[Breitbart] Sunday on CBS’s "60 Minutes," Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said he and President Donald Trump were very different people, explaining they had "different upbringing" and "different life experiences."
McCain said, "He is in the business of making money. And he has been successful both in television as well as Miss America and others. I was raised in a military family. I was raised in the concept and belief that duty, honor, country is the lodestar for the behavior that we have to exhibit every single day."
#6
#3 McCain is a piece of trash. What was the state of Arizona thinking?
Purple Heart recipient "endorsed" by Richard Nixon. His (some would say incomplete) story got him in and, once there, hard to get rid of as Swamp Crotch.
Now that the Grim Reaper is knocking, I expect Mr. McCain to be more guided by his internal voices than constituency.
[Wash Times] Radio host Rush Limbaugh ‐ also an avid Pittsburgh Steelers fan ‐ has a message for President Trump after a weekend of national-anthem protests in the NFL: owners are "scared to death."
Dozens of pro football players ‐ at least some in every game Sunday ‐ refused to stand during "The Star-Spangled Banner" in reaction to Mr. Trump’s recent statement that protesters should be fired.
Mr. Limbaugh told millions of listeners that conservatives should cheer because the decision by players to politicize the sport is backfiring.
"The left is attempting to publicly damage, take hold, whatever, of the NFL," Mr. Limbaughsaid. "And people who are not political ‐ and there are a lot of those in this country, more than you would think ‐ are seeing it. And they don’t like it, and now there’s a president speaking out against it. In public, it is Democrats who are now showing up to be the party supporting actions against the flag. The Democrats are being seen as the party that encourages protest against the anthem and the country itself. I’m telling you, sports media guys and gals, there’s no way Donald Trump loses this, the way you’ve got it going."
Mr. Limbaugh also acknowledged during the broadcast that Sunday’s protests prompted him to actively avoid a Steelers game for the first time in over four decades.
When you hire thugs and morons, don't be shocked when they act like thugs and morons. Simply fine them a few dollars and keep them on the payroll. What children at home see their father watching on television is of no consequence to the bottom line.
#6
Pelvic thrusts ought to be fined. I recall a Bear Bryant quote which was “When you get in the endzone, act like you've been there before.” There is a lot to be learned from the Bear although he has been gone a long time. Bear Bryant quotes. Many are pithy like Patton and Mattis although not quite as salty.
"...
The league’s Game Operations Department uses the manual to govern the conduct of home clubs, to ensure they protect players and provide the conditions for a fair and fan-friendly contest," reads the NFL's website. "Clubs face warnings and other penalties for noncompliance."
The NFL rulebook makes no mention of the national anthem. But the game operations manual does.
Here's what the game operations manual says regarding the national anthem, according to an NFL spokesperson:
The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem.
During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking.
The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition.
It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.
It's important to note the use of the word "may" here. The NFL is not considering punishing fines on players or teams who choose to kneel or stay in the locker room during the national anthem, the spokesperson says."
#11
Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones was caught a little while back in a restroom with a prostitute. His actions last night on Monday Night Football proves he is still a seedy old man.
#12
I discovered last night that there are other things on TV besides football...The Planets.
Note: The first time you click the play button for the video it opens a new window for an advertisement. Patience. The second click plays the video.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/26/2017 11:15 Comments ||
Top||
#13
...well, if you believe your loyal fans are just someone else to screw over, it makes sense. I doubt they'll find replacements in SJW Left to cover the loss.
I see the NFL, in aggregate, seeing the Brinks truck somewhat lighter on the tires, will come up with some kind of weak-kneed palliative to quiet the storm. Morlocks, PC's and idjits will buy into it, but those who have decided against feeding the beast will know better.
"How many teams can Canadian and European demographics handle?" may very well be a topic of discussion for the "New" NFL.
#15
In a league owned by billionaires, I can't believe the owners allowed themselves to be drawn into the cesspit of pissing off half of your potential customers. This entire fiasco should have been shutdown LAST SEASON in no uncertain terms. Instead, they drop in ratings for the product will grow. I'm guessing by season's end there will be a 20% drop in the ratings (I'm not sure how that will translate into merchandising and other revenue streams).
I would *never* want to be a "Republican Realtor" or a "Liberal Heart Surgeon"--why would the NFL allow its *business model* to get sucked into partisan politics?
#17
The one silver lining to the whole thing is ESPN on the hook for multi-million dollars to the NFL for the ever decreasing audience. Couldn't happen to a nicer 'couple'.
#22
I'd apply the Gore rule: when these guys start giving 90% of their income to support their cause, I'll start believing they really care. That day will not come.
[DAWN] IN recent days, following a tip from a discreet informant, two bodies were exhumed from a graveyard in Sherpao Colony, Karachi. A post-mortem examination conducted thereafter revealed that the two individuals had been subjected to intense torture in their final hours: they had been beaten, tied to a charpai and electrocuted until they died, and then promptly buried under the cover of the night.
The bodies, it later transpired, belonged to two star-crossed lovers, both of them teenagers. As the police investigated further, it ended up unthreading the grisly details of a macabre tragedy. The young couple, it appears, had planned to elope, but before they could do so, their families found out. Initially, they decided to settle the matter amongst themselves, but a local jirga intervened, dismissed the settlement and ordered that the couple be killed instead. The parents dutifully obeyed. And all honour lost, was apparently regained.
If this sounds all too familiar, it is. This tragedy is as modern as it is ancient, as old as it is new. It is a story that we have heard countless times before, only rephrased, restructured and reordered: characters come and go, but the plot remains unchanged.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
09/26/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
h/t Instapundit
...My argument about political correctness is not tendentious or partisan ‐ it's analytical. The core of the argument is that when groups care a lot about maintaining conformity of belief on some matter of critical interest to them, then the hunt for heretics is always ongoing. We're always looking for deviants. The willingness to speak in certain ways can be a sign of deviance, because if speakers know that punishment awaits them for speaking in particular ways, the only speakers willing to take the risks are indeed people who are not reliable on whatever the core belief or value is.
...Take affirmative action. We're not supposed to notice that Asians are being turned away in droves from the elite universities. We're not supposed to notice that blacks are included on the basis of some silly argument about diversity. At Brown, we call them "historically underrepresented groups," as if observing the historical underrepresentation constitutes in and of itself an indictment of the institution and not of the groups themselves.
We're 50 years past the civil rights movement and blacks, to get to Harvard or Princeton or Brown, still depend upon being judged by different standards than other people. And people are called "bigots" if they ask questions about this? This is trivial, and it's not engaging real arguments.
...My problem with the use of the term "structural racism" is not with the observation that there are struggles that are deeply embedded within the American political economy that have implications for racial inequality. My problem is with the claim that such structural differences are indicted as racist simply because there are racial disparities.
Laws are structurally racist in that respect. Is it structurally racist if I end up with more black people in prison because there are more black robbers? Is that structural racism? It's structure, to be sure, but whether it's racism is an argument that remains to be made.
...I think, ultimately, that we have to get out of the blame game and start getting practical about what interventions will change the facts on the ground. We can talk about housing policy. We can talk about education policy. We can talk about what kind of social safety nets we want in this country. There are big arguments to be had about those things. If we get concrete and specific about the interventions that we're going to get behind that would remedy some of these problems, that seems to me a productive conversation.
...So [Ta-Nehisi] Coates's historical account is a lie. It tells only one part of the story. It erases the responsibility that African Americans have for our own condition. I refuse to accept that we don’t have responsibility for our condition. I refuse to accept that we're not free-acting agents able to determine our own future.
Ironically, he imputes more agency and more capacity for judgments to white people in his argumentation than he does to black people. Black people are merely puppets at the end of the string that whites are pulling in his narrative. Confused by the racist Algebra
I'm referring to the welfare state here. I've often thought that by not working and having the State provide one with many of life's needs (and a few wants) leads to both a resentment towards the State as well as an even greater sense of entitlement. Such resentments and growing senses of entitlement will never be satisfied and because they will not, it often leads to crime and violence.
There are those who fan these flames of resentment and dissent for political gain--that is for votes and power. The result is that we all lose; we end up with a nation of pissed-off tribes at odds with each other. We end up with a Balkanization rather than a "United" States. I am still amazed at the selfishness of those who promote these divisions for their own gains.
A quote that exemplifies the marriage between the Welfare State and the political power of the State is often attributed to LBJ:
Lyndon Baines Johnson 1963... "These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference... I'll have them n*****s voting Democratic for the next two hundred years".
#6
"There are those who fan these flames of resentment and dissent for political gain--that is for votes and power. " They are called democrats, and if any black person voted for them, they annul their own argument.
Less than a week after Facebook agreed to turn over to Congressional investigators copies of the 3,000-odd political advertisements that the company said it had inadvertently sold to a Russia-linked group intent on meddling in the 2016 presidential election, the contents of the ads have – unsurprisingly – leaked, just as we had expected them to.
Congressional investigators shared the information with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team, which has repeatedly allowed information about its investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign actively colluded with Russian operatives to leak to the press. Once this happened, we knew it was only a matter of time before the ads became part of the public record.
And, shockingly, descriptions of the ads provided to the Washington Post hardly fit the narrative that Democratic lawmakers have spun in recent weeks, claiming the ads – which didn’t advocate on behalf of a specific candidate, but rather hewed to political issues like abortion rights – were instrumental in securing Trump’s victory.
After initially denying the story this spring, Facebook came clean earlier this month, saying its investigators had discovered that the company sold at least $100,000 worth of ads – and possibly as much as $150,000 – to Russia-linked group that bought the ads through 470 phony Facebook pages and accounts.
WaPo reports that the ads represented issues on both sides of the ideological spectrum, which would suggest that the buyers didn’t intend to support a specific candidate, but rather their own unique agenda. More at the link
[WashingtonPost] The batch of more than 3,000 Russian-bought ads that Facebook is preparing to turn over to Congress shows a deep understanding of social divides in American society, with some ads promoting African American rights groups, including Black Lives Matter, and others suggesting that these same groups pose a rising political threat, say people familiar with the covert influence campaign.
The Russian campaign ‐ taking advantage of Facebook’s ability to send contrary messages to different groups of users based on their political and demographic characteristics ‐ also sought to sow discord among religious groups. Other ads highlighted support for Democrat Hillary Clinton among Muslim women.
These targeted messages, along with others that have surfaced in recent days, highlight the sophistication of an influence campaign slickly crafted to mimic and infiltrate U.S. political discourse while also seeking to heighten tensions between groups already wary of one another. Sooooo, it appears the magic Facebook bullet the Libs were so pining for turns out to be the Ruskies sowing chaos instead of simply being tools for Mr. Trump. A sort of Radio Free Europe w/o the radio ? You'll notice Facebook kept the money
Narratives surrounding the DNC hack & Antifa reveal media bias and government bureaucracy at their worst.
U.S. intelligence agencies said Russia was responsible for hacking Democratic National Committee e-mail accounts, leading to the publication of about 20,000 stolen e-mails on WikiLeaks.
But that finding was reportedly based largely on the DNC’s strange outsourcing of the investigation to a private cybersecurity firm. Rarely does the victim of a crime first hire a private investigator whose findings later form the basis of government conclusions.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is many things. But so far he has not been caught lying about the origin of the leaked documents that came into his hands. He has insisted for well over a year that the Russians did not provide him with the DNC e-mails.
When it was discovered that the e-mails had been compromised, then‐DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz weirdly refused to allow forensic detectives from the FBI to examine the DNC server to probe the evidence of the theft. Why did the FBI accept that refusal?
That strange behavior was not as bizarre as Wasserman Schultz’s later frenzied efforts to protect her information-technology specialist, Imran Awan, from Capitol Police and FBI investigations. Both agencies were hot on Awan’s trail for unlawfully transferring secure data from government computers, and also for bank and federal-procurement fraud.
So far, the story of the DNC hack is not fully known, but it may eventually be revealed that it involves other actors beyond just the Russians.
There is not much left to the media myth of James Comey as dutiful FBI director, unjustly fired by a partisan and vindictive President Donald Trump. A closer look suggests that Comey may have been the most politicized, duplicitous, and out-of-control FBI director since J. Edgar Hoover.
During the 2016 election, Comey, quite improperly, was put into the role of prosecutor, judge, and jury in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server while she was secretary of state. That proved a disaster. Comey has admitted under oath to deliberately leaking his own notes ‐ which were likely government property ‐ to the media to prompt the appointment of a special counsel. That ploy worked like clockwork, and by a strange coincidence it soon resulted in the selection of his friend, former FBI director Robert Mueller. Read the rest at the link
#1
So far, the story of the DNC hack is not fully known, but it may eventually be revealed that it involves other actors beyond just the Russians.
When or if ever revealed it will most likely be far stranger than we can imagine.
Re Assange. I tend to believe him. He seems to have a kind of ethic where protecting sources and truth-telling is valued. Many argue about how he obtains the info which he publishes. They also question his lack of a filter when revealing State and Deep State secrets. There is an argument to be made about his lack of a filter which could be dangerous to those who practice spy craft and those who carry out government policy. He has short-circuited the usual machinery of government. Some things need the light of day on them whereas others require discretion--how to balance these is a problem.
#3
It was recently disclosed that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security had warned the Obama administration in 2016 that Antifa was a domestic terrorist organization that aimed to incite violence during street protests. That stark assessment and Antifa’s subsequent violence make the recent nonchalance of local police departments with regard to Antifa thuggery seem like an abject dereliction of duty.
I think the term dereliction of duty is being too charitable. Collusion is more like it.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
09/26/2017 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Indeed, beware of narratives and misinformation. There is a lot of that going on these days--they seem to be more plentiful than the truth.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Breitbart] Sunday on CBS’s "60 Minutes," Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said he and President Donald Trump were very different people, explaining they had "different upbringing" and "different life experiences."
[DAWN] IN recent days, following a tip from a discreet informant, two bodies were exhumed from a graveyard in Sherpao Colony, Karachi. A post-mortem examination conducted thereafter revealed that the two individuals had been subjected to intense torture in their final hours: they had been beaten, tied to a charpai and electrocuted until they died, and then promptly buried under the cover of the night.
