- Bloom bait
- ML/v0 points out the highlights in a recent interLew
- I think the Twins just activated their ** account
- Christ, what a Baumol
- What’s a more ridiculous blogger hobbyhorse — Sullivan’s Trig obsession, Yglesias’ rent-seeking-cartels, or Drum’s disloyalty card jeremiad?
- Oh, man. RIP, Betty Garrett. She’s one of the best things about Take Me Out to the Ballgame (albeit playing pretty much the same character she did in On the Town). That’s one of JP’s current favorites — he can now sing just about the entire title song. Fun movie — but the baseball action in it is awful.
Take me out to the ballgame 107
107 thoughts on “Take me out to the ballgame”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
iFSBN, ** account activates YOU
Nice.
Re3: Cahill for Liriano, straight up.
Is that actually a good deal? Cahill has a lot of team control left.
I see Cahill providing 8 WAR over the next 4 years and Liriano 8 WAR over the next 2 years. Is that an unreasonable estimate? I place a lot of value in Liriano’s concentrated WAR over the next 2 years. And if that’s not enough of a reason for you to pull the trigger, you have the option of extending Liriano through one or two years free agency, as similar deals have established in the past (i.e. Greinke and Johnson, like that article mentions).
So the concentration value outweighs the higher cost for you? Probably reasonable, and I agree it would be selling high.
Especially since we know the team has a good shot at competing the next two years — and less sure of 3, 4 years from now.
Iunno. I think his value — including his current team/cost control profile — will probably never be higher. And it seems like Beane’s going all-in on ’11 being the A’s best shot at guaranteed competitiveness. And unless Beane is planning on signing Pujols, looks as if ’12 and beyond will see more retrenching/profit-taking … Liriano would fit in all those parameters.
I’ve always liked Liriano a lot.
If only WE had had AJ
We wouldn’t have had to see D’Angelo Jimenez in the ALCS.
I am happy to report that my local Target (in Albany) has dark green Suzuki jersey tees in kid sizes S-M-L-XL for $12. Best part: rather than the usual jersey tee cursive Athletics on the front, these have Oakland instead.
still too big.
Ditto.
It drives me up the wall that 4 kids at preschool have “panda 38” shirts. My oldest wants a number shirt. Its all he talks about. I can’t get him one. (well, he HAS a Giambi Small from 2 years ago but its still too big.)
IN the pile of hats at picotrebuchet’s school, I found Giants (ok, fine), Cubs gear (lots of people from the Midwest), Red Sox gear (unforgivable), and Yankees hat (WTF?).
Gershman alert!
I approve of this message.
So I’ve been trying to tone down the angry partisan stuff, but this is too much.
Of course, when the next abortion provider is killed, we’ll have a week-long media story about how the murderer was a lone madman who had NOTHING TO DO with shit like this.
So, if there’s a natal situation where the health of the fetus is threatened but the mother is fine, the doctor could euthanize the mother to save the fetus, right?
I’ve got to say, I have a perverse respect for crazy-ass shit like this — it’s at least morally consistent. As opposed to alleged pro-lifers who somehow support rape/incest exceptions.
(Of course, it’s not actually consistent for anyone who claims to be pro-life on the basis of #5/6.)
I don’t see how it’s morally inconsistent to make exceptions for rape/incest.
As a pro-lifer, I think that people should have to deal with the consequences of their actions. If you choose to have sex and end up pregnant, that’s different than the choice being taken from you through forced sex abuse.
That’s not to say that I feel good about aborting such a baby.
So (and nm opened up this can of worms, so if either you or I get totally pissed off, let’s blame him) it’s not based on the sanctity of the womb-bound entity?
Sorry for bailing when I did–I had to catch a 90-minute ferry for work (I made it just before it pulled away), and I own no 3G devices. I’m not trying to avoid the consequences of my action of posting my feelings on the matter–it was just bad timing.
I’m reluctant to answer any questions, though, because if my experience in the matter is any indication, you probably have a response ready for just about anything I could write. Additionally, any answer I give rooted in my religious convictions could quickly be rebutted with a dismissive comment about my religion or religion as a motivator for imposing unshared beliefs onto others.
The line I’m trying to walk is fine, as I’m not discussing here why people should vote one way or another, or even why people should hold any specific belief on abortion. And, for the record, I have never voted to restrict any sort of “reproductive right”. I am merely responding to the claim that my beliefs about abortion are somehow morally contradictory.
The problem I see arises in the specific interpretation of morality that each of us holds. Something that appears to be a moral contradiction to me may not actually be a moral contradiction within your specific moral system, and vice versa. I could give you an explanation of why I believe what I believe, but you’re likely not going to be satisfied. And, as we can see with the reaction to my previous response, others will probably take it as an attack on their beliefs, even though that’s not my intention. I make it a point not to debate with people about the merits of my religious beliefs (or theirs), as I’ve found it rare that either side comes out of such a scuffle with positive feelings or altered opinions.
I apologize if my comment about consequences came across as holier-than-thou, but my intentions were not to condemn others, but to explain the beliefs I hold, which I felt were unjustly under attack. If you truly want to know why I believe what I do, e-mail me and I’ll explain (though I probably won’t be able to respond immediately, since the office on my island school blocks web mail). If you’re only motivated to publicly show how my beliefs are somehow erroneous or contradictory, I will bow out of the conversation.
Damn you and your considerate, lengthy response!
I will indeed “take this offline,” as they say, and sendja an email.
Let me just say that, as always, I appreciate your viewpoint on FK.
I would certainly hope (and do honestly believe) that no-one here is
Well, not only.
Forced parenthood as punishment. Awesome.
Remember, we’re blaming nm for any/all fallout from this. He should have to deal with the consequences of his actions.
Happy to do so.
Punishment?
We see the world a bit differently. You guys can get all dramatic about it and make me out to be some hard-ass, but I just don’t see abortion as a birth control option. Sorry if that upsets you guys.
Let me clarify–I’m not trying to be a dick. I’m fine if we agree to disagree here. But I refuse to be demonized for my position, and I won’t demonize anybody else for theirs. Sound fair?
Absolutely. A couple of honest questions:
Is your position accompanied by strong support for free and open access to information about and resources for birth control?
What happens if you do use birth control and it fails?
Yes, I do support free and open access to birth control, though I must stress that I feel that abstinence is an extremely effective form of birth control.
As for your second question, my answer is complicated, and founded on principles that most here likely don’t agree with. But the short answer is that I’d rather the mother carried the baby to term and decided to either keep or give the baby up for adoption in such a case. I apologize in advance if this makes anybody feel angry.
I believe the technical term for those who attempt abstinence is “parents.”
In the dashboard-light collision of biology and solemn vowification, nature’s fundamental force more often wins, methinks. Better to work with that force than to try to deny or subjugate it.
Maybe, but it is absolutely true that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to avoid pregnancy/stds.
That said, other methods are a whole lot more effective than inconsistent abstinence, so I am glad to hear that we all agree they are valuable too.
My own religious tradition offers a lifelong sexuality curriculum called Our Whole Lives. I got to teach part of it and am very happy with the healthy, confident outcomes it helped my kids reach. Demystification, age-approp values training, understanding and acceptance of the issues from plumbing through puberty to actual practice role-playing ‘no’, practice with various BC technologies (the better to encourage their actual, effective use — hilarity, of course, ensued, but I am confident that it helped in the ‘clinch’), more values/ethics training, implications of aging, etc. Great stuff, with a very conscious bow to biological vs. psychological maturity.
Stone wheels? Pyramids? Obelisks? Millstones?
obelisks
Hey, whether we agree or not, I take the fact that I got you to comment on FK as a win. Or maybe nm gets the credit, since he’s taking all the blame.
Ha — can’t he’p it. Just dangle the bait: –
Here’s where I come down, in several senses:
On sanctity of life, I’m pro-choice for any reason in the first two trimesters, for medical risk in the third, and without any kind of strict parental notification requirements.
On the debate, this is essentially the one culture war where I can completely accept an internally-consistent opposing viewpoint. If you believe an abortion literally is murder, you’re going to take a very dim view of it, and attempt to drastically limit its use, and I think there is something to that belief. I think you also have to have some sympathy for post-birth life. The Catholic Church is probably the largest entity with a consistent view opposing mine, and I respect them for it.
On this particular article, I think the new law is comically outrageous.
I don’t think that’s necessarily inconsistent, but it does sort of commit you to the view that, well, abortion is bad, but it’s not that bad. And mb’s point is that the usual argument is that the fetus is a human being and it’s wrong to kill human beings. It’s not the fetus’s fault that someone got raped…
Although most of the proponents of that usual argument I’ve come across in the US are simultaneously in favour of capital punishment.
Sure, but the answer there is that the fetus is innocent.
But the usual argument is based on “Thou shalt not kill”, not “Thou shalt not kill the innocent” (leaving aside the miscarriages of justice).
It’s the soundbite argument anyway.
Glad I’m not in on This one. These are “values” conflicts that are nearly impossible to persuade.
I just fail to see why both sides can’t get together and develop a dramatically upgraded and convenient adoption option. That has always seemed to me to be the fucking-obvious resolution point.
I think if you hate abortions (which all pro-lifers and most pro-choicers do), the things to do are:
1. Teach safe sex AND abstinence
2. Improve support for poor families
3. Reduce medical costs of giving birth
4. Improve adoption systems
I’m pro-choice because I believe that on top of those things you need to provide accessible and safe abortion services because not doing so is imposing your beliefs on other people, and because not doing so will result in unsafe abortions, which are frequently tragic.
I agree wholeheartedly.
me too.
I would only add to your reasons against not providing abortions that while it is never a good option there are times when it is still the best (as in least bad) option.
Right, and you and I believe that those times are best determined by the mother.
From the relevant rep:
I honestly don’t think there’s anything to see here. Doesn’t CA already have a law regarding murder and fetuses (feti)?
(What did one fetus say to the other? “Let’s head out of this sweaty mother.”)
The CA law is that killing a fetus (excluding abortion) is a 187.
I’m with comment #3 on that link. What’s the point?
I’ve decided to root for the Phillies to win more than 116 games in 2011, surpassing the all-time record for most regular season wins, and then to lose the World Series (to the A’s, of course). There is a fine tradition of teams with superlative regular season records not winning the Series.
As long as the Giants finish below .500
they have a good shot at that. {cough} Miguel Tejada {cough}
I wholeheartedly second that motion.
If anyone is looking for a systems admin job, let me know. Not my listing, but I know the person who is looking.
A good friend of mine is looking. I’ll forward to him.
Thanks, and go As.
Good to see that FK is becoming a requirement for tech hirings.
WE MIGHT NOT ALL DIE!!!!!
He is out of options, yes? So, its either “in the bullpen with the A’s or a few days after DFA with another team” right?
If his stuff didn’t evaporate he’s got to deserve a bullpen slot anyway.
No way he gets dfa’d.
right I was just objecting to her “win a bullpen spot” language. Its kinda set in stone, barring injury. (ha!)
Devine apparently has a fourth option.
Other people who are healthy/possibly in the best shapes of their lives/will be healthy and in the shapes of their lives by opening day, according to Slusser:
Cliffy
Bailey
Ross
Powell
Swee-knee is 100%!
Hatteberg
Ynoa will be healthy a bit later on. He “looks strong”!
Honestly, if anyone didn’t look absolutely spiffy today I’d be quite worried.
I KNEW I should have showered
Grady sizemore?
JD Drew is saying that he isn’t sure about his hammy. I think they may need to amputate.
I wonder how Rosales is looking.
OBAMA URGES BAY AREA: FINISH LIGHT-RAIL PROJECTS
I’ve been reading this and the associated articles, and in the end I don’t think it made much difference because the administration was so determined to go to war anyway (as evidenced by, amongst other things, their willingness to accept his information as reliable even when some of it was immediately demonstrably false).
Highly amusing
replylink fail thereHow did I manage to do that?
Rail link
You know you’re hard-core when the highest grade you give of any of the putative Republican presidential candidates for their immigration policies is C+.
Yeah, that’s a broken scale. I bet they’d give me a Z.
Well, except for your pro-abortion views — that should decrease the number of anchor babies.
Ah, but my pro-sex-ed view would increase each anchor baby’s VORB.
But your pro-adoption programs would presumably take many of those high-VORB babies away from the heathens to be raised by white middle-to-upper-class Christians, thereby diluting the mongrelizing effects of the incursive heathen cultures.
Help Iowa re-draw its Congressional Districts. The Hawkeye State is going from five to four seats in Congress, and the Des Moines Register wants to help. Rules:
Population of each district can deviate only +/- 1% from 1/4 of the state’s population.
Districts may not sub-divide any of Iowa’s 99 (yes, 99) counties.
Districts must be contiguous.
With a little practice, the devious FK’er can come up with some pretty horrendously biased districts.
Clever tool.
The problem with gerrymandering is that you have to create fragile districts to benefit (i.e. 100% wins for the other guys, 51% wins for you). That works great until the voting demographics change 2%
That was fun — I could get it to max 1.1% by a N/S + Des Moines rule, assuming geographic communities of interest in The City, The West, Mississippiana and The Rest. Somehow, I don’t think it’ll be that easy.
I managed to come up with three maps depending on who would be drawing the lines. I can’t post these maps since apparently I’m unable to upload pictures here at my place of employment, but as a general description:
Republican – using the fact that Polk and Marion counties have a slight overlap, one can create a district that extends from Des Moines into both NE and SE Iowa, forcing two Democrats to run against each other next year. This map has the most outrageously drawn districts, since Iowa currently has three Democrats and two Republican congressmen.
Democrat – By combining much of the current district 4 and district 5, one can force the two Iowa Republicans to run against each other. These districts are more reasonably drawn, although the new district two would extend from NE Iowa all the way down to the Missouri border.
Neutral – The four districts are western Iowa, central Iowa, NE Iowa, SE Iowa. My new district 2 would force Mr Latham (R) to run against Mr Boswell (D) next year. I’m guessing that this is the likeliest outcome since Iowa has a non-partisan commission that draws district lines.
[looks out the window before going to bed and thinks, wow, I haven’t used the snowblower in weeks; I hope the damned thing still works]
If the forecast holds there should be lots of fresh powder for anyone coming up for the three-day weekend.
Hail?!
Hail, indeed!
Hail Hitlar!
I didn’t think you’d go with Hail to the Redskins!
This is some really odd weather. Hail one minute, sun the next. And the result of last night’s storm is that damn near every piece of my neighbor’s bark mulch is now in my front yard. (Yay, free mulch!)
FREEMULCH.com
My power was out this morning. Life sucks.
BtB (non-stupid division) talks A’s Farm System management.
Squirrels and tigers should work in cahoots more often.
Have you fuckers even noticed I was gone?
Some tuff Tony.
We may assume the husband was under-insured — a good policy.
Who?
I noticed, and texted you a while ago. You didn’t answer, so I figured it must have been something I said. Because me me me me me.
you texted me?! Text again, Jean, because I didn’t get it! 707-480-5218.
That’s for any and all of you fuckers.
Are you kidding? You were the first one I thought about when Angelo got the axe!
That wass so fucking awesome. My dick got hard.
Cahoots will definitely regress this year.