CosmicBills

The author is discussing baseball as an allegory for a political movement. Baseball is a sport that has evolved as our nation has. The history of our nation and its past time is intertwined both culturally and historically. Like our nation, MLB carries a black mark on its record for disallowing people of color the opportunity to play in the league for the first 74 years of its existence. And like our nation, the league recognized the sins of its oppression and changed the rules. Today, Baseball features the most ethnically diverse pool of professional athletes in the country. MLB isn't the NFL or NBA where black athletes are the overwhelming majority, it's a league where white athletes are still the majority. Roughly 59% of the players are white, 29% Hispanic, 8% black, 3% Asian. MLB is as close to the "melting pot" as we get when it comes to team sports in this country. The point of that preamble is this: If the author was looking to simply make a political point, he could have chosen any number of MLB players to be his example of the "lazy, well fare seeking, Left". In fact, earlier this year, Phillies pitcher Cole Hammels (white) made a similar error to Heyward. With Harper on third, Cole forgot to check the runner and instead threw to first. Harper, seeing Hammel's mistake, stole home on a brilliant play that was as much about hustle and "old school" baseball as the one he made in Atlanta. In fact, in my opinion, it was a far better play when you factor in Harper is just 19 and making plays that veterans wouldn't think of. It would fit the article's premise 100 times better. But Judge didn't choose that play to write about. Instead, the author only calls out three players by name: Bryce Harper (white and the hero), Heyward (black and lazy), and Livan Hernandez (Cuban). When referencing Heyward THROUGHOUT the article, Judge uses notorious buzz words long associated with subversive racism while comparing Heyward to lazy welfare recipients, undeserving affirmative action hires, public sector union employees, and, last but not least, soul-less sex addicts who are a threat to our daughter's purity. The author could have stopped referencing Heyward after the opening clunker of a paragraph and carried on with his thesis. It would have made the piece stronger actually. But Judge didn't stop. Instead, Judge kept bringing Heyward's name back up while making a correlation between Heyward's error and the hyperbolic description of the liberal policies of the left. For decades, extremists on the right have portrayed the majority of welfare recipients, union members and affirmative action supporters as being overwhelming black. Continuing to hold Heyward up as the example of these programs and the conservative stereotypes about them, is deliberate. The piece wouldn't resonate with his base had he used Hammels instead of Heyward. The choice was DELIBERATE. Why did he do that? Because he's FRAMING his extremist argument, not on baseball, but classic divide and conquer political rhetoric employed by both the right and left for decades. The author cherry picked his facts and his cast of characters. He holds up a white guy as the example of good and the black and latino as examples of everything wrong with the left. He's stoking the fires of the extremists who, by in large, are the ones reading the Daily Caller. Pitting a black guy against a white guy is something that people like DaveinElma respond to -- and repost to their friends immediately. Knowing the blood will rise on the left, Judge has crafted something that even non-racists like LA will flock to defend since the right's answer to racism in the past has always been "anyone who sees racism in this is a racist themselves". It only took LA two posts to bring that old trusty gem out. But as LA admits himself, he doesn't know the context of the sport the article was written about in the first place. He has no ability to understand how badly the author has manipulated him with this absolute hack piece. It's no secret the overwhelming majority of conservatives are white and the overwhelming majority of people of color identify themselves as democrats. That doesn't mean every conservative is a racist (or white). It doesn't mean that every democrat or liberal are not racists (or of color). That being said, conservative extremists have a history of playing on the white man's fears and painting every one on welfare as being black, violent, over sexed and a threat to not only our daughters, but our nation's best interest. The author knows this, he chose a very specific example to structure his argument around -- and it worked. It got people like LA who has no hate in his heart that I've ever witnessed, to defend his racist rantings regardless of its content because he hit all the right buttons. DC, you've forgotten more history than I've read, but even you have to see the parallels this draws with the buzz words and talking points used by politicians fighting against the Civil Rights movement in the 50s and 60s. Hell, he even references it within the article himself complaining the left is stuck in the "much more dysfunctional decade of the 60s rather than the 50s". That's a shot across the bow. If that's not enough for you, well then consider this: In the article, Harper is described as a new kind of baseball player who threatens the lazy black guy's hold on the game. In the very next paragraph the author completely contradicts himself and proclaims Harper to be a "throwback" to the good ol' days of Baseball. When were those good ol' days he longs to return to? 1932 when the league was segregated. Now, if you want to go nuts, put this whole article in context of Judge's other writings. Specifically, the article he wrote last year where he describes the day "My white guilt ended". What caused his "white guilt" to end? His bike got stolen by a black guy. ... err, well he thinks it was a black guy: Yup. The author has absolutely NO agenda. If that's not enough for you, you could also check out how Judge feels Rock n Roll and Punk Rock were CONSERVATIVE movements that were taken down by the ungodliness of Hip Hop culture. Does he really expect us to believe that the Sex Pistols, The Clash and the Ramones were conservative? Or is he really trying to point to Hip Hop as being a threat to our culture because it was started by black folks? Looking at all the evidence I think the answer is clear. He used Heyward's error as the only example because it allows him to spout off about how he truly feels about black folks... They're all just people looking to steal his bike.

Because, as you said yourself, you don't even know who the players he's talking about are. You had no idea who Jason Hewyard was, or even if he was black. You're talking about something you admittedly know nothing about. Which makes your comments as insightful and intelligent as I would sound if I started talking about economic policies.

Yes. Because he IS one. That's not even open to debate and I'm not the only one on here who believes that. But it will have nothing to do with the article he posts.

100% agree with that.

I don't say that as a writer I'm the only one capable of seeing subtext. I've never said that. What I have said is that it's impossible for someone who doesn't understand the subject being discussed (like yourself) to see the subtext that is right there in your face. Read the article. Sound out the big words if you need to, but read the article. Then go and look up Hewyard. Then read it again. DaveinElma has already proved himself to be a racist. I didn't have to do anything to call him out for it. All this article does is reaffirm that. And yes, the author is a racist ass hat for writing this. Those are my only two points.

Wait ... so you're saying because the author doesn't come out and say "hey! I'm a racist!" means there's no racism in that article? I'm a writer by trade. It's how I make my living. I'm very aware of subtext and how to wield it. This author is too -- though he's a clod and a ****ty writer. To say that there is no racist undertones (hell, they're overtones) in this article is just foolish. It's like saying Wallace most famous speech had no racial undertones: He didn't say anything SPECIFICALLY about black people after all, right? Again, this has nothing to do with politics. You and 3rd are reacting because you see my posts as some sort of political attack. It's not. It has nothing to do with Obama, nothing to do with Romney. It has to do with someone on this board (DavetheRacistinElma) once again posting something that is a slam against black folks. Defending this article is as shameful as Davetheracist posting it in the first place. Okay, now you made yourself out to be what DC loves calling people. You admit you don't know anything about either player (or baseball) so of COURSE you read that article and don't see color. You don't even know who the author is talking about. Which means you're not able to understand the subtext. Which, in essence makes everything your saying not only wrong, but idiotic. But you forget, the author KNOWS the subtext and CHOSE to use Hewyard as an example. It's a choice the author made. He could have chosen one of several white outfielders who have made similar errors (errors Bryce himself has made), but instead he chose not only a black athlete, but one of the best prospects in the game. So if you don't know what you're talking about, keep your mouth shut. It will help you look less like a fool.

You're asking the wrong question. The point is if Heyward were white, Judge wouldn't have used him in the example. It's not complicated. He wanted to spout off on not only conservatism but also the evils of black folk. He goes out of his way to do it in the article. So yes, that DOES make him a racist. It has nothing to do with Obama or Romney -- it's about the author being a no talent hack with an axe to grind. That offends me as a writer and as someone with a fully functioning frontal lobe. Do you think Heyward is the ONLY baseball player to make an error in the outfield this year? Think he's the only outfielder Harper has stretched a single into a double on this year? Of course he isn't. There have been a lot of white guys making errors too. Even within the article itself he double talks -- calling Harper a "throwback" player (throwback to when? perhaps the time when Judge's grandfather played in the league ... back BEFORE the color line was broken) then also claiming Harper was the first batter ever to try to guess what pitch a pitcher is going to throw. So not only is he a ****ty writer, he knows nothing about the game he's attempting to use as a political allegory. The author has an even bigger agenda than you do on this board, and you have a HUGE agenda. Though I disagree with much of your posts (while finding them amusing) you don't go out of your way to bring racist ideology into your rantings. This guy did, which makes him a fool. DaveinElma reposted his article because he flocks to anything that holds up whitey to be superior to anyone of color. Which makes him an as#hat. Don't be an as#hat and defend something which is indefensible.

:lol:

Oh, yes ... there's nothing racist at all in that article. I'm sorry. Painting Hewyard, one of the league's best young stars (a young phenom much like Bryce himself), as lazy is not only incorrect and insane -- but also incredibly racist. If you don't agree with that, you need to brush up on your history. Go look at how scouts described Jackie Robinson play the game before (and after) he broke the color line. You'll see all the same buzz words. Most authors who were trying to make Judge's case (which, again, is really no case at all rather just the ramblings of a racist !@#$ who thinks he's making a political point) would stop at using old fashion racist buzz words to describe a black player. But nope, Judge stretches his ridiculous metaphor from nasty racial archetypes to lazy black athletes and finally to the welfare state. None of these things connect as much as Judge wants them to. Instead, he's grasping at as many straws as he can find. So ... the Left = all lazy black guys. And the Right = all hard working white guys. Got it. Yup. Nothing racist to read here.

You are even a bigger fool if you really believe that. Start with the first sentence: "Bryce Harper is a conservative hero" ... you would think that with an opener like this the author would offer some sort of proof that Harper is, in fact, a conservative. You know, maybe ask the guy a question. But the author can't ask Harper a question because he's not a real journalist (and a ****ty writer) with no access or knowledge of sports in general. So what does he do? He makes **** up: "The star rookie for the Washington Nationals has woken up Major League Baseball, and watching it unfold has reminded me of nothing so much as the collapse of the old political paradigms and the inevitable and upcoming rebirth of conservatism in November." Oh, okay, so he's a conservative hero because ... well, no reason really. You'd think that the article would end there. Instead it dives into the well of racist undertones AND overtones. Painting Hewyard, one of the league's best young stars (a young phenom much like Bryce himself), as lazy is not only incorrect and insane -- but also incredibly racist. If you don't agree with that, you need to brush up on your history. Go look at how scouts described Jackie Robinson play the game before (and after) he broke the color line. You'll see all the same buzz words. Most authors who were trying to make Judge's case (which, again, is really no case at all rather just the ramblings of a racist !@#$ who thinks he's making a political point) would stop at using old fashion racist buzz words to describe a black player. But nope, Judge stretches his ridiculous metaphor from nasty racial archetypes to lazy black athletes and finally to the welfare state. None of these things connect as much as Judge wants them to. Instead, he's grasping at as many straws as he can find. So ... the Left = all lazy black guys. And the Right = all hard working white guys. Got it. Yup. Nothing racist to read here. Dumbass.

Which only proves you know nothing about baseball. Even less about reading comprehension. Just admit it dude. You are a racist asshat. Stop running from it.

Read the article again. If you see nothing racist in that article than I suggest you brush up on your reading comprehension skills, especially in regards to subtext. Though, in this case, it's not even subtext. It's right there in bold print. Saying this article isn't racist is like saying water isn't wet. DaveinElma is berated here BECAUSE HE'S A RACIST. Nothing more. If you don't think so, look at his posting history. He's a fool, and sticking up for him on this front makes you a bigger fool. This has nothing to do with politics. This is an offensive article to me as a human being but more importantly as a writer. It's a hack job with no journalistic merit let alone political one. He uses a silly and strained SPORTS PLAY to demonstrate why the white kid is superior to the black kid. You think Jason Hayward is "indolent" and lazy because he botched a play? The writer ignores the fact that not more than a few weeks ago, the same "indolent" black guy threw out the "heroic white kid" when Harper made a boneheaded base running error.

:lol:

Just as long as he's not black, right? That makes the article way less of a hack job by a racist Fu*ktard

Maybe it's already in the works ...

You miss the point of backlash at DaveinElma over his post. It has little to do with the guy in the interview and everything to do with DaveinElma continually celebrating racism with his posts. (For further reference, check out the ridiculously racist blog he posted re: Bryce Harper). As I said earlier, it's one thing to be openly racist (as the guy in the video is) and another thing entirely to celebrate his viewpoints ... which, no matter how you try to spin it with your post here, was unbelievably hateful, racist and ignorant. People that put themselves out there publicly, and with such ignorance, deserve to be ridiculed NOT celebrated. But DaveinElma is a racist asshat, so he doesn't understand the difference.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-13-2012/newsleaks This sums up this whole story, the media's role in it and how !@#$ed our priorities are with regards to the issue. Worth watching. ...and I can't figure out how to imbed the video. Grrr.

I would say it's conservative more so because of the amount of wealth in OC compared to LA. But that's an LA perspective so it may be wrong?

:lol:

Figures you would pick an article where a black guy is portrayed as "complacent" and "indolent", while the white guy is the polar opposite. I don't know what's more offensive, the article (which, by the way makes NO comment on Bryce's political affiliation, rather just uses one baseball play of a young white kid making a hustle play as a blatantly racist metaphor), or you once again reminding everyone how much you love whitey. You are a racist asshat. This article is even worse.

I don't think it's a race issue -- but you have to admit that was pretty damn disrespectful. I don't ever remember seeing a president, at the white house, heckled by a member of the US press. No matter how much you disagree with his policies, the man is still the president. Scorn him, blaspheme him, curse him all you wish -- but not on the white house lawn while the man is speaking. It was a dick move. Plain and simple.

Reports from the OceanX team are beginning to come to the surface. While their initial dive to the mysterious object was delayed for an unannounced NATO "exercise", which happened to be centered directly over the object's resting place. Some believe the NATO exercises were really a ruse designed to cover up a massive excavation effort. Whichever side of the conspiracy coin you believe, the OceanX team finally reached bottom this week. They didn't find a UFO, but they did find something very strange. A formation of rocks that appear to resemble a fire pit as well as some sort of biologic they are describing as a giant mushroom measuring upwards of 13 feet. More research is underway, but it appears likely that the mystery "UFO" was nothing more than a sonar mirage. UPDATE:

More bull **** from you. Your OP and title of this thread and the need to defend it says all. "See I told you white people are bad" ? Are you f*cking kidding me? Only a racist asshat would hear that interview and, instead of being offended by that guy's ridiculous viewpoint, think the media is trying to make "white" people look bad. Stop trying to run from the truth. You are a racist. Show this thread to Fred Jackson and see what he says. Make sure to remind him after that he's your favorite Bill of all time -- I'm sure that will make everything okay. You are beyond a moron, sir. Calling you one would be an insult to morons.