chasfh

Dave Ramsey is the Dr. Laura of financial shows. They both appear to build themselves up by making callers feel bad or stupid. Not that it's undeserved, but it feels more like it's for the benefit for other listeners to feel good about the decisions they make in their own lives than it is to help the callers they are hammering, which, they aren't.

I just discovered this history podcast, American History Hit. It sounds similar to American History Tellers, but I like Hit better than Tellers because it's a conversation with historians, versus a dramatic reenacting of events, which I find cheesy. https://shows.acast.com/american-history-hit

He'll deport everyone with either a French first or last name, ban the speaking of French in official government and commercial business, and rename the state Trumpbec.

not for him, it doesn't. Not yet, anyway. The entire country is under his spell.

This is something we have to remember: if he starts talking about new outrageous things out of the blue, he's trying to cover up for something real and damaging that's happening.

Not for nothing, this tweet name checks 17 different teams. I’m a little surprised they didn’t extend it out to 15 years and name all 30 of them.

There's a correlation between being trad and being voracious in the bedroom. Or so I've heard ... 😁

What I'm getting that's annoying me are those Reels where the thumbnail shows big-titty-halter-wearing and/or big-assed-shorts-wearing women, I assume because they know I'm a man of a certain age. I keep selecting Hide, and FB keeps showing them to me. I guess FBAI knows me better than I know myself?

Because Democrats are rules followers. The administration will make up stories of Democrats taking dumps on the desks the day they leave the White House. You know—something they would never do. 😏 You watch.

That’s because guys join local militias so they can shoot people they don’t like. Joining volunteer fire departments or rescue squad would force them to save people they don’t like, and that’s just woke horse****.

That’s because the Democrats are rules followers, and the Republicans are rules breakers. Beware of people who celebrate the idea that Democrats are suckers and losers because they follow norms.

Fun fact: January 6 is not the date the president takes office. That date is January 20. Please make a note of it.

The current front office has no sentiment tied up in Verlander, so it would never be just a sentimental signing.

Maybe Charlie Morton likes Baltimore at $15M better than he likes Detroit at $15M?

We specifically need a RH bat who can hit RHPs, which make up about 65% of all plate appearances.

I don’t know who Tim Kelly is and how this notion landed in his head, but I agree this is a viable alternative to a straight one-year pillow deal. Although, flip side, this idea kind of flopped for the Cubs when they applied it to Cody Bellinger.

Signing Verlander won’t bring 2011 back to us, but if we could get him for a single year, and it wasn’t so much money that it prevents us from signing anyone else, like another 1/15, I could allow it, because that would mean the pitching team sees something in JV they might be able to work with.

Maybe we sign Bregman to the same one-year pillow contract we signed Gleyber to. Bregman’s market would have to completely collapse and he would have to be committed to short-terming it in Detroit only for this to happen. I’m wondering why I’m not hearing much about Bregman going to the Cubs? They need a 3B and have nothing in their system coming up to play there tat’s worth much.

He's stalling for time waiting for Trump's court to bail him out.

It's a Catch-22. It's a bad look for cities, facilities, etc., to turn down Trump's bid to rent their facilities because it would portrayed as a leftist partisan move and they would be filleted by the RWM for doing so. Then they get stiffed and the local taxpayers have to absorb the cost.

I sometimes quote trolls, but usually I do so to build off what they're saying in order to address everyone else.

"Fully" sounds a bit interpretative, which has a tinge of subjectivity to it. Or maybe I'm wrong there. I want him in there if he's 100%. Will he be 100% healed in a smidge less than four months? Do these kind of severe fractures heal that quickly for guys in their mid-20s? Especially two in the same general area?

I don't feel bad for any other team in the NFL, or for their fans, and I won't for a long time yet. SOL is too near in the rear-view for me to be so magnanimous.

Would you risk Hutch on the Super Bowl? Remember, he will not have played since early mid-October, nearly four months since live game action, so he may be less than sharp. And, of course, his newly-healed bones would be more at risk in February than starting next July. And we'll have Anzalone and Montgomery and probably Barnes back. So, stronger than we are now. If you're HC, do you risk Hutch coming back green for the Super Bowl? Bpnus question: if you're a Lions' fan, do you believe the chances Gamblin' Dan starts Hutch in the Super Bowl is any less than 100%?

**** those guys for being so reasonable about it. 😏