of my best friends about 2 years ago for his kid to use driving back and forth from college. 2003 Nissan Altima with about 130K miles on it. No major issues that I was aware of, and I told him what minor things I knew. Sold it for a few hundred under KBB, but he gave me a fair price on it.

He calls me about 3 days later saying the A/C wasn't working, and after letting me squirm for a few minutes fessed up with "Nah, I'm just messing with you." He still teases me about it but always closes by saying the car is running great and he hasn't had any major issues with it.

   1506. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5551204)
Clinton told Zakaria that she “certainly didn’t” know about Weinstein’s decades of alleged sexual harassment and abuse toward women.

“I don’t know who did, but I can only speak for myself, and I think speak for many others who knew him primarily through politics,” she said.


I have here in my hand a cheque
made out to the university,
and it is a magnificent endowment
in the name of...
...ANTHONY VEYE-to COR-lee-AHN.
The cheque is signed by
that young man's parents,
whom I think we should recognise.
Mike, Pat, Kay - stand up, please.
Let the folks see you!
Folks, I want you to join me
in giving a real Nevada thank you
to Mr and Mrs Michael COR-lee-AHN!

...

Yeah, well, let's cut out the bullshit.
I don't want to spend more time here
than I have to. You can have the licence.
The price is 250,000 dollars.
Plus five per cent of the monthly gross
Of all four hotels, Mr ... Corleone.



   1507. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:26 PM (#5551206)
The lesson of Traderdave's story is never to sell something to anyone who seems crazy. Better to sell it to the sane person for $800 than the crazy person for $1200.
   1508. Ray (RDP) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:27 PM (#5551207)
The lesson of Traderdave's story is never to sell something to anyone who seems crazy. Better to sell it to the sane person for $800 than the crazy person for $1200.


Oh. I thought the lesson of his story was that I'm always right about everything.

That's not what you took from it?
   1509. BDC Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:29 PM (#5551209)
When comparing actors/actresses across eras, is it proper to adjust for changes in technology? I'm thinking that modern movies have close ups, which means actors have to be better because the camera captures more right?

I don't know about the closeup issue per se – don't forget that most films are now consumed on home TVs or even smaller devices instead of huge theater screens. So the camera may capture more (especially digitally) but the viewer may see less.

Actors BITD did not have to deal with green screens and motion-capture and the other accoutrements of CGI, and I would say there's a different skill involved there. OTOH movie actors since at least fairly early talkies, if not the dawn of cinema, have had to deal with re-playing the same scene over and over in single-camera setups, sometimes playing their halves of scenes against a double or against nobody at all. You can often tell that some scene was filmed on two different occasions with only one actor present each time. That skill is pretty constant down the years.
   1510. Omineca Greg Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:31 PM (#5551210)
The lesson of Traderdave's story is never to sell something to anyone who seems crazy. Better to sell it to the sane person for $800 than the crazy person for $1200.

Caveat venditor
   1511. There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5551211)
1508

The lesson of Traderdave's story is never to sell something to anyone who seems crazy. Better to sell it to the sane person for $800 than the crazy person for $1200.


Oh. I thought the lesson of his story was that I'm always right about everything.

That's not what you took from it?


That certainly was my takeaway...
   1512. There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5551214)
1506

I have here in my hand a cheque
made out to the university,
and it is a magnificent endowment
in the name of...
...ANTHONY VEYE-to COR-lee-AHN.
The cheque is signed by
that young man's parents,
whom I think we should recognise.
Mike, Pat, Kay - stand up, please.
Let the folks see you!
Folks, I want you to join me
in giving a real Nevada thank you
to Mr and Mrs Michael COR-lee-AHN!

...

Yeah, well, let's cut out the bullshit.
I don't want to spend more time here
than I have to. You can have the licence.
The price is 250,000 dollars.
Plus five per cent of the monthly gross
Of all four hotels, Mr ... Corleone.


She was laughing...I remember she was laughing...

   1513. PepTech Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:43 PM (#5551222)
Ray, we'll always have Cars4Kids as common ground.
   1514. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5551223)
When you're living paycheck to paycheck, $1000 - or hell, even a couple hundred - is absolutely worth the hassle of selling something online. I've sold dozens of things online, and granted, one experience like Traderdave's or Ray's sisters' might change my opinion, but the odds of dealing with a loon doesn't really seem to be that high, IMO. I've never had any issues like that (only flakes...lots and lots of flakes that say they'll come at a certain time and never show).


Yeah, this. 15 years ago, the few hundred bucks was a necessity. Nowadays, sure - I'd probably just use it as a trade-in with a dealer, knowing full well that the trade-in "offer" is really just a proxy for price haggling.

In any case, my only (close to) experience with small claims court was a situation where a landlord was refusing to return my security deposit... and while she was very much an 'absentee' landlord; one winter, I had to fix the furnace myself because it was impossible to get ahold of her or the maintenance contact # for a week - she'd also go months without cashing rent checks, then cash them in bundles - I imagine she thought me a loon (or at least, her attorney I ultimately had to deal with thought me a loon).

As you might imagine, it was far from a swanky place - $900 for a 3 bedroom in Chicago isn't something you find a lot of... Our original lease (it was under my name) had expired more than a year prior so I was month to month, but had finally reached the point where I could afford a non-######## so after a LOT of persistence, finally got ahold of someone (she had a liquor import/export on the 1st floor, but it was rare that anyone was in the office) to inform her that the rent checks would be ceasing in 30 days. I, frankly, thought I was doing her a favor in that one of my then-roommates wanted to stay and had other move-ins lined up, so I made the intros (OK, technically - I had never added him to the lease... but again, it had long since lapsed anyway), etc. The dude was sketchy - but he had usually been on time giving me a check to cover his share of the rent and in any case, she (or her 'agent', I guess) did ultimately sign a lease with him.

For the next month, I left messages twice a week regarding the disposition of my original security deposit and got no answer. The following month, I started in with the letters - including quoting the tenant ordinances that her period to claim/itemize any damages/etc had also passed and I was now expecting to be getting the check for the full deposit, regardless. The third month - I finally began the "enough, we're going to court" stuff... and THEN I finally get a response - with all sorts of counter-threats, almost all of them relating to the new tenant (he apparently went full sketch).

I mean, I felt a little bit of guilt for hand-delivering a subsequently bad tenant, but WTF... his failure to pay rent and otherwise be a problem was not MY problem and it was complete BS that she was trying to keep MY security deposit to cover him (he had apparently never delivered his own, new deposit). After all, she/her rep had signed a new lease with him.

At least at the time, the ordinance stated that sans any documentation from a landlord, failure for a timely return of the deposit allowed the former tenant to seek 3 times the original deposit - which ended up being the threat that also got all matters referred to her attorney. He was a jackass, too -- whining about a laundry list of costs all associated with the new tenant who was not my problem and attempting to whittle down the deposit.

Ultimately, I just accepted a check for the full security deposit because I didn't want to sink more money into the matter to go through the whole process of serving her, filing costs, etc.... and her attorney very nearly blew that up by failing to just keep his mouth shut when writing the check and deeming it necessary to lecture me about how lucky I was that she was willing to do this - to which I responded that maybe we should set aside the agreement and leave it to a 3rd party (i.e., small claims court) to decide who was lucky and who wasn't.
   1515. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5551224)
1-877-Kars For Kids
K-A-R-S Kars For Kids
1-877-Kars For Kids
Donate Your Car Today

I'd donate my car to ISIS before I'd give it to those ear-worming bastards.


It's not the most annoying commercial I can remember,** but it's close.

** That "Sweet Caroline" commercial that's been running practically every other inning during the postseason is rapidly climbing the list, even though I've only heard it but a couple of times---thank God for the mute button. I'm not sure if it's for a car company or a hooker site, but it's the worst, Jerry. The worst.
   1516. bob gee Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5551225)
Kars for Kids:

" The melody was composed by the semi-satirical singer-songwriter Country Yossi, popular in Orthodox Jewish communities across the U.S. It comes from one of his best-known songs, “Little Kinderlach,” about how little children were going to make the Messiah come."
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/features/7557645/kars-4-kids-jingle-charity-backstory

Lots of problems with the charity, from fundraising issues / disclosure and trying to convert Jewish to become Orthodox. See:

https://www.charitywatch.org/charitywatch-articles/costly-and-continuous-kars4kids-ads-disguise-charity-39-s-real-purpose/179

   1517. PepTech Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5551226)
Meanwhile, Puerto Rico. Trump's Mission Accomplished moment aside, there's real fear people will start dying because they don't have access to insulin or fresh water. A month after landfall. In America.
   1518. TDF, FCL Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5551228)
So I may need some advice, don't really know yet. I sold a car yesterday. It's 2001, has over 250K miles. Offered it for $500 under blue book and took a couple hundred less than that. The guy came and drove it around, asked about some issues, I answered to the best of my ability. It's at the point where time suggests some stuff is going to happen to it, but he said he was a mechanic and could work on it. We completed the bill of sale and off he went.

I got a VM overnight (wasn't answering the phone) saying "there is an issue". I've reached back out but haven't heard yet.

What are my responsibilities here? If, I don't know, the head gasket blew on their way home (I don't know, I'm making that up as an example) is it on me to make amends or rescind the sale? Legally, ethically... just curious as to the collected wisdom here. TIA.
Laws are different in every state, but I can't imagine you have any legal issues. I certainly wouldn't have any ethical issues; it's a $1200 car, he took a test drive, so he can't expect much.**

**This is the real issue. We have people looking for "a good $3000 car for my kid to take to college" all the time; there no longer is such a thing. Maybe for $5k if you're lucky you can find a decent car from a dealer, but not anything less than that. My mom had a 25 year old Chevy Lumina with 120k miles on it (puts a different spin on "low mileage"); I was still able to sell it privately for $2000.
   1519. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:53 PM (#5551230)
I'd donate my car to ISIS before I'd give it to those ear-worming bastards.

It's not the most annoying commercial I can remember,** but it's close.

** That "Sweet Caroline" commercial that's been running practically every other inning during the postseason


I'd join ISIS if it would rid the world of that commercial.
   1520. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:53 PM (#5551233)
To piggyback on 1517 ... the Uniter-in-Chief's tiny little fingers were at it again this morning:




"Puerto Rico survived the Hurricanes, now a financial crisis looms largely of their own making." says Sharyl Attkisson. A total lack of…..

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 12, 2017

…accountability say the Governor. Electric and all infrastructure was disaster before hurricanes. Congress to decide how much to spend….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 12, 2017

…We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in P.R. forever!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 12, 2017



The Intercept has the details on the House's disaster relief bill:


House Republicans unveiled a $36.5 billion disaster relief supplemental package Tuesday night, intended to pay for relief and rebuilding efforts for the floods, hurricanes, and wildfires of the past several months. It includes money for Puerto Rico’s ongoing struggle with the aftermath of Hurricane Maria, though only a fraction of that headline number. In fact, $5 billion of the funds earmarked for Puerto Rico comes in the form of a loan, increasing the amount of money the island will eventually need to pay back.

And in a cruel irony, the bill also contains $16 billion in debt relief — just not for Puerto Rico’s crushing debt.


Link
   1521. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:58 PM (#5551236)
Meanwhile, Puerto Rico. Trump's Mission Accomplished moment aside, there's real fear people will start dying because they don't have access to insulin or fresh water. A month after landfall. In America


Just one more item in the checklist. Trump's abysmal 16 percent approval among Latinos is sending GOP strategists into a panic

Like it or not the GOP, now led by Trump, is doing everything they can to poison the well. I guess they are getting short term gain out of it, but seriously people are suffering, American citizens, and Trump is being a jackass and managing to hurt his own prospects going forward.

It is the logical extension of the idea the GOP has that only winning elections matters and governing not so much. It is just strange, when you win you need to govern, and in our system, with the divisions we have, you need both parties to govern. And yet the current GOP just refuses. Heck Bill Clinton famously cut deals with GOP leaders regarding various initiatives, while they were busily impeaching him. Trump can't manage to not blow his top and destroy everything around him if his balls are not licked on a regular basis.
   1522. Chicago Joe Posted: October 12, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5551238)
Oh. I thought the lesson of his story was that I'm always right about everything.

That's not what you took from it?


Stop Stanwycking up the thread.
   1523. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:00 PM (#5551239)
Didn't the rising stock market eliminate Puerto Rico's debt too?
   1524. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:00 PM (#5551240)
It is just strange, when you win you need to govern, and in our system, with the divisions we have, you need both parties to govern. And yet the current GOP just refuses.


No, they are governing. If they weren't, the VIX, S&P, and various confidence indicies wouldn't be reacting as they've reacted since Election Day.
   1525. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:01 PM (#5551241)
the VIX, S&P, and various confidence indicies

Drink!
   1526. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:03 PM (#5551243)
Anthony Bourdain isn't buying Hillary's "I knew nothing" defense:


Seems to kind of undercut the J'accuse…! when the accuser also apparently knew, doesn't it?

In any case, without getting into the politician/celebrity gossip overlap -

I still come back to the fact that Obamas allowed their 18 yo daughter do a summer internship at Weinstein's company. Unless you think they're total and complete monsters (and they would be), it strains the imagination to believe they'd have allowed that to occur if they "knew"... during the same timeframe that Malia was applying/interning - HRC was also running for President, which certainly means that HRC and the Obamas would have had occasion to speak. Consequently, it also strains the imagination that Malia's gap year internship plans would have either not come up (if HRC wasn't aware of them to begin with, just via other sources). I realize people love to think Hillary is the greatest monster ever - but I'm just not believing a scenario where Hillary "knows" and doesn't inform, at least/even quietly, the Obamas "Maybe you should find a different hollywood company for your daughter to do an internship".

I am just not seeing it as feasible... I mean, even if you DO think Hillary is the Greatest Monster Ever - do you really think she wouldn't have at least nudged, even vaguely, even if not directly restating the rumors she supposedly knew the Obama's in a different direction for her daughter? I mean FFS - even you think she's the sort who couldn't give two shits about an 18 that she certainly at least nominally knows walking into a predator's den - wouldn't her inherent Monsterness mean that she, at minimum, didn't want to risk her most valuable campaign supporter getting pissed off because she didn't warn him?

It only makes logical sense if you decide to wear a really, really special brand of Hillary hate blinders.
   1527. There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:04 PM (#5551245)
1523

Didn't the rising stock market eliminate Puerto Rico's debt too?




Ignorance as to how the national debt gets reduced aside, I swear to God, I really believe this putz thinks Puerto Rico is a foreign country.
   1528. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:05 PM (#5551246)
No defamation. You are a rape apologist. You became one the moment you minimized a vicious gang rape by calling it "drunken date fingering." If that is not apologizing for rape, nothing is. Not saying you apologize for all rape, but you suck one ####...
SBB is pretending that the only thing he said was that we should not judge the perpetrators so harshly because they are juveniles. But of course the first thing he said was that the crime itself was merely "mildly cross[ing] an extremely blurred line." Which is not only apologizing for it, but acting as the criminals' defense counsel.
   1529. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:06 PM (#5551248)
I'm comfortable with the idea that Hillary had heard rumors that Harvey was a connoisseur of casting couch snatch. But what was she supposed to do, blow the guy up in the media because of some rumors?
   1530. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5551250)
I'm comfortable with the idea that Hillary had heard rumors that Harvey was a connoisseur of casting couch snatch.


He was a rapist.
   1531. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:08 PM (#5551252)
Which is not only apologizing for it, but acting as the criminals' defense counsel.


Fake lawyers can't act as criminals' defense counsel.
   1532. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5551253)
The notion that SBB is a troll is
about as disputable a fact as that the earth isn't flat.
It's just used as a way to discredit him before he speaks. Which is why they/you call him a fake lawyer.
No; it's used to discredit him after he speaks. He's called a fake lawyer because he pretends to be a lawyer and makes statements that purport to be authoritative statements of the law but which are not merely disputable or incomplete, but 180° off from actual law.
   1533. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:09 PM (#5551254)
Misinterpreting how the national debt gets reduced aside, I swear to God, I really believe this putz " ####### moron" thinks Puerto Rico is a foreign country.


Rex'd that for ya!
   1534. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:10 PM (#5551255)
the second I read this, I said, "That's a quintessential BM comment."

I have bad news for you - this works with your posts, too.
People read my posts and think that they're Bitter Mouse's comments? That is bad news. Quite depressing, really.

(If you meant that my voice is distinctive, I don't know why you think I would think that's "bad news.")
   1535. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:11 PM (#5551258)
Trump's having a banner day. So far he's withdrawn the U.S. from UNESCO, threatened to abandon the Puerto Rico recovery efforts, and has just signed an E.O. that eliminates the ACA's mandate against junk insurance policies. I'm sure his base will be thrilled with that last move, at least until they try to make a claim on one of those policies.
   1536. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:12 PM (#5551259)
No; it's used to discredit him after he speaks. He's called a fake lawyer because he pretends to be a lawyer and makes statements that purport to be authoritative statements of the law but which are not merely disputable or incomplete, but 180° off from actual law.

Well, in fairness he may be an actual graduate of Trump University Law School.
   1537. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:15 PM (#5551262)
He was a rapist.


I'm aware. Do you think that all high-profile Democrats were fully aware that Harvey was a full-blown (ie no "blurred lines") rapist? I do not. I don't think that adds up.
   1538. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:16 PM (#5551263)
(If you meant that my voice is distinctive, I don't know why you think I would think that's "bad news.")


Yeah there are several of us with very distinctive comment styles. Long ago I picked up the habit of reading the comment before I look at the name and most of the time I know exactly who it is anyway. I could disguise my "voice", but why? I yam what I yam.
   1539. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:16 PM (#5551264)
(If you meant that my voice is distinctive, I don't know why you think I would think that's "bad news.")

It was a bit of failed sarcastic dry humor. Just to note that BM's not particularly special in this regard.
   1540. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:20 PM (#5551268)
He's called a fake lawyer because he pretends to be a lawyer and makes statements that purport to be authoritative statements of the law


Not only have I never made a single statement to that effect, I'm not sure that type of statement is even possible. Every statement of the law is necessarily interpretive. Even a statement of the holding of a case is merely opinion, and of course litigants will often offer up different interpretations of said holding, and obviously the overall import of a case.
   1541. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:20 PM (#5551270)
I'm comfortable with the idea that Hillary had heard rumors that Harvey was a connoisseur of casting couch snatch. But what was she supposed to do, blow the guy up in the media because of some rumors?


If by "heard the rumors" - you mean/include having watched the 2013 Oscars, OK.... But in that case, she "knew" in the same manner that how many other 10s of millions of people "knew"?

I think people are really stretching the boundaries of "knew" here. Not to overly focus on Seth MacFarlane's now-much-more-prescient Oscars joke - but I would imagine the reason it didn't ring any alarms (publicly) at the time is that as someone said, the cliche of the predatory studio exec has existed as long as studios themselves have existed. No, I'm exactly privy to private conversations between uber-famous stars and starlets and uber-famous politicians - but I find it REALLY hard to believe that they're doing a whole lot of nitty gritty secret gossip trading...

Ultimately, I come back to my biggest takeaway here being that we really have a cultural problem... i.e., that such a thing has been "allowed", in a manner of speaking, to become an almost an ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ punchline.... as if it's something that's 'expected', thus making it "OK", and a sort of "fact of life". Which - hey - is hardly unique to Hollywood.... and just as wrong in other halls of power.

And my bottom line is that I think it's exceptionally poor form and poor taste to ignore the basic problem here in favor of cheaply using it as a political cudgel against the Eternal Enemies on the Left.
   1542. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:20 PM (#5551271)
I can see it now. "Just because he was talking about the national debt for the previous five sentences doesn't mean "reducing debt" was referring to the national debt - he meant that individual stockholders who increased their portfolios have less debt now. In a sense. Sane people understand this. TDS."
Especially since something like half of the money invested in the market is from foreign sources, and almost half of the revenues are earned from outside the US. Just a mind-bogglingly dumb statement.

The really odd thing, though, is that Trump is so personally invested in tying his success to the market, since he has very little chance of coming close to Obama's performance, much less Bill Clinton's. Ignoring dividends, to match Obama the S&P500; would go to almost 50K, Clinton almost 70K. With dividends it's even tougher, and unlike those two he's not inheriting a mess; he's starting with a market at all time highs in terms of both market cap and P/E metrics, with a bull market that is already one of the longest in history, etc?

   1543. Greg K Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5551273)
It was a bit of failed sarcastic dry humor. Just to note that BM's not particularly special in this regard.

#1534 stands as an especially great riposte because the comment itself is built around a pedantic reading of another post that is quintessentially Nieporent.
   1544. Spahn Insane, stimulus-funded BurlyMan™ Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:22 PM (#5551274)
That "Sweet Caroline" commercial that's been running practically every other inning during the postseason is rapidly climbing the list, even though I've only heard it but a couple of times---thank God for the mute button. I'm not sure if it's for a car company or a hooker site, but it's the worst, Jerry. The worst.

I'm usually good at tuning out commercials, but I've had more than one occasion this postseason to hear that ad back-to-back with the TGIFriday's (I think?) ad featuring "Hungry Eyes." Hard to say which is worse, but hearing both in rapid succession is particularly appalling.
   1545. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:23 PM (#5551277)
The notion that SBB is a troll is bizarre. It's just used as a way to discredit him before he speaks.


Just as an aside, the first post of SBB's that I remember was him trying to argue that it's not against the rules to cut the course and run less than the full distance when you're competing in a marathon.

That seems difficult to square with the "not a troll" position.
   1546. Howie Menckel Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:25 PM (#5551278)
I still come back to the fact that Obamas allowed their 18 yo daughter do a summer internship at Weinstein's company. Unless you think they're total and complete monsters (and they would be), it strains the imagination to believe they'd have allowed that to occur if they "knew"

you're not getting it. Weinstein would never be dumb enough to go after the daughter of a powerful person - in fact, he specifically picked on those who couldn't cause him major grief.
   1547. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:26 PM (#5551279)
Just as an aside, the first post of SBB's that I remember was him trying to argue that it's not against the rules to cut the course and run less than the full distance when you're competing in a marathon.


Hahaha, holy ####. Quality contribution.
   1548. The Good Face Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5551281)
I still come back to the fact that Obamas allowed their 18 yo daughter do a summer internship at Weinstein's company. Unless you think they're total and complete monsters (and they would be), it strains the imagination to believe they'd have allowed that to occur if they "knew"... during the same timeframe that Malia was applying/interning - HRC was also running for President, which certainly means that HRC and the Obamas would have had occasion to speak.


Really now. Weinstein is scum, but he's not a moron and neither is Obama. Aside from the fact Obama's kids don't really fit the profile of Weinstein's targets, Weinstein knew better than to engage in rapey shenanigans with the daughter of the freakin POTUS (or recent ex-POTUS). And Obama knew he knew.

That said, I don't think Obama knew Weinstein was a full on rapist, "just" a casting couch sleazebag that would engage in quid pro quos with hot young starlets.

And it appears I owe a Coke to Howie.
   1549. Greg K Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:27 PM (#5551282)
Ultimately, I come back to my biggest takeaway here being that we really have a cultural problem... i.e., that such a thing has been "allowed", in a manner of speaking, to become an almost an ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ punchline.... as if it's something that's 'expected', thus making it "OK", and a sort of "fact of life". Which - hey - is hardly unique to Hollywood.... and just as wrong in other halls of power.

I think it's where cynicism gets you. If you expect powerful figures to be corrupt and abuse their power it can act in some way to give them cover to act that way. To return to everyone's favourite Slovenian, I think this is what Zizek is getting at when he says comedy often acts to reinforce, rather than challenge, power and the status quo. At a certain point, mocking those who abuse their power acts to makes that abuse acceptable.
   1550. PreservedFish Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:28 PM (#5551283)
Aside from the fact Obama's kids don't really fit the profile of Weinstein's targets, Weinstein knew better than to engage in rapey shenanigans with the daughter of the freakin POTUS (or recent ex-POTUS). And Obama knew he knew.


Agreed. But it is striking that Weinstein didn't mind targeting even well-connected starlets, like Paltrow and Arquette.
   1551. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5551284)
Just to note that BM's not particularly special


HEY!

jk ;)
   1552. McCoy Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:30 PM (#5551285)
When I was living in DC and needed to empty my apartment I turned to those OfferUp type sites to try and move my goods. Had no real luck because I didn't have a lot of time to move the stuff and the people on the site were really flaky, didn't have ways of transporting the goods, and wanted to pay next to nothing for the goods. Not or but and on all of those things. I had a couch that was less than a year old that I bought for over 1000 dollars and offering for 200 and the only nibble I'd get is some person offering 50 bucks and them needing me to deliver it to them and about 60% of the time once I got an accepted bid they wouldn't show up.

I ended up throwing out most of the stuff and giving the rest to the movers.

My GF had much better luck selling her stuff when we moved out of her home. She had more time to be patient and she priced her stuff to sell quickly. By the end of it she had several people following her on the sites to see what other stuff she would put up for sale.

If you don't putting up with some weirdos and you've either got time on your hands or just want to get rid of stuff those online sites are pretty good. She made enough money to pay for the movers and some new furniture.
   1553. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5551287)
Just as an aside, the first post of SBB's that I remember was him trying to argue that it's not against the rules to cut the course and run less than the full distance when you're competing in a marathon.


You misremember, actually badly so. The argument was that if cutting the course wasn't explicitly forbidden by the rules, yet they still saw fit to take Rosie Ruiz's 1980 win away, then the pro-roider argument about roiding not being explicitly forbidden by the rules collapses.

I expressed no opinion about what the 1980 Official Marathon Rulebook stated on the matter, and still don't. My "argument" was really more an "expression of an applicable principle."

I didn't really pay attention after a few days, but I haven't seen that anyone has actually consulted the 1980 OMR.
   1554. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5551288)
Just as an aside, the first post of SBB's that I remember

I refuse to acknowledge the site existed before I arrived.
   1555. Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:35 PM (#5551289)
More fun in the Caribbean sun, from yesterday's EPA Hurricane Maria update:


WASHINGTON (October 11, 2017) — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to coordinate closely with federal, commonwealth, territory, and local partners as the Agency responds to the impact of Hurricane Maria. EPA is focused on environmental impacts and potential threats to human health as well as the safety of those in the affected areas. EPA is continuing to coordinate with local governments in Puerto Rico and the USVI to assess the conditions of drinking water, which includes sampling, analysis and lab support, and getting wastewater treatment systems up and running. EPA’s missions also include oil and chemical spill response, oil and chemical facility assessments and debris management.

There are reports of residents obtaining, or trying to obtain, drinking water from wells at hazardous waste “Superfund” sites in Puerto Rico. EPA advises against tampering with sealed and locked wells or drinking from these wells, as it may be dangerous to people’s health.


Link
   1556. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5551292)
I refuse to acknowledge the site existed before I arrived.


I can't remember how I even found the site, but the first thing I saw was that Bonds thread and when I saw the nonsensical material being offered up with such bared-teeth seriousness, I was pulled in with a force stronger than the one acting on Michael Corleone.

   1557. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5551293)
you're not getting it. Weinstein would never be dumb enough to go after the daughter of a powerful person - in fact, he specifically picked on those who couldn't cause him major grief.

Really now. Weinstein is scum, but he's not a moron and neither is Obama. Aside from the fact Obama's kids don't really fit the profile of Weinstein's targets, Weinstein knew better than to engage in rapey shenanigans with the daughter of the freakin POTUS (or recent ex-POTUS). And Obama knew he knew.

That said, I don't think Obama knew Weinstein was a full on rapist, "just" a casting couch sleazebag that would engage in quid pro quos with hot young starlets.


Look, I have no children... but I find this beyond incredible to buy into.

You really think ANY parent is going to just trust their daughter is going to be OK because power and stuff?

That's silly.

I mean, it's not the rarefied air of Presidents and Hollywood - but I do have family/friends/etc with daughters, including various fathers who are of the "I have a big gun collection" variety and/or He's Pretty Physically Intimidating and able to mash most people into a pulp variety.

I can guarantee with an absolute certainty that none of them are going to allow their daughter to intern/work/play on a friggin sports team/etc where the boss/coach/whatever is even just rumored to be a predator and trust that their 'power' - in less rarefied but more direct/physical/whatever sense would keep her safe.

It does not track in the slightest.

Forget the rarefied air and just think of it in the context of say, a volleyball coach rumored to be diddling the girls on the team.... I feel pretty damn confidant that the only daughters on such a team are going to be those whose parents either haven't heard the rumors or perhaps have, but do not believe them.

Yeah, I'm not a parent so maybe what do I know... but gimme a break. I utterly and completely cannot fathom a situation where I would let my hypothetical daughter anywhere near something like that, even if I'm equal parts The Rock, Navy SEAL, Tony Soprano. Absolutely, positively, no conceivable way I'm just going to trust that "she's not his type" or "he fears me too much to go there".

No friggin way.

By all means, poll the folks on the OTP who are fathers and especially fathers of daughters... but I feel like I'm on pretty damn solid footing here.
   1558. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:41 PM (#5551295)
Really now. Weinstein is scum, but he's not a moron and neither is Obama. Aside from the fact Obama's kids don't really fit the profile of Weinstein's targets, Weinstein knew better than to engage in rapey shenanigans with the daughter of the freakin POTUS (or recent ex-POTUS). And Obama knew he knew.

That said, I don't think Obama knew Weinstein was a full on rapist, "just" a casting couch sleazebag that would engage in quid pro quos with hot young starlets.


Precisely.
   1559. McCoy Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:41 PM (#5551297)
Never really understood the thinking on that. If you're willing to do that you might as well drinking seawater. My only guess is that people so think their government is corrupt and evil that they are intentionally locking up safe drinking water from them.
   1560. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5551298)
It does not track in the slightest.


It tracks in every particular.
   1561. PepTech Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5551300)
How desperate do you have to be to break into a Superfund well to get water? More, from the Guardian:
Officials at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) say that the government and its partners are only providing 200,000 meals a day to meet the needs of more than 2 million people. That is a daily shortfall of between 1.8m and 5.8m meals.

“We are 1.8 million meals short,” said one senior Fema official. “That is why we need the urgency. And it’s not going away. We’re doing this much today, but it has to be sustained over several months.”
However, Fema provides no details on food deliveries, keeping its public statements to the most general terms. On its website, Fema says it has provided “millions of meals and millions of liters of water”.

In fact many of those meals are military ready-to-eat meals that civilians find hard to digest if consumed for more than a few days.
World Central Kitchen, founded by chef José Andrés, cooks and distributes 90,000 meals a day through a network of local chefs and kitchens.

Its Fema contract, to provide just 20,000 meals a day, ended on Tuesday. Fema insists it is bound by federal rules that mean it will take several weeks for a new contract to emerge to feed more Americans.

“There is no urgency in the government response to this humanitarian crisis,” Andrés said. “They have all the officials and armed guards at headquarters, but they have no information about the island. They don’t even have a map they can share about who needs food. Fema is over-paying and it is under-delivering.”
Conditions on Puerto Rico remain dire; just 16% of islanders having access to electricity... Less than 400 miles of the island’s 5,000 miles of road are open to traffic.
According to Donald Trump, his own response to the disaster in Puerto Rico has been exceptional.
   1562. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:44 PM (#5551301)
According to Donald Trump, his own response to the disaster in Puerto Rico has been exceptional.

Pretty sure that's been echoed on this site by a couple people.
   1563. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5551303)
It does not track in the slightest.


It tracks in every particular.


Then I can only presume you're not a father or if you are, you're a pretty shitty one.
   1564. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5551305)
On that Bonds thread -- now 11 1/2 years old -- the same "fake lawyer, no, I'm a lawyer" stuff we still see today was all the rage.

LOL, emoji, LOL:

712. Backlasher Posted: March 08, 2006 at 10:37 PM (#1889431)
Well, I think (as David and someone else correctly pointed out) context is important here. If we're having a discussion about labor law, and you show up and say "as a labor lawyer blah blah", that's relevant to the discussion.

And it depends. You bet it matters whether someone is lay or a lawyer in how much I'm going to believe their recitation of the issue. Especially here, where many confuse an interest in "business" with a knowledge in the law, or want to cite some other lawyer that has an advocacy interest in the outcome as the recitation.

The argument on the law is independent of any license or education. Its either good or bad. The fact that Nieporent, Srul, Sam M., Field, UCCF, Daryn etc. give better legal arguments would be apparent whether I knew their background or not. There are plenty of licensed attys on this site that butcher the law terribly. And Emeigh who is not a lawyer shows decent dexterity with legal issues.

So context is important. I have no qualm or animus against Daryn, but IMHO don't think the "as a labor lawyer" hacks it as an intro phrase. Can't you usually just tell who knows what they are talking about. I mean The Jim has already branded me as a bad lawyer. Its usually not important unless you are trying to appeal to authority, and create authority in oneself.

Its the Primer version of the fanhome,

"I work for x, and I can tell you, you all have no idea what you are talking about."

I do want to know if someone has a unique position to observe, but that's about all I care about. Once we get past the testimony stage, the arguments stand or fall on their own.
   1565. Sleepy's not going to blame himself Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5551308)
According to Donald Trump, his own response to the disaster in Puerto Rico has been exceptional.

Well, according to google's interweb dictionary thingy:
ex·cep·tion·al. [ˌikˈsepSH(ə)n(ə)l]

ADJECTIVE
• unusual; not typical:
"crimes of exceptional callousness and cruelty"

• unusually good; outstanding:
"a pepper offering exceptional flavor and juiciness"

• US
(of a child) mentally or physically disabled so as to require special schooling:
"helping parents of exceptional children"
I'd say his response fits at least two of the three definitions of "exceptional".
   1566. The Good Face Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:53 PM (#5551310)
Look, I have no children... but I find this beyond incredible to buy into.

You really think ANY parent is going to just trust their daughter is going to be OK because power and stuff?


Yes. And I have children. But remember, I'm not claiming that Obama knew Weinstein was a rapist or sexual predator. Merely that he was a sleazy casting couch type. Also remember that Obama's daughter was over 18 at the time, an adult. It's not like Obama was "entrusting" the girl to Weinstein's care and guardianship.
   1567. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:55 PM (#5551314)
The call wouldn't even be necessary, as Harvey would understand on his own -- but one "Harvey, don't go near my daughter" from Obama and Harvey isn't going near his daughter.
   1568. Traderdave Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:55 PM (#5551315)
Holy Unresolved Anger Issues, Batman, a Backlasher sighting!


Wow. It's been a million years since that name came up.
   1569. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5551317)
Yes. And I have children. But remember, I'm not claiming that Obama knew Weinstein was a rapist or sexual predator. Merely that he was a sleazy casting couch type. Also remember that Obama's daughter was over 18 at the time, an adult. It's not like Obama was "entrusting" the girl to Weinstein's care and guardianship.


So you're telling me that, say, your HS senior -- she's 18! -- daughter is trying out for the volleyball team. You hear that a rumor that the volleyball coach preys on the girls he coaches. You believe the rumor.

You're really going to be OK with that? You're not going to say something on the order of "we'll find you a club team" or maybe try tennis or somesuch?

I find that awfully hard to believe.
   1570. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5551318)
He's called a fake lawyer because he pretends to be a lawyer and makes statements that purport to be authoritative statements of the law

Not only have I never made a single statement to that effect,
And he's called a troll because he baldfacedly lies like that. I mean, who does he think he's fooling -- all the people for whom today is their first visit to BBTF?
   1571. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 01:58 PM (#5551321)
I liked the precursor to PepTech, who kept stalking me with his discovery in the 2005 Track rule book, utterly oblivious to the distinct possibility -- likelihood, really -- that the Ruiz episode itself caused the ruling body to explicitly codify what had theretofore been merely understood.
   1572. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:00 PM (#5551323)
And he's called a troll because he baldfacedly lies like that.


No, I in fact have never made a statement that purports to be an authoritative statement of the law. Every statement I've made about the law has been my best interpretation of it. As I noted, properly understood, there really is no one authoritative statement of any law.

   1573. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:01 PM (#5551326)
By all means, poll the folks on the OTP who are fathers and especially fathers of daughters... but I feel like I'm on pretty damn solid footing here.


As the father of a daughter, I completely agree. Those assertions by TGF and one other are patently absurd.
   1574. The Good Face Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:02 PM (#5551327)
So you're telling me that, say, your HS senior -- she's 18! -- daughter is trying out for the volleyball team. You hear that a rumor that the volleyball coach preys on the girls he coaches. You believe the rumor.

You're really going to be OK with that? You're not going to say something on the order of "we'll find you a club team" or maybe try tennis or somesuch?

I find that awfully hard to believe.


Not the same circumstances. More like, the boss at this office has a reputation for engaging in affairs with attractive women working there, and those women he has affairs with tend to have good careers in the company. None of that matters to the daughter of the freaking POTUS who's there on an internship. Again, I don't believe Obama knew Weinstein was a sexual predator. "Just" a sleazy guy who'd engage in quid pro quos with wannabe actresses. No risk there for his kid.
   1575. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:03 PM (#5551330)
As the father of a daughter, I completely agree. Those assertions by TGF and one other are patently absurd.


Get back to us when you're a former POTUS.
   1576. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:05 PM (#5551332)
I liked the precursor to PepTech, who kept stalking me with his discovery in the 2005 Track rule book, utterly oblivious to the distinct possibility -- likelihood, really -- that the Ruiz episode itself caused the ruling body to explicitly codify what had theretofore been merely understood.


Is your insistence on this shtick a kayfabe thing? Just asking to be clear, because I don't really "get" wrestling.
   1577. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5551333)
As the father of a daughter, I completely agree. Those assertions by TGF and one other are patently absurd.

I'm sure that's a longer debate. I'm more of the opinion (and consider it more accurate) that Obama has for the last 12 to 20 or so years of his life been too busy with other matters to register what he's heard about Harvey Weinstein for more than 10 seconds or so.
   1578. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:07 PM (#5551335)
Is your insistence on this shtick a kayfabe thing? Just asking to be clear, because I don't really "get" wrestling.


You were the one who linked the 11-year-old thread. (And then totally mischaracterized it, but whatever.)
   1579. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:08 PM (#5551336)
The call wouldn't even be necessary, as Harvey would understand on his own -- but one "Harvey, don't go near my daughter" from Obama and Harvey isn't going near his daughter.


Ah, so the serial rapist understands boundaries. OK. That makes sense. I mean, geez - the guy is masturbating into potted plants in the basement of his restaurant with someone he's detained, but you can trust him to not to do that with your daughter.

Um, OK...

I'd point out that at least four of the actresses on the Weinstein list -- Ashley Judd, Kate Beckinsdale, Mira Sorvino, and Rosanna Arquette -- were NOT nobodies/lacking for famous parents/families when Weinstein attempted to assault them... Those parents may not rise to the Selznick level of Weinstein, but they certainly weren't of the "you're a nobody without resources, so I can do what I want" level.
   1580. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:09 PM (#5551337)
Holy Unresolved Anger Issues, Batman, a Backlasher sighting!

Not to mention the mighty RETARDO, the mild-mannered Arkansas chicken farmer who was David's personal Lex Luthor, or maybe it was the other way around.
   1581. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:09 PM (#5551338)
Precisely.


Insanity.
   1582. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:11 PM (#5551339)
Ah, so the serial rapist understands boundaries.


Obama didn't know him as a serial rapist. Face has tried to explain this like three times now. It's hard to fathom why you can't understand it -- and in fact I think you probably can -- but it has been explained.

Yeah, if Obama thought he was a serial rapist, he wouldn't, nor would any father, let his daughter near the guy.
   1583. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:12 PM (#5551340)
   1584. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:12 PM (#5551341)
As the father of a daughter, I completely agree. Those assertions by TGF and one other are patently absurd.


As the father of two boys ... I can't say. I am completely confident in my boys making good decisions (for young men, I am not completely naive), and to largely take care of themselves. But then again they are not female, and sadly that still matters.

However, the simplest explanation is usually the best. I don't think one needs to invent their knowledge and then invent an additional reason why they didn't act on that knowledge, when one can just assume they didn't have the knowledge in the first place.
   1585. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:13 PM (#5551342)
Yes. And I have children. But remember, I'm not claiming that Obama knew Weinstein was a rapist or sexual predator. Merely that he was a sleazy casting couch type. Also remember that Obama's daughter was over 18 at the time, an adult. It's not like Obama was "entrusting" the girl to Weinstein's care and guardianship.


You should have them taken away. Seriously. Anyone who is that callous about their safety, to knowingly send them to work for a sleaze like that is an unfit parent. "She was 18 so it's OK to send her to work for a sexual predator."? Seriously? Why would any parent do that when there are innumerable other choices?
   1586. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5551345)
I'm sure that's a longer debate. I'm more of the opinion (and consider it more accurate) that Obama has for the last 12 to 20 or so years of his life been too busy with other matters to register what he's heard about Harvey Weinstein for more than 10 seconds or so. YMMV


Except for the fact that I very much suspect when Malia comes to him and says "guess what dad, I'm going to intern for David Weinstein!".... At that point, I feel pretty sure he finds the more than 10 seconds to spare considering anything he may have heard about Weinstein in passing.

To be clear - I'm NOT putting the Obama's on a parent pedestal. I'm simply saying that I think they're at least meeting the bar of not shitty parents, as I think the majority of parents do.

   1587. Traderdave Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:14 PM (#5551346)
The call wouldn't even be necessary, but one "Harvey, don't go near my daughter" from Obama and Harvey isn't going near his daughter.


What kind of lunatic sends his daughter to work with someone he feels a need to warn about assaulting his daughter?

Are you both a fake layer AND a fake father?
   1588. GordonShumway Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5551347)
Seems to kind of undercut the J'accuse…! when the accuser also apparently knew, doesn't it?

In any case, without getting into the politician/celebrity gossip overlap -

I still come back to the fact that Obamas allowed their 18 yo daughter do a summer internship at Weinstein's company. Unless you think they're total and complete monsters (and they would be), it strains the imagination to believe they'd have allowed that to occur if they "knew"... during the same timeframe that Malia was applying/interning - HRC was also running for President, which certainly means that HRC and the Obamas would have had occasion to speak. Consequently, it also strains the imagination that Malia's gap year internship plans would have either not come up (if HRC wasn't aware of them to begin with, just via other sources). I realize people love to think Hillary is the greatest monster ever - but I'm just not believing a scenario where Hillary "knows" and doesn't inform, at least/even quietly, the Obamas "Maybe you should find a different hollywood company for your daughter to do an internship".

I am just not seeing it as feasible... I mean, even if you DO think Hillary is the Greatest Monster Ever - do you really think she wouldn't have at least nudged, even vaguely, even if not directly restating the rumors she supposedly knew the Obama's in a different direction for her daughter? I mean FFS - even you think she's the sort who couldn't give two shits about an 18 that she certainly at least nominally knows walking into a predator's den - wouldn't her inherent Monsterness mean that she, at minimum, didn't want to risk her most valuable campaign supporter getting pissed off because she didn't warn him?

It only makes logical sense if you decide to wear a really, really special brand of Hillary hate blinders.


I don't know what HRC or Obama knew re: Weinstein, but regardless of what they knew, Malia Obama had and has Secret Service protection. If Weinstein laid even one finger on Malia, he'd get pounded into hamburger in seconds.
   1589. Omineca Greg Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5551350)
Just talked it over with my wife...we feel that if we were a Presidential couple, our daughter wouldn't do any internship where there was even a whiff of impropriety. After all, as the President's daughter she could get an internship in any number of places, so why put her in contact with even borderline sleazy people. Even if she doesn't come to immediate harm, we're trying to have her work with good people, and learn good values, not bad people and bad values.
   1590. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:17 PM (#5551351)
You should have them taken away. Seriously. Anyone who is that callous about their safety, to knowingly send them to work for a sleaze like that is an unfit parent. "She was 18 so it's OK to send her to work for a sexual predator."? Seriously? Why would any parent do that when there are innumerable other choices?


Settle down and read. It's right there in the post of Face's you quoted:

But remember, I'm not claiming that Obama knew Weinstein was a rapist or sexual predator.

Why you would then attribute to Face the thought that "She was 18 so it's OK to send her to work for a serial predator?" is just a complete mystery -- other than that you're just on some kind of rampage and want to unleash your emotions on something or somebody.

It's exactly the same thing you did with the "you're excusing rape" stuff.

Maybe get like a heavy bag and some boxing gloves or something. It's actually way better exercise than typing, too.
   1591. The Good Face Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:17 PM (#5551352)
You should have them taken away. Seriously. Anyone who is that callous about their safety, to knowingly send them to work for a sleaze like that is an unfit parent. "She was 18 so it's OK to send her to work for a sexual predator."? Seriously? Why would any parent do that when there are innumerable other choices?


Who was it that defined trolling as repeatedly, intentionally, misrepresenting another person's statements and arguments? Because that's what you're doing here.

For like the 5th time now, I don't think Obama knew Weinstein was a sexual predator. Sleazy guys that have office affairs are not by definition sexual predators, and that's how I believe Obama viewed Weinstein.
   1592. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:20 PM (#5551353)
Obama didn't know him as a serial rapist.


But Hillary did and didn't warn him. Risking her most valuable political relationship when she was running for President. Yeah, that totally makes sense.
   1593. The Good Face Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:20 PM (#5551354)
Just talked it over with my wife...we feel that if we were a Presidential couple, our daughter wouldn't do any internship where there was even a whiff of impropriety. After all, as the President's daughter she could get an internship in any number of places, so why put her in contact with even borderline sleazy people. Even if she doesn't come to immediate harm, we're trying to have her work with good people, and learn good values, not bad people and bad values.


Sooooo... no Hollywood internships for her.
   1594. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:22 PM (#5551356)
That said, I don't think Obama knew Weinstein was a full on rapist, "just" a casting couch sleazebag that would engage in quid pro quos with hot young starlets.
I think it's important to keep that distinction in mind. It has been alleged now that Weinstein is an actual criminal -- that he committed various forms of assault and sexual assault (among other things). But the original allegations, and the things people cite the Seth MacFarlane and Tina Fey jokes as evidence of, were primarily sleaziness, not criminality. Sexual harassment is not a crime. Offering to reward someone if they sleep with you (or do other sexualish things with you ) is not a crime; it may not even be sexual harassment (in the legal sense of that term), depending on the context.
   1595. Omineca Greg Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:23 PM (#5551357)
Sooooo... no Hollywood internships for her
.

I don't know every company in Hollywood, but yes, quite likely you're correct.
   1596. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:25 PM (#5551358)
I don't think one needs to invent their knowledge and then invent an additional reason why they didn't act on that knowledge, when one can just assume they didn't have the knowledge in the first place.


If you don't do that, you cannot blame Hillary for this and that just won't stand. Hillary HAD to know, and chose to withhold it from Obama. that's the only narrative that makes sense.
   1597. Zonk Tormundbane Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5551360)
I'd point out that at least four of the actresses on the Weinstein list -- Ashley Judd, Kate Beckinsdale, Mira Sorvino, and Rosanna Arquette -- were NOT nobodies/lacking for famous parents/families when Weinstein attempted to assault them... Those parents may not rise to the Selznick level of Weinstein, but they certainly weren't of the "you're a nobody without resources, so I can do what I want" level.


Actually, 5 -- I always forget that Angelina Jolie is Jon Voight's daughter... though, I suppose - without looking it up - her run-in may have been while they were estranged.... well, that plus Voight's politics place himself safely outside the Who Knew bubble.
   1598. BrianBrianson Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5551361)
As the father of two boys ... I can't say. I am completely confident in my boys making good decisions (for young men, I am not completely naive), and to largely take care of themselves. But then again they are not female, and sadly that still matters.


It doesn't matter if they're young enough to be called boys.
   1599. Lassus Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:28 PM (#5551362)
I'm still of the opinion that the overwhelming saturation of Weinstein's confirmed sexual predator status was less than is being currently accepted. (This includes his status as a LIBERAL POWER BROKER.) No proof, just lifetime opinion stuff, couple/three years in LA with people breaking into the biz, etc. I suppose maybe I'm being naïve, but I don't think knowledge disseminates and sticks that way.
   1600. Blanks for Nothing, Larvell Posted: October 12, 2017 at 02:29 PM (#5551363)
But Hillary did and didn't warn him.


Nobody said Hillary knew him as a serial rapist either.
Page 16 of 22 pages ‹ First  < 14 15 16 17 18 >  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
dirk
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogALCS Game 6 OMNICHATTER, for October 20, 2017
(146 - 3:24am, Oct 21)
Last: LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim

NewsblogAngell: Bringing the Yankees Home?
(3 - 2:52am, Oct 21)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogDusty Baker Will Not Be Back as Manager
(54 - 2:50am, Oct 21)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogOTP 16 October 2017: Sorry, Yankee fans: Trump’s claim that he can ensure victory simply isn’t true
(1723 - 2:42am, Oct 21)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(427 - 1:53am, Oct 21)
Last: cmd600

NewsblogHeyman | Tigers To Hire Ron Gardenhire
(26 - 1:48am, Oct 21)
Last: cmd600

Gonfalon CubsFive minute Los Angeles Dodgers Preview
(89 - 9:07pm, Oct 20)
Last: Pops Freshenmeyer

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2086 - 9:01pm, Oct 20)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogBaseball News, Scores, Analysis, Schedules
(4 - 9:00pm, Oct 20)
Last: Dr. Vaux

NewsblogTheo Epstein: Joe Maddon has taken enough heat, don’t blame NLCS on Cubs manager | NBC Sports Chicago
(17 - 8:58pm, Oct 20)
Last: Andere Richtingen

NewsblogDodgers crush Cubs in Game 5 to advance to the World Series for first time since 1988 | LA Times
(51 - 8:26pm, Oct 20)
Last: TomH

NewsblogSeverino, Verlander ready for G6 in Houston | MLB.com
(4 - 8:09pm, Oct 20)
Last: caspian88

NewsblogOT: New Season August 2017 Soccer Thread
(1187 - 7:57pm, Oct 20)
Last: Fourth True Outcome

NewsblogOT - 2017 NFL thread
(149 - 6:11pm, Oct 20)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-20-2017
(20 - 3:00pm, Oct 20)
Last: There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie)

Page rendered in 1.0229 seconds
47 querie(s) executed