chasfh

That 4-3 inning-ending double play just confirms that even though there’s a ban on fielders playing across second base, teams are still shifting fielders to play directly up the middle.

I just wanna know what Tim Hogan is referring to when he says “the big one”.

Luis Arraez is back up to a .400 batting average hit across his first 67 games of the season. People talking about we're gonna have a .400 hitter for the first time in 80+ years. That would be super cool. Here are some more players who hit .400 over a 67-game stretch just this century: Jose Altuve, 112 hits in 273 at bats, .410 batting average, 2017 Joey Votto, 99/240, .413, 2016 Jose Altuve, 107/264, .405, 2016 Andrew McCutchen, 102/255, .400, 2012 Josh Hamilton, 109/264, .413, 2010 Manny Ramirez, 96/240, .400, 2008 Dustin Pedroia, 117/292, .401, 2008 Chone Figgins, 112/276, .406, 2007 Ichiro Suzuki, 130/293, .444, 2004 Tood Helton, 100/250, .400, 2003 Albert Pujols, 105/255, .412, 2003 Larry Walker, 98/241, .407, 2002 Johnny Damon, 120/290, .414, 2000 Todd Helton, 96/240, .400, 2000 Nomar Garciaparra, 104/248, .419, 2000 Carlos Delgado, 96/234, .410, 2000 Todd Helton, 98/242, .405, 2000

The Reds just going to show that when you're a good team, or things are going good, you don't need players like Wil Myers.

In the OP's defense, people around here routinely refer to Alex Lang and Akil Badoo and Matt Veirling and Zach Short and Ryan Kriedler and Reese Olsen and Eric Hasse and Eric Haas and Eric Hass and especially Riley Green, so we're one to talk.

If it's not insurrection/treason, then I'm having trouble imagining what "the big one" could be, if it's not the documents. 'Cause that's a really big one.

What's "the big one"? Isn't Documents the big one? It can't be the porn actress. Is it insurrection and treason, at long last?

Said who when?

"What about Hillary and Sleepy Joe" ... ?

"Or as soon thereafter as the case may be called" sounds widely open-ended to me.

You reminded me of my favorite cartoon of just about all time:

It happened again today! We had someone coming in to bid a paint job for us and he'd said yesterday he'd be around this morning between 9 and 10. Around 830am this morning, he emails us and says he will be here at 915am. Fairly precise. A minute or two before nine, nature calls. I figure, I have almost fifteen minutes, so I answer the call. The moment ... errr, how do I put this delicately? ... the moment the music started, DING DONG! YAAYY! HE'S FIFTEEN MINUTES EARLY! YAAAAAAYYYYY!

This is really great advice, if you can manage to remember to do in those few times you’re interviewing for jobs.

Yes, I have a friend who’s the type who says he’ll be there between 11:00 and 11:30 and he shows up at ten to 11. That happened just this past Sunday before we went to a ball game. Then on those occasions when I allow for him to be early, I’m sitting around waiting toward the end of the window. It’s like he’s a mind reader. 😁 He’s also the same guy who, I get to the bar early, he calls to say he’s just looking for parking and he’ll be in in two minutes, I order him a beer, and he shows up twenty minutes later. And I’m smiling and saying hi and thinking to myself, sorry your beer’s a little warm, man.

He’s used to pitching to minor leaguers.

Most people really hate it when other people are late, meaning really late, and especially chronically late. Yeah, I hate that, too. But just as much, I hate when appointments come early. I don't mean five minutes early. That's fine—preferable, even. I mean, like, really early. Fifteen, twenty, thirty minutes early. That's what I hate, because I got stuff that I'm working on, and now I gotta stop because they're here early? Maybe they think it demonstrates that they are eager for the business, or maybe they even think it's a sign of respect that they'll come to see you soon as possible. Me, I don't think it's respectful—I think it's borderline disrespectful, or if not exactly that, then at least maybe a tad ... I don't know, thoughtless? After all, I'm a busy man, and I have things to do. I plan out my schedule based on when they're going to arrive, so if they show up twenty minutes early, all of a sudden I'm supposed to stop what I had planned out my time out to do and deal with them instead? Media reps would do that **** all the time. They'd show up fifteen minutes early when I'm in the middle of working on a big client deck. I would ask them to hang out in the lobby until our appointed time but I always felt like they thought I was being a jerk asking them to do that, then I'd feel like I would have to apologize to them for not being able to see them until our scheduled time instead of super early. Whenever I would go to see someone for an appointment and I happened to be really early, I would let the receptionist know I was there but then ask them (1) is it OK if I hang out in the lobby and catch up on stuff until the appointment time, and (2) please don't let my appointment know I was there until five minutes before the appointment. Sometimes my appointment would be crossing across the lobby, see me, and say hey, didn't know you were here already, and I'd be like, yeah I got here really early and I didn't want to disturb you until it's time, and then I would spool out my philosophy to them on arriving acceptably early versus unacceptably early. I made a couple of converts that way. I would also explain this to college graduates who would inevitably come to the interview half an hour early to show how eager they were for me to hire them, and then I would explain to them the same philosophy, and I loved seeing the light bulb go on when I did. They're still flexible thinkers so they would totally get what I meant. I love molding young minds. There will be people here who disagree, but if you're one, you won't be able to change my mind about this.

I discovered team handball a few Olympics ago. Wow, is that game awesome.

I think this is because people are told to question everything they read and hear (and half of everything they see), including (particularly) those from institutions, without being provided the educational and intellectual basis for effectively challenging what they're presented with. So where does that leave them? Basically, open and willing to readily accept the argument that most soundly confirms their biases. This is why a lot of people who are in charge want to completely gut the public schools and make every family responsible for figuring out how to educate themselves. Sure, your family is capable of doing that well. So are yours and yours and yours. We're all capable of that. But is your neighbor's family capable of that? You tell me.

Not everybody has the day off, right? It's not like Memorial Day or Labor Day where a day off for private and public non-retail businesses is practically mandatory, is it? I gotta believe Juneteenth is considered, more or less, a secondary holiday for which it's a discretionary decision for businesses to close down or remain open. I doubt that machine shops in Alabama are closed today. That reminds me of a funny situation I lived through. I worked at ad agencies and while a lot of them, particularly the big auto ad agencies, had all the primary and secondary holidays off, the first two agencies I worked at were always open for business on President's Day and Columbus Day and Veterans Day and whatnot, even if our clients closed for them. The third agency I worked for was in Columbus. It was part of the Bates ad agency empire as a result of a merger with a local agency, and part of the deal was that Bates would give the local guys the Bates name and the access to resources and clout that went with it, but they would get to maintain their own working culture, including staying open to work all the secondary holidays that all the other Bates offices closed for. So that created the weirdly unique situation that the only Bates office that did not close down for Columbus Day was the Columbus office.

Exactly. I don't believe anyone, including I, is arguing whether Rogan is or is not qualified to hold forth on any of this. I'm arguing none of that even matters. In fact, I might argue that his lack of credentials is exactly what attracts his largely anti-intellectualist fan base in the first place. Actually, that's probably not right. It's not an anti-intellectualism because they fancy themselves as intellectualists, or perhaps more exactly, alt-intellectualists. What they are is anti-expertise. They don't respect people with expert credentials because they don't respect the very basis for the credentials. They think they're the smart ones because they know things about the world nobody else does, and that the rest of us are sheeple just believing what we are told with any agency for making our own conclusions.

How close are they to gaining control of or influencing the direction of Ukraine? Is Zelenskyy himself part of it? How do they factor into the big picture of what’s happening in Ukraine? What are the numbers we’re talking about, in terms of percent of population? How close are they to exerting their overall will in the conflict from the Ukraine side? Can you bottom line that for us?

Is this true? I’m not arguing that it’s not, because I honestly don’t know, but I’ve seen nothing along these lines taht indicate that it’s a major or existential problem. Maybe because I’m hearing about Ukraine only from MSM, tweets and, frankly, posts here. What’s the evidence that neo-Nazis are prominent to the degree that they are a threat to gain control of or influence the direction of Ukraine? Because that’s the only way neo-Nazism in Ukraine would truly matter, right? Is Zelenskyy himself a neo-Nazi? That seems unlikely to me since he is reportedly Jewish. If he’s not, then who is and how do they and their followers factor into the big picture of what’s happening in Ukraine? What are the numbers we’re talking about, in terms of percent of population? How close are they to exerting their overall will in the conflict from the Ukraine side?

To some, he's entertaining, and to some, that's all it takes.

Major league baseball is hard.

Old enough to remember Tiger fans not trusting Scott Harris because the Giants aren’t so good.