chasfh

Well, the Trump police state will come and get me for this when it's time, I guess.

When people who are supposed to be acting in a professional capacity personalize what are supposed to be strictly professional interactions. At the doctor today, the last thing to happen for the visit was the phlebotomy. Young woman, a nurse I guess, looks to be in her mid to late 20s, comes in to do that. This is a secondary specialist I go to, not my main physician, so the process is a little different and more cumbersome, and maybe she's newer to the whole thing, so she takes a long time to set up, more than a minute, maybe two. It takes more like fifteen seconds at my main doctor. So I'm in the chair just waiting, looking, and waiting for her to be ready. She gives me a pillow for my lap, so I can lay my arm across it while she draws the blood. I'm staring out the window because I don't like looking at my blood being drawn. And she asks, unbidden, "Are you nervous?" I answer, no, I just don't like looking at this, that's why I'm staring out the window. What I didn't answer was, even if I am nervous, what could we do about it? Nothing, right? It's not as though we're going to change up the approach to address that, right? Perhaps unadvisedly, I also add, I also don't want to see the needle break off and travel up into my arm, ha ha ha. I made sure to chuckle to signal the joke. She did not respond. She might still have thought I was being serious. Anyhow, so she's working on the arm and she asks, did you have water today? I say no, I had only coffee. She says, that's why your blood is so thick. I go, oh, OK. I didn't think much of it. She pulls everything out and goes to the table to work on things, muttering out loud about how thick my blood is. And I'm like ... OK? 🤷🏻‍♀️ Then I toss the pillow onto the exam table and she barks, what are you doing, we're not done yet. I say, Oh! Sorry! I ask is there something else we need to do? She says yes, I need to draw the blood again, I didn't get any, your blood is too thick, look at this, nothing here, you see! I paused for a second because it was kind of a shocking response, but I said, oh, OK, I didn't know, you didn't say that before, that's fine, we can do that. And I get the pillow so she can draw it again. And then she asks the magic question: "Are you mad?" God, I ****ing hate that. I say, no, I'm not mad, I'm fine, I just thought we were done and I could go. She says, well you seem mad. I take a deep breath. I said no, I'm fine, no need to be sensitive. She says, I'm not being sensitive. And I'm asking myself: why the everloving hell are we even having this conversation right now? So I say, please, I'll be good, just, please, here's my other arm, OK? Then we complete the process in tense silence, she announces she's done, and finally I go. Now, if I had any stake in her development, I would have told her right then and there that it's unprofessional for her to put patients on the spot and on the defensive by basically asking them to assuage their personal feelings in such a manner. Even if she thinks the patient is mad, you just don't say that kind of thing to them. You suck it up, get the job done, then move on to the next patient, and keep your personal sensitivities to yourself and away from the job. And that goes double for when you are speaking to patients, or any other client. Or maybe I'm bad guy here, and clients are supposed to assuage the vendors feelings, I don't know. Maybe that's the new expectation as we move into the second quarter of the 21st Century. And I could probably adapt to that if that's the new appropriateness. But if so, that sure is a lot different from what I learned when I was at her stage of professional development during the last quarter of the 20th Century.

Sometimes Americans will fantasize about Russian mothers by the hundreds of thousands protesting their boys dying and forcing Putin to end the war to save their lives. That would be a cultural 180 for those people, and I promise you, we will never see that. The Russian people—I wouldn’t say they don’t care about the losses, but—they have been conditioned as a people to accept millions and millions of dead in their wars across the centuries, so losing a few million here would be basically a blip in their history. It will be sad in the moment, and then they will write long Russian poems and songs about their heroism, and they will be celebrated, not mourned. It’s just not the same there as it is here. Russia has the numbers, and they have a national resignation to this kind of thing happening, and in the end, they accept it as the condition of being Russian.

It probably wouldn’t land with me since I know approximately as much about John Prine as I do about Benjamin Crump! 😂

That’s why I led with “if”.

If you see D-Meat, you will know.

As much as it appears our relief corps has let us down, in terms of what we can control—walks, strikeouts, homers to a degree—we have actually improved lately. The problem has been the outcomes. Through end of April, our relievers' FIP-minus was 102, which is ever-so-slightly worse than the average of 100, but our ERA-minus was 73 (6th-best). For May, though, our FIP-minus has been 88, ranking 11th, but their ERA-minus has been 115, which ranks 19th. As you may have guessed, the culprit has been balls starting to fall in. Our March/April BABIP was .232; so far in May, it's .340. That's a problem for a bullpen like the Tigers' that was already among baseball's worst in striking out the opposition in March/April (21.8%, 18th), but has gotten much worse in May (17.9%, 29th). You may or may not agree that strikeouts are fascist, but when a team doesn't get enough of them, they have to rely on some combination of their defense and dumb luck to get guys out.

True, you did say you don't want to hear excuses, although your post mostly criticized his not hitting for power at the big league level, implying his "supposed" performance in the minors might have been a mirage. I think it was real, and I'm not so worried that Colt Keith's power output won't click at some point.

I still don't know anything about the guy, and FWIW, which may or may not be much, your all sides research looks like a bunch of random websites and numbers without sourcing, linking, or corroboration.

Well, I must admit, “Black America’s attorney general” does sound very threatening …

Hitting big league hitting is harder and takes more of an adjustment to get right than hitting minor league pitching.

So, basically, Hittin’ Harold territory.

Someone is having a good day. And so is Zach Short.

Why isn't there an "ewww" emoji on this thing?

We already knew hardly anyone at campuses were involved in these protests, even though the media makes it look like every campus in the country is completely falling apart. Honestly, I'm surprised it's as high as eight percent. 2. Chart of the day: Students on war By Monica Eng and Sareen Habeshian Data: Generation Lab; Note: Respondents selected up to three issues; Chart: Axios Visuals College protests against the war in Gaza are dominating headlines. But only a sliver of students are participating or view it as a top issue, according to a new Generation Lab survey shared exclusively with Axios. Why it matters: The poll hints that the war — and the accompanying protests — might not hurt President Biden's election prospects among young voters as much as previously thought. By the numbers: Only a small minority (8%) of college students have participated in either side of the protests, the survey of 1,250 college students found. Go deeper

Seriously. Despite its apparent comic value, the name never broke through to me in any news stories I read about incidents he was involved in. But I can see how right-wing media, which thrives on demonization and dehumanization, would name him and show his face over and over to rile up their consumers and get them clicking on ads for gold-based 401(k)s and fascist pillows. Although: part of it might also be that I don't generally pay close attention to stories about big topics like police shootings or mass protests that mainly focus on a sprawling cast of named characters and how they interpersonally interact. People will get named in these stories, even people with funny names, and I will immediately forget the names while internalizing the big idea the stories are getting across. Zimmerman and Trayvon was different because it was the first, or one of the first, story of its kind; same with George Floyd and Derek (or was it Darren?) Chauvin. But I don't remember the names of anyone from any of the follow-up incidents, at least not in terms of unaided recall. Tell me their names and it might ring a bell, or it might not. But I don't generally think of stories about incidents with broad sociological or political implications as being about this person vs. that person. That would explain in part why Crump doesn't ring even a little bell.

I totally get now what Oblong meant. 😏

Part of the uniform everyone else has as well.

I just looked it up, and pink bats on Mother’s Day were first used in 2006, which is even longer ago, and if I’m not mistaken, the only player in the majors today who also played in 2006 was Justin Verlander, who, either for nothing or not for nothing, is not sporting even a stitch of pink anywhere on his person. At least not visibly. 😁

Remember when they started sporting pink in ballgames on Mother’s Day? That was probably about, what, 2010 or so? Back then there was still enough of—to use a way of speaking contemporaneous to the times—the stink of gay around the color to suppress adoption of use, and I would say roughly two-thirds of players did not participate, and of those who did swing a pink bat their first time up, at least a third of them went back to their regular non-pink bats for subsequent trips to the plate. We do have a completely different generation of players in the game now, though, and a lot of them were familiar with female authority figures in the sports they grew up playing, like women coaches, umpires, girl players, and the like. There’s a lot that’s good about that in general, and one of them is the softening up toward use of the color pink as not being a commentary on your manliness.

I have no idea who that is, no, so I assume he must be just another bogeyman right-wingers bring up to scare red hats of modest worldliness.

Guns are in the Constitution, and not-babies are not.

They would argue that the Confederacy is more American than anyone or anything not wired in to Trump could ever be.

Southern culture in general rules America, whether it’s veneration of the military, or the ubiquity of country music, or the spread of evangelical religion, or the watching of Hallmark Channel movies. Also, practicing and/or wishing cruelty on those who don’t share their nativist culture, because we respect toughness projected proactively by those of modest means—which is another way of saying everyday bullying. Just another example of how the North won the war, but the South won the peace.