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

Thursday, August 17, 2017

Red Sox want to do away with ‘racist’ legacy of famed Yawkey Way

Henry said he would like to see it changed to David Ortiz Way or Big Papi Way, in honour of the Dominican Republic-born Red Sox great who retired following last season. A portion of the street was named David Ortiz Drive in his honour this past June.

winnipegwhip Posted: August 17, 2017 at 08:24 PM | 112 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: limousine liberalism, phony outrage, red sox, steroid heroes

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 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. The Duke Posted: August 18, 2017 at 08:15 AM (#5515976)
Pumpsie Way. Such a great name deserves a street
   2. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 08:24 AM (#5515979)
It only seems appropriate to rename the street for the man who was responsible for so much of the club's success. Bud Selig Way just sounds right.
   3. villageidiom Posted: August 18, 2017 at 10:03 AM (#5516036)
The name Jersey Street still applies for the rest of that street. Go back to the old name.

Or not. Whatever. It's a road. It's named for an imperfect man whose family owned the primary local business for like half of its existence. Renaming it doesn't erase anything the man did; it just means I need to remember the new name when arranging to meet up with someone before the game, or if for some reason I forget my way around Boston and need to enter it into GPS. It's entirely utilitarian to me. If it's more than that to others, I'll leave it to them to argue about an appropriate identifier for it.
   4. Swoboda is freedom Posted: August 18, 2017 at 10:37 AM (#5516057)
I need to remember the new name when arranging to meet up with someone before the game, or if for some reason I forget my way around Boston and need to enter it into GPS.

Or they can name is Yastrzemski Way just to mess people up when they have to type that into the GPS.
   5. villageidiom Posted: August 18, 2017 at 11:04 AM (#5516070)
Or they can name is Yastrzemski Way just to mess people up when they have to type that into the GPS.
Anything to discourage people from driving to that street, which is closed on game day, is fine with me.
   6. RickA. Posted: August 18, 2017 at 11:56 AM (#5516109)
I'm calling it now. Yawkey will be the first person to be removed from the baseball HOF. With the way things are going with current race relations and re-evaluating history in regards to that perception , I don't see how he stays in. His teams were not successful at all, and he prevented the Red Sox from integrating. I don't see the argument for why he is in there, anyway.
   7. Rough Carrigan Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:11 PM (#5516127)
I'm curious about the conversion or contrition rules. Tom Yawkey hired Dick O'Connell to be GM in 1965 and from then on the Sox drafted and developed players in a generally color blind fashion. It's not like Tom Yawkey knew nothing about that. Is he evil forever more because he ran the team in a racist fashion before that? There's no credit given for changing his ways? If not, why is it different from politics where senator Byrd from West Virginia was a high ranking Klansmen but somehow never had that thrown back in his face by the media?
   8. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:12 PM (#5516132)
I was going to give it another 5 minutes before this thread went OTP, but here we go.
   9. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:16 PM (#5516138)
I was going to give it another 5 minutes before this thread went OTP, but here we go.

How could it not?
   10. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:23 PM (#5516145)
'm curious about the conversion or contrition rules. Tom Yawkey hired Dick O'Connell to be GM in 1965 and from then on the Sox drafted and developed players in a generally color blind fashion. It's not like Tom Yawkey knew nothing about that. Is he evil forever more because he ran the team in a racist fashion before that?

so.. was Tom Yawkey a racist? or did he preside over a racist organization? (or are those two things the same?)

in Howard Bryant's book "Shut Out: A Story of Race and Baseball in Boston" it was claimed that Yawkey relied almost entirely on his drinking buddies Eddie Collins, Joe Cronin, and Pinky Higgins to make the baseball decisions (Higgins, in particular was a racist buffoon)--so Yawkey was maybe a passive racist --at best, lazy, at worst, a lazy drunk

the team was the last to integrate? well--SOME team had to be last. The Tigers only integrated the previous year

I don't recall EVER reading any specific statements from Yawkey, in contrast to Del Webb, who EXPLICITLY stated he didn't want "Negroes" on the Yankees, because it would bother his Westchester fans (meaning, black players would draw fans from Harlem and we couldn't have that, could we?)

   11. Captain Supporter Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5516146)
If not, why is it different from politics where senator Byrd from West Virginia was a high ranking Klansmen but somehow never had that thrown back in his face by the media?


Byrd was a democrat, so it does not count.
   12. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:39 PM (#5516162)
I'm calling it now. Yawkey will be the first person to be removed from the baseball HOF. With the way things are going with current race relations and re-evaluating history in regards to that perception , I don't see how he stays in. His teams were not successful at all, and he prevented the Red Sox from integrating. I don't see the argument for why he is in there, anyway.

Yawkey never should've been elected to the HoF in the first place, but once he's there, he's not going anywhere. The politics of the Hall of Fame have little to do with the re-naming of a street by the Boston City Council.

Ted Williams Way sounds about right to me, although if Ted Williams Highway along Route 9 is any precedent, they'll have to keep replacing the signs about once a week.
   13. villageidiom Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5516163)
I'm calling it now. Yawkey will be the first person to be removed from the baseball HOF.
Nope.

We're getting to the point where the debate will be about whether someone can be publicly honored and also imperfect. The obvious blunt answer is "yes", but the debate will be the more nuanced "yes, except in case of ________" with many variations on the blank. Without even engaging that discussion here, it's pretty clear you'd have to get a very narrow and logically inconsistent way to fill in that blank to have Yawkey's name on the top of the list.
   14. Tom Nawrocki Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:46 PM (#5516168)
If not, why is it different from politics where senator Byrd from West Virginia was a high ranking Klansmen but somehow never had that thrown back in his face by the media?


Byrd was a democrat, so it does not count.


Are you guys serious? Byrd never had that thrown back in his face by the media? Google has 149,000 returns for "Robert Byrd Ku Klux Klan." Newsweek.com posted a story about Byrd's KKK membership this very morning - even though he died seven years ago.
   15. villageidiom Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5516170)
Ted Williams Way sounds about right to me
Lansdowne Street has already been renamed this. Which, of course, nobody recognizes, but that's not the point. The only way to make Boston less navigable is to rename every street after Ted Williams like Atlanta does with peach trees.
   16. Rough Carrigan Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:52 PM (#5516176)
Are you guys serious? Byrd never had that thrown back in his face by the media? Google has 149,000 returns for "Robert Byrd Ku Klux Klan." Newsweek.com posted a story about Byrd's KKK membership this very morning - even though he died seven years ago.


He would appear on talk shows and interviews and pontificate and no one ever said, "Uh, but sir, you were a high ranking klansman yet you say . . . ." Never happened.
   17. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:58 PM (#5516182)
If not, why is it different from politics where senator Byrd from West Virginia was a high ranking Klansmen but somehow never had that thrown back in his face by the media?

Byrd was a democrat, so it does not count.
Or, maybe because Byrd actually said he was wrong.
   18. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: August 18, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5516184)
If not, why is it different from politics where senator Byrd from West Virginia was a high ranking Klansmen but somehow never had that thrown back in his face by the media?


In addition to what Tom said, and disregarding the regular idiocy you've seen this week (such as Post 11), Byrd very publicly disavowed his former beliefs and conduct in the 1980s, and lived 30-plus years after that demonstrating the validity of his professed change.

While Yawkey may have made subtle moves in that direction, to the best of my knowledge he didn't publicly disavow the club's history or his role in its racist past, and thus it's not hard to see why one could forgive Byrd and not do the same for a guy like Yawkey, who might have had a change of heart. And when comparing Byrd to current racists, it's not exactly a needle-threading distinction, even if it eludes the Jesse Watters of the world.
   19. JimMusComp likes Billy Eppler.... Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:18 PM (#5516214)
Ortiz Ave.

Bloody Sock Blvd.

Pedro Pl.

Teddy Ballgame Blvd.

Damon Dr.

All suck, so all will be included....
   20. jmurph Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:31 PM (#5516225)
Imagine thinking that "but what about Robert Byrd?" is an insightful, original contribution to politics in the year of our lord 2017. My god.
   21. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:32 PM (#5516226)
Just wait til people find out the Ivies didn't admit women (largely) until the 1970s.
   22. The Good Face Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5516236)
The entire club is hopelessly tainted with racism. The only sensible thing to do is burn Fenway Park to the ground and put the whole organization to death along with all their fans. Only then will our sport be clean, pure. Only then.
   23. dlf Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:47 PM (#5516247)
Just wait til people find out the Ivies didn't admit women (largely) until the 1970s.


For Cornell, you are only off by a hundred years.
   24. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5516251)
Imagine thinking that "but what about Robert Byrd?" is an insightful, original contribution to politics in the year of our lord 2017.

What must be about half the roads, libraries, schools, and government buildings in West Virginia are named in his honor, so as we're otherwise in a frenzied rush to rename buildings and remove statues honoring others deemed by progressive lynch mobs as racist, he would seem to be germane.
   25. BDC Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:02 PM (#5516261)
I don't know about the whole concept of owners in sports halls of fame. It seems roughly like giving Nobel Prizes to the CEOs or university presidents that scientists report to.

Perhaps Pat Rapper will have an opinion about Jerry Jones, though :)

   26. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:07 PM (#5516266)
Byrd's family legacy is pretty fascinating, as Andrew Sullivan noted over a decade ago:

He is married to the former Erma Ora James, his high school sweetheart and a coal miner’s daughter. They are the parents of two daughters, Mrs. Mohammad (Mona Byrd) Fatemi and Mrs. Jon (Marjorie Byrd) Moore. Senator and Mrs. Byrd have been blessed with six grandchildren — Erik, Darius, and Fredrik Fatemi; Michael (deceased), Mona, and Mary Anne Moore — and four great-granddaughters: Caroline Byrd Fatemi and Kathryn James Fatemi; Emma James Clarkson and Hannah Byrd Clarkson. In February 2004, Senator and Mrs. Byrd welcomed their first great-grandson, Michael Yoo Fatemi.

From a member of the KKK to Michael Yoo Fatemi in two generations. Not bad.


(I think it's technically three generations, but still noteworthy.)
   27. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:08 PM (#5516268)
What must be about half the roads, libraries, schools, and government buildings in West Virginia are named in his honor, so as we're otherwise in a frenzied rush to rename buildings and remove statues honoring others deemed by progressive lynch mobs as racist, he would seem to be germane.
If Lee, et. al. were just racist, it would be one thing. But they're:

1. Traitors to the USA
2. Who wanted to create a country based on slavery (not one that allowed it, but one based on it; read the various states' Articles of Succession).
   28. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5516282)
Oops, just read my post, too late to edit. Secession, obviously.
   29. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:35 PM (#5516288)
I don't know why most people ignore the fact that the Civil War statues are honoring and celebrating traitors and treason. It isn't just race, although that is a huge factor.
   30. winnipegwhip Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:44 PM (#5516302)

If Lee, et. al. were just racist, it would be one thing. But they're:

1. Traitors to the USA


Just keep the statues of William Tecumseh Sherman because he was loyal.
   31. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:53 PM (#5516308)
Are you guys serious? Byrd never had that thrown back in his face by the media? Google has 149,000 returns for "Robert Byrd Ku Klux Klan." Newsweek.com posted a story about Byrd's KKK membership this very morning - even though he died seven years ago.

He would appear on talk shows and interviews and pontificate and no one ever said, "Uh, but sir, you were a high ranking klansman yet you say . . . ." Never happened.

When Trump starts apologizing for all the racist innuendo he's thrown out there, not to mention his racist actions in real estate, then you can start making coherent analogies to Robert Byrd, who apologized many times for his Klan membership and his opposition to the civil rights bill.

EDIT: cokes to TDF and SoSH
   32. Batman Posted: August 18, 2017 at 02:58 PM (#5516313)
I don't remember many articles about Byrd that didn't mention the Klan. It's like when somebody posts "You'll never see the lamestream media report on this!" and links to an article from CNN or the New York Times.
   33. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 18, 2017 at 03:09 PM (#5516325)
Robert Byrd, who apologized many times for his Klan membership and his opposition to the civil rights bill.

Byrd was only Senator to vote against both African-American Supreme Court Justices - he earned his reputation. Reportedly, there are at least 50 publicly-funded buildings named after Byrd, or his wife, in West Virginia. Don't think that includes the highways, bridges, and parks, either.
   34. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 03:25 PM (#5516338)
Byrd was only Senator to vote against both African-American Supreme Court Justices - he earned his reputation.
And as I and 2 others have pointed out, he fully admits to his reputation.
Reportedly, there are at least 50 publicly-funded buildings named after Byrd, or his wife, in West Virginia. Don't think that includes the highways, bridges, and parks, either.
I never understood why Senators and Representatives were damned for "pork" - I vote them to work for me, and part of "working for me" is getting as many jobs for my state/district as possible. If the US Government is going to build a building anyway, it was Byrd's job to do what he could to get it built in WV.
   35. Shibal Posted: August 18, 2017 at 04:47 PM (#5516402)
In addition to what Tom said, and disregarding the regular idiocy you've seen this week (such as Post 11), Byrd very publicly disavowed his former beliefs and conduct in the 1980s, and lived 30-plus years after that demonstrating the validity of his professed change.


Sure. When racism started becoming a career killer for politicians, he changed his views. Klansman Byrd was certainly quite the hero.



   36. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 18, 2017 at 05:24 PM (#5516444)
If the US Government is going to build a building anyway, it was Byrd's job to do what he could to get it built in WV.

All of those facilities weren't going to be built anyway - Byrd was pivotal in the authorization of many. I'll leave it for others to debate how many projects were justified based on the costs & benefits, but there was no requirement that they all be named for him.
   37. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 18, 2017 at 05:27 PM (#5516449)
Byrd was only Senator to vote against both African-American Supreme Court Justices

If you were to poll every African American leader whether they'd rather have their laws constructed by Clarence Thomas or the latterday Robert Byrd, I doubt if you'd find many votes for the former. It's funny how the same people who want to define Byrd by actions he took over 40 years before his death are eager to normalize Donald Trump every time he reads a ghostwritten speech off a teleprompter. Racism in a Senator from 1964 or 1967 seems to bother them a lot more than racism from a president in 2017.
   38. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 05:29 PM (#5516450)
All of those facilities weren't going to be built anyway - Byrd was pivotal in the authorization of many. I'll leave it for others to debate how many projects were justified based on the costs & benefits, but there was no requirement that they all be named for him.
It cost no more or less for them to be named for him than anyone else.

And I'll repeat: It was his job to get money and jobs for WV. That he did it well should be lauded, not damned.
   39. TDF, FCL Posted: August 18, 2017 at 05:32 PM (#5516455)
Sure. When racism started becoming a career killer for politicians, he changed his views. Klansman Byrd was certainly quite the hero.
I dunno, Steve King is still in office.
   40. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: August 18, 2017 at 05:53 PM (#5516465)
And I'll repeat: It was his job to get money and jobs for WV. That he did it well should be lauded, not damned.

And he seems pretty well liked in WV. Why people from other states should be lauding him for spending their money on pet projects for the citizens of WV, I'm not sure.
   41. Shibal Posted: August 18, 2017 at 06:37 PM (#5516497)
If you were to poll every African American leader whether they'd rather have their laws constructed by Clarence Thomas or the latterday Robert Byrd, I doubt if you'd find many votes for the former. It's funny how the same people who want to define Byrd by actions he took over 40 years before his death are eager to normalize Donald Trump every time he reads a ghostwritten speech off a teleprompter. Racism in a Senator from 1964 or 1967 seems to bother them a lot more than racism from a president in 2017.


In other words, bigotry is overlooked when the bigot is on our side of the aisle.
   42. Shibal Posted: August 18, 2017 at 06:40 PM (#5516499)
I do enjoy Ken Tremendous, aka Michael Shur aka Fire Joe Morgan, getting on his twitter high horse and lecturing all about the evils of Tom Yawkey. Conveniently ignoring the fact that he didn't have any black actors as main characters in either of his two hit TV shows. The only black guy on either played a stereotypical angry, lazy, bitter black man.

But he sure does signal his virtue good!
   43. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: August 18, 2017 at 06:53 PM (#5516506)
I can think of 3 black characters that had long-running significant roles on The Office or Parks and Rec, and that ignores a number of non-black minorities in featured roles.
   44. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 06:54 PM (#5516508)
You'd complain if he had a happy grinning black man who was always dancing too. There's no pleasing your type.
   45. if nature called, ladodger34 would listen Posted: August 18, 2017 at 06:59 PM (#5516512)
I do enjoy Ken Tremendous, aka Michael Shur aka Fire Joe Morgan, getting on his twitter high horse and lecturing all about the evils of Tom Yawkey. Conveniently ignoring the fact that he didn't have any black actors as main characters in either of his two hit TV shows. The only black guy on either played a stereotypical angry, lazy, bitter black man.

But he sure does signal his virtue good!


Darryl sure a hell wasn't angry, lazy, or bitter. I guess if you squint and are trying to make a really bad argument, you could call Stanley lazy but on a show full of characters that were mostly flawed & weird Stanley and Darryl were kind of the most normal.
   46. Shibal Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:00 PM (#5516513)
Darryl sure a hell wasn't angry, lazy, or bitter. I guess if you squint and are trying to make a really bad argument, you could call Stanley lazy but on a show full of characters that were mostly flawed & weird Stanley and Darryl were kind of the most normal..


Forgot about Daryl. He did work his way into a decent size role, but still not a main character.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Office_(U.S._TV_series)_characters#Main_and_recurring_cast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Parks_and_Recreation_characters
   47. Shibal Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:14 PM (#5516518)
You'd complain if he had a happy grinning black man who was always dancing too. There's no pleasing your type.


I guess by "my type", you mean the type of person calling out racists like Robert Byrd.
   48. Fourth True Outcome Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:35 PM (#5516533)
I guess by "calling out" you mean bring up to push a false equivalence. (Not sure what Ken Tremendous has to do with anything either, but Rashida Jones sure is a person of color too.)
   49. PeteF3 Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:41 PM (#5516537)
So is Retta. And not a main character, but Perd Hapley certainly was not lazy, bitter, or angry. Dumb, yeah, but he meant well.
   50. Hank G. Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:42 PM (#5516538)

Byrd was only Senator to vote against both African-American Supreme Court Justices - he earned his reputation.


That‘s disingenuous. If Byrd had not changed, he would have voted for Clarence Thomas, as Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms did.
   51. Hank G. Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:47 PM (#5516543)
I guess by "my type", you mean the type of person calling out racists like Robert Byrd.


No, the type that thinks it’s a compelling argument to point out that the Democratic Party used to be the racist party and ignores the fact that the most racist Democrats moved over to the Republican Party, where they were welcomed with open arms.

Wouldn’t it be more productive to call out current racists, like the current occupant of the White House, rather than dead reformed racists like Robert Byrd?
   52. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: August 18, 2017 at 07:52 PM (#5516547)
person of color

Careful -- it's very important to frame this specifically in terms of black characters, given that each show has given one of the most popular minority actor/comedians working today their big break.

Also, the divisions in that wiki list should be taken with a grain of salt (edit: or i just don't understand showbiz) -- Ryan was a main character but Darryl and Kelly weren't?
   53. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 18, 2017 at 10:01 PM (#5516645)
No, the type that thinks it’s a compelling argument to point out that the Democratic Party used to be the racist party and ignores the fact that the most racist Democrats moved over to the Republican Party, where they were welcomed with open arms.
Ah, yes, the good ol' "Southern Strategy" myth.
   54. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 18, 2017 at 10:26 PM (#5516672)
If you were to poll every African American leader whether they'd rather have their laws constructed by Clarence Thomas or the latterday Robert Byrd, I doubt if you'd find many votes for the former. It's funny how the same people who want to define Byrd by actions he took over 40 years before his death are eager to normalize Donald Trump every time he reads a ghostwritten speech off a teleprompter. Racism in a Senator from 1964 or 1967 seems to bother them a lot more than racism from a president in 2017.

In other words, bigotry is overlooked when the bigot is on our side of the aisle.


It wasn't overlooked when Byrd was actually a bigot, and it's hardly a forgotten part of his history. And if Trump spends his next 30 years working to dispel the poison he's unleashed for the first 70 years of his miserable life, he might wind up being at least partially forgiven himself, and he wouldn't even have to switch parties.
   55. Rough Carrigan Posted: August 18, 2017 at 11:00 PM (#5516686)
Funny, Jesse Jackson and even Al Sharpton had nice things to say about private citizen Donald Trump for years. But it wasn't politically necessary to call him a racist then.
   56. Tom Nawrocki Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM (#5516738)
I guess by "my type", you mean the type of person calling out racists like Robert Byrd.


Or, as some people call it, the type of person who "virtue signals."
   57. Jay Seaver Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:49 AM (#5516740)
I do enjoy Ken Tremendous, aka Michael Shur aka Fire Joe Morgan, getting on his twitter high horse and lecturing all about the evils of Tom Yawkey. Conveniently ignoring the fact that he didn't have any black actors as main characters in either of his two hit TV shows. The only black guy on either played a stereotypical angry, lazy, bitter black man.

(Scans rest of thread, sees no mention of Brooklyn Nine Nine or The Good Place, is confused)
   58. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:57 AM (#5516765)
(Scans rest of thread, sees no mention of Brooklyn Nine Nine or The Good Place, is confused)
Forget it, he's rolling.
   59. Morty Causa Posted: August 19, 2017 at 06:23 AM (#5516769)
Bill Veeck had good things to say about Yawkey.
   60. DavidFoss Posted: August 19, 2017 at 07:01 AM (#5516772)
Was the Yawkey issue a thing in Boston before this week? Part of me thinks the current owner is just using current events because he wants to switch the street name to a popular player.
   61. Swoboda is freedom Posted: August 19, 2017 at 07:54 AM (#5516776)
I do enjoy Ken Tremendous, aka Michael Shur aka Fire Joe Morgan, getting on his twitter high horse and lecturing all about the evils of Tom Yawkey. Conveniently ignoring the fact that he didn't have any black actors as main characters in either of his two hit TV shows. The only black guy on either played a stereotypical angry, lazy, bitter black man.

First of all you ignored Brooklyn Nine Nine and The Good Place, which Schur created. Also, Schur was just a writer, later a producer on The Office. It wasn't his show.

Parks and Rec had Aziz Ansari, Retta, and Rashida Jones (daughter of Quincy Jones) as main characters.

Brooklyn Nine Nine has Terry Crews, Andre Braugher, plus the 2 of the main female characters are both Hispanic.

In the Good Place, of the 5 main characters, one is African American (playing and actual African), one is Pakistani English and one is Taiwanese.

Other than that, you are right.
   62. Jay Seaver Posted: August 19, 2017 at 09:17 AM (#5516793)
Was the Yawkey issue a thing in Boston before this week? Part of me thinks the current owner is just using current events because he wants to switch the street name to a popular player.

It's a thing that's come up on occasion; I've seen people (maybe even here) pointedly refer to the street as its former name rather than Yawkey Way, although it's usually just been one blogger at a time and never something that has a lot of people behind it at once. It's never gotten much behind it, because inertia.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is a thing Henry's wanted to do for a while, but Boston's an old city, there are still a lot of people who at least remember Jean Yawkey and the charitable trust fondly, and it's a weird thing to ask the city to rescind the recognition of one's predecessor. Bringing it up now is opportunistic, but it's also a moment where you can argue against staying quiet, especially with one of these rallies planned for Boston today.
   63. TDF, FCL Posted: August 19, 2017 at 10:11 AM (#5516803)
Ah, yes, the good ol' "Southern Strategy" myth.
Well, the people who were closest to it didn't think it was a myth.
Republican strategist Lee Atwater discussed the Southern strategy in a 1981 interview later published in Southern Politics in the 1990s by Alexander P. Lamis.

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 ... and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster...

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, \"######, ######, ######." By 1968 you can't say \"######\" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than \"######, ######."


And if it's just a myth, why did all of the racist Dixicrats either (1) become Republicans or (2) repent like Byrd?
   64. Morty Causa Posted: August 19, 2017 at 10:32 AM (#5516806)
Where were they going to go to have a decided influence? The thing is, in a democracy, even a limited one like ours, where everyone gets to vote, a large contingent of voters will have to be taken into account. You can't get around that--except of course by undemocratic means, like Supreme Court dictates and fiats.
   65. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 10:57 AM (#5516809)

And if it's just a myth, why did all of the racist Dixiecrats either (1) become Republicans or (2) repent like Byrd?

Well, if you believe many of the people who post around here, they either became anti-racist Republicans** or "reverse racist" modern liberals. Few shell games have ever used such transparent shells.

** like you know, the eminently qualified Jeff Sessions
   66. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 11:37 AM (#5516814)
And if it's just a myth, why did all of the racist Dixicrats either (1) become Republicans
That's another myth. Those bigots died out.
   67. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 11:39 AM (#5516815)
Sean Trende, RCP:
In 1930, the Southern Democrats are pretty solidly aligned against Northern Republicans. But as more liberal Northern Democrats began to pervade the Democratic caucus in the 1930s, and as FDR embraced increasingly strong state interventions in the economy, these Southern Democrats became increasingly uncomfortable with the national Democrats. As my former colleague Jay Cost wrote in a piece addressing the same pair of articles, this was the result of "an intra-party economic cleavage centered around issues of labor and wages . . . it has to do with race - just as many things in the South do - but race was not the central point of this particular conflict."

By 1942 we see this:

[MAP]

Look at how much the South has changed! By now its members have voting records that are almost completely purple, and some areas in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi are more red than blue. These latter Congressmen were already voting more with Republicans than with Democrats, six years before the Democrats became intertwined with Civil Rights. And remember, we're purely looking at economic votes here.

[MAP]

By 1962, the Republicans were pretty routinely winning Southern states in Presidential elections, and there were twelve Republicans from the South: two in Texas, two in Virginia, four in Tennessee, two in North Carolina, and two in Florida. But that doesn't explain the "redness" of many of the Southern districts. At this point, a near-majority of Southern Democrats had voting records that placed them on the right side of the ideological spectrum, even excluding civil rights votes.

In other words, by 1964, most Democrats were already voting like Republicans on non-racial issues. On a blank slate, these Democrats would be Republicans; they were true DINOs. But three things kept these Democrats from actually calling themselves Republicans: Jim Crow, seniority and Herbert Hoover.

This is why we see such little change from the general trend post-1964, even with the end of Jim Crow's strange career. Republicans picked up a few Congressional seats. J. Strom Thurmond became a Republican, and a few other prominent Democrats followed suit. But the Southern Congressional delegations continued to be dominated by Democrats. Almost all of the signatories to the Southern Manifesto remained Democrats until they left Congress. Some, like Russell Long and John Stennis served as Democrats into the 1980s. When Haley Barbour ran against Stennis in 1982, he lost by a nearly 2:1 margin. George Wallace was elected Governor of Alabama as a Democrat in 1982.

Richard Nixon walloped George McGovern in the South, but this was hardly exclusively about race -- McGovern was to the left of you average Southern voters on just about every issue imaginable. Four years later, Jimmy Carter was still able to carry every Southern state except for Virginia in 1976. As late as 1988, the South was still considered something of a swing region (the reason that Lloyd Bentsen was included on the ticket). Bill Clinton carried four Southern states in 1992, and came within five points of carrying four others. Republicans didn't make real progress in the Congressional delegations until the 1990s; even then the transformation continued into the 2000s.
   68. Hot Wheeling American Posted: August 19, 2017 at 11:50 AM (#5516818)
How can Shibal ever show his e-face 'round these parts again?
   69. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:06 PM (#5516822)
What happened between 1996 and 2000 that had such a huge, seemingly permant effect on Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia? I've followed elections since 2000 and none of these states has ever been considered swingable, except possibly Tennessee with Gore in 2000 relying on home field advantage. And just four years earlier...
   70. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5516824)
Shorter Sean Trende: The Dixiecrats didn't have to change much in order to become Republicans, since the Republicans were more than willing to meet them halfway. It's okay to be racist as long as you're also right wing on everything else.

How this translates into an absolution of either Dixiecrats as Democrats or Dixiecrats as Republicans is something that might require further explanation. I love this paragraph:
In 1964, Goldwater did break through in the Deep South. But compared to the preceding decade, that isn't all that surprising. Goldwater ran roughly even with Nixon in Arkansas, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. He ran about ten points better in South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. On average, he ran two points ahead of Nixon.

Funny how he neglects to mention two little details: (1) how much better Goldwater did in Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi; and (2) Oh, yes---Goldwater's vote against the civil rights bill.

Goldwater himself was much more honest as to what was going on. When asked why he was concentrating on attracting white voters, especially in the South, he replied that you "go hunting where the ducks are."
   71. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:30 PM (#5516826)
Funny how he neglects to mention two little details:
Funny how you pretty much neglect 90 percent of what he wrote.

The move to the Republican Party was a long drift that began perhaps as early as the Al Smith nomination of 1928 and picked up steam during the 30s, when northern Democrats were increasingly running the show. To casually assign the shift to little more than a Goldwater-Nixon "Southern Strategy" is either an act of ignorance of dishonesty.
   72. Booey Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5516828)
Parks and Rec had Aziz Ansari, Retta, and Rashida Jones (daughter of Quincy Jones) as main characters.


Plus Aubrey Plaza, who's half Puerto Rican, as is her character April Ludgate (who speaks fluent Spanish on the show).
   73. Tim D Posted: August 19, 2017 at 12:53 PM (#5516829)
This country desperately needs a centrist party. Liberal on social issues, moderate on economic issues with an emphasis on market-based solutions and a healthy mistrust of big government solutions, and strong but not interventionist on defense. Not the libertarians, they are way too conservative economically and too passive on defense. I know, the system is totally rigged against a viable third party, but it seems we are going to be deadlocked forever if most of the time power is split and even when we have a "party in power" they can't agree on an agenda.

Just a thought since this thread has turned to party politics. Both parties are a mess.
   74. PreservedFish Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:07 PM (#5516833)
Parks and Rec had Aziz Ansari, Retta, and Rashida Jones (daughter of Quincy Jones) as main characters.


It also positively portrayed a conservative character, Ron Swanson, amply demonstrating the boundless charity and humanity of the white liberal male towards his inferiors.
   75. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:38 PM (#5516844)
The move to the Republican Party was a long drift that began perhaps as early as the Al Smith nomination of 1928

Yes, when at a time when the KKK had picked up on anti-Catholicism, the Democrats nominated a wet New York Catholic.

and picked up steam during the 30s, when northern Democrats were increasingly running the show.

It picked up to the point that by 1944, in FDR's last election, the Republican candidate (Thomas Dewey) got less than 5% of the vote in South Carolina, less than 10% of the vote in Mississippi, and less than 20% in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana.

20 years later, those were the only states that Goldwater won outside of his home state of Arizona. You can call that nothing but sheer coincidence, but it's an historical fact that those were the states where the resistance to the civil rights movement was at its uniformly fiercest.

To casually assign the shift to little more than a Goldwater-Nixon "Southern Strategy" is either an act of ignorance of dishonesty.

We've been through this before. I've never said that the SS was the only reason, only that it produced the floodtide and cemented it in place. I've also never tried to lump all southern states together, as once you get out of the Core Five you have to consider factors such as northern migration to South Florida, and the longstanding Republican tradition in the Appalachian parts of North Carolina, Tennessee and the Border States. If you break down those states by region, parts of them look little different from the Core Five, but other parts have Republican voting patterns that long pre-date Al Smith.

Here's one easy way that the Republicans could quickly dispel what you call a "myth": Sign on to the non-partisan campaign to restore the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and stop trying to use the phony issue of "voter fraud" to shrink the franchise. That would do more to restore a belief in the GOP's faith in racial equality than all the pious denunciations of Nazis and alt-rights. Talk is cheap.
   76. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:43 PM (#5516849)
The Dixiecrats didn't have to change much in order to become Republicans, since the Republicans were more than willing to meet them halfway. It's okay to be racist as long as you're also right wing on everything else.

The Democratic Strom Thurmond (and his fellow Southern Democrats) opposed anti-lynching bills & filibustered the Civil Right Act; the Republican version was the 1st southern senator of either party to hire a professional black staff member, and voted to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. If anyone is going to be criticized for harboring the racist, shouldn't it be the Democrats?
   77. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:46 PM (#5516851)
It picked up to the point that by 1944, in FDR's last election, the Republican candidate (Thomas Dewey) got less than 5% of the vote in South Carolina, less than 10% of the vote in Mississippi, and less than 20% in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana.
Gee, I wonder how FDR did nationwide? Um...

Similarly, I wonder how Nixon fared nationwide in 1972, when the Southern Strategy was supposedly in full effect? Um...

And hey, while we're on the topic, where did Jimmy Carter kick off his re-election campaign in 1980? Wasn't it Tuscumbia, Alabama? Hmmm, I wonder what makes that place so significant. Um...

EDIT: And what POTUS candidate in 1976 appealed to "ethnic purity" and warned of "black intrusion?" Um...
   78. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:48 PM (#5516853)
[75] Agreed. As long as the Republican Party shows itself committed to preventing black people from voting, I can't take any of their platitudes on race seriously.
   79. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:54 PM (#5516857)
[75] Agreed. As long as the Republican Party shows itself committed to preventing black people from voting, I can't take any of their platitudes on race seriously.
"Preventing black people from voting?"

Sigh. Some folks here don't even try anymore.
   80. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 01:56 PM (#5516859)
It picked up to the point that by 1944, in FDR's last election, the Republican candidate (Thomas Dewey) got less than 5% of the vote in South Carolina, less than 10% of the vote in Mississippi, and less than 20% in Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana.

Gee, I wonder how FDR did nationwide? Um...


If you must know, he got 53%. This wasn't 1936.

Similarly, I wonder how Nixon fared nationwide in 1972, when the Southern Strategy was supposedly in full effect? Um...

I'll let you look up Nixon's 1972 percentages in the Deep South and compare them to his non-Deep South percentages. Have fun.
   81. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:03 PM (#5516867)
The Dixiecrats didn't have to change much in order to become Republicans, since the Republicans were more than willing to meet them halfway. It's okay to be racist as long as you're also right wing on everything else.

The Democratic Strom Thurmond (and his fellow Southern Democrats) opposed anti-lynching bills & filibustered the Civil Right Act;


Er, Strom Thurmond switched parties during the Civil Rights Act debate, and was welcomed with open arms by his now-Republican colleagues, who also supported another Senator who voted against the CR bill. Thurmond didn't even lose his seniority. Of course all that means nothing.
   82. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:04 PM (#5516869)
The Democratic Strom Thurmond (and his fellow Southern Democrats) opposed anti-lynching bills & filibustered the Civil Right Act; the Republican version was the 1st southern senator of either party to hire a professional black staff member, and voted to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. If anyone is going to be criticized for harboring the racist, shouldn't it be the Democrats?
If Robert Byrd had switched parties in 1964, this is how Republicans would write about him.
   83. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:06 PM (#5516871)
As long as the Republican Party shows itself committed to preventing black people from voting, I can't take any of their platitudes on race seriously.

Nothing is "preventing black people from voting". In 2012, blacks voted at higher rates than whites. As long as the Democratsic Party remains committed to demagoguing voting issues in a desperate attempt to boost turnout by frightening its base, I can't take any of their platitudes seriously.
   84. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:08 PM (#5516873)
demagoguing voting issues

Remind me, what's the actual voter fraud rate?
   85. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:16 PM (#5516875)
Exactly how complicit was Yawkey in the Donald Fitzpatrick stuff? Any Red Sox fans have context? I was pretty young when it all happened...
   86. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 19, 2017 at 02:32 PM (#5516883)
Er, Strom Thurmond switched parties during the Civil Rights Act debate …

No, Thurmond switched parties almost 3 months after the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act, and more than 2 months after it was signed into law on July 2, 1964.
   87. Renegade (((JE))) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 03:05 PM (#5516892)
If you must know, he got 53%. This wasn't 1936.
Dewey won all of 99 electoral votes.
I'll let you look up Nixon's 1972 percentages in the Deep South and compare them to his non-Deep South percentages. Have fun.
And I'll let you look up the percentages in favor of the Vietnam War in the Deep South and non-Deep South.

Meanwhile, Andy, feel free to weigh in on Carter vs. Reagan vis-a-vis the Deep South and earlier, the peanut farmer's appeals to "ethnic purity" and warnings of "black intrusion."
   88. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 19, 2017 at 03:27 PM (#5516909)
No, Thurmond switched parties almost 3 months after the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act, and more than 2 months after it was signed into law on July 2, 1964.
Southern politics was never about race. It was and is all about states' rights, and has been for the last 200 years, or whatever convenient date you happen to need for the argument of the moment.
   89. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: August 19, 2017 at 03:33 PM (#5516914)
I'm not even sure what point Clapper is trying to make.
   90. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 19, 2017 at 03:46 PM (#5516918)
I'm not even sure what point Clapper is trying to make.

Quite obviously, in #86 I am correcting Andy's #81, which misstated the chronology while partially quoting my #81. Problem with that?
   91. bookbook Posted: August 19, 2017 at 04:14 PM (#5516925)
Southern politics was never about race. It was and is all about states' rights, and has been for the last 200 years, or whatever convenient date you happen to need for the argument of the moment.


I'm assuming that's sarcasm, as whenever the "South" takes national power--pre-1860 or after, Democrat or Republican--it becomes a staunch advocate of national authority over any state-level objections to its agenda.
   92. bookbook Posted: August 19, 2017 at 04:17 PM (#5516926)
Papi Way. I reckon that's what ownership is angling for...
   93. Count Posted: August 19, 2017 at 04:35 PM (#5516942)
Yawkey was a racist and a bad owner, but it's not called Yawkey Way in honor of his racism... I wouldn't change the name.
   94. Count Posted: August 19, 2017 at 04:38 PM (#5516944)
Don't really get the argument about why the South switched. In 1928 the Democratic candidate was a catholic (this is mentioned in JE's earlier link but handwaived away). FDR's coalition included northern blacks and other urban groups (jews etc.) and the national democratic party became increasingly more progressive on civil rights. See the Dixiecrat run in 1948.

edit: just mentioning this in response to the "trend line since 1928" argument
   95. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 04:48 PM (#5516948)
And if it's just a myth, why did all of the racist Dixicrats either (1) become Republicans or (2) repent like Byrd?
They didn't. They almost all stayed Democrats.
   96. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 19, 2017 at 05:28 PM (#5516976)
Er, Strom Thurmond switched parties during the Civil Rights Act debate …

No, Thurmond switched parties almost 3 months after the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act, and more than 2 months after it was signed into law on July 2, 1964.


Well, THAT sure puts his switcheroo in a more favorable light!

First he filibusters the bill as a Dixiecrat, then after his efforts fails, he joins the party with the presidential candidate who also voted against it! I'm sure in his explanation he had something in there about conscience or principles.

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

If you must know, he got 53%. This wasn't 1936.

Dewey won all of 99 electoral votes.


Right, but the 46% of the popular vote that he received is obviously a much more accurate reflection of the nation's overall mood that the vagaries of the electoral college.

Unless, of course, you're looking to Donald Trump for your reasoning.
   97. Tim D Posted: August 19, 2017 at 05:32 PM (#5516977)
Republicans voted for LBJ's Civil Rights Act and Voter Rights Act in far greater proportion than Democrats. The GOP was still the more progressive party on race into the 60's. Northern blacks voted Democratic beginning with Roosevelt. Southern blacks, the few that voted despite intimidation, voted mostly Republican until Kennedy and LBJ. Very few Southern Democrats became Republicans. They stayed Democrats until they got beat or retired. Republicans gradually replaced Southern Democrats more because the Southern voters couldn't stand the Kennedys and their ilk. Of course race was part of that. But even Goldwater was for civil rights; he wasn't for legislation on a national scale. Goldwater believed strongly in equality but felt the Fed was intruding in state affairs on civil rights. State governments in the south were routinely segregationist; Goldwater in later life admitted places like Alabama and Mississippi had to be pushed. The disaffected Southern Democrats became Reagan Republicans, and the Religious Right. It was hard enough with them in the party in the Reagan years. Now they have ruined it, the racist undertones, the right-wing social agenda have destroyed the party I knew as a kid. Moderates of both parties and independents need an option, and Ted Cruz vs. Nancy Pelosi doesn't give them one.
   98. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 05:51 PM (#5516984)
20 years later, those were the only states that Goldwater won outside of his home state of Arizona. You can call that nothing but sheer coincidence, but it's an historical fact that those were the states where the resistance to the civil rights movement was at its uniformly fiercest.
I've danced this dance with Andy a few thousand times. Let me shorten the discussion:

Andy: Theory with no facts.
Sane person: Your theory is lacking proof. Other than 1964, which fits your theory, other years don't show the same pattern. 1964 was an outlier.
Andy: But what about 1964? It proves my point.
Sane person: No, it's an outlier.
Andy: You can call it a coincidence, but it proves my point.
Sane person: I didn't call it a coincidence; I called it an outlier. Other years don't show that pattern.
Andy: But what about 1964? It proves my point.
Sane person: <Blows brains out.>
   99. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 19, 2017 at 05:52 PM (#5516986)
Er, Strom Thurmond switched parties during the Civil Rights Act debate …

No, Thurmond switched parties almost 3 months after the Senate passed the Civil Rights Act, and more than 2 months after it was signed into law on July 2, 1964.

Well, THAT sure puts his switcheroo in a more favorable light! First he filibusters the bill as a Dixiecrat, then after his efforts fails, he joins the party with the presidential candidate who also voted against it! I'm sure in his explanation he had something in there about conscience or principles.

So, when you misstated the chronology you were attempting to cast Thurmond in a more favorable light? Hmm. The facts are what they are, and only one of us had them right. In any event, as others have noted, Thurmond was really the only Dixiecrat Senator to switch parties, the rest (Russell, Talmadge, Stennis, Eastland, Long, et al) hung on as Democrats until death or retirement. Democrats were reasonably competitive in southern elections until 1994, when they took a heavy hit, but even then they rebounded a bit until 2010, when they were almost wiped out. All this was several generations past the Dixiecrat era.
   100. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 19, 2017 at 05:59 PM (#5516990)
Nothing is "preventing black people from voting". In 2012, blacks voted at higher rates than whites. As long as the Democratsic Party remains committed to demagoguing voting issues in a desperate attempt to boost turnout by frightening its base, I can't take any of their platitudes seriously.
What you have clearly failed to grasp is that treating everyone equally is racist.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

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
Don Malcolm
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-22-2017
(28 - 1:11pm, Sep 22)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOTP 18 September 2017: Ex-Baseball Star Darryl Strawberry Criticizes Jemele Hill, Praises POTUS: Trump is ‘A Great Man’
(1145 - 1:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: Ray (RDP)

Newsblog‘Highly unlikely’ Mets risk Harvey burning them — with another team | New York Post
(14 - 1:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: TheHomeRunsOfJuanPierre

NewsblogRobinson Cano hits 300th home run | MLB.com
(13 - 1:07pm, Sep 22)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

NewsblogOzzie and the MVP | Articles | Bill James Online
(5 - 1:06pm, Sep 22)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogWhere have you gone, Tim Lincecum? In search of beloved Giants ace
(19 - 12:48pm, Sep 22)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogMarlins’ Brian Anderson — inspired by Brian Anderson and Brian Anderson — has one of the most common names in baseball history - Sun Sentinel
(18 - 12:44pm, Sep 22)
Last: Perry

NewsblogMLB, Rob Manfred must expand protective netting | SI.com
(64 - 12:40pm, Sep 22)
Last: base ball chick

Sox TherapyStep One Complete
(24 - 12:38pm, Sep 22)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Newsblog‘Friends,’ the Sitcom That’s Still a Hit in Major League Baseball
(431 - 12:26pm, Sep 22)
Last: Man o' Schwar

NewsblogThe Rangers release artists’ renderings of their new ballpark
(19 - 12:22pm, Sep 22)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogOT-NBA off season thread
(2432 - 11:53am, Sep 22)
Last: 2 dudes are better than STIGGLES; i'm both of em

Gonfalon Cubs15 To Go
(77 - 11:50am, Sep 22)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogOT: New Season August 2017 Soccer Thread
(728 - 11:29am, Sep 22)
Last: Nose army. Beef diaper? (CoB)

NewsblogA’s preferred stadium site criticized for causing gentrification, killing waterfowl | Field of Schemes
(79 - 11:26am, Sep 22)
Last: Traderdave

Page rendered in 0.6500 seconds
47 querie(s) executed