|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Political loyalties aren’t as strong as team loyalties.
NOTE: As I discussed in the Off-Topics, Politics, and the Redesign thread, in the redesign I’m making non-baseball content opt-in. Until the redesign is done (about two months), I’m designating one thread each month (similar to the basketball and soccer threads) as Off-Topic Politics (OT-P) and will restrict off-topic political conversations to that thread. Off-topic political comments which appear in other threads will be deleted. Since this thread has been highjacked, I’m designating this thread as the June OT-P thread.
|
Support BBTF
Thanks to
Tuque
for his generous support.
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: Heyman: Miggy-Trout debate rages on, but Cabrera wins all here (140 - 5:25pm, May 20)Last: Greg (U)KNewsblog: [OTP-May] Politico: Congressional baseball game, May 1, 1926 (3456 - 5:25pm, May 20)Last: Publius PublicolaNewsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread - May 2013 (974 - 5:23pm, May 20)Last: smileyyNewsblog: Rosenthal: Ax to fall soon for LA's Mattingly (63 - 5:16pm, May 20)Last: Tom NawrockiNewsblog: Williams: Discover one of baseball's forgotten streaks (15 - 5:14pm, May 20)Last: Walt DavisNewsblog: Sherman: Mets' roster of rubbish makes it impossible to evaluate Collins (31 - 5:11pm, May 20)Last: billyshearsNewsblog: TheZobrists.com (13 - 5:08pm, May 20)Last: gef the talking mongooseNewsblog: Cafardo: Dustin Pedroia the best second baseman in MLB? (113 - 5:05pm, May 20)Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...)Newsblog: Holmes: Where does Miguel Cabrera rank among Tiger greats? (44 - 5:00pm, May 20)Last: MefistoNewsblog: OMNICHATTER for MAY 20, 2013 (28 - 4:50pm, May 20)Last: Mike EmeighNewsblog: The Changing Gigantics of SF | Bill James Online (15 - 4:46pm, May 20)Last: BhaakonNewsblog: BBTF SOFTBALL GAME IN NEW YORK--AUG 17 (308 - 4:36pm, May 20)Last: villageidiomNewsblog: OT: The Soccer Thread, May 2013 (973 - 4:22pm, May 20)Last: I am going to be FrankNewsblog: Hochman: Dallas Green still tells it like it is (13 - 3:58pm, May 20)Last: dlfNewsblog: MLB’s Best and Worst Catchers at Framing Pitches - Bloomberg Sports (8 - 3:45pm, May 20)Last: Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle
|
|
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.
Well, Romney is a fan of "sport", if Dressage qualifies as a sport.
(1) "I've been a hunter pretty much all my life. (...) I'm not a big-game hunter. I've made that very clear. I've always been a rodent and rabbit hunter. Small varmints, if you will." His campaign later revealed that he has been hunting twice, once when he was 15 and once when he was about 60, the latter time at a Republican fundraiser. Dick Cheney may very well have shot more humans than Romney has shot small varmints, if you will.
(2) When at a car race, the announcer interviewing him asked if he follows racing. "Not as closely as some of the most ardent fans, but I have some friends who are NASCAR team owners."
It's fine that he's not a fan - in fact I think the obsession on the part of some to make sure politicians follow sports is kind of dumb - but don't pretend, man. It's just pathetic. It's like he's a step away from "I have always been a big fan of the side of fellows who represent this city and/or state in this form of sport."
It's not like you're going to be able to make a comment in passing, fans just won't let you get away with it (yet somehow Boston Mayor Thomas Menino keeps stepping into this problem over and over and over). However, whoever comes out against Jack Morris induction will definitely get my vote, no matter how badly they #### up the reasons why.
And don't forget firing people, which has been his favorite sport of them all. (/ducks)
Anyone see Newsroom? My wife and I debated whether a candidate (not a reporter) who made exactly the same speech as the anchor at the beginning (the one to the students) would be hurt or helped. I tend to think we all generally know we're on the wrong track and, though we might disagree on which track to take, most people would welcome someone who put the situation bluntly.
My wife disagrees saying, basically, that that guy would be tarred and feathered.
Anyway, that kind of speech would stick. No one cares who the candidate roots for.
Hey, there's a bear in south Brookline, up a tree! News is on the scene! Excellent! Let's frighten the bear!
Boo-rack?
John Kerry was for the trade before he was against it.
Nancy Pelosi said that they had to make the trade before they found out who was in it.
Rick Perry couldn't remember the three players involved.
John Boehner cried.
Boy, you'd almost get the opinion that people in Boston don't cotton to colored folks fom reading those comments.
I agree with your wife. Ask Jimmy Carter how well that went for him, and he never even used the word malaise.
Agreed.
This. Sorkin monologues don't work in real life.
He's more of an NBA/college hoops fan than a baseball fan, but I agree --
In 2003, when he was a relatively unknown Senate candidate, I went to a fundraiser for him (we're talking $20 and reduced price Miller Lite out of a plastic cup) and asked him to sign a Cubs schedule I happened to have in my wallet... He signed it "Go White Sox!"
...and Craig's #1 requires googling just to make sure it isn't true!
I haven't seen Newsroom, but knowing Sorkin, he'd be tarred and feathered for being overly preachy.
I think that Obama refuses to compromise on who he is as a person. He would rather lose an election because he was himself than win it by being fake. This is why all the BS about his "evolution" in support of gay marriage being politically motivated is so frustrating.
I'm OK with people who don't vote for Obama because they disagree with his views on having a strong central federal government, a strong executive branch, and a strong, federally funded social infrastructure. Obama has a seething (and, in my opinion, justified) contempt for the legislative branch which might rub people the wrong way as well. But the people who say that's he's not genuine are just full of $hit or don't know that much about him (or both). The dude is who he is and although his views on the world evolve, he's pretty transparent on the reasons why. He's not like many other politicians and that is his greatest strength and also, probably, his greatest vulnerability. I could totally see him getting voted out of office because he refuses to play along with the usual election machine.
The same posters who worry about Obama's use of "casual language" neglect to mention that W constantly butchered the language. Maybe the difference is that Obama knows better, and just chooses to speak informally.
Bill Clinton says it depends on what your definition of "trade" is.
Sen. Tom Coburn denies a trade actually happened, despite evidence to the contrary.
Rep. Ron Paul thinks its ludicrous anyone in federal government would even comment on a private action like a baseball trade.
Rep. William Jefferson somehow made $4000 in cash off the deal and it is now hiding in his fridge.
Former Gov. Sarah Palin says she can see the trade from her house.
He's upset the Reds didn't get Youkilis.
Well, Romney is a fan of "sport", if Dressage qualifies as a sport.
Is that "sport" in the Roger Maynard sense?
Probably, being from Boston and all, but being from Boston and all, they're probably Obama supporters anyway.
I agree with this, although I think it pushes the "genuine" argument as far as it can possibly be. I was born a Yankee fan and I'll probably die a Yankees fan. But if I find myself in a Boston sports bar or if my boss is a Red Sox fan, I'll be quieter and less demonstrative. I don't think that reflects a lack of "being myself", just an acknowledgement that it may not be the world's greatest time to allow that facet of my personality to show.
long-time horseman here
dressage is not my thing being a western guy but i respect the effort and dedication required
South Boston, long a symbol of Boston bigotry, is a diverse community these days, and you see very little racial tension. Recently, a person of color was the victim of a violent crime (at the hands of another person of color), and neighbors of all races were interviewed and offered their support for the victim, saying how nice she and her family were (are). This is anecdotal but just as valid as the anecdotal stuff I'm sure you're relying on while making your comments.
I'm not saying that it was a smart thing (or even a polite thing to say). Much of what I've read about Obama is that he's a pretty direct guy and not exactly well-mannered, but that's one of the things that endears him to me. I would always rather trust the person who errs on the side of too much honesty rather than not enough.
Eh, my sister did dressage for many years, I guess it's a sport, in the sense that lots of things can be categorized as sports such as competitive herding with dogs, but it's certainly worthy of mockery.
Two words: puh and leeeeze. It's likely that Obama has never in his life said the word "folks" without a podium in front of him. If he looks like a real person, maybe it's because he's running against the robot from "Metropolis."
I think you're living in a complete dream world. Try reading the new David Maraniss book; Obama is as phony and insincere as any politician who has ever lived. Even his autobiography is half bullsh*t. And Maraniss isn't some birther, he's a well-credentialed liberal.
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."
No one's linked this yet, but Obama on baseball, with Bob Costas, circa 2009 .
Bits I enjoyed: his first MLB game was a Royals game when he was 11 or 12. He doesn't remember who was on the Royals at that time. He says there is some debate as to who has the bigger potty-mouth, Ozzie or Rahm. I'll leave the rest for you to enjoy.
also competed in marksmanship events for both shotgun and rifle
also rodeo
Video gaming is considered a sport by many. Never play a Korean at Starcraft.
As a clown?
Note to self: Don't piss off Harvey.
He used to tend more towards "guys" than "folks", at least when he was in the Statehouse here in Illinois. Both my dad and I had occasion to meet him in informal circumstances (myself in a bar that each of us frequented) and my dad because he was a legislative specialist. Nice guy and easy to talk to. Avid NC and CHIW fan, though he was accepting of my Illini fandom. Not so much with the Cubs, though.
Wait, what? Why? I use that word reasonably often and I think I'm culturally more or less in the same bucket as Obama.
I think he's earnest - but a good politician... and a good politician has to, on occasion, be phony and insincere. Jimmy Carter wasn't phony and I think he was fairly sincere - and look where that got him.
If the question is - does he believe the soaring rhetoric, the 'hope and change', in a fundamental transformation of the status quo? OK - that, I'll give you... I think he's a lot more cautious and conventional than his rhetoric and whatever 'sheen' certain media outlets, some circles of his support, and yes - his campaign apparatus - have layered onto him.
He's a wonk who masquerades as a rock star -- but rock stars win elections and wonks don't, so I don't hold it against him.
I don't claim that I've got any sort of enormous insight into him, but like I said -- I attended several smaller campaign events when he was a Senate primary candidate and outside of the canned speeches (which were special, even in a sparse crowd of 50 people), the politician he most reminded me of in more conversational/discussion oriented settings was actually Dick Lugar. Circumspect, even-handed, not wishy-washy or without a compass - but certainly more willing to consider alternate ideas and theories than most partisans would prefer (and I say this AS a partisan).
Probably more Martin than Charlie.
Oh, jeez--my original post was completely tongue in cheek (playing on the very "Boston is racist" rap you allude to). That said, I apologize for any offense it caused, as none was intended.
bah. since the stroke my aim has gone to hell
some twerp kids were vandalizing my wife's flower garden and i missed their backsides completely with the shots of rock salt
scared the crap out of them though so not a total waste
I think the truth on this little point is quite a bit closer t Joey's take on it...
Of course Obama is not as phony and insincere as any politician who has ever lived- one only need to look at Romney to find someone even phonier and less sincere, plus I get to live in NYC, so I see and hear quite a bit from and about two incredibly (by politico standards) insincere phonies, Governors Cuomo and Christie.
as he is in so many things, Obama is once again surprisingly pedestrian and mediocre.
I recall in the 2000 election that the notoriously liberal mainstream media opined that a very important consideration in vetting presidential candidates was the test of which candidate you would rather have a beer with - folksy man of the people Dubya Bush, or uptight wonk Al Gore. I'm sure we'll see a resurrection of this standard in the coming months; combined with a thorough examination of Mormon beliefs akin to those published about Obama's former church, this will clearly prove once and for all that the liberal media hate Republicans.
Wait, what? Why? I use that word reasonably often and I think I'm culturally more or less in the same bucket as Obama.
I don't know you, but I imagine it doesn't come out nearly as artificial and canned when you say it. Romney's a "folks" guy, too; presumably the research shows that it's a good word for politicians to use. Just one irritating piece of the whole "rather have a beer with" chapter of Politics for Dummies.
If that is literal then at least you got some fresh fertilizer out of the deal!
What's the point of this comment?
I think the truth on this little point is quite a bit closer t Joey's take on it...
If you find yourself agreeing with Joey, it might be time to reassess your views.
I'm sorry, but no one, and I mean no one, could be more phony (at least in their general mien, not necessarily their political beliefs) than the Bushes, HW and W.
One of the most ludicrous aspects of W's good-ole-boy act: the Crawford ranch, where he spent all those vacations clearing brush? He bought it in 1999. And when his presidency ended, he moved to Dallas.
I remember back in 1984, Walter Mondale in the midst of his catastrophically awful campaign made a stop near where I was living, went to a local bowling alley, followed by the local media, donned a red checkered flannel shirt (while wearing un-pleated grey trousers...) and promptly rolled a gutter ball... maybe that was his warm up, maybe it was his only gutter, but it's all the TV showed...
Come on hippie, if that were true don't you think the notoriously liberal media who hate people of devout faith would have pilloried Dubya for being as dishonest and insincere as Al Gore, who claimed to have personally invented the Internet?
Speaking of the Photo Op Ranch, see if you can find a photo of Cowboy Bush riding a horse.
That's what they make automatic weapons for. Land mines are also useful in this situation.
And remember we have a fiercely liberal media, so the real footage must have been even more damning - Mondale staring intently at this mysterious black sphere, wondering what the holes were for as the slowly rotated it in his small, effeminate hands.
Not only did Jim weigh in, he posted the damn thread ... looks like
meat'spolitics's back on the menu!I will grant you W, he was a bit of a phony with the ranch thing, but I think HW came off as he was. Patrician, but a good guy.
Yeah, it is a little odd that Furtado posts a Repozian political pinata thread after claiming once again a little while back that politics was going to be put off into its own little section. I'm starting to strongly suspect this is all just a big silly game that's being played.
until yesterday, looks like no one gave the memo to Scalia...
*Slaps hand on table and screams "YAHTZEE"!!!*
I thought the Mormon tradition was to kill it in the field while dressed up as Indians, and take any young colts back to your compound to be converted. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I only know a few Mormons since I live in Colorado.
Scalia doesn't count. He's like the honey badger of conservatives.
For crying out loud, it's a news site comment board. They're not any better in DC. They're like that everywhere.
I don't think there's really any outrage. He's a fan of the other party to the trade, and I think we all know that, and if we had friends who were ChiSox fans we'd expect them to say something similar. He's not pretending to be a Red Sox fan and I don't see why he should have to.
No its not.
Dude, Jimmy. Jimmy's Repozzing his own website!
He's actually pretending that baseball is important enough to include in his address. Context is everything. He's not expected to go on MLBnetwork and dissect and analyze the pennant races. It was a non-sequitur, to begin his address.
I was too young to be fully aware of it, but my understanding of HW was that during the Reagan years and his presidency he would try to adopt some Texas affectations, which he was pretty lousy at, then completely dropped the act and went Kennebunkport after he was voted out.
*slaps forehead*
No. I can't. Unless they're an imbecile.
Stop talking about Harveys as if he's not here.
*slaps forehead*
No. I can't. Unless they're an imbecile.
Well, yeah, that's basically what I meant. There are plenty of liberal Red Sox fans who are imbeciles (and conservative Yankee fans who are, too). I just don't think, however imbecilic that person is, that comments about fandom are going to affect votes.
I dislike him politically, but I fully respect his baseball/sports credentials.
For recent presidents and presidential candidates, I'd rank their phoniness as follows:
Romney > Edwards > Bush junior > McCain > Reagan > Kerry > HRC > Obama > Clinton > Gore > Bush senior > Dole > Carter
Gore, Bush senior, Dole, and Kerry were all fairly stiff patricians, but I don't think any of them really pretended otherwise.
But as far as baseball, he owned a team and actually voted against interleague play (the only owner, IMR, that voted this way). His "rancher" bona fides might be in doubt, but I don't think his baseball ones are, at least as far as I'm concerned.
By the way, I see people talking all the time about how Romney is "phony" but I don't see it at all. It strikes me as a lazy meme that gets repeated without any actual thought to it, because in my estimation it just really isn't that true. Romney comes across as the guy I think he really is: a genuinely Ward Cleaver-esque throwback in his personal life and mores (surely nobody is arguing that his sterling family life or commitment to private charity is phony -- this is a guy who literally spends his spare time building houses for people and uprooting stumps and making sure there's no media coverage of it), and somewhat awkward conservative-leaning pragmatist in terms of his politics. Where's the "phoniness?" This bias towards people who pick up their flaming swords and bellow a battlecry of pure, unvarnished emotion strikes me as childish, especially because THAT is more likely to be a 'pose' from a politician than Romney's native caution and reluctance to commit on the record to things he honestly doesn't think are good ideas.
Again: the whole "Romney's so PHONY!" thing is just a meme that liberals repeat to themselves without actually analyzing it, because if they actually tried to square it with his public actions and words it would be immediately clear that it ISN'T true. After all, isn't the OTHER criticism of Romney that he 'gaffes' too often by making it known how rich and "out of touch" he is? I mean, it's not like he's an ultra-rich, adulterous trial lawyer posing as a 'virtuous man of the people' -- that was John Edwards' schtick, and it's why Yearrgghhh's patently hackish ranking of Romney ahead of Edwards is so auto-discrediting, so obviously based on "oh no, Obama might lose to this guy!" reflex-fear. Rather, Romney holds himself out as the guy he truly seems to be: a very rich businessman with a strong pragmatic streak, a downright admirable personal life, and a decidedly awkward public bearing borne out of native caution and the ghosts of his father's experiences.
Didn't Bush Senior just have an interview where he admitted now that he's not in public office he didn't have to pretend he was a Texan anymore?
I'm also a big Clinton fan and voted against McCain, but I don't see how anyone could have him as less phony than John McCain. McCain may "sell out" for his party at times, but in interviews he seems to be as he genuinely is. I think Bill Clinton genuinely cares about people, but that sometimes falls to the wayside in favor of his own self-interest.
I think W was pretty genuine. He was Frat Boy in Chief with a churchy bent. I don't think he hid that.
Edwards > Romney > Palin > Clinton > Reagan > HW Bush > Kerry > HRC > Gore > W. > Obama > McCain > Dole > Carter
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main