Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 35 pages
No, you're an idiot. It mean abstaining from sex about one week a month.
Modern NFP use symptoms and/or temperature to detect ovulation. Its success rate is better than the pill. Over 99% effective with proper use.
You must have an awful, pathetic little impotent life, to resort to that sort of "argumentation". I actually feel sorry for you.
The lengthy comments under that Coates article are a refreshing contrast to the easy moralizing that often gets posted here.
While I have occasionally asked guys about knowledge bases in certain topics, which is often tied to formal education, (for example, in my case, I don't opine about macroeconomics but do opine about education) I don't think that overall formal education or lack of same should generally be on the table in terms of debating ideology/worldview. Coates obviously reads a lot, and he writes in a way that gets people to read him. Those are the quals for his gig.
professional race victims like Joe
This is non-responsive to the core issue at hand — i.e., the role that Coates' race played in his hiring. If Coates was white, but with the same (alleged) ability to "write in a way that gets people to read him," it's highly unlikely that he would have been a priority hire at Time or The Atlantic, especially as a college dropout in 1990s or 2000s America. Yet Coates' writing is woefully lacking in any acknowledgment or awareness of this, and, indeed, often leaves readers with the opposite impression — that Coates has had to fight hard against racism and The Man to get where he's gotten.
You really haven't read Coates at all, have you?
the role that Coates' race played in his hiring.
The only thing wrong with my comment was that you're an amateur. You constantly claim bogus victimization for white males based on selective anecdotal evidence, without any regard for any historical context.
Your opinions on a man with twice your intelligence ...
If Coates was white, but with the same (alleged) ability to "write in a way that gets people to read him," it's highly unlikely that he would have been a priority hire at Time or The Atlantic, especially as a college dropout in 1990s or 2000s America.
The Washington Post
Journalism is kinda weird in this way. It was odd that Rob Neyer, another college dropout, was the guy making the case for sabermetrics at ESPN.
It goes back many years, but Carl Bernstein was a college dropout. Another odd guy to be in that position.
I don't know how the hiring worked per se, but I assume that most organizations/organs like that want to have writers from certain demographic groups to examine some issues from a certain perspective (black, women) etc). so the whole staff is not straight white guys. So I would think of Coates as coming from that pool, rather than occupying a spot that should be going to a college-educated white.
You sure sound like a victim.
He's not a victim! He's just "describing the current state of affairs in the U.S." The fact that he's describing it in such a way that he's always the victim is beside the point.
Joe, you've blown the lid off the stunning secret that media outlets sometimes select writers and analysts because of their race, ...
Coates was likely hired precisely because of his race, yet he often gives the impression his race has been an impediment to his professional success.
Both could be true. If you're planning on hiring 29 people of one race and only one of another, but the first race has ten times as many qualified applicants, that means that people of the first race have better chance of being hired.
Unless you're claiming whites outnumber non-whites at U.S. media outlets by 29:1, or that there tend to be more minority candidates who are qualified for writing jobs than white candidates, I'm not sure what the above purports to tell us.
They were sample numbers to demonstrate that someone could be hired for their race, but that their race could still be an overall impediment to being hired. The two are not necessarily contradictory.
The lengthy comments under that Coates article are a refreshing contrast to the easy moralizing that often gets posted here. It's also nice to see Coates replying at length to many of the comments and questions
Ah, now if anyone is an expert on victimhood, it's our old stalker friend 'Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim.'
Re: NFP, we mock what we don't understand. It's as effective as the pill and, even better, won't increase a woman's breast cancer risk or present other unwanted side effects. Women shop at Trader Joe's for organic food and then pump themselves full of carcinogens to avoid pregnancy.
And we all know women on the pill or using a condom NEVER get pregnant ... *eye roll*
For a comparison chart, see here.
Method Typical LowestCombined Pill (Estrogen/Progestin) 5% 0.1%Minipill (Progestin only) 5% 0.5%Natural Family Planning 25% 1-9%No Method 85% 85%
"Typical Use" rates mean that the method either was not always used correctly or was not used with every act of sexual intercourse (e.g., sometimes forgot to take a birth control pill as directed and became pregnant), or was used correctly but failed anyway.
"Lowest Expected" rates mean that the method was always used correctly with every act of sexual intercourse but failed anyway (e.g., always took a birth control pill as directed but still became pregnant).
NFP, we mock what we don't understand. It's as effective as the pill...
If they don't, there's no reason for them not to go with the rhythm method and a bottle of morning after pills at the ready just in case.
They can't do that, according to snapper and Tyrus Raymond.
Tell that to women in Kansas, Ohio, the Dakotas, or pretty much any other state like those. You'd be hard pressed to figure out how he isn't.
Yeah, except that unlike Joe, Carroll O'Connor knew that the garbage Archie was spewing was garbage. — Andy
Still waiting for that list of white college dropouts who were quickly hired as writers by major outlets like Time magazine over the past 10 or 15 years.
No you're not. Stop lying. You were presented with a white writer with a national profile despite dropping out of college (Rob Neyer) and immediately rationalized it away.
Because you're not interested in anything other than hacking at Coates' shins by insinuating that he doesn't deserve his position and only has it due to soft-headed liberals and their stupid affirmative action quotas.
Ta-Nahesi Coates has earned his position at the Atlantic far more than Jonah Goldberg ever earned anything in his life.
while Coates is a black man who makes arguments you hate but can't rebut.
If Coates was white and had the same resumé, he probably never gets his first writing job at a major outlet, let alone chance after chance after chance.
So we're doing another round of Kehoskie ######## about race? Pass.
Brian Williams is a college dropout. Peter Jennings was a college dropout. John Chancellor was a college dropout. Conservative columnist for the New York Times William Safire dropped out of Syracuse and never graduated college.
Your favorites, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, both dropped out of college. Well, Limbaugh didn't quite drop out, he flunked out. In fact, according to his mother, he flunked every course he ever took. Glenn Beck never even went to college. Shepard Smith dropped out of Mississippi before graduating. Jeepers, does Fox hire anyone who has a degree?
How did Coates "earn" his jobs? He dropped out of college and was fired from three great jobs, in succession, yet always managed to get an even better job. He's hardly an example of meritocracy in action.
I asked for examples within the past 10 or 15 years.
The only way to win is not to play. You just lost.
Imagine if a baseball traditionalist wrote off Joe Posnanski, not by taking up the actual points in Poz's articles he disagrees with, but because Poz has left a bunch of jobs and NBC shouldn't have hired him to begin with. The guy's abilities as a prose stylist -- especially relative to his peers -- are what foreclose this argument, as with TNC. You utterly beclown yourself with this.
Stay classy while getting your ass handed to you left and right, Joey.
Funny comment, after you and your lefty amigos remained utterly silent after Formerly DP's classless #105.
As for getting "[my] ass handed to [me]," I'm still waiting for an actual fact-based rebuttal. Your usual rantings and some examples of white guys getting jobs in 1954 really weren't all that persuasive.
'formerly dp' is one of the angriest people on the internet.
105 was clearly out of line, and it was pointed out.
Of course you don't find them "persuasive." You would find any way you could to rationalize away *any* counter argument, because you are not interested in intellectually honest discourse. You are not now, nor have you ever been.
The idea that you're looking for a "persuasive" argument that might change your opinion is obviously absurd, as everyone familiar with you knows. You're never interested in persuasion or discourse.
We've discussed the merits of Coates' various race-obsessed positions countless times here, over hundreds if not thousands of comments.
Publius's list in #161 directly answers Joe's question in spite of all his attempts to pretend that it didn't,
but it doesn't address the fact that Coates wasn't "fired" by those other papers because he couldn't spell or write (at Time, for instance, he was a new hire and among many who were laid off due to their yearly budget cuts),
I'm not talking about his positions. The baseball traditionalist would be on much stronger ground arguing that Poz is a slave to WAR, doesn't know what the players know, etc. than he would be arguing that the guy is unqualified to even be in the profession of writing, when Poz writes as beautifully as he does and his peers write the way they do. Same thing here.
No interview will ever convince someone whose mind is fixated solely on something as inconsequential as a BA degree. No magazine editor gives a flying #### about academic credentials if he thinks you can write.
But carry one in your proud robe of white male martyrdom. You wear it so convincingly.
Joe K's "list of black college dropouts who were quickly hired as writers by major outlets like Time magazine over the past 10 or 15 years and who were offered a full-time spot on The New York Times' editorial page when still in their 30s" is a list of one: Coates.
Everybody else's "list of white college dropouts who were quickly hired as writers by major outlets like Time magazine over the past 10 or 15 years and who were offered a full-time spot on The New York Times' editorial page when still in their 30s" is a list of zero.
1-0. Oh yes, Joe Kehoskie just Yu Darvished your sorry asses!
We've had that discussion countless times — a fact which, for reasons known only to you, you're still ignoring.
Oh, I have a sad now. And after Joe was so complimentary of my "awareness" in #130/131.
We've had a discussion countless times about whether TNC, independent of his positions, is an elegant writer?? If that's the case, then yes, I did miss that.
But even if so, I don't see why you would portray TNC's allegedly inartistic writing skills as a point that has somehow been proven, since it is ultimately subjective. I mean, I think TNC is a better prose stylist than most political writers and Poz is a better prose stylist than most sportswriters in much the same way I think Lawrence of Arabia is a better movie than Batman and Robin, but I can't prove that.
I never asked for a "list of list of white college dropouts who were quickly hired as writers by major outlets like Time magazine over the past 10 or 15 years and who were offered a full-time spot on The New York Times' editorial page when still in their 30s." I asked for white college dropouts on either list — and I'm still waiting for a single name/example.
I don't recall offering any critiques of the quality of Coates' current writing in a stylistic or grammatical sense. I've pointed out that Coates appeared to be unqualified for the jobs he secured at major media outlets
I don't recall offering any critiques of the quality of Coates' current writing in a stylistic or grammatical sense. I've pointed out that Coates appeared to be unqualified for the jobs he secured
Whatever. You got a list. The fact that you're limiting the timeframe so you can limit the scope of conversation is telling. As always, you're not interested in discussion, you're interested in a rigged fight.
Okay, so then I don't get how we're disagreeing. My point is that anyone who is an unusually stylistically talented writer is, by virtue of that talent alone, qualified to be a professional writer.
And this is why you're being an idiot. The quality of a writer's writing is his only qualification. It's right there in the damned word. You're hung up on Coates' academic record because you think it's a hook to smear him by. Nothing more, nothing less.
He's just unskewing the timeline. (I don't recall Joe's fascination with academic credentials three time college dropout Sarah Palin was you-betchaing her way around as John McCain's proxy.
It seems to me that, while it seems odd Joe is asking for a list to counteract the list of 1 that Coates is on, timeframe is important, as the world has changed significantly the past 20 years.
You think hiring conditions are the same in 2013 as they were in 1949, or whenever William Safire got his first job? Get serious.
For writers above the 4th-grade level, it makes no sense to divorce the quality of one's writing from the content of one's writing, and the content of Coates' writing is what's at issue here.
Wait, now TNC lacks "basic writing skills"? Isn't that a comment on the elegance of his prose (rather than its content), which you believe to be irrelevant to writing hiring decisions?
“If you had told me he would be a big deal, I would have said, ‘Get real,’” said Times media critic David Carr. Mr. Coates’s first writing gig was at the Washington City Paper, where Mr. Carr was his editor. “He needed work. He was not a great speller. He wasn’t terrific with names. And he wasn’t all that ambitious.” — source: linked article in #133
The "right wing" here is so dominated by libertarians that it's kinda weird seeing a righty complaining that a columnist got a job because he didn't meet some regulatory-style credential requirements.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (2 members)
Page rendered in 0.9786 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed