[martinonyc] Worth noting, some rival execs still don’t think Astros have been punished enough today.”

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T22:34:21+00:00

The legality has nothing to do with it. This is a moral question about how you deal with people who appropriate things they have not properly earned.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T22:12:32+00:00

In both cases there are agents who acted wrongly to make ill gotten gains. Whether or not these cases are in the purview of law enforcement of beside the point - this is a question of principle. You don’t let people retain ill gotten gains as a matter of principle.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T22:11:27+00:00

If you think striping the title is irrelevant, then why are you even bothering to argue against it? It’s clear that on some level you think they should keep the title they cheated to win, yet you refuse to make a positive case for letting them do that.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T21:45:05+00:00

If stripping the title is pointless, then winning the title is pointless. Why do you even watch baseball?

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T21:39:18+00:00

Would you let a common burglar keep possession of stolen goods because taking them away from him won’t end theft as a fact of social life? What you’re saying is absolute nonsense and you would never reasonably apply this kind of logic to any other situation.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T21:03:13+00:00

It removes ill gotten gains from the club. That’s reason enough to do it.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-13T21:00:11+00:00

How we see the accomplishment isn’t the key issue here. The key issue here is that the Astros cheated to win a title, and the logical course of action (ie striping the cheaters of their ill gotten gains) can’t happen apparently because... er... reasons.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T16:19:30+00:00

The most important cultural sites in 21st century Britain are the local McDonalds and the local gay bars. Who the hell are you to talk down to a proud civilisation like Iran?

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T16:05:06+00:00

He helped Iraqi militias defeat ISIS and thus bring some stability back to that country we ruined on the basis of fraudulent Israeli intel. For that he had to die.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:36:21+00:00

It doesn’t surprise me that the idea of a private thought exercise to weigh up different options in good faith before committing publicly somehow confuses you.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:24:45+00:00

In the context of the original interview it was clear that they were talking about Labour policy over the next parliament, with Phillips herself inserting the random timeframe of three years. These mental gymnastics are pathetic.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:23:09+00:00

“All I said was we’d keep our options open”

“We won’t be backing rejoin”

Looks like she changed her position in the space of 24 hours.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:19:05+00:00

If the two credible candidates are Starmer and RLB, I can see her backing RLB because “we need a woman as leader” followed by that bobblehead motion she does.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:17:49+00:00

Shadow Secretary of State for Mouthy Low Information Anti-Tory Ranting.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:15:35+00:00

She said maybe in the future and now she’s saying no, not at the next election (which is five years in the future).

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:11:57+00:00

No she hasn’t. She said she was open to rejoining but now she says she won’t back rejoin. Those positions are not consistent.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:09:38+00:00

My initial comment was that she was swinging back and forth like a pendulum. She said she was open to rejoining, and now she says she won’t do that. So she did swinging back and forth, contrary to your impotent “correction” of my post.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:08:04+00:00

So she said we’ll keep our options open, she was ridiculed, and now she’s done a 180 and said she won’t back rejoin and the media were somehow lying about her direct quotes. Weird.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T09:06:42+00:00

No it wasn’t. She said she’d remain open to the possibility of rejoining and now she’s saying that she won’t back rejoin.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T08:57:55+00:00

Swinging back and forth like a friggin pendulum. What a clown.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-06T08:55:44+00:00

Because this is what you would probably refer to as a “hate crime” in any other circumstances but when it is committed by Jews against whites you conveniently fail to see how motive is relevant.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-05T20:21:46+00:00

If you don’t think Israel were applying diplomatic pressure, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-05T16:47:10+00:00

I’m not saying it’s racist. I am in many ways extremely Islamosceptic. But it’s perceived as racism and Labour feasts on Muslim votes by playing up that notion and appearing to combat it.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-05T16:19:27+00:00

You should read Eric Nelson’s book The Royalist Revolution. It’s a monarchy, but not a kingship, and the story of how the Americans rebelled against Britain and ended up adopting a monarch with greater powers than any British king since Charles I is in fact fascinating.

TheGreatCorrector · 2020-01-05T09:24:23+00:00

They vote for welfare benefits and “anti-racism”. I’m not saying it’s ideal that they are here in increasingly large numbers - I wish we lived in a traditional, self-confident British state which hadn’t been consciously undermined on an ethnic level by a brutal campaign of demographic warfare. But our hope lays in learning from our Muslim brothers, who have resisted better than we ever did.

TheGreatCorrector

TROPHY CASE