chasfh

I guess the one other thing I want to stress here is that disco was never presented to us in the mainstream as part of a gay way of life. There was no gay lifestyle represented in the media of the 1970s. Homosexuality was something that existed only in some shadowy netherworld, and no details about it were made available to us throughout the mainstream media that I as a 15-year old suburban white kid was immersed in. Disco was presented to us as a heterosexual dancing lifestyle, populated by the Tony Maneros* of the world and their girlfriends. So at no point would I have been able to associate disco with the gay community at that time, which is why the idea that we hated disco because of homophobia rang so false to me once I first heard about it some 30 years after the fact. I can see now that it did have that association with some people and groups, and I can now acknowledge the pain and isolation that those people who clung to disco as a positive affirmation of their essential personhood felt when confronted with the agita wrought by the anti-disco "movement". But if I ever encountered the idea at the time through media vehicles like the Rolling Stone, I didn't commit it to memory. As far as I was concerned at the time, disco was so grounded as being a hetero trip that I never considered it otherwise. * To this day I have never seen Saturday Night Fever even once, so I had to look up the character's name for this post.

This is a fair response to my strongly-expressed opinion. Speaking only for myself, the "this" in "none of this" contemplates only my thoughts and feelings that I expressed as strictly my own in the preceding two paragraphs. I was responding more to an idea I have seen expressed that everybody who hated disco necessarily did so because they hated black and gay people. As an absolutist statement, it's garbage. (had I meant it as you interpreted it, I would probably have said "none of it" instead of "none of this".) By the same token, I would never stipulate that no one hated disco only because they hated black and gay people, which is also a garbage absolutist statement. I'm sure there were a lot of those people around, too. I was just saying that, from my own standpoint, that never occurred to me, or at least I don't recall that it did. My objection to disco was not because of its roots, but because of how completely it overwhelmed music culture at the time. It is difficult to overstate just how ubiquitous disco music was in the late 70s, and how completely it wiped out all vestiges of other music genres within popular culture for three solid years running. You couldn't go to school or flip on a TV or walk through a mall and not hear disco music playing either in the foreground or the background. To me, it wasn't simply a matter of letting people who enjoy it enjoy it. It was a matter of having it foisted upon me by disco culture at large in a truly relentless manner. I didn't like new wave music, either, because I think it was also superficial and weak as music goes, but in a way, thank god for new wave, because that's what finally put disco into its grave as THE dominant cultural force. (Disco enthusiasts could probably blame MTV, which has its own struggle with racial balance, for that.) FWIW, I loved Ice-T in the early to mid-90s, the days of The Iceberg and O.G. Original Gangster and Home Invasion. He was my go-to "gangsta rapper", and I started listening to several of the acts he name-checked in his work specifically because he name-checked them. When I have to remember some of the artists of that period, I actually replay a couple of his tracks in his head to do so.

Yeah, I’ve heard this as an adult, that people who hated disco did so because they were racist and/or homophobic, full stop. That’s horseshit. Black people were already all over top 40 radio, and gay people made glam rock cool even among straight teenage guys. I was in my late teens myself at the time, and the idea that disco was about black people or gay people never occurred to me. Far as I was concerned, disco was how white people ruined funk. I’d grown up on Ohio Players, and Earth Wind and Fire, and Kool & the Gang, and tough like that, because that’s what the hits were on CKLW and WDRQ. That stuff was great. Bee Gees and ABBA and KC and the Sunshine Band fell far short of great. I hated disco because disco wasn’t about the music—it was about everything attended to that lifestyle except the music which, for the most part, might as well have been written by computers. The music was merely background noise for the vapid, shallow, superficial lifestyle disco people led, and that stupid movie with Vinnie Barbarino cemented all that into the top of the culture for years. Disco is what drove me into the arms of chainsaw guitar rock and, regrettably, prog rock. (Later, new wave music drove me into the arms of the Beatles, the Who, and, regrettably, Jethro Tull.) None of this had anything to do with hating black people or gay people. Most people who insist this is the case were not even alive at the time disco dinosaurs roamed the earth, and it sounds for all the world like they are underdogging when they insist as much.

Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was the bright red line after which American media turned to complete shit. Because stations were no longer required to provide balance to political or otherwise partisan speech, radio became the Internet before the Internet. Just one more way by which Ronald Reagan fucked future generations.

Disco sucks.

Maybe McGriff should send fruit baskets to Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, Belle, and Schilling.

Maybe they called Harold Baines and asked for his input.

I won't breathe a sigh of relief until Warnock is declared the winner.

Said nobody ever.

Nicely said. I also agree it would have been the riskier move to keep Candelario because the fans would have been howling about it all winter, creating more noise around the organization than stakeholders typically like. The far easier path with far less friction was to just let him go and take our chances on the open market, or even going with internal options that benefit from being known quantities that many fans will accept. Again, all moot if Harris has something up his sleeve for third base. Dumping Candelario for nothing because he had one bad year after two very good years is practically the very definition of selling low.

Has he been flat out talking about terminating the Constitution for a long time now? I’m not sure I’ve heard him be this direct about that, but I may have simply missed it while being sprayed with the fire hose.

Oooooh, that’s still close … what’s the plus/minus on that one?

Maybe Harris has something up his sleeve, but otherwise, I’m not sure how we are going to unlock impact major leaguers through trades without giving up multiple single-digit Pipeline guys along with Riley or perhaps TORK! I’m not even sure any of the pitchers, like Manning, could get us much back in the way of big leaguers who can help right now. If it’s starters we want, I’m thinking we have to sign either free agents with sleeper potential, or second-tier free agents for first-tier money and years along with generous out clauses. Either way, Harris’s honeymoon ends this week.

I don’t think we make Riley available for his CF replacement unless we are one player away from the division. I don’t think we do it when we’re starting another 90+-loss season in the face. I suppose one possibility is move Riley to left to make room for Reynolds (thus trading someone else for him), but I don’t know if I like that solution. Riley was better in the field than Reynolds was this year. If Riley were merely a 55-gallon drum sitting in CF, i would think differently of that possibility.

Bryan Reynolds would be an interesting add. He can certainly pound the ball. The questions Scott Harris would have are about his plate discipline, which took a dive this year, and his defense, which also took a dive. The former is probably reversible; the latter might be as well. Also, will he be comfortable abandoning center field and moving into left basically full-time? I think he’s also hoping for a long-term deal, so if he doesn’t get one from us in short order, is he going to ask through the media for a trade from us as well? I could see the Red Sox, Astros, Cubs, and Giants all being top suitors for him. Maybe even the Brewers, who have been going younger this winter so far. I wouldn’t count out the Yankees or Dodgers on him, either. They all could use a center fielder with a stick.

I’d be fine with DJ for a year. Not as excited at the prospect of having him for four. Are the Yankees making him available? Would Scott Harris be OK paying him and running him out there every day at age 38 in 2026?

Of course you’re correct, it’s not done done or two. It could be 0.7, it could be 1.5, it could be -0.4, or 2.3, or 3.8, or 6.1 with some MVP votes. I’m aware projections are not guarantees. But they do reflect likelihood, and negotiated contracts reflect compensation for likelihood of performance based on projections, and not for what players did the previous year. You pays your money and you takes your chances. It’s possible Washington got a steal in Jeimer, but it could definitely go upside down on them, too.

We already have a nice prospect for third base. I would like a solid starter who’s good for two wins.

lol I’m a millennial If all you want out of third base is Zach Short, that’s your prerogative.

I don’t understand what you mean by this, but I answered yours, so would you please answer mine?

I definitely think Trump wants to be president, because he is intoxicated by the almost limitless power it affords him. He may not have cared much about being president before 2017, maybe because he thought it would be too much actual work or something, but once he got in there and saw he didn't have to hardly do jack shit, and experienced all the power that came with it, he got hooked and never wanted to let it go. I also think we give him too little credit when it comes to being stupid, ignorant, and clueless. He doesn't give a shit about working within a democracy, I agree, but I think he does give enough of a shit about the concept of democracy to know that he wants to destroy it, because it was democracy what got him kicked out of the presidency in the first place. Democracy is a huge impediment to him. Becoming president again will give him more attention, money, and opportunity for revenge than even he will ever be able to eat. I don't think it's enough for him anymore to simply fund-raise off the idea. I think he will do anything to get back in.

Right, which would help me understand why it made sense to let Jeimer go. It would make sense to let him go if we have designs on a better third baseman through free agency or trade; or he has a chronic injury issue; or he's a clubhouse problem of some sort; or if proprietary internal projections belie the current public projections and they determine that he is indeed a sub-one-win player, or even completely toast. If any of those apply, then OK, I totally get letting him go. What wouldn't make sense to me is that the Tigers determine that he is a good bet to recover to being a two-plus-win player next year, but they let him go because the fan base was calling for his head, or worse, they just didn't want to spend the $7 million, a paltry sum for a two-win player, in arbitration.

Interesting. Most autocratic tyrants make a show of pretending to promise to uphold the rule of law while campaigning for office under the democracy they seek to destroy.

Nobody gunning for Joe Biden and the Democrats gives a flying fuck about the chain of custody on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

What it really comes down to is what Jeimer is likely to deliver in 2023. Some people here appear to believe he’s done done even though he’s still short of his 29th birthday. Others believe as I do he is likely to recover to at least a two-win level this year. I’m not sure how many here believe he’s capable of being a two-win player but simply don’t want him on the team under any circumstances, or more perplexingly to me, for a relatively small salary such as $7 million, which is an absolute bargain for two WAR. If you believe Jeimer is done done, that’s fine, it’s an opinion anyone is welcome to. If you think he can’t be even replacement level anymore because of his early career numbers, and/or because of his variability in results, that’s a fair in-bounds opinion for any fan to have. I respectfully agree to disagree with both of those. I don’t think anything Jeimer did from 2016 through 2019 has any bearing on how he’ll do in 2023, which is why I focused on the recency of 2020-22 instead. Barring career collapse, players are more likely to perform more closely to their recent numbers than to the numbers they started their careers with X years ago.