Did you see

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by waltjp

The New York Times is a first rate newspaper. You may not agree with everything they have to say but it's their constitutional right to publish it. Why everyone is so quick to deprecate The Times, when our nation was built upon the principle of free speech, is beyond me.

What does Freedom of Speech have to do with this? I am a staunch defender of the First Amendment, but with Free Speech comes the responsibility of what to say and when.

The NYT is a piece of schit, pure and simple. They no longer have an ounce of credibility and have had a dangerous agenda for years. To put it mildly, they're nuts. They've become so bad that they're hurting big time. Their subscription numbers are down dramatically, and their ad revenue is also down. They've fired hundreds of employees lately as a result. And why is this so? Because people with common sense realize this newspaper is nothing but a partisan rag with no qualms about harming the United States. I say this not as some right-winger, either.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UMP25

What does Freedom of Speech have to do with this? I am a staunch defender of the First Amendment, but with Free Speech comes the responsibility of what to say and when.

The NYT is a piece of schit, pure and simple. They no longer have an ounce of credibility and have had a dangerous agenda for years. To put it mildly, they're nuts. (edit)
Because people with common sense realize this newspaper is nothing but a partisan rag with no qualms about harming the United States. I say this not as some right-winger, either.

Neither do you say it as matter of fact, but rather as matter of opinion.

(If you don't mind, I will use this post during my next lesson on the differences between fact and opinion.)

Personally, I enjoy the writing style of most Times journalists. I also prefer the Times Style. Back in the day, we were required to use the NYT style guide for our term papers and thesis projects. I do, however, refrain from reading much of the editorial page.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Neither do you say it as matter of fact, but rather as matter of opinion.

An "opinion" I am happy to say that is shared by more and more Americans each day. It's no wonder the NYT is bleeding, with no coagulation in site.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Neither do you say it as matter of fact, but rather as matter of opinion.

(If you don't mind, I will use this post during my next lesson on the differences between fact and opinion.)

Personally, I enjoy the writing style of most Times journalists. I also prefer the Times Style. Back in the day, we were required to use the NYT style guide for our term papers and thesis projects. I do, however, refrain from reading much of the editorial page.

It can never be seen as fact that the NYT is a very left-leaning rag, true. However, it can be seen as fact that the Times has employed some people who have no qualms about writing fiction and passing it off as news.

I live in Madison. There are two daily papers here -- morning and afternoon. Morning is seen as more conservative and afternoon is off the charts liberal which sees nothing wrong with putting anti-Bush articles on the front page and spinning them as "News."

My opinion, as someone who has lived elsewhere is that BOTH papers are quite left of center, with the afternoon one almost a parody. But I subscribe to both -- I love newspapers and I can always get a chuckle out of the editorial pages.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

It can never be seen as fact that the NYT is a very left-leaning rag, true. However, it can be seen as fact that the Times has employed some people who have no qualms about writing fiction and passing it off as news.

Yes, and the last such example of that was with a reporter named Judith Miller.

Is the "not some right-winger" guy as upset with the Wall Street Journal as he is with the New York Times. If you compare their reporting - particularly on the stories that have gotten the current administration all hot and bothered with respect to the allegation that they have spilled state secrets, you will see that both publications have reported the same things, with the same level of detail, at the same time.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

Yes, and the last such example of that was with a reporter named Judith Miller.

Is the "not some right-winger" guy as upset with the Wall Street Journal as he is with the New York Times. If you compare their reporting - particularly on the stories that have gotten the current administration all hot and bothered with respect to the allegation that they have spilled state secrets, you will see that both publications have reported the same things, with the same level of detail, at the same time.

Dave,

I hate the WSJ. It has a lousy sports section.

I consider myself middle of the road these days, so you must be talking about someone else

--Rich

PS -- Isn't it about time for the traditional LL bashing threads? I mean, U1 kicked the crap out of that call last night and I haven't seen anything here posted about it.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UMP25

An "opinion" I am happy to say that is shared by more and more Americans each day. It's no wonder the NYT is bleeding, with no coagulation in site.

Let's see, the NYT, with 116 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other newspater, according to it's SEC filings had increases in both subscription and ad revenues during Q2, 2006, this while much of the media suffered from a decline of ad dollars spent in several of the industry segments, including entertainment and automotive.

You need to get your news from someone other than Bill O'Reilly.

I read the NYT to balance the local neanderthal press. I add Time Magazine and NewsWeeK to the mix and I believe I get a fairly god picture.

(Sources: NYT Q2 Filing and "Seeking Media.")

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

I mean, U1 kicked the crap out of that call last night and I haven't seen anything here posted about it.

That was the most brutal call I've ever seen, bar none! Took runs off the board, for sure.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

Dave,

PS -- Isn't it about time for the traditional LL bashing threads? I mean, U1 kicked the crap out of that call last night and I haven't seen anything here posted about it.

Let the bloodletting begin.

Missing a banger is one thing. Blowing a call by two full steps is another.

If anyone has video of this play, it should be posted in the "what is a LL umpire" thread.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

PS -- Isn't it about time for the traditional LL bashing threads? I mean, U1 kicked the crap out of that call last night and I haven't seen anything here posted about it.

http://www.boston.com/sports/other_s...to_nh_victory/

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

http://www.boston.com/sports/other_s...to_nh_victory/

Stupid coach. Stupider rule.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Stupid coach. Stupider rule.

Why? These kids are ALL-STARS. It's not like some local league where you try to hide the crappy playing kid on the bench. Kids shouldn't have to travel all the way to a regional so the same 9 kids can play every game.

Every LL coach knows the consequence of not meeting MPR. Most coaches make sure the starters meet MPR and get the subs in VERY EARLY. So your first sentence I'll agree with wholeheartedly.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

Why? These kids are ALL-STARS. It's not like some local league where you try to hide the crappy playing kid on the bench. Kids shouldn't have to travel all the way to a regional so the same 9 kids can play every game.

Every LL coach knows the consequence of not meeting MPR. Most coaches make sure the starters meet MPR and get the subs in VERY EARLY. So your first sentence I'll agree with wholeheartedly.

I agree that the coach should have gotten his last sub in the game somehow to comply with the rule.

I regular season play, the MPR is 6 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. And they lessen the requirement in tournament play to 3 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. I just don't feel there should be any mandatory play rule, period, in tournament play. The coaches and parents should take care of that on their own.

I don't like it that these kids, from both teams in this situation, have to suffer and be totally disappointed because of one coach's negligence. Sure everyone should participate, but forfeiting a game over it rubs me the wrong way.

Because of this rule, the two managers involved resorted to shenanagins, and made a mockery of the game. They also embarrased their players, and like PWL said, I'd rather lose on the field than be given the win by forfeit.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I agree that the coach should have gotten his last sub in the game somehow to comply with the rule.

I regular season play, the MPR is 6 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. And they lessen the requirement in tournament play to 3 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. I just don't feel there should be any mandatory play rule, period, in tournament play. The coaches and parents should take care of that on their own.

I don't like it that these kids, from both teams in this situation, have to suffer and be totally disappointed because of one coach's negligence. Sure everyone should participate, but forfeiting a game over it rubs me the wrong way.

Because of this rule, the two managers involved resorted to shenanagins, and made a mockery of the game. They also embarrased their players, and like PWL said, I'd rather lose on the field than be given the win by forfeit.

I would've liked to have seen BOTH teams forfeit myself.

[ctblu40]

The whole mandatory play requirement chaps my a$$! IMO, this type of stuff just helps feed kids opinions of entitlement. If the kid is an all star, that doesn't mean he is just as good as his teammates!
Johnny, you want more playing time? Get better! How about a little extra batting practice, stay at the field with dad afterward and field some extra ground balls.

A couple of years ago, my sons hockey team lost the state championship game 2-0. The next day, I received an e-mail from a team mom asking for $15 so that she could order the kids medals anyway "because they did their best." My reply was that their best wasn't good enough, they should learn to earn their awards. I'm not trying to be cold hearted, I'm just trying to emphasize that youth sports are about fun and learning. Learning that anything worth having is worth working for.