Forced Patriotism-- Another Reason to Hate the Yankees
by Angels95 on Apr 15, 2009 4:55 PM PDT
164 comments
It's Yankee policy that fans remain seated during the singing of God Bless America-- under penalty of expulsion.
Bradford Campeau-Laurion says in his federal lawsuit his rights were violated at an Aug. 26 game between the Yankees and the Boston Red Sox when he tried to pass a police officer.
The lawsuit said the officer did not let him take a step before grabbing his right arm and twisting it behind him. It said two officers marched him down several ramps to the stadium’s exit, where he was pushed out as one officer told him to leave the country if he didn’t like it.
Of course, we'll have to see what more there is to the story, but it is clear from this report and others, that the Yankees probably compel participation in religious patriotism. That's offensive and ridiculous.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
2 recs |
164 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I don't know whether that's "enforced patriotism"
and I don’t exactly know what “religious patriotism” is, but as I understand it the Yankees sing “God Bless America” in memory of the 3000 people who lost their lives in the World Trade Center attacks. This motivation is not so much patriotism nor religiosity as it is simple respect for human life and recognition of the losses felt by their loved ones.
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t endorse the policy, nor the behavior of the officer in question, but on the grounds that it exceeds the rights of Yankee management to control the behavior of their guests. Also, I object to people’s being forced to listen to Ronan Tynan sing more than once a season; it’s cruel and unusual punishment.
But I’ve always put it as a plus in the Yankees’ column that they have the heart to keep that remembrance well beyond its season of fashion. You can call it religious or patriotic if you want to, but don’t sneer at it.
Nick Adenhart, RIP
by rspencer on Apr 15, 2009 6:16 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
this is a great comment
this is exactly how I feel about this issue
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see nothing wrong with this policy
Bradford Campeau-Laurion wasn’t forced to go to the Yankees game. If you can’t be bothered to take a minute out of your day to show a little respect for America, watch the game on TV.
I find the fact that he filed a lawsuit over this way more disturbing than the Yankees’ policy.
by Ajax on Apr 15, 2009 6:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Personally, I love the idea behind the policy
and there’s nothing wrong with requesting people remain seated, but it’s simply out of bounds to make it compulsory under threat of forcible ejection. Do they compel everyone to stand up for “Take Me Out to The Ball Game” too?
Nick Adenhart, RIP
by rspencer on Apr 15, 2009 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing wrong?
There is something INSANELY wrong with forcing someone to show what the Yankees organization deems as “patriotism”. Forcing someone to do something to honor freedom belittles the freedom you’re supposedly honoring. And for the record- reciting lyrics to outdated songs about the illusion that we are somehow more worthy of “blessings” than the rest of the world honors nothing or nobody. Especially at a fucking baseball game.
Bradford Campeau-Laurion wasn’t forced to go to the Yankees game.
Right. He PAID to be there. Shouldn’t he get to decide when he gets up to pee, how he shows his patriotism, or even IF he’s patriotic? It’s like arresting people for not voting.
If you can’t be bothered to take a minute out of your day to show a little respect for America, watch the game on TV.
So this is what it’s come to? Maybe we could take the pledge of allegiance at the ticket window, or electronically sign a transcript every time we buy tickets online.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 15, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
you are rediculous man
I don’t agree with the policy of arresting the man over this, but your post is out of line. If you don’t like America then leave
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong.
“a little rebellion now and then is a good thing” — Thomas Jefferson
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” — First Amendment to the US Constitution (emphasis mine).
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 6:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh please...
I’m so tired of people citing freedom of speech to defend everything. The man wasn’t arrested for speaking.
People are constantly DOING things and then saying that it is okay because of freedom of SPEECH. Give it a rest. it’s a tired argument.
Speaking ones mind is one thing. You are allowed to say any stupid thing you want to. I have no problem with that. that is what freedom of speech is all about. But that does not give you the right to DO whatever you want!!
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 7:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the only tired argument here
is “If you don’t like America then leave!” Of course freedom of speech does not allow one to do whatever they want. But it does give one the right to leave their seat during a ceremony if they have to. Its not about respect for our country; its about your basic rights as a citizen (or guest). The stadium can ask folks to remain seated, quiet, respectful, etc., but if someone decides they need to get up and do something while the ceremony is taking place it is their right to do so. This IS forced patriotism, and its wrong.
by dmhead on Apr 16, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Constitution is a tired argument?
The foundation of American values and laws?
Maybe you should reevaluate your decision to reside in the States rather than telling other people to leave.
RIP #34
by linkbruin on Apr 16, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
can't you read?!?!
I’ll post it AGAIN. READ THIS TIME!
People are constantly DOING things and then saying that it is okay because of freedom of SPEECH. Give it a rest. it’s a tired argument.
Speaking ones mind is one thing. You are allowed to say any stupid thing you want to. I have no problem with that. that is what freedom of speech is all about. But that does not give you the right to DO whatever you want!!
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It doesn't allow you the right to go and do a little sitting on the toilet during someone's idea of a great song?
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 16, 2009 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not discussing this with you anymore
You just don’t get it Vladdy. I never said what the cops/guards did to him was right.
We don’t see eye to eye, but thats okay man. You are an Angels fan, so I love you
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Supreme Court has ruled that actions like that count as symbolic speech, and are thus protected under free speech..
If you don’t like, you can leave the country.
Jose Lopez roxxorz my boxxorz.
54!
by joof on Apr 16, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not going anywhere
I love America. It’s just hippies I can’t stand
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
dirty dirty hippies
Phys: Well, Coon doesn't have a lot of power but he's a good bunter
Coon: F$%# That!
Thanks Zu
by halofan4life on Apr 17, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
Many, many years of Supreme Court precedent pretty definitively state that freedom of speech goes well beyond literal words coming forth from one’s mouth. That does not mean that anything and everything is speech, but that the category is very broad.
And this is the ONLY thing I will say on the topic.
RIP Nick Adenhart.
"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5
by Clutch on Apr 17, 2009 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, just saw the above post
Disregard this one.
RIP Nick Adenhart.
"When the Babe tries to call his shot, I hope Nick puts one in his ear."
--RallyMonkey5
by Clutch on Apr 17, 2009 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, not applicable
The New York Yankees are a private entity. Congress didn’t make the policy—the Yankees did.
This isn’t the government interfering with any free speech rights.
by Ajax on Apr 16, 2009 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When the police enforce the policy, then the gov't is involved.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you have no idea how the justice system in this country works do you?
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Laugh-able
First of all, I never said I didn’t like America. I just don’t like being told how and when to show my love, regardless of what you or anyone feels about it.
Second, the “love it or leave it” argument is ALWAYS dumb. Disagreeing with policy is not a sign of disrespect- it’s a sign of being an American, where I have the right to speak about what I see as social injustice. The beauty of it, is that you are allowed to refute me as well. But you’ve sadly missed the entire point when you equate protest with treason, and ask people to leave the country. Jingoistic fervor is not a requirement to live here, so I’ll be staying, thank you very much.
As for you, i personally couldn’t give a stadium rat’s ass if you love it, OR leave it. But I’ll gladly defend your right to say something as stupid as that.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly right.
It’s a BASEBALL GAME for crying out loud. What’s next, teams aren’t allowed to beat the Yankees because of 9-11?
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Apr 16, 2009 6:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why don't you move to China?
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 15, 2009 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
why was this rec'd?
Ajax should move to China because the man respects our country?
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because the attitude is very communistic
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 16, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you even know what communism means?
I’m not quite sure how pointing out the constitutional flaw in the OP’s argument makes me “communistic.”
by Ajax on Apr 16, 2009 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The concept of forced patriotism is pretty darn communistic.
I read your post to mean,’ if you don’t like it don’t go’. This has nothing to do with respect for America. Respect for America and some banner waving song where fans are forced to poop their pants to listen too are two completely seperate entities. It just seems to me that is how they run things over there, and if you like it so much, that might be a great place to live.
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 16, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Compare and contrast
Your analogy is absurd.
China = a country. Yankee Stadium = private property. Comprende?
And “God Bless America” is not just some “banner waving song,” especially to the citizens of NYC. If that is your opinion than there is no use even arguing with you about this topic. It’s not forced patriotism that you abhor, its the concept of patriotism in and of itself.
If I had to guess, you also probably advocate or at least support flag burning. After all, its just a piece of cloth, right?
by Ajax on Apr 16, 2009 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't support it
But I certain abhor the idea of banning it.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
God, I'm tired of that
First of all, the police enforced the policy, so the government did play a role.
Second, even with that aside, what the Yankees did is detestable. Even if you want to hide behind the thin argument that the Yankees were TECHNICALLY within their rights because they were private property (which, considering taxpayers fronted a TON of the bill for the stadium is a pretty questionable assertion as well), it’s all B.S. The mere fact that they were not legally OBLIGATED to observe the laws set forth in the constitution doesn’t make it any less disgusting when they choose to circumvent them. Particularly in the context of an event meant to honor the sacrifice and loss we’ve endured to keep our freedom, it is horrific that the organization would do ANYTHING at all to limit that freedom.
Let’s just pretend the Yankees are within total legal rights to do what they did; it still does nothing to diminish the idea that forcing the man to quietly observe the ceremony is certainly not within the SPIRIT of the constitution. Essentially, by forcing such a practice, the Yankees have implicitly stated that when the constitution needn’t legally apply, they’d rather it didn’t…the organization has, by its actions, expressed the sentiment that the principles of our constitution are laudable enough or worthy enough to be upheld even in the moments where it isn’t legally obligated to be. The statement is clear: the Yankees do not honor the principle of the freedoms afforded by the constitution enough to respect them when they don’t have to. That, in and of itself, is disgusting.
And unless they discontinue the practice entirely at their new stadium, it becomes even more reprehensible (and I would say illegal) on the grounds that the stadium is largely paid for by the same public that would be getting ejected.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 17, 2009 1:15 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
BTW, old Yankee Stadium was owned by the City of New York since 1971
Wiki Link and Ballparks.com Link .
So the private property argument is void.
by Big Easy Halofan on Apr 17, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Old Yankee Stadium or new?
They don’t play in the old park anymore.
by sothball on Apr 17, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The new one was paid for with taxpayer money
at least in large part. Not sure of the exact percentage.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 17, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's $350 million of $1.5 billion
Though I think there is still a debate as to whether this taxpayer money will still be used to pay for the stadium.
At any rate, the link that HaloFanInDC provided below was pretty damn informative about all of the legal complexities involved.
by Big Easy Halofan on Apr 17, 2009 3:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I already read it
to summarize:
Yankees organization = piece of shit.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 17, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome display of brevity
And on that note, I’m off to the French Quarter Festival.
by Big Easy Halofan on Apr 17, 2009 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're thinking of fascism, not communism.
by Rocktopus on Apr 16, 2009 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Describe the difference between the two.
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you want the long answer or the short?
Short answer: fascism a nationalist ideology taken to its social darwinian extreme. its a method of running the state and as all its institutions (economy included) under a single party, nationalistic ideology. one of its core tenets is rejection class conflict.
Communism is an economic ideology pushed to a political realm. it calls for common ownership and controls of the means of the production. in theory it lies in the hands of the people. in practice every meaningful communist government has been a totalitarian one (with the state being the key actor/controlling the means of production rather than the proletariat).
In practice they have looked similar, but most totalitarian governments use similar methods (true throughout all history). The problem is that all meaningful communist govts were also totalitarian. But we see principles of communism (its an economic theory) in most, if not all, Western governments.
RIP #34
by linkbruin on Apr 17, 2009 1:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
theres a lot of prepositions missing here
im tired
RIP #34
by linkbruin on Apr 17, 2009 1:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope you were able to get some rest!
You mostly made my point. In practice there isn’t a significant difference between the two.
by sothball on Apr 17, 2009 5:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, sorta.
Truthfully, we’ve never seen communism in practice, so we can’t really say what it would look like.But that’s a bit of a tangent.
Put simply, there is a difference between fascism and communism. Hitler’s Germany was undoubtedly fascist, and it was also very anti-communist. You wouldn’t call Hitler a communist if what you really meant was fascist. Communism is inherently anti-fascist, as its basic goal is to decentralize power, freeing the proletariat from the chains of oppression. It is primarily an economic theory, but it has political ramifications.
It’s clear that Big Bad Vlad, when talking about people’s “communistic” attitudes and about how forced patriotism was like something from communist China, he meant to draw a comparison to that country’s fascist attributes. Communism is just a confusing word, and when there is a perfectly appropriate one (“fascism”), why not use that one?
by Rocktopus on Apr 19, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice observation, Comrade Rocktopus.
RIP Nick Adenhart - Angel fans will never forget you!
by Downing Rules on Apr 20, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I, for one, am tired of the singing of "God Bless America" at baseball games
I was a proponent of the observation after the wake of the 9-11 attack, but it is nearly 9 years later and the entire idea of continuing this ritual has lost its meaning years ago.
Yeah, we sure are living in the land of the free, aren’t we. Stay in your goddamn seat, sing the song and hope that our ethnocentric god doesn’t strike you down for hoping that other countries, or the entirety of innocent, life-loving human beings throughout the world, are also under “his” blessing. And I’ll throw you in jail, asshole, if you piss in your pants…
God bless the USA!
Disclaimer: I understand this is not the site to make this statement, but I’d like to think that the ballpark can supercede the bullshit politicization of daily life that is thrust upon us. Live and let live; sing “Take me out to the Ballgame.”
by Big Easy Halofan on Apr 15, 2009 7:28 PM PDT reply actions 9 recs
Big Easy, and Red114
Have hit the proverbial nail on the head. How can being forced to sit through “God Bless America” be viewed as a sign of respect or patriotism, if its mandatory?
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
by halofolife on Apr 15, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no problem with someone going to the bathroom during the song...
But is it really THAT bad that we continue to sing it? I mean, c’mon. For the same reason you all think people shouldn’t be forced to listen/sing the song, others have the right to sing it at will.
Everyone here needs to relax. The cop was a jerk. The policy is a little much. But baseball stadiums around the country don’t need to ban the song for all of eternity.
RIP NA
by NoDakHalo on Apr 17, 2009 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you there.
If the Yanks want to sing it, let them sing it. Just don’t force me to deal with it.
On the other hand, if you want to ban a song, how about “Buttercup”?
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 17, 2009 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
rec"d
Phys: Well, Coon doesn't have a lot of power but he's a good bunter
Coon: F$%# That!
Thanks Zu
by halofan4life on Apr 17, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not a terrible thing to continue to sing God Bless America
And I never meant to imply that it should be banned. I was just stating (or ranting?) my opinion that I believe the song, which began as an honor to those who died in the 9-11 attacks, has lost its meaning over the years (though I agree it still holds true in New York). And without getting too political, the entire premise of the song – and the idea of patriotism – for me, was bastardized the moment the US invaded Iraq. Personally, I find myself hesitant to lavish the grace of God on such actions even if it is only by virtue of singing a song at a baseball game.
At the same time, I respect and support anybody who wants to sing the song; freedom of choice and expression is what makes this country great. I just found it ironic that these liberties were taken away during a song that touts our freedom.
OK, that’s it – back to baseball. Enjoy the games this weekend, NoDak, and do us proud!
Cheers
by Big Easy Halofan on Apr 17, 2009 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It really does not matter one whit what any of else feel about this policy.
Nor does it matter what the Yankees think.
Nor does it matter what the NYPD thinks.
This is why we have a Constitution, and a Bill Of Rights. In particular, the First Amendment. Those trump social fashion. Even fashionable patriotism.
Freedom of though and speech can neither be denied, nor compeled. End of argument. See you in court, officers.
And that is why, truly, God Bless America!
by Stirrups on Apr 15, 2009 8:53 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Not sure I agree, not sure I disagree...
…I don’t believe it is so simple, so cut and dried. Without checking, I assume Yankee stadium is private property with public accommodations.
I think there is a gray area here…where does the right of the private citizen (in this case the Yankee organization) end and the right of “joe public” begin.
NOTE:I am sure there is Supreme Court precedent here. Regardless, I am not as interested in Supreme Court precedent as I am between privacy rights/public accommodation. I believe there compelling arguments on both sides.
by sothball on Apr 15, 2009 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
There is no expectation claimed via the purchase of a ticket to a sporting event that attendance will also allow the venue operator to compel the visitor to make any particular political statement chosen by that operator. The sale of a ticket ot a baseball game does not entitle the Yankees to compel their guests to cheer for the Yankees, nor to compel their guests to cheer against them. It does not entitle the Yankees to compel their guests to proclaim allegiance to the memory of Hitler, or to verbally repudiate a sitting President of the United States.
Further, fans are able to enter the stadium of their free will, and they retain that same free will to exit the stadium at any time. If that guy was not going to the restroom, but to leave altogether, he would have been arrested just the same and pushed out the door just the same. (And yes, technically, any time you are detained by a policement you are under a state of arrest.)
by Stirrups on Apr 15, 2009 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
1) Not sure that “God Bless America” is strictly sung for patriotic reasons. It started after 9/11, as a remembrance of those murdered. It appears to me it is some combination of both patriotic and honoring the fallen.
2) You reacted to a specific event. I’m not sure we know all the facts on the specific case. I suppose the facts will eventually be offered in court.
3) My response was more general, to the ongoing tension when rights collide. What or whose right/rights is/are paramount?
4) I could make a theoretical case where you might agree with the right of the property owner to remove a fan for exercising their right to free speech. EXAMPLE: Angels organization decides to observe a minute of silence at the next home game to honor Nick Adenhart. During that time, a “fan” continually yells that the “bastard got what he deserved”…or worse. Perhaps you would stick to your guns and defend this ticket-paying “fan’s” right to free speech. I believe others might weigh this behavior and determine it is closer to the argument that this is akin to shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.
5) The property owner DOES maintain rights beyond what one would encounter in the general public. Every time my wife enters the Big A, her purse is searched prior to entry. They restrict the sale and use of alcoholic beverage (can’t bring your own liquor into the game, can’t purchase alcoholic beverages after the 7th inning).
So, like I wrote above, I just don’t see these issues in terms so cut and dried. There are multiple levels of complexity that vary depending on the details.
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 8:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1) Well, let’s be real here. The song is not God Bless Our Fallen Fellow New Yorkers. It is a patriotic song. Yes, this action started in response to 911, but that response would be categorized as a nationalistic one to foreign terrorist attacks and led by those targeted by the attacks. So it still echos today as a nationalistic response and still presents that response using a wholly patriotic song. Yes, continuing to honor the fallen is the driving force behind that ongoing demonstration of nationalism but the demonstration itself is the use of a patriotic song to arouse and encourage patriotic feelings. Those are political statements (and, for the others in this thread, statements with which I agree).
2) Yes, I am reacting to a specific event. Sure, when all the facts are in we will all have a new opportunity to define a new position concerning the person involved. (“When the facts change, I change my opinion. What, sir, do you do?” – Keynes) But for the moment I am dealing with the specific event and in that context alone as a theoretical moment, and with a specific right. If the guy turns out to be a real prick, he gets no sympathy from me. But as long as the issue is exclusively one’s right to choose whether or not to participate on somebody else’s brand of political speech, I defer to the Bill Of Rights.
3) Since I do not believe that any party has the right to compel another party to speak falsely, I do not recognize that the Yankees have any such right to compel anyone to proclaim that my God should bless my country. Therefore, I do not recognize the existence here of two rights in collision.
4) Yes, there ARE limits to free speech. Incitements to riot, hate crimes, all sorts of things. But the action being discussed here is a passive one, not an active one. The action of the person is to remove himself from the demonstration, rather than interrupt it or cause another one. The party is inciting nothing and threatening no-one by his action. But let’s use your example to make my basic point, by turning this around and putting the party in a position more acceptable to you and me. Imagine that the Yankees post a picture of Adenhart on the Jumbotron in the 7th inning of every game, and require all their guests to remain in their seats and shout “the bastard got what he deserved!” over and over. Then, should any fan reject participation in that program and attempt to remove themselves from their seats, the police get to arrest that fan and eject him/her from the stadium altogether. I think you and I would agree that this would be outrageous. And our instinctive defense of our outrage and our trust in ultimate justice through the authorities would be the full and certain knowledge that the 1st Amendment is on our side as citizens. Ultimately , we would prevail.
5) Yes, I do realize that the venue does maintain rights, but none that are unconstitutional. There is no 28th Amendment entitling citizens to purchase beer after the 7th inning of a baseball game so the venue can make that call. But if Congress were to pass this 28th Amendment it was ratified, then the venue operators would have to resume beer sales in late innings. One might argue that checking purses at the gate violates the 4th Amendment, but one would be wrong. One might argue that stripping fans of their banners and posters is a limit of free speech, but the venue operator merely claims either a public safety problem and trumps free speech, or declares a hate speech problem and remains constitutional.
As long as the facts were restricted to the theoretical limits we are discussing, and the guy does not turn out to be a lying prick, I do believe that the Supreme Court would find this issue pretty cut and dried.
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well
It almost seems like the guy was being a prick. I mean its the 7th inning, and it seems to me as if the singing has become a tradition and a sort of special ceremony, and they ask everybody to stay seated for about a minute. They dont require you to sing, just to stay seated. The guy could have waited one minute to do what he needed to do, or could have been on his cell phone, etc… If he made a big show of getting up and leaving, then it would be disrespectful and him just basically slapping people in the face. And if he was drunk, and made a big deal that he was getting up, and tension was rising, the police had a right to eject him. But however, if he was not drunk, and just quietly got up to go to the bathroom, while he may have still been being a prick, he has every right to do that.
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that is new info. It would certainly change my mind about this guy.
But not about the original premise.
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure there's much of a difference in our opinions here. A couple quick of clarifications
Regarding #2 above, The Bill of Rights does not override private property rights. It fact, it was intended to enhance private property rights. I don’t have the right to stand on your porch and yell profanities in your face…I would have to save that performance for the sidewalk.
In #3 above, you wrote, "…I do not recognize that the Yankees have any such right to compel anyone to proclaim that my God should bless my country. " I am not sure where they compelled anyone to proclaim anything. They just asked that they respectfully stand in silence while the song was sung.
Overall, I agree that forcing patriotism – or to be more precise, acts of patriotism – is a losing battle whether it be compelling someone to stand in silence for a patriotic song or making them recite the pledge of allegiance. The collision is where these rights apply in public vs. private facilities, taking into accout the active/passive acts as you described above in #4.
Finally, you’re paying Ladybug to rec your posts, aren’t you? Come on…tell the truth! I think the public has a right to know…
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no idea who is doing that. I get curious about it too!
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Uh huh...
…feigned innocence…and curiosity? A sure sign of guilt…
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh uh. Stalkers or groupies come to mind.
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you ARE paying Ladybug...
…I KNEW it!!!
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have seen a few people in other SBN sites question the fact
that it only takes 1 rec to turn a comment Green where other SBN sites require 3-5 recs before the comment turns color.
Was that a concious decision on our part? Hmmm. I’ve seen threads that get silly with recs, makes sense to me that it would take more than one.
by MidwayCityLivestock on Apr 16, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will admit that I went rec crazy on the St Pat's day thread.
That one was fun.
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that it was
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For anyone interested
Here’s a good sum up of the legal principles involved…this is a generally really good blog for keeping up with sports law
http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2007/05/yankee-stadium-god-bless-america-and.html
by HaloFanInDC on Apr 17, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I'm not a fan of this sort of thing, I have to admit the Yanks may have the right to do it.
At the same time, it really goes against my grain for something like that to occur at a public venue like a baseball stadium.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 15, 2009 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe the guy had diarrhea, and really needed to go!
Or maybe he wasn’t feeling well, or his ears hurt.
All who support the police brutality on this guy, get on the next plane to China!
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 15, 2009 10:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Exhibit A: Skidmarks
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you trying to replace Downing Rules?
…not that he has skid marks…that I know of…
by sothball on Apr 16, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh? replace Downing Rules?
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the middle of holding down the Z button, I saw my name here..
this is one of the lamest fanposts ever. Get back to baseball or skid marks. More fun.
RIP Nick Adenhart - Angel fans will never forget you!
by Downing Rules on Apr 16, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's worth noting the police-officer's side of this, BTW.
Police spokesman Paul J. Browne said the officers, who were being paid by the Yankees to work at the Bronx stadium, ejected Campeau-Laurion, 30, after they "observed a male cursing, using inappropriate language and acting in a disorderly manner while reeking of alcohol."
If this happened in August, why did he file the lawsuit just now?
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 15, 2009 10:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for bringing some perspective.
Two sides to every story and all that. Not that I’ve been very two sided around here recently.
Let's do this for Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson.
by AlanFalcon on Apr 15, 2009 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course police never lie in their reports.
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 15, 2009 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because no one has ever sued on false pretenses before.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 15, 2009 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is why Rodney King invented video
Was there stadium security footage of the exchange?
by Rev Halofan on Apr 15, 2009 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Article doesn't say.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 15, 2009 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that's the kind of thing a civil suit would try to determine
Sure, policemen are human like everyone, and they do sometimes lie in their reports. But in my experience, I have experienced drunk and disorderly louts at ball games several orders of magnitude more often than I have seen lying policemen. If this whole thing was just a pretext for getting rid of a drunken jerk, then I’m OK with it. That’s a far cry from deploying armed seat monitors to enforce compliance.
As good a job as they do, I wish the Anaheim police were more assiduous at ejecting angry drunks from Angel Stadium.
Nick Adenhart, RIP
by rspencer on Apr 16, 2009 2:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What is your problem with authority Vlad?
Are you 12 or something? Every post on here by you is criticizing the police.
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he's right....
Actually, he should probably be criticizing Yankees management.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 6:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you don't know that
You weren’t there.
Yes, sometimes the police lie in reports. But criminals ALWAYS lie to save their own butts. We don’t know what really happened, so we can’t pass judgment.
Hating on the police for no reason is childish. When you need them , you will be glad they are there to help you.
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 7:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So by definition, if you claim to be innocent, you're a criminal.
Because if you were a criminal, you’d lie and say you were innocent.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
Because they would be telling the truth, and not a criminal. Criminals and Innocent people both claim to be innocent, but the difference is that criminals are still guilty, despite what they profess.
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how do you tell which is which?
You’ve proclaimed this guy a criminal, even though he said he did nothing wrong. Why do you not assume he’s telling the truth?
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bad
I took your statement out of context. I thought you were saying that instead of criticizing KingF15h. apologies.
Also, i was not talking about Bradford, if that was what you were implying.
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is clearly not what KingF15h said.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 16, 2009 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You sound like a communist too!
by Big Bad, 'Vlad'! on Apr 16, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you obviously don't know what communism is
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Filing now instead of then
there is protocol exchange of notification by the party’s counsel that attempts to settle the complaint – which also then assists the plaintiff as it leaves a paper trail of the defendant’s case.
by Rev Halofan on Apr 15, 2009 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but remember that lesbian couple at Safeco that got booted?
They were up in the papers the next day, putting their story out there, getting all the rights activists up in arms, pretty much daring anyone to come forward with contradictory info.
Over an issue as touchy as freedom of speech/religion, you can’t tell me this guy couldn’t have done the same thing.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 16, 2009 12:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait so now we're chastising the guy for not making a big enough deal about it?
RIP #34
by linkbruin on Apr 16, 2009 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hahahah.
Let's do this for Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson.
by AlanFalcon on Apr 16, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
I think we’re chastising him for not making out with a chick!
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Apr 16, 2009 6:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He did.
I read about this last summer.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 6:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, you're right.
I couldn’t find it yesterday, but after doing some more checking, I finally found this article from the time.
~Till the Halo burns out...
by Zu Long on Apr 16, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, well, well
Why is this not surpising?
by Ajax on Apr 16, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My two cents
Judging by the contradictory reports, it seems like both sides are exaggerating. A quote by Emily Dickenson: Tell the Truth, but tell it slant.
Each side has clearly put their slant on it. Bradford likely overemphasizes the brutality, if he was indeed drunk (a point of contention whether he was, or whether the drunk rowdy people were just sitting near him), or the police thought he was drunk, and potentially a threat, and they deemed that ejecting him was the best way to solve the problem, they would use a little force to make sure that he cannot fight back. Whether it was excessive or not, nobody knows for certain. The truth probably lies in the middle. Either way, it was not handled very well by the cops, and the policy should be called into question.
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 12:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm just wondering
If and when the Dixie Chicks play Gothams new digs, are the people in attendance going to be forced to sit and observe “God Bless America”? If so, that really detracts from the whole premise of free speech.
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
by halofolife on Apr 16, 2009 12:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Excessive
Nothing wrong with patriotism, however.
Angel Pitching (Adenhart), Angel Defense - get past that.
by vladtheimpaler on Apr 16, 2009 2:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
boy this thread has spurned some interesting debate.......
I’ll just say………
Im glad im american……….and leave it at that.
Godspeed Nick - RIP - 1986-2009
by norcaliangelsfan on Apr 16, 2009 2:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
wow 114
Outdated songs? That is extremely offensive! So by that token, our national anthem is outdated too huh? I guess we should just stop singing it. Maybe Miley Cyrus can write us a new one, would you prefer that?
If you don’t like this country move to China
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Ha...
Now you sound like one of the people that created this ridiculous rule. Why do people always say “if you don’t like it here move somewhere else?”
I will never understand that saying as there is nothing more patriotic than speaking their mind or speaking out against those who are trying to take your freedoms away.
by Wytelitning on Apr 16, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just dont really like the defense of
disagreeing with you is the most patriotic thing we could do. I hate it almost as much as, “if you dont like it, then you can git out”. No, the most patriotic thing is not speaking your mind, that is just exercising your given rights.
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
look, all I'm saying is
if you think you have it so bad here, if you think that our government is so evil, and the man is just constantly putting you down, then try living in China, or Iran, or North Korea, or any of those other countries.
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine if the Founding Fathers had followed your advice
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly...
This guy might have put up a road block at Boston Harbor back then. “If you think the british are so evil and these taxes are unfair, then try living in Prussia or the Ottoman Empire”
I am as proud to be an American as the next guy, and my dissent is just as patriotic as your flag waiving. I would argue that I actually care more about my country because I will fight when my freedoms are being threatened or taken away.
by Wytelitning on Apr 16, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
...and if I may quote the great Rex Banner
“It’s not up to us to choose which laws to obey. If it were, I would kill everyone who looked at me cock-eyed”
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
You don’t see the INSANE leap you just took? You really believe that us arguing against a policy at a Yankee game somehow warrants the suggestion that we try living in IRAN or NORTH KOREA! Why is it so important that we all agree with each other in order to want to live here? Don’t you see the danger in that way of thinking? That’s the way it’s done in the very countries you suggest moving to.
Why would I move there if it is my wish to protest my government when I see fit? I already live where that is perfectly legal. Don’t you get that? Have you never disagreed with any American policy or action? Ever? Should you be asked to leave because of those feelings? Why are you offended by Americans exercising American rights? It’s what they’re there for.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes- outdated!
That offends you? Stating that a nearly 200 year old song is out-dated OFFENDS you? Pick your battles, man. The greatness of this country has nothing to do with a song, especially one that millions don’t know the words to anyway.
So they’re not out-dated? Because I am pretty sure the only freedom being experienced at the time the national anthem was written was by white land-owning males. I think women, all minorities, and certainly Native Americans would all agree that the song is out-dated. Guess they all just should have “loved it or left it” as you have so brilliantly suggested multiple times now.
As for your Miley Cyrus reference, I will assume it is your failed attempt at humor, as I see no connection. You seem to make great leaps in your arguments instead of taking time to think about what is being stated. Very reactionary- like the Chief of Police at Malibu.
If you don’t like this country move to China
Oh god, please just stop. Do people REALLY still say this? This is an argument that children make when they have yet to fully grasp and understand what it really means to be American. I’ll say it again: protest does not equal treason. I’m sure I speak for all of us when I say we all love this country. Some of us just paid enough attention to grasp the concept that loving the country is not a requirement for living in it. Since you seem to have such a problem with Americans exercising their rights, why don’t YOU move somewhere where falling in line is the law? I’m happy where I am thank you, and I will continue to speak out against ANYTHING I deem fit to speak out against. That’s what we do here.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
did you know that the Star Spangled Banner has actually like 5 verses?
and that we dont sing much of it?
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, you are WAAAAY out of line
Insulting the National Anthem is very unpatriotic. I will not debate this with you. It is the song of our country, the greatest damn country in the world, and when you insult it you insult me and everyone else who lives in this country. You make me sick to my stomach
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do believe you're starting to get it...
Dude, you are WAAAAY out of line
Exactly! I’m waaaay out of line! You should step out of line too. It’s ok.
And it is my intention to insult the type of people that are insulted by anything I said, so that works out. The induced nausea was just a bonus. Go Angels!
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm absolutley speechless...
I am sitting here and I don’t know what to think…I cannot believe you would even say such an asinine thing. The country was founded by white land owners. Deal with it. It was a different time. And further, I have never met a Woman or a minority that would even suggest that the national anthem isn’t a great song. So you are wrong there to
You are a disgrace
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and why did you even bring race into this????
WTF does that have to do with any of this???
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You missed the point completely.
He just proved to you that not ALL americans agree with you and the fact that they CAN voice their opinion is what makes this country great.
You are insulted that that someone would want to modify your National Anthem??? I recall a small modification to the Pledge of Allegience by Congress back in the 1950’s, yet I have a good feeling that even a purist such as yourself has no problem uttering the words “under god” and happy to do it.
by Wytelitning on Apr 16, 2009 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is no need to bring religion into this
I’m not here for a philosophical debate.
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My argument was made clearly
If you don’t understand it, I can’t help you.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hahahahahaha
I have never met a Woman or a minority that would even suggest that the national anthem isn’t a great song. So you are wrong there to
Who can argue against logic like that? I mean if YOU never met one, then I must be wrong.
I also find it hysterical that you would be baffled by the mere suggestion. How dare someone have the audacity to even suggest something that you disagree with?
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude. You just don't get it and you never will
I have had family and friends die in wars defending this country that you keep insulting.
F*ck off. You are disgracing their names and the names of everyone who defends this country. You are a complete waste of life.
I’m done here. There is no point in arguing this with you anymore.
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You showcase your ineptitude with every point you attempt to make.
I’m done here
Finally, we agree.
Apologies in advance.
by Red114 on Apr 16, 2009 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the deal
I don’t know how I feel morally about all of this.
All I know is I hate the Yankees, so they must be wrong.
Yet this guy is either a Yankee fan or a Red Sox fan (the article only states he’s a baseball fan at a Yank/Sox game), so he must be wrong…
I’m so confused!
I have nothing important to say.
by thrill000 on Apr 16, 2009 9:30 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
While we're on the topic of group singing...
Can we please go back to singing BOTH verses of “Take Me Out to the Ballgame” at the Big A. Are we not the ONLY ballpark in the country that doesn’t do this?
And to make matters worse, we started that trend in the year that celebrated the 100th anniversary of the song.
by MidwayCityLivestock on Apr 16, 2009 9:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The only thing that really offends me about this is the guy’s name: Bradford Campeau-Laurion
I am 100% positive he was wearing top-siders, khaki shorts, and a yellow Polo shirt with a baby blue sweater draped over his shoulders.
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 10:07 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
rec'd!
Where is John Belushi when we need him?
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 11:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lets put an end to this...
FACT: We live in the greatest country in the world
FACT: The Yankees suck
/Topic
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 12:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Insufficient
FACT: We live in the greatest country this world has ever known.
FACT: The Yankees really, really, really suck.
by Stirrups on Apr 16, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But do they suck more than the Chowds?
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And in baseball news.....
The Indians trounced the Yankees by a score of 10-2 and ruined the Yankees’ home opener.
With the Tribe up 5-1 in the top of the 7th they were able to put the game away. With Grady Sizemore at-bat and the bases loaded, he made contact with the ball……..but that’s when things got weird. The ball actually left the field of play and while soaring through the air went over a vertical structure (wall?). And here’s where things were crazy – the runners were allowed to score UNIMPEDED! And then as if to confuse matters even further the next batter (Victor Martinez) did the same thing!
A strange and perhaps illegal tactic. This thing, this ball-in-the-air-travelling-long-distances-clearing-a-vertical-structure-allowing-runners-to-score; what is it? Are the Angels allowed to employ this maneuver?
by XYZ123 on Apr 16, 2009 2:32 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
This game
was a perfect example of why the Yankees are going nowhere this year.
CC had a great game going, but the bullpen blew it big time.
FAIL
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
CC had a great game going, but the bullpen blew it big time.
That sounds like the way that another team (that we all know and love) has been playing.
Angels fan since '67
by red floyd on Apr 16, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah good point
I don’t see it being a season-long problem for us though. More of an anomaly (fingers crossed).
RIP Nick Adenhart, #34
by Higz on Apr 16, 2009 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
much like the mythical beast "clutch hitting"
There is an "Angel in the outfield" and his name is GA! ps. he is lazy but not a bum GO HALOS!
by wallispdub1 on Apr 16, 2009 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would be amazing
but I’m not holding my breath
RIP Nick. We will miss you!
by KingF15h on Apr 16, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is funny
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
by hauldog on Apr 16, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that just made my day
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 16, 2009 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't understand this at all.
So I went and watched the inning on MLB.tv.
You’re very silly, sir.
Let's do this for Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson.
by AlanFalcon on Apr 17, 2009 3:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus
I’ve obviously been watching too much Angels baseball.
Also, the next batter was Mark DeRosa, who did not follow up as described. Martinez was the batter after DeRosa.
Let's do this for Nick Adenhart, Courtney Stewart, and Henry Pearson.
by AlanFalcon on Apr 17, 2009 3:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This fanpost = FAIL
RIP Nick Adenhart - Angel fans will never forget you!
by Downing Rules on Apr 16, 2009 11:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i disagree
the lively banter has been pretty interesting
That'll only happen if that one prospect is the second coming of Christ and redemption for mankind can only be achieved by smacking many balls out of the yard.
-The Limey
by anaheim angels on Apr 17, 2009 1:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm more incensed at being forced to listen to "Build me up, buttercup!"
I think I’m going to sue the Angels … can I get $10 million? No, I won’t take GMJ in place of the $10M.
RIP Nick Adenhart - Angel fans will never forget you!
by Downing Rules on Apr 17, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What if they throw in Willitts?
R.I.P. King Ad-Rock #34
by Seik1177 on Apr 17, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Find some reason to get teh Halos pissed at you. Sue them. Collect $10million.
Then go up to Arte and buy out 1 year of GMJ’s contract. This would be a good year to buy out.
Step 1 towards returning to respectability: Izzy starts at SS.
by Stirrups on Apr 17, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You WILL stand there, and you WILL enjoy the song, goddammit!
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 17, 2009 12:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure why the picture link didn't work
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 17, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I am seeing that pic right
we have a stadium usher holding a chain at the top of the steps and, essentially, barricading the attendees away from the exits?
Step 1 towards returning to respectability: Izzy starts at SS.
by Stirrups on Apr 17, 2009 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess they should start handing out Flomax then.
Play Wood already. Willits sucks.
by hauldog on Apr 17, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
