« Hagel: We Are Losing The War In Iraq | Main | Alea Iacta Est »

June 27, 2005

Comments

You'd think they wouldn't want to pit their popularity against MLB's, but when its one party rule they believe they get to do anything they want.

This is one of those stupid, ugly little stories that will disappear without a trace 99.9% of the time and blow up into a national scandal the other 0.1%. Any bets as to which one it's going to be this time?

Well, to satisfy the Republicans (there's gotta be another name we can call them; I keep thinking Slart and Von and Sebastian and maybe even Charles think this awful name refers somehow to them) Soros and his partners could change the name of the team to the Washington Virgins.

And the entire 25-man squad and coaches could be drafted and sent off to the Great War to be vaporized by a roadside bomb, Halliburton supplied chastity belts and all.

Thuggery.

Thank God no partial team owners have ever been politically affiliated.

John Thullen: 'Republicans in Congress' or 'the Bush administration' generally do the trick for me, depending on which is relevant.

Halliburton supplied chastity belts...

*cough*masturbands*cough*

Thank God no partial team owners have ever been politically affiliated.

Heh heh.

I agree with Davis! Who needs the politics! It is totally inappropriate for republican Colin Powell to own a stake in a team representing a city that went 90% for Kerry.

Oh, is that not what he was talking about? My bad...

Ah, hell, there's part of me that would rather see this fight flash out over the financing of baseball teams than elsewhere.

Wow. These guys really are sleazy. No limits.

Soros and his partners could change the name of the team to the Washington Virgins.

How about the Washington Re-Virgins?

Of course whenever I see the name Soros bandied about as a whipping boy I can't help but read "Soros" as "Jew." But maybe that's just me.

What continues to amaze me is the speed with which the Republican Congress has reached the levels of smug corruption which characterized the [press coverage of the] end of Democratic control of the Congress.

Is there any guiding principle except To the Winners Belong the Spoils?

Barry Freed,

Of course whenever I see the name Soros bandied about as a whipping boy I can't help but read "Soros" as "Jew." But maybe that's just me.

It's not just you.

"Of course whenever I see the name Soros bandied about as a whipping boy I can't help but read "Soros" as "Jew." "

*snicker*

Funny, but I'm pretty sure it's not the Republicans who keep sending Cynthia McKinney and James Moran back to Congress--and it's odd how many copies of The Protocols of the Elders Of Zion were reported to be floating around the anti-war rallies with nary a right-winger in sight. Must have been a fluke.

Wow, if there were copies of the Protocols at any of the demonstrations against the Iraq war in NYC, I sure didn't see them. They do tell me I look Jewish, though, so maybe I wasn't allowed in the inner circle.

The Passive Voice strikes again! Copies of the Protocols were reported to be floating around? The mind reels. Did they self-report? Is it also reported that they were literally floating? And, do right-wingers have some clear identifying marks that would allow them to be picked out of a crowd of thousands? Something like a full mane, or glistening, ruby-red hind-quarters?

In my long history of attending leftist demonstrations, which I think started when I was 8, I have never once seen a copy of the protocols, or heard anyone say anything about them. In my even longer history of talking to people on the left, I have only heard denunciations of them. Do you have a cite, or any other sort of evidence?

I am humbled in the presence of a vastly better comment ;)

What's next: a horse's head in Bud Selig's bed?

A papier mache of Tommy "Stick it to them" Thompson would be nice.

I'll stop telling the truth about Selig when he gives the money back to the taxpayers of SE Wisconsin.


Thank God no partial team owners have ever been politically affiliated.

But it's okay if you were convicted of various NY style crimes and then pardoned.

I'm pretty sure it's not the Republicans who keep sending Cynthia McKinney and James Moran back to Congress.

I'm pretty sure that neither of them suggested that Soros's survival of the Holocaust was reason enough to be suspicious of him. I'm also pretty sure that neither is, or ever will be, Speaker of the House.

Much of the right likes Jews, they just hate the overeducated middle to upper class Christmas-ruining baby Jesus-hating New York liberals who control the media and the universities. ;)

I don't think it's a pretext for anti-semitism--I am sure they will despise me no more when I was all of those things plus Jewish, than they do now. It's just odd, to be so philo-semitic, yet dislike such a high percentage of actual Jews.

As for protocols--not in New York, they weren't. That wasn't those ANSWER morons, it was the still stupid but far more benign United for Peace and Justice. But I'd honestly not heard about it anywhere. My in-laws would have flipped, as would I.

M. Scott -- your smear is fascinating on a number of levels.

1. Anti-war rallies tend not to prevent people from exercising their First Amendment rights. While it's disappointing that anyone lends credence to the Protocols, the US is full of people who have all sorts of strange beliefs. And there's nothing like a parade / rally to bring out the loonies. What would have the organizers do, tear up the posters? That would send a lovely message about toleration of dissent. Sorry, but pre-approved guest lists at "public" events is a feature of the administration, not its opposition.

2. Jews vote democratic in huge numbers. So do anti-war activists. Is one or the other group voting against its interest? It certainly appears that you're accusing Jews (in a charmingly back-handed manner) of doing so.

3. The lack of citation is always a reliable tell that you're just making s--- up. Was this blog getting too liberal for you, so you just had to troll?

4. Best of all, you completely divert attention from the main point, which is that Republicans are threatening MLB if the Nats are sold to a prominent opponent of the admin.

Due to the lack of typos and all-capitalization, I give your comment 8 out of 10 on the BRGORD Troll Scale.

Not to take this any further off-topic, but I'm curious what you think is 'stupid' about United for Peace and Justice, Katherine.

M. Scott Eiland: not holding my breath waiting for your to produce evidence for that smear.

Maybe George Soros will build a stadium and not try to stick the citizens of DC with the tab. That'd be nice.

Funny, but I'm pretty sure it's not the Republicans who keep sending Cynthia McKinney and James Moran back to Congress

Funny, but it's not a spokesman for a former Democratic Speaker who felt it necessary to refer to Soros as "a Jew who figured out away to survive the Holocaust." This in the midst of criticizing him for his financial operations. See any stereotypes there?

And it's not Democrats who tailor their positions to Tony Perkins, David Duke's pal, either.

Much of the right likes Jews, they just hate the overeducated middle to upper class Christmas-ruining baby Jesus-hating New York liberals who control the media and the universities. ;)

What do you expect, Katherine? They are rootless cosmopolitans, after all.

Back to the original topic, I'm somewhat surprised that these people voiced their sentiments anywhere near a reporter. Surely the MLB powers that be were already well aware of the potential implications of a Soros part-ownership of the Nationals. If Davis' comments get any kind of wide publicity, that'll just make it a little harder for MLB to reject the Soros bid, since it'll look like they're kowtowing to Congress.

"They are rootless cosmopolitans, after all."

Roger that one. Yglesias suspects that some of the current gay-bashing is a new outlet for anti-semitic instincts, and I would ditto that for the "liberal professor"-bashing.

Amidst the snarling (very subtle, by the way--I could barely see Raimondo's lips moving as I read the comments), I spotted something of interest in Katherine's comment:

As for protocols--not in New York, they weren't. That wasn't those ANSWER morons, it was the still stupid but far more benign United for Peace and Justice. But I'd honestly not heard about it anywhere. My in-laws would have flipped, as would I.

Interesting bit of cognitive dissonance there--you seem to have heard of it, but not heard of it.

Meanwhile, back to the topic at hand before Barry and Bernard's innuendo provoked my counter-troll:

If Davis' comments get any kind of wide publicity, that'll just make it a little harder for MLB to reject the Soros bid, since it'll look like they're kowtowing to Congress.

Oh please--when Congress feels a chill, MLB owners catch a cold. Why do you think the Nationals are in D.C. in the first place? It certainly isn't economics. Name one occasion when MLB has stood up to Congress when some Senator or another has started threatening to yank their antitrust exemption. Soros is dead in the water as of now--I guess the left will have to find some other convicted criminal who *hasn't* cheesed off the majority in Congress if it wants to carve off a Dubya-free enclave in the Show.


Name one occasion when MLB has stood up to Congress when some Senator or another has started threatening to yank their antitrust exemption.

Exactly, so why make these thinly-veiled threats when everyone who matters already knows how the game is played? It just makes the GOP look a bit more thuggish and the MLB, when it inevitably steers clear of Soros, look a bit more cowardly.

You're misunderstanding me. I did not hear about it until you brought it up, and I'm not sure what in my post led you to think otherwise....was it my vague pronoun use? "That" referred to "the organizers of the protest in New York", not "those distributing copies of the protocols." I mentioned that because ANSWER's leadership is anti-semitic and Stalinist, and UFPJ's is not--so a UFPJ protest in New York would be an even less likely place to find such a thing than any antiwar rally. This does NOT mean that I'd ever heard anyone else provide evidence or anecdote of the protocols being distributed elsewhere. Your comment was the first I heard of that, and the only time I've heard of it, as you've not provided a cite.

Nell, "knee jerk and oversimplistic and not convincing to those who don't already agree" more than "stupid." To be fair, they did an okay job organizing the rally I went to. I don't want to be all Beinart-y. They're not my cup of tea though.

Exactly, so why make these thinly-veiled threats when everyone who matters already knows how the game is played? It just makes the GOP look a bit more thuggish and the MLB, when it inevitably steers clear of Soros, look a bit more cowardly.

I'd venture a guess that no one likely to vote for the GOP gives a rat's posterior if George Soros isn't allowed to buy a baseball team, and I know for a fact that the Powers That Be in MLB have never been too self-conscious about grovelling in public when Congress beckons--it makes them less of a target. In fact, with the overwhelming power of the baseball players union, I'd say that congressional pressure works to the owners' benefit a lot these days--they can say to the union: "If we don't fix this, Congress will step in and do it in a way that's worse than anything we will do."

Meanwhile, back to the topic at hand before Barry and Bernard's innuendo provoked my counter-troll

My innuendo? I don't think that word means what you think it means. Try this on for size: "a Jew who figured out away to survive the Holocaust."

If you need another example review your usage of "counter-troll."

You're a real piece of work.

Interesting bit of cognitive dissonance there--you seem to have heard of it, but not heard of it.

So, no cite forthcoming, then?

Instructions for Proper Use of the M. Scott Eiland Doll:

1. Search to see how many of his initial comments in any given ObWi post start with "*snicker*."

2. Ignore him.

M. Scott: and it's odd how many copies of The Protocols of the Elders Of Zion were reported to be floating around the anti-war rallies with nary a right-winger in sight.

What a bizarre allegation to make. Cite?

It occurs to me that the snide insinuation of ObWi being a mouthpiece for the likes of Raimondo would be hilarious if it weren't pathetic. Last I looked, Eiland, Raimondo and the rest of the Buchananite crowd, despite their opposition to this particular war, were on your team.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad