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, June 02, 2014

OTP - June 2014: Iraq war costs U.S. more than $2 trillion: study

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said.

The war has killed at least 134,000 Iraqi civilians and may have contributed to the deaths of as many as four times that number, according to the Costs of War Project by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.

When security forces, insurgents, journalists and humanitarian workers were included, the war’s death toll rose to an estimated 176,000 to 189,000, the study said.

Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 07:48 AM | 4613 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: otp, politics, stupid ideas

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 47 pages  1 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›
   1. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:29 PM (#4717409)
If only I could figure out a way to spend $6 Trillion so well.
   2. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4717417)
If only I could figure out a way to spend $6 Trillion so well.

I'd spend the first $3 trillion on booze and women. The rest I'd waste.
   3. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:37 PM (#4717418)
Remember in 2004 when John Kerry was ridiculed for saying the Iraq War could cost $200 billion? Good times.

Edit: Forgot Bush fired Lawrence Lindsey in 2002 for saying that a war in Iraq could cost as an "upper bound" between $100 and $200 billion.
   4. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:38 PM (#4717419)
Interesting article on Putin and Russia.

“We got to the point where the market speaks and politicians are forced to listen and adjust,” Mansur Mammadov, a money manager at Kazimir Partners Ltd. in Moscow, which oversees $300 million in emerging-market equities, said by phone on May 29. “The volatility was like a tsunami and it would be just logical to assume that it made the politicians realize the cost of Russian expansion in Ukraine was too much for the slowing economy.”


And snapper, your plan is WAY better than what happened. Piling up all the money and having a bonfire is a better plan than what happened.
   5. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:40 PM (#4717422)
From the other thread:

One last time, folks: The issue isn't whether you leave a man behind. It's about the terms of the exchange and when it gets consummated.


No, that's your issue. For others, it seems the issue is "Hey, I heard he deserted. ####'em.

And if the facts from #4447 are correct, that we were soon to be obligated to release these guys anyway, then it's a goddamned no-brainer.
   6. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:40 PM (#4717423)
If only I could figure out a way to spend $6 Trillion so well


Apparently, you could buy every single NBA franchise. And I guess every MLB team, too. Maybe a good portion, & perhaps the entirety, of the NFL as well. Probably the NHL, too, since probably a BOGO policy would apply.
   7. spike Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:42 PM (#4717425)
   8. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:43 PM (#4717427)
Edit: Forgot Bush fired Lawrence Lindsey in 2002 for saying that a war in Iraq could cost as an "upper bound" between $100 and $200 billion.


Now let's see what "staying on message" looks like:

TED KOPPEL
(Off Camera) Well, it's a, I think you'll agree, this is a much bigger project than any that's been talked about. Indeed, I understand that more money is expected to be spent on this than was spent on the entire Marshall Plan for the rebuilding of Europe after World War II.

ANDREW NATSIOS
No, no. This doesn't even compare remotely with the size of the Marshall Plan.

TED KOPPEL
(Off Camera) The Marshall Plan was $97 billion.

ANDREW NATSIOS
This is 1.7 billion.

TED KOPPEL
(Off Camera) All right, this is the first. I mean, when you talk about 1.7, you're not suggesting that the rebuilding of Iraq is gonna be done for $1.7 billion?

ANDREW NATSIOS
Well, in terms of the American taxpayers contribution, I do, this is it for the US. The rest of the rebuilding of Iraq will be done by other countries who have already made pledges, Britain, Germany, Norway, Japan, Canada, and Iraqi oil revenues, eventually in several years, when it's up and running and there's a new government that's been democratically elected, will finish the job with their own revenues. They're going to get in $20 billion a year in oil revenues. But the American part of this will be 1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this...

TED KOPPEL
(Off Camera) And we're back once again with ANDREW NATSIOS, administrator for the Agency for International Development. I want to be sure that I understood you correctly. You're saying the, the top cost for the US taxpayer will be $1.7 billion. No more than that?

ANDREW NATSIOS
For the reconstruction. And then there's 700 million in the supplemental budget for humanitarian relief, which we don't competitively bid 'cause it's charities that get that money.

TED KOPPEL
(Off Camera) I understand. But as far as reconstruction goes, the American taxpayer will not be hit for more than $1.7 billion no matter how long the process takes?

ANDREW NATSIOS
That is our plan and that is our intention. And these figures, outlandish figures I've seen, I have to say, there's a little bit of hoopla involved in this.
   9. zenbitz Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:46 PM (#4717433)
Is it safe to conclude that Sgt. Bergdahl is (was) the only US soldier in captivity - at least held by the Taliban. If so - and with the additional point that if we end hostilities in Afghanistan we should probably release all their POWs anyway... I think 100% for 100% is probably fair.

I am sure that a (large?) portion of POWs in previous wars were captured in "desert-y" like circumstances. Otherwise, they'd have died fighting, like real men. Obviously there is an exception when a command surrenders. In the Civil War these were called "Stragglers".
   10. zenbitz Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:51 PM (#4717439)
Hey, Natsios was only off by 3 orders of magnitude!

By the way... that is about $10M per death (low estimate on Iraqis, including the other numbers). I bet we could have gotten Saddam to kill them for 1/1000th of the price.
   11. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:53 PM (#4717441)
I am sure that a (large?) portion of POWs in previous wars were captured in "desert-y" like circumstances. Otherwise, they'd have died fighting, like real men. Obviously there is an exception when a command surrenders. In the Civil War these were called "Stragglers".

In the Civil War era, things were different because troops generally fought in rather tight formations. It was very hard to get separated.

In modern war, most POWs are taken when they are cut off from their units in combat, or the unit is overrun and the stragglers are picked up while trying to escape.

Most US prisoners in WW2 or Korea would have been taken in those circumstance, or shot down air crews. In Vietnam, prisoners were overwhelmingly shot down airmen. I'd thing there were only a small fraction of deserters/AWOL. Especially in Korea, Vietnam or the Pacific in WW2, where you could expect hideous treatment.
   12. Publius Publicola Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:53 PM (#4717442)
Remember in 2004 when John Kerry was ridiculed for saying the Iraq War could cost $200 billion? Good times.


Better times. Remember when Paul Wolfowitz said the Iraq war would pay for itself?
   13. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4717447)
And if the facts from #4447 are correct, that we were soon to be obligated to release these guys anyway, then it's a goddamned no-brainer.

Agree with this.
   14. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:13 PM (#4717467)
Pro Russian rebels bury their dead and ask "Where is Putin?"


Remember that time the US told Iraqis "hey, if you agitate against Hussein, we'll totally keep rolling out of Kuwait and right on into Baghdad!!?" Apparently Vlad Putin didn't.
   15. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:17 PM (#4717471)
Remember how the Democrats in Congress held inquiry after inquiry over Andrew Natsios going on those Sunday talk shows and spitting talking points instead of 'the truth?' Right.
   16. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:33 PM (#4717489)
You don't think they'd actively attempt to undermine the Administration during wartime, thus giving aid and comfort to the terrorist enemies who hate us and want to kill us because they hate our freedoms, do you?
   17. Ziggy Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:54 PM (#4717504)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.
   18. spike Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:55 PM (#4717505)
All Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, or at least that's what Ari Fleischer warned me
   19. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 02:58 PM (#4717507)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.

When there was no OTP thread, these discussions tended to infect a lot of baseball threads. This is a way to control the OTP chatter.
   20. robinred Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:02 PM (#4717508)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted?


That is a question for Furtado.
   21. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4717509)
When there was no OTP thread, these discussions tended to infect a lot of baseball threads. This is a way to control the OTP chatter.


The "OTP" threads were specifically created to fix this problem. Trust me, you'd rather have us over here in the OTP-Politics ghetto than spinning every fourth baseball thread out into another political argument. This is much better than it was. One day the redesign may be finished and people can "hide" the OTP threads from their personal Hot Topic bars, which would improve it even more. But this is better than it was. Trust me.
   22. just plain joe Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4717510)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.


If you think what you read here is yelling, then you must not spend time on other internet boards.
   23. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4717511)
You could pay for ten years of Mike Trout's services.

Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.


How does it "gum" it up? It takes one slot (two for now, until the May one dies).
   24. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:23 PM (#4717525)
How does it "gum" it up? It takes one slot (two for now, until the May one dies).


We are in prime OTP "gumming" time for the Hot Topics bar; the monthly flip of politics thread; the NHL and NBA playoffs going strong for those threads. And the World Cup spinning up soon to set the soccer threat alight anew, I'm sure. Of course, one way to make that happen less would be to be more active in the baseball related threads, thus keeping them in the HT bar instead.

I do think it might be reasonable to have a quarterly OTP thread rather than a monthly thread. We tend to do about 4K of posts per month. A 12K thread wouldn't take the servers down, I doubt.
   25. madvillain Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:25 PM (#4717527)
@4, I see a lot of "Obama's weak FP gave Putin...Ukraine" -- but in reality it's Russia's incredibly weak geo-political situation that drove Putin to annex the Crimea. Putin knows that sooner or later his authoritarianism is going to run into the same economic reality that produced the breakup of the USSR and it was acting from great weakness that drove him into Crimea, not strenght.

China, as a major player in all of this, understandably is pretty happy with the status quo wrt to Russia's sphere of influence and from what I've read let Putin know it was none too happy with is destabilizing actions and rhetoric. In a way, the isolation strategy by Obama worked exactly as it was supposed to and quickly Putin realized he was out on an island and it was time to take heed.

Russian society is as desperate and cynical as it's ever been and Putin's time may be drawing to an end.
   26. Lassus Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:31 PM (#4717529)
I do think it might be reasonable to have a quarterly OTP thread rather than a monthly thread.

Agree. Monthly is too much.
   27. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4717535)
All Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, or at least that's what Ari Fleischer warned me


Your sneering has been noted in the building.
   28. zenbitz Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4717544)
In the Civil War era, things were different because troops generally fought in rather tight formations. It was very hard to get separated.


Well, until the formation routed. But most straggling in the ACW occurred on the march, not in the heat of battle... although someone did have the job of rounding up guys who were behind the lines shirking. Also they were draftees.

You are right in that it probably doesn't really apply to a volunteer US soldier on patrol duty in Afghanistan. I mean... he was going to walk to India. That sort of sounds like he wasn't right in the head.
   29. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:50 PM (#4717547)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.

When there was no OTP thread, these discussions tended to infect a lot of baseball threads. This is a way to control the OTP chatter.

Normally, the OTP thread titles have had some sports link, but Bitter Mouse opted for pure political partisanship this time.

As I recall, it was mostly one side of the political spectrum making political comments, leaving those with different views the choice between extending the off-topic political comments or leaving the original statements unchallenged. While the OTP thread may have reduced the politicization of other threads, the vituperative incivility of some here appears to have carried over to other threads. Not sure the OTP thread is worth the price, and as informative as my posts here are, BBTF would probably better if everyone kept their politics to themselves and concentrated on baseball.
   30. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:50 PM (#4717548)
We are in prime OTP "gumming" time for the Hot Topics bar; the monthly flip of politics thread; the NHL and NBA playoffs going strong for those threads. And the World Cup spinning up soon to set the soccer threat alight anew, I'm sure. Of course, one way to make that happen less would be to be more active in the baseball related threads, thus keeping them in the HT bar instead.

Of course if nearly half of those "baseball" threads weren't little more than serial rants against either Derek Jeter or the unspeakable MSM, maybe you'd see some more activity on them.
   31. Random Transaction Generator Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:53 PM (#4717553)
and as informative as my posts here are,


*spit take*
   32. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:53 PM (#4717554)
Well, until the formation routed. But most straggling in the ACW occurred on the march, not in the heat of battle... although someone did have the job of rounding up guys who were behind the lines shirking. Also they were draftees.

Sure, but that deserting wasn't deserting to the enemy; no one wanted to go to Andersonvile. Soldiers deserted to go hoem. And some even re-enlisted again to claim an additional bounty. But the Civil War was completely different from modern American wars in that you could walk home.

The Southerners couldn't really desert effectively though. Since every able bodied white male was being drafted, you stuck out like a sore thumb. They'd have to head out West.
   33. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 03:56 PM (#4717557)
As I recall, it was mostly one side of the political spectrum making political comments,

You mean the side represented by you, Ray, Nieporent, SugarBear, Kehoskie, Good Face, snapper, 'zop, bobm, and JoeyB? The side that thinks that all the world's problems stem from Obama and/or "modern liberals"?

(As yes, I'm aware of the oh-so-vast differences within that group: Some of them (Nieporent) think that our decline began in 1933, some of them (snapper) think it began in "the 60's", while good old You Know Who thinks the world began caving in around 1979. And yet strangely enough, their targets always seem to coincide: It's always those Marxist/socialist/communist liberals.)
   34. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:02 PM (#4717567)
and as informative as my posts here are,


*spit take*


Well, they are informative. Some of us don't have access to Fox TV & have no other way of knowing what the latest GOP drone duckspeak might be.
   35. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:05 PM (#4717573)
As I recall, it was mostly one side of the political spectrum making political comments,

You mean the side represented by you, Ray, Nieporent, SugarBear, Kehoskie, Good Face, snapper, 'zop, bobm, and JoeyB? The side that thinks that all the world's problems stem from Obama and/or "modern liberals"?

No. If you go back and look it mostly wasn't folks on the right who were injecting politics into baseball threads. Actually, Andy might have been the biggest offender with his lame [insert baseball player or event] is like [insert politician or political development he disfavors] comments. The OTP thread has made the reception for those comments much more hostile, since no one (or very few) wants the entire site to resemble the OTP battlefield.
   36. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4717576)
Normally, the OTP thread titles have had some sports link, but Bitter Mouse opted for pure political partisanship this time.


How is an article describing the cost of something with no opinion, just facts, partisan? Are poll numbers partisan? Death tolls and dollars are partisan now?

Had I linked to an op-ed piece, that would have been partisan, but this was just pure facts my friend. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean you should whine about them.

And yes had I found a article with a sports link I would have used that, but I did not find a good one, so I opted to link to a fact based article instead. I also am not fond of pictures or videos in my links (some people do like that sort of thing) so I avoid those. But hey next month (or quarter) you can submit the link. My feelings won't be hurt.

EDIT: And I even kept my editorial comment to the first comment, rather in the actual body of the link description.
   37. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:09 PM (#4717578)
You mean the side represented by you, Ray, Nieporent, SugarBear, Kehoskie, Good Face, snapper, 'zop, bobm, and JoeyB? The side that thinks that all the world's problems stem from Obama and/or "modern liberals"?


No. If you go back and look it mostly wasn't folks on the right who were injecting politics into baseball threads.


Kids, stop fighting. Both sides injected politics, semi-uniformly. Sometimes it was innocent, sometimes it was trolling, and Jim wanted to keep the engaged users (that's us), but wanted us somewhat in our own space. Thus was the OT thread type born. It is a good compromise and it works (mostly).

I would be OK with Quarterly threads, or whatever periodicity Jim wants.
   38. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:10 PM (#4717579)
As I recall, it was mostly one side of the political spectrum making political comments,

You mean the side represented by you, Ray, Nieporent, SugarBear, Kehoskie, Good Face, snapper, 'zop, bobm, and JoeyB? The side that thinks that all the world's problems stem from Obama and/or "modern liberals"?

No.


Gee, what a surprise.

If you go back and look it mostly wasn't folks on the right who were injecting politics into baseball threads. Actually, Andy might have been the biggest offender with his lame [insert baseball player or event] is like [insert politician or political development he disfavors] comments. The OTP thread has made the reception for those comments much more hostile, since no one (or very few) wants the entire site to resemble the OTP battlefield.

IOW the group above is composed purely innocent** victims who are merely reacting to hyperpartisans like Mean Old Me. I love it.

**Not to mention "objective", as in Ray and SBB's favorite self-description.
   39. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4717586)
And BTW, YC, who posted all those pinata post articles about Luke Scott, John Rocker, etc., that had absolutely nothing to do with baseball?

HINT: It wasn't us liberals.
   40. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4717587)
Jim wanted to keep the engaged users (that's us),


My fellow varmint, you & I will not be getting married anytime soon. Or ever.
   41. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:14 PM (#4717588)
No. If you go back and look it mostly wasn't folks on the right who were injecting politics into baseball threads. Actually, Andy might have been the biggest offender with his lame [insert baseball player or event] is like [insert politician or political development he disfavors] comments. The OTP thread has made the reception for those comments much more hostile, since no one (or very few) wants the entire site to resemble the OTP battlefield.

The Primate who most often inserts partisanship into the other posts is CFB. Interestingly, you will never see him comment here.
   42. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:15 PM (#4717591)
My fellow varmint, you & I will not be getting married anytime soon. Or ever.


<Sob>
   43. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:15 PM (#4717592)

The Primate who most often inserts partisanship into the other posts is CFB.


Man, you pay a lot more attention to these things than I do. (Which is not a criticism, BTW. I'm basically too scatterbrained to keep up with such details.)
   44. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:16 PM (#4717594)
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/06/taxation_of_carried_interest_the_loophole_for_hedge_fund_managers_could.html

Here's a head scratcher for you. Obama could end the carried interest exception for hedge funds tomorrow.

Looks like the D's are just as bought and paid for by the rich as the R's.
   45. tshipman Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:17 PM (#4717596)
No. If you go back and look it mostly wasn't folks on the right who were injecting politics into baseball threads. Actually, Andy might have been the biggest offender with his lame [insert baseball player or event] is like [insert politician or political development he disfavors] comments. The OTP thread has made the reception for those comments much more hostile, since no one (or very few) wants the entire site to resemble the OTP battlefield.


Joey B and Andy are the biggest offenders of inserting politics into other threads. I don't think that's particularly controversial. Andy tends to hijack while Joey B just makes a random nasty aside. Kevin--oh wait, I mean Publius Cloaca or whatever he calls himself--, Esoteric and random libs are the other repeat OT-violators.

Never understood why people get the vapors over discussing things other than baseball. How many trolling threads about Derek Jeter can there be?

Edit:
The Primate who most often inserts partisanship into the other posts is CFB. Interestingly, you will never see him comment here.

This is not accurate. Joey B and Andy are much, much more likely to make some comment about it.
   46. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:18 PM (#4717599)

Looks like the D's are just as bought and paid for by the rich as the R's.


Unfortunately (or not, I guess), I for one stopped thinking otherwise long ago.
   47. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:20 PM (#4717600)
And if the facts from #4447 are correct, that we were soon to be obligated to release these guys anyway, then it's a goddamned no-brainer.

Agreed, if the facts from #4447 are correct. In any event, the war is not over. As noted previously, US troops are expected to remain in force in Afghanistan until the end of 2016.
   48. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:24 PM (#4717605)
As I recall, it was mostly one side of the political spectrum making political comments, leaving those with different views the choice between extending the off-topic political comments or leaving the original statements unchallenged.


Poor wittle babies, so helpless as liberals argued with liberals over...um...well, what exactly were they arguing about again? Oh, that's right. Your recollection is a pile of steaming tripe. You do love your victimization complex though.
   49. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:33 PM (#4717611)
Agreed, if the facts from #4447 are correct. In any event, the war is not over. As noted previously, US troops are expected to remain in force in Afghanistan until the end of 2016.


Thus, these guys being held in Qatar for a year. So, in exchange for getting our guy back now, and out of the hands of people under no obligation to treat him humanely or even keep him alive, these mullas get paroled 18 months or so early. Is that really enough to get your panties in a wad? Bearing in mind the great harm that would be done to troop morale if they find that their government was unwilling to get one of their own back for the low low price of releasing 5 guys 18 months early.
   50. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:35 PM (#4717612)
Pro Russian rebels bury their dead and ask "Where is Putin?"


Did anyone ever watch the second mummy film? (since there was both a third and a spin-off movie I'm guessing yes)

In the second film one of Imhotep's (the titular mummy) henchman is being carried off to his doom and he calls out to Imhotep for help... Imhotep responds briefly, with a genuininely befuddled, "why [would I do that]?

That's Putin's response to those asking for his help. Yes they're in the trouble they're in because they did Putin's bidding, but to him the idea that he's somehow responsible for their fate or should do something about it is baffling- yes he said he was concerned about the rights of and fate of ethnic Russians- but in his mind you're a fool if you think he cared about anything other than advancing the political power of the state of Russia as personified by Putin himself.
   51. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:35 PM (#4717613)
Joey B and Andy are the biggest offenders of inserting politics into other threads. I don't think that's particularly controversial.

Other than being lumped with the Brown Diaper Baby who subtracts from the sum total of human knowledge every time he hits his keyboard, I don't take that comment as being a particular insult. But unless you could cite more than a random isolated snark or two that wasn't meant to go anywhere, I'm going to have to suspect that your memory on this is a bit less than perfect.

And I repeat: The biggest offender of them all is Repoz, bless his heart. He's the one who dangles all those big fat pinatas within easy reach. Not that there's anything wrong with that, since it's all about the eyeballs.

And BTW, who is "CFB"?
   52. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:38 PM (#4717614)
Well, using the standard the Republicans have used during the VA scandal, how many heads rolled once the Tillman coverup was exposed? How many of those involved in the coverup were punished for their role in it? And what did President Bush have to say about it, after Stanley McChrystal had warned Bush's speechwriters not to mention the circumstances surrounding Tillman's death because it "might cause public embarrassment if the circumstances of Corporal Tillman's death become public"?

Nine officers, including four generals, were disciplined as a result of the Tillman inquiries.

Meanwhile, did you forget that President Obama didn't mind having General McChrystal as the top military commander in Afghanistan? Heck, Obama even had McChrystal co-chair a White House commission on military families over the objections of Tillman's mother?

In any event, the President didn't cook the books at the Phoenix office, but candidate Obama had shot his mouth off about veterans care and how, unlike the Bush White House, he would make it a top priority of his administration. (I read somewhere that Shinseki had been to the White House only once in the past two years. If he wanted access, maybe he should have told the Secret Service he was working for the IRS.) Moreover, his refusal to push Shinseki out the door until members of his own party were pleading with the White House to do something didn't help.

EDIT:
And BTW, who is "CFB"?


Cardsfanboy.
   53. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:38 PM (#4717615)
who is "CFB"?


cardsfanboy, I presume (I think that's how he spells it).

   54. tshipman Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:52 PM (#4717629)
But unless you could cite more than a random isolated snark or two that wasn't meant to go anywhere, I'm going to have to suspect that your memory on this is a bit less than perfect.


Andy, come on, dude. I'm not going to go through your posting history, but you make political comments in other threads all the damn time.

In any event, the President didn't cook the books at the Phoenix office, but candidate Obama had shot his mouth off about veterans care and how, unlike the Bush White House, he would make it a top priority of his administration. (I read somewhere that Shinseki had been to the White House only once in the past two years. If he wanted access, maybe he should have told the Secret Service he was working for the IRS.) Moreover, his refusal to push Shinseki out the door until members of his own party were pleading with the White House to do something didn't help.


Shineski also didn't know about it, so not sure how him taking more meetings with O would have helped anything. Shineski did a lot of good at the VA, you know. He drastically reduced veteran homelessness (by about 25%), reduced the pension and claims backlog, and addressed the realities of modern warfare by adding PTSD to the list of covered claims.

In addition, he served his country with distinction and had part of his foot amputated in Vietnam. The rush to push down a good man is disgusting.
   55. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:54 PM (#4717630)
Is that really enough to get your panties in a wad? Bearing in mind the great harm that would be done to troop morale if they find that their government was unwilling to get one of their own back for the low low price of releasing 5 guys 18 months early.

I am enjoying how you're discounting what those in his unit are saying about Bergdahl while jabbering on about "great harm that would be done to troop morale" if we didn't release him now with all of this great fanfare. And again, what happened to morale when the White House didn't give in to the Taliban's demands three years ago? (I think it survived.)
   56. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: June 02, 2014 at 04:59 PM (#4717637)
Nine officers, including four generals, were disciplined as a result of the Tillman inquiries.

Yes, with "corrective measures." Ooooh.

General William Wallace wrote letters to three generals, one of whom had been promoted to that rank after the Tillman incident. However, the letters say "You should not consider this an adverse action." And they are not part of the generals' official personnel files. The Lt. Colonel who ordered his soldiers to keep the facts of the Tillman shooting secret, including from Tillman's brother who was part of the same unit, was hit much harder. His letter of non-punishment DID go into his file.

General Stanley McChrystal tipped off the White House less than a day after approving Tillman's Silver Star, only awarded for gallantry against enemy attack, at the same time he lied to Tillman's family. McChrystal was subsequently promoted to four-star general. The official inquiry found that there was no deliberate coverup by any individual.
   57. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:11 PM (#4717646)
Well, using the standard the Republicans have used during the VA scandal, how many heads rolled once the Tillman coverup was exposed? How many of those involved in the coverup were punished for their role in it? And what did President Bush have to say about it, after Stanley McChrystal had warned Bush's speechwriters not to mention the circumstances surrounding Tillman's death because it "might cause public embarrassment if the circumstances of Corporal Tillman's death become public"?

Nine officers, including four generals, were disciplined as a result of the Tillman inquiries.


I don't pretend to any great knowledge of the aftermath of that case, but here's what Wiki says about McChrystal:

McChrystal was also criticized for his role in the aftermath of the 2004 death by friendly fire of Ranger and former professional football player Pat Tillman. Within a day of Tillman's death, McChrystal was notified that Tillman was a victim of friendly fire. Shortly thereafter, McChrystal was put in charge of paperwork to award Tillman a posthumous Silver Star for valor. On April 28, 2004, six days after Tillman's death, McChrystal approved a final draft of the Silver Star recommendation and submitted it to the acting Secretary of the Army, even though the medal recommendation deliberately omitted any mention of friendly fire, included the phrase "in the line of devastating enemy fire", and was accompanied by fabricated witness statements. On April 29, McChrystal sent an urgent memo warning White House speechwriters not to quote the medal recommendation in any statements they wrote for President Bush because it "might cause public embarrassment if the circumstances of Corporal Tillman's death become public." McChrystal was one of the first to caution restraint in public statements, until the investigation was complete.[27] McChrystal was one of eight officers recommended for discipline by a subsequent Pentagon investigation but the Army declined to take action against him.


So how were the others punished? That's not a rhetorical question. And how did Bush explain the coverup? Again, not a rhetorical question.

EDIT: Do you have anything to add to Gonfalon's response?

Meanwhile, did you forget that President Obama didn't mind having General McChrystal as the top military commander in Afghanistan? Heck, Obama even had McChrystal co-chair a White House commission on military families over the objections of Tillman's mother?

That's a black mark against Obama, no question, especially in the context of his role in the coverup.

In any event, the President didn't cook the books at the Phoenix office, but candidate Obama had shot his mouth off about veterans care and how, unlike the Bush White House, he would make it a top priority of his administration. (I read somewhere that Shinseki had been to the White House only once in the past two years. If he wanted access, maybe he should have told the Secret Service he was working for the IRS.) Moreover, his refusal to push Shinseki out the door until members of his own party were pleading with the White House to do something didn't help.

AFAICT the problem within the VA stems from a combination of lack of funding, lack of leadership, and an obsession with statistical accountability that in part seems to have caused management in Phoenix to have cooked the books. Obviously there's no excuse for it, but you can also read more than a few articles that quote veterans who say that they got excellent care within the VA system once they were admitted.

Now "once they were admitted" is the key phrase, and therein lies the scandal. But the idea that this is something that's going to be easily fixed without a serious allocation of more targeted resources to the VA system is just crazy. Obama's campaign rhetoric on the subject is embarrassing, but unless we get a real consensus on what the mission of the VA hospitals is supposed to be (and what it's not supposed to be), you're going to see this sort of scandal repeated, regardless of who's the president.

And BTW, who is "CFB"?

Cardsfanboy.


Thanks. I never associated him all that much with political comments, and when I see a 3-letter abbreviation beginning with a "C" and ending with a "B", I think of everyone's favorite whipping boy.


   58. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:15 PM (#4717649)
But unless you could cite more than a random isolated snark or two that wasn't meant to go anywhere, I'm going to have to suspect that your memory on this is a bit less than perfect.

Andy, come on, dude. I'm not going to go through your posting history, but you make political comments in other threads all the damn time.


Here's a simple proposition: The next time you see me instigate politics into a baseball or other non-political thread, call me on it. The same proposition goes for anyone else.
   59. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:24 PM (#4717654)
The party of small government.
   60. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:25 PM (#4717655)
In addition, he served his country with distinction and had part of his foot amputated in Vietnam. The rush to push down a good man is disgusting.

Once you become a politico, all bets are off. Ask John McCain.
   61. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:26 PM (#4717656)
I am enjoying how you're discounting what those in his unit are saying about Bergdahl while jabbering on about "great harm that would be done to troop morale"


Are those guys upset that we brought him home? or do they just want to make it know that he was a deserter? IOW, given a choice, would they prefer an Army policy to forget about anyone captured under less than honorable circumstances, or to bring such people home, try them, and if convicted, send them to prison? I suspect the overwhelming majority would prefer the latter.

And I'll repeat the question you avoided. are you really that upset that 5 guys may go free as much as 18 months early in exchange for a guy who could be killed by his captors any day between now and 2016?
   62. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:28 PM (#4717657)
Once you become a politico, all bets are off. Ask John McCain.


Or John kerry.
   63. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:34 PM (#4717659)
Normally, the OTP thread titles have had some sports link, but Bitter Mouse opted for pure political partisanship this time.

How is an article describing the cost of something with no opinion, just facts, partisan? Are poll numbers partisan? Death tolls and dollars are partisan now?

The headline is far more political than any of the "sports-related" political articles that have previously given birth to the OTP thread, making its presence on the Hot Topics area more jarring, I assume, to the non-political audience, and which appears to have led to the polite request that such topics be discontinued. I would expect to see a similar reaction if there was a headline continuously displayed for the next month noting that "Obama Presided Over 6 Largest Budget Deficits In U.S. History", although I doubt we will see Bitter Mouse post such an article.

   64. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:37 PM (#4717661)
And I'll repeat the question you avoided. are you really that upset that 5 guys may go free as much as 18 months early in exchange for a guy who could be killed by his captors any day between now and 2016?

"As much as 18 months early?" Explain and please provide corroboration.

"A guy who could be killed by his captors any day between now and 2016?" A guy who could have been killed by his captors any day between 2009 and 2014. And wasn't. Getting him home is one thing. Who we trade for his release is another.

In any event, it's not "a great day in America." An exchange was ultimately necessary but this was no foreign policy victory.
   65. spike Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:38 PM (#4717662)
Your sneering has been noted in the building.

MY sneering? Dunno if you actually saw that, but I did. Just the beginning of the most inept, corrupt and amoral war effort mounted by the shiattiest gang that ever set foot in DC. Of course they farked it up. They never cared about winning, just doling out the dough and getting it back on the side, all while having little american flags and questioning the patriotism of anyone who pointed it out.
   66. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:39 PM (#4717663)
Getting him home is one thing. Who we trade for his release is another.


And people with far deeper knowledge of who those traded are for his release made the decision. You can't respect that decision, because you can't respect anything any Democrat ever does. That's not a fault of them or their decision making process, Jason.
   67. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:40 PM (#4717665)
Shineski also didn't know about it . . .

Probably true, but it was Shinseki's job to know about it. Given that cooking the books about appointment data had been identified as a problem by Obama's Transition Team, and also came to light in 2010, Shinseki should have been far more vigilant. Now that Shinseki is gone, let's see if those who lied to him are held accountable.
   68. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:50 PM (#4717670)
Shineski is hardly a politico.
   69. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:51 PM (#4717671)
Can I ask - politely - that no more of these be posted? The internet has lots of places where people can yell about politics. I know I don't have to click on the thread, but let's stop this if for no other reason than it gums up the Hot Topics and so makes it harder to actually talk about baseball. Thanks.

Forget it brother. Many people were politely asking for this years ago, but the site owners made a conscious decision that they were going to cater to our cadre of dedicated high-volume professional democratic party operatives.

As a result, so many of the real baseball fans have left here in disgust over the last few years that the site probably can't even survive without the operatives at this point.
   70. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:56 PM (#4717673)
The headline is far more political than any of the "sports-related" political articles that have previously given birth to the OTP thread, making its presence on the Hot Topics area more jarring, I assume, to the non-political audience, and which appears to have led to the polite request that such topics be discontinued.


To protect these delicate flowers' fragile sensibilties, can we revise the title to "Iraq war costs U.S. more than Phillies owe Ryan Howard, more or less: study"?
   71. Random Transaction Generator Posted: June 02, 2014 at 05:59 PM (#4717676)
Forget it brother. Many people were politely asking for this years ago, but the site owners made a conscious decision that they were going to cater to our cadre of dedicated high-volume professional democratic party operatives.


I'm pretty sure you're in just as many of these threads throwing your favourite insults, so I'm not sure why you are complaining about them...
   72. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:05 PM (#4717680)
Because he's a whining, poo-flinging crybaby who AFIACT is so roundly loathed that he's been placed on ignore by people on both ends of the political spectrum, not to mention those somewhere in between?
   73. JE (Jason) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:10 PM (#4717683)
Shineski is hardly a politico.

If you're a POTUS political nominee, you're a politico. It doesn't matter what you were doing previously.
   74. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:15 PM (#4717686)
Normally, the OTP thread titles have had some sports link, but Bitter Mouse opted for pure political partisanship this time.

How is an article describing the cost of something with no opinion, just facts, partisan? Are poll numbers partisan? Death tolls and dollars are partisan now?


The headline is far more political than any of the "sports-related" political articles that have previously given birth to the OTP thread,

Quick, without looking, can anyone tell me what the nominal "baseball" topic for the OTP/April or May threads happened to be?

I thought so.

I agree that a nominal formality has been broken by our aggrieved rodent friend, but how many of those nominally "baseball" OTP threads have ever stuck with the "baseball" part for more than a page at most? After that, it scarcely matters what this nominal "baseball" tie-in happened to be, because nobody remembers it and nobody cares.

Also, it happens all the time that OTP political threads get "hijacked" for hundreds of posts on completely non-political subjects like restaurants, movies and video games. The beauty of BTF isn't that it's a simon-pure "baseball" site, it's that it's a freeflowing stream of information and opinions that varies wildly according to the quality of the people who happen to join in at any particular time of day. Unlike most political sites, it's actually got a sizable representation of all shades of non-totalitarian opinion, and unlike many baseball sites, it doesn't consist of nothing but semi-literate fanboys or stat freaks. It's got something for everybody.
   75. tshipman Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:16 PM (#4717687)
If you're a POTUS political nominee, you're a politico. It doesn't matter what you were doing previously.


The first rule of Tautology club is the first rule of Tautology club.

   76. Publius Publicola Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:17 PM (#4717688)
Not sure the OTP thread is worth the price, and as informative as my posts here are, BBTF would probably better if everyone kept their politics to themselves and concentrated on baseball.


LOL. Well, if you like unskewed polls, they're informative. If you like some sort of objective analysis, the dustbin is too good for them.
   77. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:23 PM (#4717691)
Because he's a whining, poo-flinging crybaby who AFIACT is so roundly loathed that he's been placed on ignore by people on both ends of the political spectrum, not to mention those somewhere in between?

He's the sole unifying force of this entire site!

OTOH he may be slipping in his vigilance, since I notice he wrote "dedicated high-volume professional democratic party operatives" instead of the standard issue "democrat party" version that all good wingnuts are contractually required to use.
   78. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:50 PM (#4717702)
Auction company says it will donate soldier's remains

The remains of a Civil War soldier were set to be auctioned Tuesday in Hagerstown, Md.



Can't see how this was ever a good idea.
   79. Morty Causa Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:53 PM (#4717703)
   80. Morty Causa Posted: June 02, 2014 at 06:59 PM (#4717707)
   81. Srul Itza Posted: June 02, 2014 at 07:01 PM (#4717710)
This is not accurate. Joey B and Andy are much, much more likely to make some comment about it.


Correct.
   82. GregD Posted: June 02, 2014 at 07:07 PM (#4717713)
Interesting piece on the blond hair mutation here

The mutation doesn't alter the protein production of any of the 20,000 genes in the human genome, he said. Instead, in people of European ancestry, it causes blond hair through a 20 percent "turn of the thermostat dial" that regulates a signaling gene in the hair follicles of the skin.

   83. Srul Itza Posted: June 02, 2014 at 07:08 PM (#4717714)
If you're a POTUS political nominee, you're a politico. It doesn't matter what you were doing previously.


So that's your excuse for tossing dirt on a man who has sacrificed more and done more for his country than you could ever hope to? You truly are despicable.
   84. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:04 PM (#4717737)
"As much as 18 months early?" Explain and please provide corroboration.


Going by your words that the last troops will leave Afghanistan at the end of 2016.
   85. GregD Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:09 PM (#4717739)
Was this vox piece on Bergdahl's critic posted already? I might have missed it. The critic's stance makes sense to me, assuming the facts are correct:
1) People should tell the truth about the events of Bergdahl's disappearance
2) We should have exchanged for him no matter what the events since you can't leave someone behind
3) If he did desert or go AWOL, then charging him after he gets home is appropriate.

   86. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:18 PM (#4717746)
The critic's stance makes sense to me, assuming the facts are correct:
1) People should tell the truth about the events of Bergdahl's disappearance
2) We should have exchanged for him no matter what the events since you can't leave someone behind
3) If he did desert or go AWOL, then charging him after he gets home is appropriate.


Frankly, there doesn't seem to be any dispute about the facts. Bergdahl walked off the post after being relieved of guard duty, apparently leaving at the darkest time of night between 3:00-4:00AM. The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.
   87. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:21 PM (#4717749)
Frankly, there doesn't seem to be any dispute about the facts. Bergdahl walked off the post after being relieved of guard duty, apparently leaving at the darkest time of night between 3:00-4:00AM. The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.


So, leave him behind, or bring him home?
   88. Lassus Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:32 PM (#4717752)
The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.

Only liberals lie, so maybe. I don't know enough about these soldiers.
   89. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:36 PM (#4717754)
Frankly, there doesn't seem to be any dispute about the facts. Bergdahl walked off the post after being relieved of guard duty, apparently leaving at the darkest time of night between 3:00-4:00AM. The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.

So, leave him behind, or bring him home?

That's a tough call, considering the price - releasing the 5 top Taliban commanders. If he was actively collaborating, I don't see how you can make the deal. It'd be like trading 5 Nazi Generals for Lord Haw-Haw. If he was just a garden variety deserter, closer call, but still seems like a very high price for someone who betrayed his fellow soldiers after becoming disillusioned with U.S. policy. Not sure how much the Administration actually knows, but Congress will be looking into it, and it seems like the people should have the right to know the truth.
   90. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:40 PM (#4717756)
it seems like the people should have the right to know the truth.


I agree.

edit: that said, I look forward to a search for the truth, not some partisan hack job that congress is likely to produce. I'll place my trust in an Army investigation, assuming there is one (and I hope there is).
   91. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 02, 2014 at 08:53 PM (#4717761)
Was this vox piece on Bergdahl's critic posted already? I might have missed it. The critic's stance makes sense to me, assuming the facts are correct:
1) People should tell the truth about the events of Bergdahl's disappearance
2) We should have exchanged for him no matter what the events since you can't leave someone behind
3) If he did desert or go AWOL, then charging him after he gets home is appropriate.


Generally agree, but a lot of my agreement depends on the assumptions that these Taliban guys were getting released soon anyway.
   92. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:04 PM (#4717769)
Frankly, there doesn't seem to be any dispute about the facts. Bergdahl walked off the post after being relieved of guard duty, apparently leaving at the darkest time of night between 3:00-4:00AM. The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.


This is hardly established fact. It may be true, but at this point no one actually has any proof that it is the case. As is his wont, Clapper is simply posting cherry picked "facts" to establish his party's preferred narrative.
   93. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:07 PM (#4717771)
releasing the 5 top Taliban commanders


I was unaware that KSM was among those released.
   94. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:24 PM (#4717776)
For anyone looking for a better line of thinking on what's going on in the actual left today (rather than what is being said about the hawkish, centrist, capitalist-without-question-or-critical-concern Obama-centric DLC...) Marx-ish.
   95. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:26 PM (#4717777)
If he was just a garden variety deserter, closer call, but still seems like a very high price for someone who betrayed his fellow soldiers after becoming disillusioned with U.S. policy.

Hey now, everyone has the right to do what they feel is the best thing for them. As long as he was comfortable with his decision, who are we to question him?
   96. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:27 PM (#4717778)
For anyone looking for a better line of thinking on what's going on in the actual left today (rather than what is being said about the hawkish, centrist, capitalist-without-question-or-critical-concern Obama-centric DLC...) Marx-ish.

I've read Utopia or Bust. I'd recommend it.
   97. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:27 PM (#4717779)
Frankly, there doesn't seem to be any dispute about the facts. Bergdahl walked off the post after being relieved of guard duty, apparently leaving at the darkest time of night between 3:00-4:00AM. The only question seems to be whether he was a deserter or a collaborator, unless you believe that multiple soldiers who served with him would just make stuff up.

This is hardly established fact. It may be true, but at this point no one actually has any proof that it is the case. As is his wont, Clapper is simply posting cherry picked "facts" to establish his party's preferred narrative.

All the soldiers from his outfit being quoted in the news stories are saying the same thing. If they were making stuff up, there almost certainly would be strong pushback from others that served with Bergdahl. I suppose, in Sam's world, the TV networks, NPR & the Washington Post all got the story wrong.
   98. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:30 PM (#4717780)
I suppose, in Sam's world, the TV networks, NPR & the Washington Post all got the story wrong.


As Sam has stated repeatedly, which you would know if you could read for comprehension, in his world we don't pretend to know what we don't know. But that's not good enough for you. Because as always, you value party over nation and principle. Every. Single. Time.
   99. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:37 PM (#4717785)
releasing the 5 top Taliban commanders

I was unaware that KSM was among those released.

KSM is Al-Qaeda, not Taliban.


   100. Bitter Mouse Posted: June 02, 2014 at 09:56 PM (#4717797)
The headline is far more political than any of the "sports-related" political articles that have previously given birth to the OTP thread


Wow, nice way to back down, apology accepted. Because before you claimed it was partisan. It clearly is political, but it is not (as you initially asserted) partisan in the slightest.

I agree that a nominal formality has been broken by our aggrieved rodent friend, but how many of those nominally "baseball" OTP threads have ever stuck with the "baseball" part for more than a page at most?


I did not know there was some formality I was violating. And I still don't especially since some admin adjusted my headline (improved it by adding the month, which I forgot), so it can't have been that big a violation. Still if there is such a rule against a political OTP thread intro (which seems odd to me) then I do apologize.
Page 1 of 47 pages  1 2 3 4 5 6 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Rough Carrigan
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogDoc Daugherty: Aroldis Chapman not necessary for Reds
(8 - 1:45pm, Sep 02)
Last: CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(176 - 1:45pm, Sep 02)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogBrewers prospect plays every position, all in one game
(2 - 1:37pm, Sep 02)
Last: Jim (jimmuscomp)

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(996 - 1:36pm, Sep 02)
Last: Grunthos

NewsblogTrevor Hoffman's Hall of Fame induction seems inevitable
(45 - 1:33pm, Sep 02)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogNo-hitter! Four Phillies pitchers combine to blank the Braves
(26 - 1:25pm, Sep 02)
Last: TerpNats

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-2-2014
(21 - 1:23pm, Sep 02)
Last: Davo Dozier

NewsblogBPP: Why do people still think Jack Morris pitched to the score?
(19 - 1:22pm, Sep 02)
Last: Ron J2

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(100 - 1:20pm, Sep 02)
Last: Canker Soriano

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-1-2014
(41 - 1:18pm, Sep 02)
Last: TerpNats

NewsblogRule change means more players to choose from for postseason roster
(3 - 1:18pm, Sep 02)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogKlapisch: Yanks need Derek Jeter, Mark Teixeira to lead way to postseason
(12 - 1:15pm, Sep 02)
Last: Win Big Stein's Money

NewsblogHBT: Jorge Soler with an extra-base hit in each of his first five games
(6 - 12:37pm, Sep 02)
Last: HMS Moses Taylor

NewsblogNitkowski: Wanted: Major League manager...sort of.
(12 - 12:29pm, Sep 02)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(7993 - 12:24pm, Sep 02)
Last: Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB)

Page rendered in 1.0676 seconds
53 querie(s) executed