gehringer_2

When I checked last week, the Tigers were more game over 500 in games started by Mize and Skubel than their overall record - thus they are sub 500 when anyone besides those two start.

apropos of this: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-techs-energy-hungry-data-040203455.html

There are all kinds of studies out there to purport to show that conservatives and liberals have fundamentally different psychological profiles that draw them to various institutions that match those profiles. I guess there is always some level of chicken/egg question with those kinds of conclusions.

Wasn't the major piece of the motivation for UCLA to leave the PAC10 that their Athletic Dept was effectively bankrupt and they needed the bigger B10 payouts to stay afloat? So with Cal going to the ACC and UCLA bailing, UCal system will be out of the B1G

There is diverging sentiment between Wall Street and consumers about the future. The market thinks the future is peachy, consumer sentiment about the future is in the tank both regarding employment and inflation. Given the continuing income disparity in the US, that could be true for both, but only to a degree. In a 60%+ consumer spending driven economy, if the consumer bugs out, it will still pull down most things else eventually. I've always just rode out the drops in the past, but my horizon is a lot shorter now so IDK.

Ironically, the former does exactly help make the latter possible. Condition someone to always just accept doctrine, then suddenly remove the constraints - and the moral reasoning muscle is deeply atrophied. It may go in a lot of wrong directions before it ever (hopefully) does find its ground. I know all the modern understanding about young brains, but all the more reason they should start being challenged with taking moral responsibility for themselves early, when the stakes are still low and they can learn their own way. I always thought Judaism was onto to something then they told a 13yr old it was time to grow up and start taking responsibility for yourself. If you are 13 with half an ounce of sense, you can figure out what is right and wrong for yourself if given the chance. But that's what too many parents are afraid or, or are being taught to be afraid of by the people they allow themselves to be led by.

Society can't function when everyone is this greedy, and what I mean is that if the members of the press don't have enough solidarity with each other to boycott the event in support of one of their members who is singled out, then they all deserve to be divided and conquered. But they are too willing to see one of their own go down to make a nickel. Of course the problem is that even if they all deserve to go down, damn-little good that does the public.

They aren’t going to have enough investigators to keep up.

The one caveat is that the player is never truly an invariant source. The person may vary in time due to any of the thousand things that affect people, including his efforts to get better. And of course some guys are just more stable/consistent than others.

Yup. He’ll have a couple clean outings then go out and walk three the next day. I had been kind of hopeful because he had a couple of good outings when he came back, but he didn’t sustain it.

IDK, I think Klein is clear enough the column is about the unacceptability of political violence more than about whether Kirk was good for the body politic or not. In the "liberal" (as in classical Burkean) Western view, everyone is supposed to have the right to speak and rational debate is supposed to lead to the right answers emerging by consensus. Maybe 20 and 21st century psychology, history and the rise of social media having given the lie to that idealization as naive; and that view certainly can't hold when things as basic as scientific facts are willfully denied in the body politic. Problem is I don't know what framework we have to replace it In a moral society a guy like Kirk would be marginalized because because everyone finds his view unacceptable, not by shooting him. Well, good luck with that - amirite?

True enough. Whatever you want to call 'good', it transcends all the boxes into which society or religion or culture tries to classify people.

I just checked, no member of this forum has celebrated Kirk's death in this thread. Now it's clear that many believe the world may be a better place without him and many have pointed out why they believe he was a bad guy (yours truly incl). But those remain quite different things. I think the world would be a better place with fewer lawyers - I'm not advocating we do any in.

+1 (i'm out of likes today)

I think they might get something from Urquidy but otherwise agree. Disappointed Lange hasn't come around. Relief pitchers throw so few innings you never know if it's their good years or their bad years that are the outliers. Looking like with Lange it was the good year Or maybe he's just got permanent deficits from the injuries. I think sometimes we underestimate how much permanent damage these guys build up from their injuries. Maybe what did in Manning also.

No fear of that. This SCOTUS would happily reverse even Miranda to make sure the death of one of their stars is avenged.

If you think everyone is saying that you maybe you should parse the conversation a little more closely. But even if some are, can you blame them? If you were one of those people Charlie so cavalierly suggested be removed from the population how could you be blamed for being happy he's gone? Why was virtually every American glad to see Bin Laden gone? Because he had made himself our mortal enemy. Charlie made himself that for a lot of people.

interesting, But a hunter that buys another a 3rd gun doesn't really change the calculus of how many armed people are wandering around the streets or how many households where a gun becomes the end point of some stupid drunken argument or a suicide vector. As has been discussed before, we tend to debate the gun issue backwards in the US. The gun control issue always comes up after some kind of high profile assassination - but what gun control really does is make the streets safer - and reduce suicides. Under almost any reasonable gun control regime you can imagine, a Lee Harvey Oswald probably could still have obtained a rifle. That's not what you are going to stop. What you can get are safer streets, and at least a reduction in lethality of the mass shooters - for instance in '66 the Texas Tower shooter was able to kill 15 compared to the Vegas Shooter killing 60 in somewhat similar circumstances. Where the debate in the US always founders is that we let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because there may be nothing that can stop all gun deaths, doesn't mean we can't stop a lot of them. And despite what you quoted about Australia's possible backsliding, gun deaths still fell by something like 2/3 with the actions they took. And in the end, I just don't get it. If I knew I could save the life of some poor unknown person by going out my way just a little bit, or even to prove I was competent to own a weapon, I'd leap at the chance. I just don't understand American gun owners who would rather see people die than be inconvenienced a little. And so many profess to be Christian. How can they care so little for their fellow man?

this is one of the reasons that the right has such a need to devalue science, because guns are such a big piece of the right's theology and science absolutely proves that guns are a bad idea. So what do you do? You don't want to change your mind so you must deny the facts and the systems that produce the facts.

hard to have a polite conversation with a merchant of hate and intolerance.

Dickens actually already wrote this character once, but of course as fiction. But it's right out of 'A Christmas Carol' where Scrooge wants to see some "human feeling" over his death and the Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Be shows him the chambermaid having a gay old time selling what she stripped from his bedroom as he lay there dead but still warm.

Life is complex, people are complex. What a person does that is good doesn't mean they can't be crazy. But seriously, that's exactly why what a guy like Kirk preaches is so terrible. The trans person I happen to know the best does more selfless good work out in the larger community than Charlie Kirk probably ever dreamed of doing in his life. He has(had) no right or standing at all to impugn that person's existence or their value.

Yankees were holding the door open, Tigers didn't walk through

Tigers sending too many minor league pitchers out against major league hitters right now.

best of all possible worlds for the US now would be for Trump to lose energy to where he no longer initiated much but keeps holding to power so close none of the crazies around him can take any initiatives either.