Hell Freezes Over

shmessy said:

Everybody misses the point when they point to the "Eagles fan" part.

This isn't about Specter's fan allegiances.

This is about COLD, HARD CASH. As Mark Felt told Woodward and Bernstein - - 'Follow the money'.

Comcast. Comcast. Comcast.

Click to expand...

Brilliant analysis! I would agree that Specter is an embarassment to Eagles fans but take it a step further: he's an embarassment to the people of Pennsylvania.

The timing of his remarks is no accident, either.

He's the genius behind the "magic bullet" theory in the JFK assassination. You know, I don't know if JFK was killed by Cubans, the Mafia, LBJ or even martians but the Warren Commission (IMHO) has as much credibililty as a room full of chimpanzees banging on typewriters.

shmessy said:

Comcast. Comcast. Comcast.

Click to expand...

This is emblematic of the exact problem with our society.

But even that pales in comparison to the Cheney-Halliburton/BrownAndRoot alliance.

Specter may have been right that burning the tapes was analagous to the CIA tapes thing, depending on how you define "analogy". Analogies should not be taken to represent one-to-one relationships. Still, it's a bad analogy to associate typical corporate espionage (and harmless at that) to life threatening espionage at the highest levels of government. It's a poor analogy because of the association of high crime with a simple jay walking ticket.

SoonerPatriot said:

This pretty much expresses how I feel. I'd also like to add to the Giants troll that Specter is a registered Republican, and caucuses with the Republicans the majority of the time. Those facts trasncend perception.

He's is a whack job, however.

Click to expand...

There is no real difference between republicans and democrats. None (and i realize this isn't the board to offer a 29 page diatribe on the one-party system so I won't). They are, without exception, corrupt, moronic, and pathetic. It is not at all shocking that Specter is doing this hideous foolish thing. It would not be shocking if a democrat did it.

I am sure the imbecile thinks he's doing a wonderful heroic thing, and probably actually believes the spew that dribbles down his noxious chin. He has no clue how stupid and petty he is being. I am sure he has rationalized this completely and thinks it has nothing to do with his fowl love for the baldy birdies.

Fortunately he's old and will be dead soon.

Sadly it won't be soon enough. Oh Mother Nature, you are one cruel woman to foist such fetid feces into human skin!

PromisedLand said:

One more thing, PfnV - Goodell is between a rock and a hard place. No doubt he would throw the team under the bus if it would save his hide, but the problem he has is that he has publicly stated that his investigation revealed nothing that would have helped the Patriots win their past Super Bowl. He has staked his reputation on that.

Click to expand...

The last thing on earth that Goodell wants to do is throw the Pats (or any team) under the bus. Listen, he isn't cracking down on athletes and teams because he's trying to make some moral point. He's trying to protect the NFL brand, plain and simple.

shmessy said:

Everybody misses the point when they point to the "Eagles fan" part.

This isn't about Specter's fan allegiances.

This is about COLD, HARD CASH. As Mark Felt told Woodward and Bernstein - - 'Follow the money'.

Comcast. Comcast. Comcast.

Click to expand...

Who is the 2nd largest contributor to Specter? None other than Comcast. I would love to hear Goodell point this fact out in a press conference.


http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00001604&cycle=2008

I don't know if this has come up before in this discussion, but Specter has been locking horns with the NFL on behalf of his "daddy" Comcast since well before Spygate ever happened:

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6398153.html

Specter Vows to Lift NFL TV Exemption
By Ted Hearn -- Multichannel News, 12/7/2006 6:10:00 PM

Washington -- A law that allows the National Football League to sign lucrative television contracts on behalf of all 32 teams should be repealed, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said at a Senate hearing Thursday.

Specter said he would introduce a bill in the new Congress that would repeal the NFL’s antitrust exemption under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961.

He claimed that he wasn’t afraid to tackle the commercially and politically powerful NFL. “I think I’ll have a lot of company, and that is the football fans of America, who are being gouged,” he added after chairing a hearing on sports-programming issues.

FrontSeven said:

Specter may have been right that burning the tapes was analagous to the CIA tapes thing, depending on how you define "analogy". Analogies should not be taken to represent one-to-one relationships. Still, it's a bad analogy to associate typical corporate espionage (and harmless at that) to life threatening espionage at the highest levels of government. It's a poor analogy because of the association of high crime with a simple jay walking ticket.

Click to expand...

You like the word analogy. Spell analogous correctly from now on. It's sfobv someone spotted you the first four letters.

full tilt, thanks for reiterating the point that Specter gets a bunch of money from Comcast. I am being ironic. Read the damn threads we know this.

Promised land, the lingering threat scenario answers my question as to blackmail value, but thanks for the primer on lobbying.

Assuming a that the lingering threat hypothesis is correct, we should soon see some re-airing of the ongoing Cable vs. NFL issue.

That is, Specter says "lie down now, and the investigation will not occur."

But it strikes me that NFLN is a dead issue for the non-hardcore fanbase the moment the season is over, that is, the day after tomorrow.

Of course, if there is a big event in that saga in the next few weeks, the Comcast Comcast Comcast explanation becomes a slam dunk. Specter's not up for reelection until 2010, so on first blush it's hard to see him giving a damn about a momentary super bowl surge in the polls.

But the same thing applies in terms of timing to the "CCC" explanation. Why not on the eve of the Clots game, or for that matter, at any point in the second half of the season? Why not threaten an ongoing regular season, while the NFLN issue is hot? Why wait?

That's why it looks more like symbolic swiping (in intent) than a serious threat. It looks like he wants credit for doing it, rather than like he wants to do it.

Answers won't be long in coming.

PFnV

PatsFanInVa said:

full tilt, thanks for reiterating the point that Specter gets a bunch of money from Comcast. I am being ironic. Read the damn threads we know this.

Click to expand...

You're being ironic? Do you mean sarcastic?

Lighten up, Francis.

PFnV, you're welcome. Thanks for the primer in sarcasm.

Full_Tilt_Full_Time said:

The last thing on earth that Goodell wants to do is throw the Pats (or any team) under the bus. Listen, he isn't cracking down on athletes and teams because he's trying to make some moral point. He's trying to protect the NFL brand, plain and simple.

Click to expand...

That's a very good point - after all, Kraft was one of his biggest boosters in becoming commish. However, I feel there is another important reason that Goodell made such a big deal out of a little sideline taping, and it has to do with the context of him cracking down on players who get into off-field difficulties - Pacman et al. When spygate happened he had already laid out unprecedented punishment to players. He couldn't afford the appearance of being hard on player crime and soft on team crime. He needed to make a big statement that he is equally tough on teams who break the rules, lest he offend the powerful players union.

PromisedLand said:

That's a very good point - after all, Kraft was one of his biggest boosters in becoming commish. However, I feel there is another important reason that Goodell made such a big deal out of a little sideline taping, and it has to do with the context of him cracking down on players who get into off-field difficulties - Pacman et al. When spygate happened he had already laid out unprecedented punishment to players. He couldn't afford the appearance of being hard on player crime and soft on team crime. He needed to make a big statement that he is equally tough on teams who break the rules, lest he offend the powerful players union.

Click to expand...

You nailed it, PromisedLand.

SuperBowl42 said:

Maybe the patriots do deserve an investigation though:

http://beta.profootballtalk.com/2008/02/02/report-pats-filmed-rams-walk-through/

or even this one on Walsh:

http://anonym.to/?http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3226465

Click to expand...

Marshall, is that you?

Full_Tilt_Full_Time said:

You're being ironic? Do you mean sarcastic?

Lighten up, Francis.

Click to expand...

No, I mean ironic. I thanked you for something that deserves no thanks; I said the opposite of what I meant. Hence, the choice of "ironic".

But okay, Theodore, I'm light.

PFnV

The Boston Sports media

...is the only media in the country that would try to put a damper on its hometown team right before the Super Bowl.