MLB

[horninchicago]

It means you are more likely to make the team.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I saw Ventura and Buckner play and always felt that both were defined by one play. Fairly or unfairly, that happens when you are on TV. I was watching that night against the Mets and knew he would never live that down.

When I played softball for a company team I had an EASY ball jump over my shoulder in the outfield leading a run being scored. I felt bad but nothing like if it had been televised to millions.

I agree. It definitely happens. Buckner won a batting title, got over 2700 hits, had a .289 lifetime average, and was one of the toughest hitters to strikeout in the modern era. He wasn't a Hall of Famer (didn't get 3,000 hits, didn't hit a ton of home runs though did rack up doubles, and didn't walk enough), but he was a hell of a player with tons of success. But when the Red Sox most needed him to field a weak ground ball that most Little League first basemen would have fielded, he choked on the very biggest stage, and for 98 percent of baseball fans, that's how he'll always be remembered and defined. It's not fair, but it is what it is.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Man, I never met Nolan Ryan.......but the guy who built his house in Georgetown (i don't think he still owns it) built mine. And he was a crook and not a good person at all.

A crooked homebuilder? Surely you jest.

 

[mchammer]

A crooked homebuilder? Surely you jest.

Wait a second. A crooked contractor like the few that Trump wouldn’t pay? They don’t exist right?

 

[mchammer]

People who said Trump was a billionaire that didn’t pay his contractors as if that was a negative have never hired a contractor in their life. So ******* stupid. I guess it was intended to alienate his base. Anyway, it didn’t work in 2016.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Back on topic, I know that posting this might seem self-absorbed, because this is a very "validate Mr. Deez" article, but it's good. More voters and higher turnout isn't an inherent good. Link.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Wait a second. A crooked contractor like the few that Trump wouldn’t pay? They don’t exist right?

I'm willing to judge his fleecing of creditors on a case by case basis. I fleeced a creditor about 6 years ago. We were visiting family in Texas, and Deez, Jr. (who was a baby) ran up a pretty high fever. We took him to an urgent care facility in Waco.

At the time, we had a health insurance plan that in the US only covered preferred providers - meaning they'd completely deny payment on all others. At the facility, I told them this, and they somewhat rudely dismissed my concern and said they were preferred by my insurance. Well, guess what. They were wrong, so about three months later, I got billed for $122. I refused, and they put me in collections. I told the collection agency what happened, and they tried to play ball - offered a payment plan, to reduce the bill, etc. I said, "I have the $122 and could easily pay it. I'm not doing so, because the creditor lied to me, dismissed my concerns, and I'm not going to pay people who do that. It's a moral decision, not a financial one." They sent me threatening letters for a few years and eventually gave up.

Sometimes creditors deserve to get fleeced. I get it. But here's the key. That one ******* in Waco is the only ding on my credit report in 25 years of buying things on credit. I pay my creditors in full and on time. How many times has Trump or a Trump enterprise been in bankruptcy court? Five or six? He didn't just fleece a few jackasses. He has obviously fleeced many. Were they all deserving of it? Probably some of them were, but I'll bet many of them were not.

 

[Chop]

Lannisters always pay their debts.

 

[mchammer]

I'm willing to judge his fleecing of creditors on a case by case basis. I fleeced a creditor about 6 years ago. We were visiting family in Texas, and Deez, Jr. (who was a baby) ran up a pretty high fever. We took him to an urgent care facility in Waco.

At the time, we had a health insurance plan that in the US only covered preferred providers - meaning they'd completely deny payment on all others. At the facility, I told them this, and they somewhat rudely dismissed my concern and said they were preferred by my insurance. Well, guess what. They were wrong, so about three months later, I got billed for $122. I refused, and they put me in collections. I told the collection agency what happened, and they tried to play ball - offered a payment plan, to reduce the bill, etc. I said, "I have the $122 and could easily pay it. I'm not doing so, because the creditor lied to me, dismissed my concerns, and I'm not going to pay people who do that. It's a moral decision, not a financial one." They sent me threatening letters for a few years and eventually gave up.

Sometimes creditors deserve to get fleeced. I get it. But here's the key. That one ******* in Waco is the only ding on my credit report in 25 years of buying things on credit. I pay my creditors in full and on time. How many times has Trump or a Trump enterprise been in bankruptcy court? Five or six? He didn't just fleece a few jackasses. He has obviously fleeced many. Were they all deserving of it? Probably some of them were, but I'll bet many of them were not.

1. In 30 years, I was dinged once on my credit. The morons were too lazy to contact me even though I was in the phone book (I moved a few miles down the street). I was unaware of the debt until the collection agency contacted me 2-3 years later! At the time, I didn’t know what recourses I could pursue, so I paid it without complaint. Found out later it was in my credit report when I applied for my first mortgage (it was about to roll off).
2. Regarding Trump, I bet most were deserving. Otherwise, contractors will over charge you to offset the risk of partial payment.

 

[OUBubba]

1. In 30 years, I was dinged once on my credit. The morons were too lazy to contact me even though I was in the phone book (I moved a few miles down the street). I was unaware of the debt until the collection agency contacted me 2-3 years later! At the time, I didn’t know what recourses I could pursue, so I paid it without complaint. Found out later it was in my credit report when I applied for my first mortgage (it was about to roll off).
2. Regarding Trump, I bet most were deserving. Otherwise, contractors will over charge you to offset the risk of partial payment.

He still owes cities money for his 4 year personal self esteem tour.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Back on topic, I know that posting this might seem self-absorbed, because this is a very "validate Mr. Deez" article, but it's good. More voters and higher turnout isn't an inherent good. Link.

That article is 100% bull pucky. It's an elitist view that is self-serving, which the author fully admits. It's an argument that Democracy is actually bad. More engagement in our government is bad.

Are less motivated voters less informed? That's one of the premises of the articles. We see ample evidence on West Mall daily that even the most engaged in politics aren't always informed due to their own news bubbles.

I'm biased. The extremes of both parties are literally tearing us apart at the seems. The only way to drown them out is to engage more people into the process. It starts with voting.

 

[mb227]

Are less motivated voters less informed?

Based on City of Houston and Harris County elections, the answer is obviously yes. Because low information voters cannot get beyond a letter, we are stuck with Dora the damned Explorer instead of a very competent Ed Emmett (who neither party ever had a real quibble with).

Travis County DA election is another prime example...he is cut from the same soft-on-crime cloth as Gascon (who is trying to destroy LA County single-handedly).

 

[iatrogenic]

That article is 100% bull pucky. It's an elitist view that is self-serving, which the author fully admits. It's an argument that Democracy is actually bad. More engagement in our government is bad.

Are less motivated voters less informed? That's one of the premises of the articles. We see ample evidence on West Mall daily that even the most engaged in politics aren't always informed due to their own news bubbles.

I'm biased. The extremes of both parties are literally tearing us apart at the seems. The only way to drown them out is to engage more people into the process. It starts with voting.

You are the extreme and the uninformed due to your news bubbles.

 

[WorsterMan]

Since many of us were chiming in re: Nolan Ryan & Bradshaw.

Years ago I attended a charity event and got a very cherished baseball signed by Mr. Ryan - still have it on a shelf with other sports related mementos like a UT game program signed by James Street and a replica game ball from the Horns 2005 NC season.

Years ago briefly met Terry Bradshaw on an American Airlines flight returning to DFW (he lived or lives in Irving, IIRC). He was very friendly and gracious. I did not ask him for an autograph and no one else did that I observed.

He sat 1 row in front of me in First Class. He talked endlessly & told stories the WHOLE flight to some poor chap sitting next to him.

 

[Monahorns]

Back on topic, I know that posting this might seem self-absorbed, because this is a very "validate Mr. Deez" article, but it's good. More voters and higher turnout isn't an inherent good. Link.

KDW is my favorite writer there. Interesting thinker and a great writer.

 

[Monahorns]

That article is 100% bull pucky. It's an elitist view that is self-serving, which the author fully admits. It's an argument that Democracy is actually bad. More engagement in our government is bad.

KDW is a bit of an elitist. He gives hints as to why in the article. Some things shouldn't be up for vote. He isn't saying democracy is bad per se, but he is saying that isn't an unmitigated good either. The best you can get with democracy is the average of society. You are basically saying C- students decide everything. Plato considered democracy as the 2nd worst government just above tyranny. So wise men have said similar things.

Are less motivated voters less informed? That's one of the premises of the articles. We see ample evidence on West Mall daily that even the most engaged in politics aren't always informed due to their own news bubbles.

That is true. It isn't necessarily a sound premise. But he gives other reasons why raising the bar for voting is a good idea in his mind. He also explains that verifying ID is a good in and of itself too. That can reduce the number of voters but doesn't follow the premise you state.

 

[OUBubba]

I love that more voters is bad for the right. To quote a great retired sheriff, "what the hell is this world comin' to?"

 

[OUBubba]

KDW is a bit of an elitist. He gives hints as to why in the article. Some things shouldn't be up for vote. He isn't saying democracy is bad per se, but he is saying that isn't an unmitigated good either. The best you can get with democracy is the average of society. You are basically saying C- students decide everything. Plato considered democracy as the 2nd worst government just above tyranny. So wise men have said similar things.



That is true. It isn't necessarily a sound premise. But he gives other reasons why raising the bar for voting is a good idea in his mind. He also explains that verifying ID is a good in and of itself too. That can reduce the number of voters but doesn't follow the premise you state.

I seem to remember being told that we aren't a democracy, we are a democratic republic (feel free to clarify me). How does that rank with Plato and the boys?

 

[mchammer]

What’s the point of letting 100% of population vote if 50% don’t trust the vote? The reverse is far better (50% vote with 100% trust). I guess libs don’t understand that concept

 

[Seattle Husker]

KDW is a bit of an elitist. He gives hints as to why in the article. Some things shouldn't be up for vote. He isn't saying democracy is bad per se, but he is saying that isn't an unmitigated good either. The best you can get with democracy is the average of society. You are basically saying C- students decide everything. Plato considered democracy as the 2nd worst government just above tyranny. So wise men have said similar things.

The assumption that the more fervent voters, those willing to make the effort to jump through hoops are the A/B students is what? Remember, not too far back in our history similar logic was used to limit black votes to only being worth 3/5th of their caucasian peers and women weren't allowed to vote at all. Why? Because they were thought of a less intellectually capable, less informed and shouldn't be concerned with matters such as governing. It's pure unadulterated elitist tripe. Yes, populism can be equally as troubling but a government ruled and managed by some self-serving political elite, more than it already is, can only be worse.

That is true. It isn't necessarily a sound premise. But he gives other reasons why raising the bar for voting is a good idea in his mind. He also explains that verifying ID is a good in and of itself too. That can reduce the number of voters but doesn't follow the premise you state.

Voter ID is a solution in search of a problem. Republicans haven't been able to find more than miniscule voter fraud but yet feel we need to put forth many restrictions to ensure that lonely fraudster doesn't get through. It's like passing a law that forbids any more than 1 person in the bank at a time to try and prevent bank robberies. Voter ID is the antithesis of everything that libertarians believe in thus I'm shocked you are pushing it. It's more government regulation trying to solve a problem that hasn't been proven.

 

[Seattle Husker]

What’s the point of letting 100% of population vote if 50% don’t trust the vote? The reverse is far better (50% vote with 100% trust). I guess libs don’t understand that concept

Let's talk about WHY 50% don't trust the vote. If you can't find evidence of fraud to support your conspiracy then the problem of trust is in the mirror. Come on...I accepted the Mueller investigation findings. You still want to believe the election was stolen?

 

[mchammer]

The assumption that the more fervent voters, those willing to make the effort to jump through hoops to jump are the A/B students is what? Remember, not too far back in our history similar logic was used to limit black votes to only being worth 3/5th of their caucasian peers and women weren't allowed to vote at all. Why? Because they were thought of a less intellectually capable, less informed and shouldn't be concerned with matters such as governing. It's pure unadulterated elitist tripe. Yes, populism can be equally as troubling but a government ruled and managed by some self-serving political elite, more than it already is, can only be worse.



Voter ID is a solution in search of a problem. Republicans haven't been able to find more than miniscule voter fraud but yet feel we need to put forth many restrictions to ensure that lonely fraudster doesn't get through. It's like passing a law that forbids any more than 1 person in the bank at a time to try and prevent bank robberies. Voter ID is the antithesis of everything that libertarians believe in thus I'm shocked you are pushing it. It's more government regulation trying to solve a problem that hasn't been proven.

It’s about chain of custody and minimizing ballot harvesting. This is where most abuse occurs.

 

[Seattle Husker]

It’s about chain of custody and minimizing ballot harvesting. This is where most abuse occurs.

Evidence or supposition?

 

[mchammer]

Let's talk about WHY 50% don't trust the vote. If you can't find evidence of fraud to support your conspiracy then the problem of trust is in the mirror. Come on...I accepted the Mueller investigation findings. You still want to believe the election was stolen?

It’s about lack of chain of custody and ballot harvesting. It’s found every time when someone spends the time looking for it.

 

[mchammer]

Evidence or supposition?

Project Veritas found many examples.

 

[Seattle Husker]

It’s about lack of chain of custody and ballot harvesting. It’s found every time when someone spends the time looking for it.

Yet it isn't found. Kris Kobach went on the hunt for this in Kansas and found limited voter fraud. Yes, it did happen but it was generally unintentional and mostly senior citizens committing it. Aside from the North Carolina incident, "ballot harvesting" is an all hat, no cattle claim.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Project Veritas found many examples.

Project Veritas? Please show me some legal cases not some activist group trying to build a narrative whose only court involvement ends in Project Veritas settling with the plaintiffs. We should NEVER be building legislation using biased activist organizations as justification. Yes, that would apply to BLM too.

 

[Monahorns]

I seem to remember being told that we aren't a democracy, we are a democratic republic (feel free to clarify me). How does that rank with Plato and the boys?

Plato didn't consider a republic as such. The idea didn't exist. But the republic ideal was birthed in order to avoid some of the problem's of democracy he highlighted.

 

[huisache]

We got Washington and Jefferson when only white male property owners got to vote

now we get Clinton and W and Trump and the present monkey.

 

[Monahorns]

The assumption that the more fervent voters, those willing to make the effort to jump through hoops to jump are the A/B students is what? Remember, not too far back in our history similar logic was used to limit black votes to only being worth 3/5th of their caucasian peers and women weren't allowed to vote at all. Why? Because they were thought of a less intellectually capable, less informed and shouldn't be concerned with matters such as governing. It's pure unadulterated elitist tripe. Yes, populism can be equally as troubling but a government ruled and managed by some self-serving political elite, more than it already is, can only be worse.

I don't disagree with you basic criticism. Elitism isn't good either. But would you also agree with KDW that there are "bad" voters? Those who really don't have a clue about what they are doing? If so, should our system take that into account?

You are factually incorrect on your 3/5s statement. Slaves didn't vote and once they were made free and did vote their votes counted 1 for 1. The 3/5s was about assigning seats in the House of Representatives based on population. Slaves were considered 3/5 in the count. Northerners wanted slaves to count as 0. Southerners wanted slaves to count as 1. You are thinking of poll taxes and the like. I don't like those. I am open to things that don't discriminate by race or sex. Raising the voting age isn't a bad idea.

Voter ID is a solution in search of a problem. Republicans haven't been able to find more than miniscule voter fraud but yet feel we need to put forth many restrictions to ensure that lonely fraudster doesn't get through. It's like passing a law that forbids any more than 1 person in the bank at a time to try and prevent bank robberies. Voter ID is the antithesis of everything that libertarians believe in thus I'm shocked you are pushing it. It's more government regulation trying to solve a problem that hasn't been proven.

You keep up that mantra but I have seen reports that are interesting. Of course social media sites are trying to remove the reports from their platforms.

Voter ID isn't anti-libertarian. Voting is anti-libertarian for those who are anarchists. Many don't vote because they don't care. But if there is a voting system then that is under the purview of government and should be made secure. Philosophically i think requiring voter ID is common sense. 1 person 1 vote is fair and can't be verified if there is no voter ID.