Jump to content

hayden_horn

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    8658
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by hayden_horn

  1. 3 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

    damn, that fucking ump absolutely jacks off to the extra low and outside pitch. 

    this is actually my biggest issue with the batter interference. you can't call low and away consistently, and not expect an occasional off-balance swing. that said, i stand by my earlier commentary.

  2. Just now, Fozzz said:

    Why not see how deep Shugart can go in this game?  Relievers gonna be a lot more valuable tomorrow. 

    my thoughts exactly. though they stated they'd be keen to bounce him asap in the regional

  3. 1 minute ago, Goo Punch said:

     


    I don’t believe he impeded the throw. Not even a little bit.

     

    think of it like this, because i know you know soccer. think of an offside call against a player who never touches the ball on a goal. the ref and linesmen are in the unfortunate position to determine whether or not intent even matters. you can't have a guy charging at the goalkeeper even if he isn't part of the play. sometimes they have to call that, even if it might not be certain that bad intent is in play, just to send the message that little games like that aren't to be played. at that point, intent doesn't matter, the position after the swing does. even if you duck under the throw, you're still in front of the catcher. just putting the kabosh on any tomfoolery is a strong ump move, imo. i think it was a questionable call, but good umping, if that makes sense.

    • Like 1
  4. i don't know. i don't think it was a great call, but i get it. it could easily look to the ump like he jumped across the plate on a hit and run. pretty much everything about it, including david pierce coming out for discussion was proper baseball, imo.

    • Like 1
  5. Just now, Lagunamadre said:

    Ya, I watched the conference live and caught that, he started by saying it was a really nice letter and ended by saying he hasn't opened yet. Bizzaro world. 

    we're through the looking glass. i love the "i could be in for a big surprise" line though. a weird moment of humor from a generally humorless man.

  6. lulz, remember that 5th grade level letter trump issued about north korea?

    it was all bullshit, i guess.

    from AP: 

    Quote


    Trump ends week of uncertainty, announces historic summit with Kim Jong Un is back on for June 12 in Singapore

     

  7. On 5/24/2018 at 4:56 PM, Johnny Sack said:

    How many people here with jobs are allowed to pontificate about politics with customers?  I am a lawyer.  I have partners.  There is no way any of us would preach politics to our clients.  Period.  And we certainly wouldn't let our employees preach their political views to our clients.

    What freaking world do you people live in?

    The NFL's major mistake was not cutting this bullshit off as soon as it happened.  Like the NBA did with Chris Jackson.

    i think it sort of depends on the employer. my employer is based in the uk, and gives us 24 paid volunteer hours. my employer is also heavily involved in various charities, and we have a fairly robust pride program for lgbt. we volunteer for pride events here in austin. is that political? sort of, yeah, some might say absolutely. i think somewhat cynically that it is more about not shutting off sources of talent, because talent wins. but either way, it's fairly progressive, from a political standpoint.

    the nfl's major mistake was making a big controversy out of it. let the men kneel if they want to kneel. it does no harm to anyone to allow them to kneel. it doesn't disrespect the flag at all. they aren't setting the flag on fire during the anthem. 

    i think people don't like the cause, and they don't like the people protesting the cause. as such, they find ways to obscure the cause, or intentionally conflate it with disrespect of the military (which is the biggest reach, i think) and hatred for the country, when in reality, it's a fairly simple statement that while we may be the land of the free and home of the brave, some people aren't as free as others, especially in the eyes of the cops, and these men are somewhat brave in protesting their cause.

  8. 9 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    You know Caillou is dead right?  Cancer (hence the bald head).  That’s why clouds surround most of the scenes and why his grandma is narrating most of it  

    The whole cartoon is his grandma telling his little sister about things he did when he was alive.  His little sister was only like 3 when he died.

    jesus christ, i could've done without knowing that

    • Like 1
  9. 5 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

    We have sent $16 billion.  That's $4,500 for every person on the island.  There are a shitload of people down there rebuilding.  My buddy is one.  He said the local government is nothing but a hindrance.

    i believe it. however, that's america's responsibility, just like trying to get louisiana, mississippi, and alabama rebuilt after katrina. i appreciate there is local corruption, as i mentioned it in my post, but it is still AMERICAN soil.

  10. this is honestly a complete fucking catastrophe. this storm hit on september fucking 20th.  that's 8 months ago. i know there is local corruption, and i know there are data integrity issues, and i know there is an economic calamity on the island, but this is an american fucking territory. we have a fucking responsibility to straighten this shit out. i know it's unlikely, but what happens if another hurricane hits this season? there are already more than double the number of katrina deaths. this is horrifying, and we aren't really talking about it.

    • Like 3
  11. republican ben sasse has an opinion:

    Quote

    “This is dumb. Europe, Canada, and Mexico are not China, and you don’t treat allies the same way you treat opponents,” [Sasse said]. “We’ve been down this road before—blanket protectionism is a big part of why America had a Great Depression. ‘Make America Great Again’ shouldn’t mean ‘Make America 1929 Again.”

     

  12. 6 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

    Maybe so.  My money is on no but DOTARD could DOTARD.  

     

    Still though, tariff and ban aren’t the same thing.  The Hill headline writer, or whoever first said total ban, was going for maximum clicks over accuracy because nothing seems to indicate that. 

    understood, and point taken. 

    now, trump says he's considering commuting the sentence of blagojevich and pardoning martha stewart.

    this-is-fine.0.jpg

  13. 4 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

    “Stick to pokicy until you don’t see any more Mercedes” is very different than “impose total ban on luxury German cars”.  One is a hyperbolic statement about the effect after decades of [something, probably some dumb tariff] resulting in US cars bought at the expense of foreign cars and one is a specific ban on a particular product.  

    That headline is totally click baity

    well, the second line is more implicating, imo. that he's looking into car and truck imports would indicate an interest in a tariff.

  14. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/07/heres-how-congress-can-stop-trumps-tariffs--if-lawmakers-want-to.html

    Quote

    To implement new taxes on imports of steel and aluminum, President Donald Trump is relying on a law last applied in the early 1990s.

    The law – specifically, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 – allows the president to bypass Congress and impose tariffs by executive order.

    In this case, Trump made his determination on Thursday, announcing with little prior indication at a White House meeting that his administration would impose tariffs of 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminum.

    The legal justification for the tariffs came in the form of a report from Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, which outlined the national security threats from the imports in question and provided a framework for retaliation.

    Ross' report originally suggested a 24 percent tariff on steel; Trump nudged it up to 25 percent.

    "Your guess is as good as mine" for why Trump increased the number, said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan think tank. "Twenty-five sounds better, probably."

    The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment.

    Executive tariffs
    President George W. Bush slapped tariffs on steel imports in 2002. But his were so-called safeguard tariffs, which require a lengthier legislative process involving the input of the International Trade Commission. He ended those tariffs in 2003.

    In those days, Republicans were generally unified in their preference for free trade. And as recently as 2013, Republicans appeared to join Democrats in strongly supporting U.S. participation in a more global economy: A Pew Research poll from that year found that 74 percent of Republicans agreed that growing trade and business ties are good for the U.S.

    “You do not want to give Jeff Bezos a seven-year head start.”
    Hear what else Buffett has to say

    But Trump's winning presidential campaign, during which he regularly attacked free trade agreements as "unfair," quickly buckled that consensus. By March 2016, more than two-thirds of Trump supporters said free trade agreements have been a bad thing for the U.S., according to a Pew Research poll at the time.

    Republican congressional leadership, however, has been less enthusiastic to follow Trump on trade.

    House Speaker Paul Ryan this week said he was "extremely worried" about the consequences of a potential trade war. And Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, said he has "genuine concerns" about the policy.

    lulz at that last line. article is from march, by the way, so it's dated. 

    and we know congress won't do anything. because they are cowards.

×
×
  • Create New...