chasfh

Of course he wasn’t, and isn’t. It was a joke: people like MTG calling Biden a communist when the Russian leader she reveres was himself a member of the communist party of the loudest communist nation. Get it?

Far as I can tell, red hats want healthcare to be tied to a job so their tax dollars won't be used to provide precious healthcare to undeserving people of questionable national provenance that they don't like and care even less about. I think that's how it plays in their minds, anyway.

Wasn't he always both, really? 😏

The irony is that Putin was very much the communist one.

Oh the irony of person beholden to Russia and Putin accusing Biden of being communist.

One day later ...

1987 is still my favorite Tiger baseball season, because of the comeback. 2006 is a close second, because it felt like the turning point.

This dovetails into a pet peeve that has taken root in the past year or so: the synonymization of the words “misinformation” and “disinformation”. They are simply not the same, and NPR is a repeat violator of botching the difference. “Misinformation” is defined by the OED as “The action of misinforming someone; the condition of being misinformed” or “Wrong or misleading information”. Specifically, intent is not contemplated in the definition, the general idea (which you may have experienced in your own life) being that when someone is “misinformed”, you generally give them the benefit of the doubt that they tried to obtain the correct information, and that when they turned around and relayed such information to you, they thought they were dealing in the truth—but were instead misinformed. It’s fair to assume that they are trying to be honest actors. “Disinformation”, on the other hand, is defined by OED as “The dissemination of deliberately false information, esp. when supplied by a government or its agent to a foreign power or to the media, with the intention of influencing the policies or opinions of those who receive it; false information so supplied.” Differently from the word “misinformation”, malevolent intent is front and center in the definition of “disinformation”, the dissemination of which is, again, deliberate and with intention to influence those who receive it. People who spread disinformation know the information is wrong, know it’s a lie, and yet spread it anyway, typically for a clear purpose beneficial to them. There is no way red hats are being misinformed, because the people they are getting their direction from are not trying to be honest actors and deal in the truth. Instead, they are lying for gain. That's not misinformation. That's disinformation.

Ahahahahanoshit. You don't say.

Lockout. Not strike.

Of course. Time changes dynamics. Just saying, that thinking being widespread is within my living memory.

I wouldn’t. Kraft dinner with ketchup is simply an abomination. 🤢

No, but Biden doesn’t have the base on unwavering media support that Trump does, no matter how much right-wing media tells you he does.

Correct, seven percent right now. We’ll see what it’s paying six months from now.

The United States is inarguably the greatest country in the world in reach and influence. Whether it’s the best country to live in—that’s up to the individual to decide.

Over forty-five thousand gun deaths occurred in the United States last year. How many murders last year from people being plowed over by SUVs driven through a crowd? Thirty? Thirty-five? Come on.

I had to chuckle at this a little because I'm old enough to remember when wives working outside the home for a second family income was itself considered an unraveling of society's fabric.

So you're turning in your gun to the government if they tell you to, are you?

Well, if they don't know the difference between a "clip" and a "magazine", or what a risk pool is, I guess their opinion on this means nothing.

That's true, the United States is the best country for women to live in. Well, except for the Netherlands. And Norway. And Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Canada, Switzerland, New Zealand, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Italy, Spain, Japan, Australia, United Kingdom, Portugal, and ... wait for it ... Singapore. https://ceoworld.biz/2021/06/11/the-worlds-best-countries-for-women-2021/

It's a not-uncommon rhetorical tactic people use for many other topics, too. I remember some years ago on MTS we were talking about healthcare and I made the case that health insurance is a form of what people called at the time "socialized medicine", because people pay insurance premiums into a pool (managed by a for-profit company), and then the benefits funded by the premiums get doled out based on who needs their healthcare subsidized at the time of need. IOW, health insurance (all insurance, really) is a socialized asset collection and redistribution scheme. One of the regulars there kept trying to invalidate my argument by trying to trip me up on the term "risk pool". Specifically, did I know what one is? We went back and forth for a few pages on the relevance of the question (I said it wasn't; he ignored relevance and kept pushing the question) and I said, let's say I don't know what it is, so now what? His reply was that since I didn't know what a risk pool was, then nothing I had to say about the topic could possibly be valid, since to his argument I was ignorant on what a risk pool is. The strategy of course is to ignore the core point in a bid to win the entire argument on a strictly semantic point. It's what people who have a weak case throw against the wall hoping it sticks.

I guess I can take Jim’s word for all that. I thought maybe you were suggesting that Leyland had made positive contributions to the organization's current approach to roster management, player advancement, and development.

Victory from the jaws of defeat. The NFL has been thwarted.