chasfh

Who's laughing now?

Only a smattering of Confederate state schools.

The inflection point will be when the Republicans start using rhetoric and taking action that tell us they don't care about approval ratings anymore.

I see nothing in the Democrats' rhetoric that leads me to believe they will crush the people with authoritarianism, although the Republicans will be glad to "remind" you it's exactly what Joe Biden did.

He'll be named the head of the new Men and Women Must Get Married and Have Babies Department.

I predicted for years he would campaign on reforming the judiciary. Turns out he didn't need to campaign on that after all.

They're putting those aside for the citizen militias. The professionals will still wear camo and flak.

Life of Brian Death of Stalin Groundhog Day Trading Places

Julie Unruh is a well-known field reporter for the WGN TV in Chicago. Any relation?

TBF that is what it looked like at the time.

Whoa, sh*t—this is a very big domino.

Mass protests probably will be a catalyst to change, but in the end, real power change in Washington would have to come through the political process, and in a two-party system in which one of the parties is completely in thrall to a foreign power, that leaves only the party that is not. Unless you mean a new political system ruled by mass protests of the people, which, who knows that would even work. I also agree a substantial event would have to trigger the mass protests, but I don't think we are all that far from seeing that.

I've been coming around to this more lately. I mentioned this the other day to a guy who sits next to me at ballgames. He seem offended by the idea.

The only reason he's now retroactively joking is that he came to realize he couldn't do it.

They want to cull people they would consider “weak” in body, mind, and spirit so they can make America “great”.

I wonder how much taxpayer money is being funneled under the table to the Kremlin right now? Presumably for the purpose of annexing Ukraine and eventually the other ex-Respubliks, but maybe for other things, too, who knows.

Maybe the current crop of Democratic leaders won’t dig us out of that, but the people who do dig us out are probably going to have to come to that through the Democratic Party, because ultimately this is a two-party power system, and it’s not going to come through Republicans by magic.

AJ Hinch*

I don’t love that either, but that was in the international rules before the big leagues adopted it, so … 🤷‍♂️ When that runner scores, it is an unearned run, which is also logical because the runner did not earn his way on against any pitcher. That came up at the game I was at Wednesday because when Noah Davis came into the game, his season ERA was shown to be 0.00, even though he was the guy who gave up the walk off hit in the 10th inning on his one and only pitch the night before.

There were a lot of very angry people here years because we’d even hired him. I wonder whether they still feel that way?

You’re sooooo cool … 😉

Is that Reese Olson in glasses?

One of the beauties of baseball is that it is a game of logic, with double-entry bookkeeping, so charging fielder errors for one position as earned while maintaining they are unearned for the other eight positions—and also, maintaining that such runs are earned against pitchers while it is considered not earned by anyone on offense, apparently to satisfy some sort of maximal punishment directive against pitchers—would be illogical and capricious. There is a specific rule in the book, 9.16(e), which addresses this: An error by a pitcher is treated exactly the same as an error by any other fielder in computing earned runs. And that’s logical because once a pitch crosses the plate, a pitcher is no longer pitching. He is fielding, and fielders’ errors can’t count against the pitcher record, because fielding does not occur int he act of pitching. They are neatly separated functions, so by rule, nothing a fielder does, short of the specific function of turning a ball into the out he is presumed to, affects the pitcher record. This also helps explain the whole deal about why, when there is a strikeout, the putout goes to the catcher, not the pitcher. Once strike three crosses the plate, the batter’s plate appearance ends and it becomes the fielders’ responsibility to complete the out. The closest fielder is the catcher, so he gets most of the putouts on strikeouts, although sometimes the first baseman gets the putout when the ball gets away from the catcher and the batter runs toward first. This is the key reason the batter evens gets to run on strike three: once the at bat is over, the pitch becomes a live ball until the putout is made. This is also why, when the batter manages to reach first after strike three, the pitcher gets credit for the strikeout even though the actual out is not recorded—he completed his end of the bargain, so he gets credit for that. It is the fielder (usually the catcher) that failed to record the out.

How can an error count against the pitcher's record when it's made by a player fielding and not by a player pitching? And how can it can called an earned run against the pitcher when it is not credited as a earned hit for the hitter?

You're right, it will not come from CNN or any other one entity. CNN is not leading this, and I am not suggesting as much. They are part of what might be a building wave. I just think it's good to see. The pessimist is allowing a little hope to seep in.