chasfh

I'm old enough to remember when gambling was bad because criminals ran it.

Although they are indisputably the top two in Michigan in terms of sales.

I get ESPN unlimited with my DIRECTV subscription, so I think I’m good. I also get MLB TV with my DirecTV extra inning subscription, so I can see it on TV or online for a single subscription.

Yes, minus the grin and run

I believe WBC is banning him for cannabis use because multiple countries in the tournament still criminalize marijuana use.

Ooh, so close!

I have done it multiple times. I just haven’t done it on every post. It’s emoji for when you say something controversial and follow it up with *ducks*, as in, someone is gonna throw something at you for saying it.

If this is actually true, I cannot imagine that MLB simply doesn’t care if they lose fans.

I am not putting ducks on every post.

Yeah, she is definitely impressed with herself.

Apologies for the source, but …

I also think so many of them are compromised.

I posted this in congressional elections thread a few weeks ago. I went back to review it, and I still think it all holds water. The only thing I might add is that, in the month or two preceding the actual election, the Trump regime might dramatically soften their ground game when it comes to immigration, and also, do something dramatic to address consumer prices, maybe even send (or promise to send) a $1,000 check from the federal government in the names of their Republican congresspeople, or their Democratic congresspeople's Republican opponents, to sow doubt among independents and suppress their urgency to want to vote.

I don't know that Trump wants the Post to shut down, necessarily. I think he just wants to make sure that the local paper is on board with him. He can't have a major journalistic institution taking potshots at him from his own backyard. As for serious reform of media ownership, the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was the "Big Bang" of media deregulation ("television is just another appliance—it’s a toaster with pictures"), which led to The Telecommunications Act of 1996, the most significant ownership loosening in history. We had those rules for a reason. Now we can clearly see what those reasons were.

Tigers beat their 2022 projection by seven games? Well, maybe Baby Doc was a little too hasty giving Al Avila the gate after all ... 🦆🦆🦆

I'm not sure I get it. Is this a way of saying he has zero chance?

And that's another reason I don't root for ex-Tigers on other teams. Big league baseball players are not my friends or family members. They are merely employees of an organization for whom I root to win games on the field. I know zero about most players personally. As such, I don't know what true colors they are going to reveal once they go to another team, but even if they do, that's not going to change what I feel about them personally, because I feel nothing about them personally, if that makes any sense. When I root for a player on my team, I am rooting only for his effect on the team, not for the player personally. So if he does something objectionable as a Tiger, for example, keeping a second family, it doesn't affect how I root for him, because I'd been rooting only for his output, anyway. Would I rather have a good guy playing for my team than a bad guy? To the degree that it matters, which is minute, sure, why not. But that's only a nice-to-have, not a must-have. Beyond that, I have no personal stake in what kind of people these guys are off the field. This is why I don't root for ex-Tigers on other teams. Because he's not a friend or family member, when he engages in something on another team like "bang a gong", I feel no betrayal or disappointment. He's someone else's problem now. Flip side, if he wins a Cy Young and a ring, I feel no joy, because he had to beat my team in order to get there.

Only if he's given up on all the third base options we have in-house.