chasfh

I went to the show Late Night Catechism Saturday night, where an actress dressed as a nun does a one-woman show as a teacher in a Catholic grade school, and which involves audience participation in which she calls on people to answer questions about Catholic education principles like the Immaculate Conception and whatnot. It's actually a very funny and fun show to attend. One of the people the nun called on was Dawn. While watching Dawn gamely answering whatever the question was, it occurred to me that Dawn was just masculine enough to lead me to hypothesize that Dawn is trans. After the exchange, as the nun actress addressed the rest of the "class", she referred to Dawn as "Don" and used the pronoun "he" as reference. Dawn quickly stated that they preferred the pronouns "they/them", which the nun actress deftly handled in a slightly awkward but still, I believe, respectful way. I've come across many people online wishing to go by they/them, but this is the first time I had been live in the room with someone who asks for that consideration. Not surprising, since we've been in a self-imposed lockdown for the last year and a half. At intermission, while I was washing up in the restroom, Dawn came in and went into one of the stalls. They had to choose one or the other, I guess. But it certainly gives lie to the canard that men become trans only so they can go into ladies' rooms and harm females.

Devil's Advocate says it's possible for Kamala's vice presidency to be frustrating, dysfunctional, and scandal-free all at the same time, so this tweet doesn't do what Dr Johnson thinks it does.

Wasn't this basically the same reason that Bonsonaro was almost brought up on genocide charges in Brazil?

Trading for and signing frontline starters during the offseason. I had forgotten what that felt like. It's fun!

Yes, because the #1 correlation to high gun violence rates is the very availability of guns.

Is there such thing as a team opt out? I’m having trouble seeing any decent free agent agreeing to that. I do see there is a no-trade clause, which is kind of interesting. I interpret that as an assurance by team to player that the team are truly serious about contending and are not going to just jerk player around and sell him off for prospects this year or next. I like that idea.

I like it! Big fan of the component parts. Hope their deep cuts are gutsier than this.

I like it for three years. I’m a little more nervous about four. Not as happy if it’s five-plus, which it looks like. Looks like we still have to punt on the back half of contracts to get people to come here.

Chris Myers must have royally pissed off somebody in the sports media business to fall all the way from top-tier Sportscenter anchor to Fox’s go-to PxP for Lions games.

I see somebody here isn’t sick of the losing yet. 😭

Glad you like it. I’ll ramp up its use for your benefit. 😁

But Andrew Miller is a Devil We Know™, so … let’s sign him! And Justin Verlander is a Devil We Know™, so … let’s sign him! And Carlos Rodon is 4-2 lifetime against the Tigers. He’s a Tiger Killer™ so … let’s sign him! And everyone knows Carlos Correa is the #1 free agent on the market and everyone else wants him, who cares how many years it costs, so … let’s sign him! Maybe we don’t want what Tony Paul’s having, after all.

OK.

I mean, 1984 was great in its own right, of course, but 1987 was special to me because we had to make up a three- or four-game in the last week, and we did. That's the first team I rooted for that had ever done anything like that, and it was magic.

Of course we hope for both, but that just short-circuits the this-or-that question, so if you'd like to, tell us which of the two you'd prefer.

Of course.

Two of my favorite teams were the 1987 and 2013 teams, and they didn't even go to the Series.

Exactly.

This raises an interesting question: if we sign Correa and keep him for the next ten years, from a fan standpoint, would we be happier if we won one title and sucked for the other nine years, or would we be happier making the playoffs most of those years and never winning even one title? I suppose the closest analogous comparison I can think of is the 2010s Royals, who were mostly under .500 but won one ring, versus the 1996-2005 Braves, who went to the playoffs every year for ten years but didn’t win any rings during that time. Or, if we want to keep the comparisons to the 2010s, how about the Yankees, who went to seven playoffs without winning a ring. Which circumstance would I be happier with during a Correa decade? I think I’d be happier overall with the playoffs every year even without a ring, versus sitting on Ring Island surrounded by the Under Five Hundred Sea. Sure, it would be a little sad never converting the playoffs to a championship, but at least I’d have fun during the ten regular seasons instead of wailing and gnashing my teeth in despair the other nine.

Trying to “buck-buck-buckawwww-chicken” Mike Ilitch into offering $30M/year contracts. I like your style.

Yeah, 2008. Those were the days, huh?

Wake up and … what?

So there’s some magic line in there up to which a black kid can defend himself, where anything less than that allows him to get bullied and assaulted by an armed thug, and anything more than that he deserves what’s coming to him? I suppose The Talk that black parents give their young boys contemplates that line.

I guess Trump has until, what, tomorrow? To kick it upstairs and get the ruling he wants. Isn’t the White House releasing tomorrow? I wonder whether that will get delayed by negotiations?

You knew the kid was going to get exonerated the moment you heard the Judge insisted the people who got shot should be referred to as “looters” and “arsonists”, but cannot be referred to as “victims”. He might walk away a hero and become rich as a pundit and spokesman because of this.