Somewhat political post, non baseball

[Driver Love]

There have been some occasional non baseball or non fantasy sports related conversations here and at times they have been interesting. Today I watched the press conference as the investigation on what happened in Benghazi (before, during, after) finally wrapped up. The press conference itself was riveting TV. There was an honest, sincere, authenticity to the words expressed by the committee members. I watched the coverage (and post press conference reporting) of this news across three different media outlets as I taped multiple networks. We often hear people debating what the biggest threats facing our nation are. Is it global warming? Is it terrorism? Is a failing economy? I have to say one of the biggest problems our nation faces is now is the deterioration of media in America and the inability to count on it to be a watchdog for the citizens of this country. It is amazing how dishonest and agenda driven some (most) media outlets are now and how they literally control and spin hard news to fit their perspective or the narrative they want to perpetuate.

I encourage everyone to find a replay of this press conference. I cannot recall ever seeing something quite like it. Watch the question/answer portion. Watch the committee leader get seemingly emotional at the end about the loss of life, heroism, patriotism and dealing with the victims families. Then watch how different media outlets spin the facts knowing a lazy citizenry will never take time away from the Kardashians to read the full report that has been released. It is staggering.

[TOXIC ASSETS]

Another good posting, Driver.
Could not have written it better myself.
The media is extremely dishonest and has been in bed with the democrats forever, but it's gotten much worse since Obama assumed command in 2008.

[KJ Duke]

The Internet's reach has allowed for extraordinary measurement techniques of marketing messages (propaganda). This data has been a gold mine for marketers and their ability to predict response rates, conversion rates, etc. Then it spilled over to media providers and now politicians themselves. Bottom line is, anyone willing to spend the money can learn exactly how to manipulate the public to get the sales, viewership or votes they desire. Integrity can't win now that manipulation is down to a science.

[Outlaw]

Awesome post- Well Articulated. Most Americans Naive to whats happening to our country. Kids especially getting hurt with the PC culture and will never know any better.

[cfolson]

I guess the press should stick to pushing Republican causes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

[Driver Love]

I guess the press should stick to pushing Republican causes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

cfolson,

I am not sure which side of this topic you are on but your post and the link you connected to it are the PERFECT example supporting my point. This isn't a "republican cause" and those who think that are contributing to the absurd polarized nation we are in that continues to get worse with the bloods vs the crypts behavior we see now with democrats vs republics and countless other topics. This was an effort to uncover truth and facts and the first investigation on Benghazi purposefully avoided much of the truth and many of the facts. That is obvious simply by seeing who they chose NOT to interview or even talk to.

I watched every word of that press conference. I have followed this story closely over time. I read the report (http://benghazi.house.gov/NewInfo). Watching the media try to characterize this as some "republican witch hunt" proves my point because the facts prove the exact opposite and these media outlets count on their readers being too ignorant or too lazy to demand and or look into the truth. Fox news is obviously a conservative leaning network (practically the only one). However, many (if not most) of their normal programming regularly has liberal perspectives, libertarian perspectives, democrats, etc to give voice to all opinions. An area I think they fail is not aggressively enough calling out other news outlets who are dishonest. Sometimes I wonder if Fox does this because their ratings are huge (because the majority of the nation is still conservative and traditional values leaning) and they like being that lone beacon in the media for that.

Watching them go around and play the same soundbite of "No new evidence of wrong doing by Hillary Clinton in Benghazi" spewed from most of the other major news outlets without anyone challenging that dishonesty is heartbreaking if you care about this country. There ABSOLUTELY was new information, evidence and clear signs of wrong doing. If you eliminate the failures to be properly prepared for the attacks (and govt is usually inefficient and bloated so I get it), and you even eliminate the failures by our highest leadership DURING the attack as they wasted time and didn't act (deplorable, but mistakes happen), you are still left with the 100% fact that Hillary Clinton herself contributed to purposefully lying to the American people and the families of these 4 dead heros in an effort to help protect Obama just 50something days to his re-election where he ran on a platform of "Terrorism is on the run, I killed Bin Laden, I will keep us safe, so elect me!" This is an undeniable fact proven by this committee and report.

The fact this does not get reported and the fact most people care less is a horrific indictment on our nations watchdog (the media) and the direction we are headed as a country.

[headhunters]

good post driver. Hillary is just a huge liar- and like her husband- should be in jail- but man the republican party just plain blew it. they blew it by taking the easy way out with both bushes. the 1st wasn't really a republican- more of a career politician who sold the party out to get a few bills past in congress to 'get things done". look at the justices he put on the supreme court. The second I can't even figure out- I guess he decided to let the economy go to hell in a handbag so he could be the commander in chief for 8 years and kill a bunch of people. if the economy was in any shape at all when Obama runs- he loses- but even I had to admit that McCain / Palin were not right to fix what was wrong.

[Yah Mule]

I guess the press should stick to pushing Republican causes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"During the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died."

— John Garamendi

Confirmed by Politifact, which skews rights.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... ssies-and/

Isn't it strange that Democrats didn't investigate George W Bush or Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice after any of those attacks? They didn't even devote a fraction of this effort investigating the illegal war Bush and Cheney used to completely destabilize the region and trap us in this endless multi-trillion dollar fiasco.

Just curious, Driver, if this was a somewhat political post, what would you consider an overtly political post?

[NorCalAtlFan]

most of the nation is conservative and traditional values leaning? oye veh. i thank allah that i live in CA and don't have to deal with that ideology.

8 years of obstructionism and disdain for obama and the rnc came up with no one. that's sad. one can hope that this election cycle sends a wake up to both parties. but that's not likely. perhaps the 2018/2020 cycle will even be more of a shit show?

[BK METS]

I guess the press should stick to pushing Republican causes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"During the George W. Bush period, there were 13 attacks on various embassies and consulates around the world. Sixty people died."

— John Garamendi

Confirmed by Politifact, which skews rights.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... ssies-and/

Isn't it strange that Democrats didn't investigate George W Bush or Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice after any of those attacks? They didn't even devote a fraction of this effort investigating the illegal war Bush and Cheney used to completely destabilize the region and trap us in this endless multi-trillion dollar fiasco.

Just curious, Driver, if this was a somewhat political post, what would you consider an overtly political post?

The big difference is, there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died. I am sure the Democrats would have researched any one of those attacks under the Bush Admin, if there were a hint of a cover-up or a thought that it could have been prevented. We knew about the lack of security in Benghazi, we decided to do nothing and blame it on a video. That is treason, in my opinion.

[King of Queens]

most of the nation is conservative and traditional values leaning? oye veh. i thank allah that i live in CA and don't have to deal with that ideology.

8 years of obstructionism and disdain for obama and the rnc came up with no one. that's sad. one can hope that this election cycle sends a wake up to both parties. but that's not likely. perhaps the 2018/2020 cycle will even be more of a shit show?

Geographically speaking, yes -- red states dominate in terms of square footage. I'm assuming that's what is meant by "most of the nation."

If you limit your travel to the major USA cities, you'll do just fine, Bryan.

[NorCalAtlFan]

ahhh, the yucky fly over states? who would go there anyways?

[cfolson]

The big difference is, there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died.

This is just stupid. Even the highly partisan Republican report on Benghazi doesn't allege this.

[BK METS]

The big difference is, there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died.

This is just stupid. Even the highly partisan Republican report on Benghazi doesn't allege this.

I am not sure what world you are living in, but if stating fact is considered stupid, I suppose I am guilty. Hillary herself, in her own testimony, has admitted that she was responsible and should have done more to prevent the attacks.

[cfolson]

The big difference is, there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died.

This is just stupid. Even the highly partisan Republican report on Benghazi doesn't allege this.

I am not sure what world you are living in, but if stating fact is considered stupid, I suppose I am guilty. Hillary herself, in her own testimony, has admitted that she was responsible and should have done more to prevent the attacks.

That's amusing. When I call you out for saying "there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died", you back down to "has admitted that she was responsible and should have done more to prevent the attacks". Those are far different statements. What's really funny is that she didn't admit to any such thing.

Actual quotes from Clinton's testimony:
"As secretary of State, I had the honor to lead and the responsibility to support nearly 70,000 diplomats and development experts across the globe. Losing any one of them, as we did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Mexico, Haiti and Libya, during my tenure was deeply painful for our entire State Department and USAID family and for me personally. I was the one who asked Chris to go to Libya as our envoy. I was the one who recommended him to be our ambassador to the president."

"After the attacks, I stood next to President Obama as Marines carried his casket and those of the other three Americans off the plane at Andrews Air Force Base. I took responsibility, and as part of that, before I left office, I launched reforms to better protect our people in the field and help reduce the chance of another tragedy happening in the future."

[King of Queens]

Perhaps I can be of some assistance here:

[TOXIC ASSETS]

Liberalism is a mental disorder....Michael Savage

In any logical society, Hillary would have resigned as secretary of state, and Obama would have been impeached for TREASON, not only for Benghazi, but for a host of other lies.

And by the way, I'm not a republican and you aren't going to get me trapped into this ridiculous democrat vs republican nonsense. Both parties have sold this country down the river. All 3 branches of government are full of self serving criminals who could give a damn about anything other than holding on to power. To quote George Carlin....."when you have a selfish ignorant population, of course you are going to have selfish, ignorant leaders. This is it folks...this is the best we can do."

I've been drinking tonight and yes, I'm on a rant, but I've had it with the direction we are going.

Trump may be the only person who can save things.....and no, I'm not kidding.

[Edwards Kings]

Sober up old friend and think again.

The sad thing is, which is the dirty, polluted theme central to this thread, is that never have we faced a presidential election with worse choices offered by the two "major" parties. Trump is a blowhard with zero proffered in relation to the skills needed for this job and has shown through out his life to lack the basic scruples or temperament one might find in a reptile.

Secretary Clinton has left of solid path of vile corruption, self-aggrandizement, and incompetence since she came on the national political scene by announcing for Senate from her "home" state of NY in 2000, the latest example of which the little spontaneous meeting between former President Bill Clinton (one of the worst serial abusers of women since Bluebeard) and the head of the Justice Department, Loretta Lynch, on a tarmac in Arizona, despite the fact the Justice Department is investigating the Bill and Hillary Foundation for (alleged) crimes committed while Secretary Clinton was head of the State Department and three days later the Justice Department requests a 27 month delay in the court-ordered release of emails between four of Secretary Clinton's top aides and officials at the Clinton Foundation and a closely associated public relations firm (was to occur this month).

They are both dirty. That anyone could vote with a clear conscience for either of the worst of us is unfathomable.

[Outlaw]

by Edwards Kings » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:01 am
So Who you voting for or are you a 100% No Vote?


by Edwards Kings » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:01 am
"They are both dirty. That anyone could vote with a clear conscience for either of the worst of us is unfathomable."
[/quote]

[Edwards Kings]

by Edwards Kings » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:01 am
So Who you voting for or are you a 100% No Vote?


by Edwards Kings » Fri Jul 01, 2016 2:01 am
"They are both dirty. That anyone could vote with a clear conscience for either of the worst of us is unfathomable."

[/quote]


Man, what a great question. If I were a Demoquack, I would check out the Green Party I guess. As someone who at one time identified as a Repiglican (I can no longer), I am considering Libertarian. As I wrote earlier, my opinion of Libertarians in the past has been pretty low. When KJ brought them up, I went out to do a little more research as the current situation forced me to open my mind up to alternatives. So I looked up Gary Johnson and found a compelling story. BTW, this is not intended to be a political ad for Johnson, but in general this is what I found.

Johnson's parents were public school teachers and worked at the Bureau of Indian Affairs in North Dakota, where he was born (i.e. not necessarily born with a silver spoon in his mouth). While in college in New Mexico, Johnson earned money as a door-to-door handyman. He then started his own business, Big J Enterprises, in 1976. He eventually grew Big J into a multimillion-dollar corporation with over 1,000 employees. By the time he sold the company in 1999, it was one of New Mexico's leading construction companies, so pretty much a self-made man (though many believe that he only got there because of the Government "allowed" him to ).

He entered politics for the first time by running for Governor of New Mexico in 1994 (self-funding at least initially during the primaries) on a fiscally conservative, low-tax and anti-crime platform. Johnson defeated incumbent Democratic governor Bruce King, although party registration in the state of New Mexico at the time was 2-to-1 Democratic, so he appeared to have cross-party appeal. During his tenure as governor, Johnson became known for his low-tax views, adhering to policies of tax and bureaucracy reduction supported by a cost–benefit analysis rationale. He cut the 10% annual growth in the budget: in part, due to his use of the gubernatorial veto 200 times during his first six months in office which gained him the nicknames "Veto Johnson" and "Governor Veto". According to former New Mexico Republican National Committee member Mickey D. Barnett, "Any time someone approached him about legislation for some purpose, his first response always was to ask if government should be involved in that to begin with." Johnson fulfilled his campaign promise to reduce the 10% annual growth of the state budget while raising education spending by nearly a third.

Johnson successfully sought re-election in 1998 and won with 55% of the vote. In his second term, he concentrated on the issue of school voucher reforms, as well as campaigning for marijuana decriminalization and legalization, and opposition to the War on Drugs. Term limited, Johnson could not run for re-election at the end of his second term. After leaving office, Johnson founded the non-profit Our America Initiative in 2009, a political advocacy committee seeking to promote policies such as free enterprise, foreign non-interventionism, limited government and privatization.

So, here is a guy who has history of successfully negotiating tough issues in a bicameral system as the Chief Executive and who gained cross-party (at least at the voter level) support. Fiscally conservative and socially liberal. This is a compelling story and skill set here, especially when compared to what we know is coming under either a Clinton or a Trump presidency.

Oh, his VP candidate is William Weld, elected Governor of Massachusetts (traditionally very democratic as Republicans made up under 14% of the electorate) in 1990 and served to 1997. He was re-elected by the largest margin in Massachusetts' history in 1994. Prior to that, Weld served as the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts from 1981 to 1986 and as the head of the Department of Justice Criminal Division from 1986 to 1988. So as the #2, Weld seems to bring more to the table than either Secretary Clinton or Donald Trump.

[headhunters]

EK- you are catching on- you go guy. that federal deficit would look waaaaaaay better if no trillions spent on stupid wars and defending us against 50,000 smucks in the desert and the trillions spent on the "safety net" that encourages people not to work, get fat and NEVER question that medical bill- because- you know- they ain't paying anyway. f the dems and the repubs.

[Driver Love]

The big difference is, there was a massive cover up of epic proportions, which if the administration would have dealt with it honestly and swiftly, these people would not have died.

This is just stupid. Even the highly partisan Republican report on Benghazi doesn't allege this.

There absolutely was a cover up. It is in the report. The main stream media has purposefully chosen to not report it to trick people too lazy to do the legwork to get to the truth.

-It is a FACT that this administration told the public this was a "spontaneous attack instigated by an Islamic offensive you tube video someone posted" within a day of the attack. Videos of this happening exist so no dodging this fact

-It is a FACT that the administration sent out a completely unprepared spokesperson on all the media outlets (probably not Fox as they purposefully try to avoid that network because they can't control it). Ms Rice repeatedly doubled down on the "youtube video instigated the "angry mob" into attacking.. Again, it is on video. Can't hide from it.

-THIS INVESTIGATION (that main stream media outlets say produced "no new information and no wrongdoing by Ms Clinton") found an email from Clinton (this is another pesky FACT) to her daughter the day after the attack saying "an organized terrorist group attacked the consulate and people died.. it is a sad day"... she also emailed the president of Egypt ( FACT) saying it was an organized terror attack and not a spontaneous reaction to some video. In the world of honest, rational people, this is in direct conflict with the actual words Ms Clinton spoke repeated to the American people during this time. Another damn FACT no less. This, is an example of "wrongdoing" that the main stream media will tell you didn't happen. Thus the opposite of THE FACTS is being reported to much of America.

-Keep in mind this investigation also uncovered that Hillary Clinton had a secret private server to handle secret email communications, which is an entire other thing that she is currently under federal investigation for (again, do people often end up under federal investigation when there is "no evidence of wrong doing?")

-It is a fact that on sept 18th (a full week after the attacks and 7 days after Clinton sent emails proving she knew it was an organized terror attack and not a spontaneous reaction to some video), the white house spokesperson again says this was a spontaneous reaction to an internet video. Think about that for a second.

-Hillary also lied to the faces of the family members about what happened to their dead loved ones. They have corroborated this publicly.

-This clearly dishonest SPIN of what occurred in Benghazi happened while president Obama was in the home stretch of his re-election campaign. There is no logical explanation to why the administration would lie to the American public about this other than to help protect the (now proven to be false) notion that President Obama had snuffed out terrorism and that his policies and strategic decisions are going to continue to keep the world stable and us safe. Clearly we see otherwise now with about 100 terrorist attacks around the world since then. including several on our home soil.

Now anyone who would say "No new information came from this investigation and nothing points to wrong doing by Hillary Clinton" is a stone cold liar, completely uninformed or purposefully avoiding the facts.

The "Hey, ambassadors got killed under Bush's watch and the Dem's didn't investigate!!!!" is the classic "bloods vs Crypts" partisan stuff I was talking about in my very first post. It reminds me of the liberals who will try to defend radical islamic terror by trying to make a moral equivalency to Christian terror or "white guy" terrorism. The whole "You can't say radical Islamic terror is bad, what about Timothy McViegh???" Adult human being actually make this point sometimes. The reason THIS attack got so scrutinized is because there are TONS OF THINGS to scrutinize and countless failures, mistakes and after the fact lies to scrutinize. THERE WAS A MOVIE MADE ABOUT THIS TRAGEDY by a non partisan, non political guy! If there were clear examples of mistakes during an embassy attack/murder and there was a post attack cover up the Dems and the dishonest liberal main stream media would have pounced like a cat and gone insane (think about the laughable "bridge gate" story with Christie and how that was handled/covered.

What an incredible time we live in. I think many things about America hang in the balance. The incredible opulence, prosperity and comfort many in our country have enjoyed for a long time has made many people soft.. ignorant.. completely insulated from the real problems that have been creeping closer (not only terrorism). When you throw in a dishonest, agenda driven main stream media that literally lies and misleads the citizenry, you end up with a situation that could be very dire for America in my opinion.

[NorCalAtlFan]

FACT-when do DC's start up for 2017 Greg/Tom?

FACT-the All Star Break SUCKS for sports junkies

FACT-BK Mutts and Gecko will not be getting cocktails anytime soon

FACT-I can't draft SP

Hillary 16!

[DOUGHBOYS]

In 1912,Teddy Roosevelt was shot on his way to making a speech. He had 50 pages of a speech double folded in his breast pocket.
The bullet pierced those pages, entering Roosevelts body and lodged in a rib. The bullet would stay there till his death many years later.
Roosevelt was a former President. He was running again because the candidate he endorsed years earlier, William Taft, did not fulfill Roosevelt's hopes and expectations.
Roosevelt's handlers wanted to rush Teddy to the nearest hospital. Roosevelt refused. He directed them to take him to the auditorium to deliver his speech.
He was expected.
He put his finger to his lips. Roosevelt was no stranger to gunshot wounds. He had fought in many a battle and seen many men die with gunshot wounds. He knew that if there was no blood coming from his mouth, that his lungs had not been pierced by the bullet.
Knowing that the lungs were not punctured, he knew that delivering the speech was a matter of pain tolerance and compression on the wound.

Upon arriving at the auditorium, his handlers addressed the crowd and informed them that Roosevelt had been shot.
A lot of folks did not buy into the information and began yelling "Showboat" and "Fake".
When Roosevelt took the stage, he spoke softly.
He showed the crowd his blood stained shirt and bullet-holed speech.
He gave his full speech. 90 minutes while bleeding.
As was his habit when giving a speech, he would drop each page to the floor when done reading.
A reporter picked up the first page of the speech which was torn by the bullet.
That first page is now at the Smithsonian.

Roosevelt had become President because of another gunshot. He succeeded William McKinley who was assasinated.
Roosevelt had felt that he would be shot as well.
There were plenty of political zealots around and security was sparse.
One of Roosevelts first thoughts was that he wasn't even shot as a President, but as a candidate.
The irony amused him.

This was not a huge story. Partly because the shot did not result in death.
Mostly because of the way Roosevelt handled the situation.
Roosevelt took two weeks to recover from the wound. He then campaigned for another week before the election and lost.

No matter his party, no matter his beliefs, I feel that Americans are searching for a candidate with the grit of Roosevelt.
Candidates today give good speech.
That's all.
There's no leadership.
Only rhetoric.
Put a bullet in their ribs and see how they react.
I fear that their handlers would be telling the candidate what to do, not the other way around as with Roosevelt.
Those aren't leaders.


,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Some baseball related politics...

1904 Had no World Series winner. John McGraw did not feel that another league had as good as team as his Giants.
Back then, Managers like McGrew wielded a lot of power in baseball.
In 1908, the Chicago Cubs won their last World Series. It was also the first election year that a World Series Champion was crowned (good trivia question).
In that year, Roosevelts failed project, William Taft won election.

In 1924, the Washington Senators won the World Series during an election year.
That year, Calvin Coolidge was elected President.
Coolidge did not like leaving the White House. He knew that with each departure, it cost tax payers money.
(Can you imagine? A President concerned about dollars?)
Coolidge was thrifty. Most of his life, he would send some of his wages made to his parents.
He was thrifty enough to be the last President to leave office with a balanced budget and no deficit.

Franklin Roosevelt was elected in '32, '36, '40, and '44.
The Yankees won the World Series in seven of Roosevelt's 13 year reign.
The Cardinals winning three for the National League.

In 1960, Kennedy upset Nixon.
And the Pirates upset the Yankees.
Nixon's downfall was looking 'sweaty and swarmy' during televised debates with Kennedy.
It marked the first election in which the age of television gave viewers a chance to actually see and hear candidates without going to speeches.
In the meantime, Yogi Berra helplessly looked at Bill Mazeroski's seventh-game winning homer sail over the Forbes Field fence.

In 1972, 'sweaty and swarmy' was in as Tricky Dicky was re-elected.
The kelly green outfits the Oakland A's wore were considered 'out there'.
But soon, the uniforms paled to the players that were in them.
Reggie Jackson, Catfish Hunter, Vida Blue, and Rollie Fingers led the A's to victory over a future 'Big Red Machine'.

[Edwards Kings]

Dan,

If you like Teddy, three books may interest you (I am currently reading the last one on the list):

Mornings on Horseback, by David McCullough
The Imperial Cruise, by James Bradley
The Bully Pulpit: Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and the Golden Age of Journalism, by Doris Kearns Goodwin

Verrrry little baseball (just breath into the Doritos bag, you'll be ok!), but a lot about Roosevelt.