It's also a bit simplistic to say 'the pointy heads got it right'. I don't sense much intense research has taken place, as you can find 'expert' opinions on both sides, some of which acknowledge warming, but contend that it is manageable or overstated, and that human ingenuity will overcome. These usually also regard economic, and therefore human toll of draconian climate policies.
I do know for certain that thus far oil has raised the world quality of life almost incalculably, and if these hated oil companies turned off the spigots the world would descend into anarchy within weeks.
Sensible and not hysterical will get everybody on board and get us through.
And low 90s in Pontre Vedra in late July doesn't sound half bad. Here in Cincy my grass is still green, not a crazy hot summer imo. That may change soon :)
Was unaware of this site until recently and glad to read Paul again.
Of almost 12,ooo peer-reviewed, published climate studies *just* from 1991 to 2o11, there was a 97% consensus that humans were causing global warming through industrial use of fossil fuels. We also have extensive evidence of the extensive counter-activities of anti-science climate change denying propaganda *misinformation campaigns* explaining, with evidence, just exactly how that has been accomplished, as well as who has been paying for it (so as to illuminate some of what their motivations might be for doing so). Why would there even be any need for such massive expenditures *countering* a global warming body of evidence w/o that body of evidence existing in the first place? Perhaps you could name a source or two in support or explanation of how you came about this "sense much research [hasn't] taken place"? What exactly led you to generate such 'feelings'? A simple search on "Koch brothers climate denial" (apart from the Weather Channel link, below) alone will give you some idea just how extensive their little corner of climate change denial is ...
Check the graph at the bottom. Before it was going up the trend was down. Even if 'nothing' was causing this, the concern is still real. Even more reason to be skeptical of someone telling you not to worry
Unbelievably, I agree with you on renewing Bell. Not as much as his management as his being a great fit for this young team. Not as big a fan of his bullpen use as you, but he's improved. I hope, if they do make a trade, it's for a lefty in the pen. Maybe 2. Another righty.. Load up, let Casali go( I like the guy, but...) and try to get by until our guys are healthy.
Love Motown, especially the Temptations.
As far as climate change, I'll hold my tongue. Too many danged experts commenting. Think I'll go watch 'The Day After Tomorrow '.
I get tired of the mythical climate change that some people worry about - this past spring I had to wear three layers to get through my 9 hole golf league matches. It always gets hot in the summer - 90’s for a week or so and then I start to worry about the cold fall mornings that slow my swing during my 9 hole golf league. If we average 75 degrees this winter with no snow or ice here in Ohio, I will start to worry.
Pitching less than 200-250 innings is to much for a 24 year old???? If that's true then somebody needs to re-evaluate how we train pitchers... See below regarding a hard throwing right hander:
In response to Gibson’s success in 1968 – along with dominant seasons by dozens of other pitchers – Major League Baseball instituted several rule changes for 1969, including the lowering of the pitching mound. Gibson responded with another 28 complete games that year, going 20-13 with a 2.18 ERA and 269 strikeouts. In 1970, Gibson won his second Cy Young Award by going 23-7 with a 3.12 ERA and a career-best 274 strikeouts.
I am always concerned about giving up top prospects for a pitcher in times of desperation. The Reds basically got Steer, CES, and Benson for Mahle. He has pitched in less than 20 games since then and out this year. The rookies have somewhat cooled off lately, so it will be important to keep the prospects.
I have mixed feelings about climate change. This hot summer has caused some to push the panic button, but I recall hot summers in the past. The summer I worked construction in Cinci in 1969, there were several days of high nineties and a few 100. It was 108 in Walnut Creek, CA on 9/8/1984 when our daughter was born. Topeka temps were commonly above 100 in the five years we lived there, and St. Louis always had severe thunderstorms in the late 80's and occasional softball size hail. I am much more concerned about growing population in desert areas, water supply, and elimination of farmland, meadows, and forests. They provide CO2 conversion to O, and gradually absorb and release moisture. Eliminating forests and farmland to put in solar farms is totally idiotic. I support reduction of fossil fuels. but a gradual transition to hybrids makes a lot more sense than EV's until technology is improved. Solar and wind energy can help, but we really need the newer nuclear power sources to effectively replace natural gas and coal power for electricity. I also don't want to rely on China and other enemies for our batteries to power our personal and military vehicles. As long as China, India, and other developing countries keep polluting like they do now, nothing that we do here will make any difference. The smoke from Canadian fires this year probably counterbalance any benefits from clean energy sources in the Midwest. People also forget that it would be better to produce and refine oil in the US where the cleanest technology is used than get it from overseas sources where there are no rules in place.
Doc, I could be wrong but isn't it possible that the current state of internet (Twitter et al) make us more informed about floods, fires, hurricanes etc. ?
That's just it, Doc. The word "seemingly" is a loaded word. It's a snapshot over a huge history of time. Hurricanes are provably less prevalent and/or severe in the last century. Check out the Medieval Warming Period for hotter times. Most areas thrive when things are warmer. Even when some of the extreme weather does show up, there are reasonable explanations. Why do we always knee-jerk and say it's global warming?
Look, who's not for a clean environment? And who isn't willing to do what's reasonable? Best way to do it is nuclear. It's clean, reliable, and efficient. Check out this link:
Using Dennis Prager and his crowd of lying clowns as a source is a good way to get yourself laughed off stage anywhere intelligent and serious people meet to discuss anything of importance.
LOL. Let's factcheck the factcheckers, while we're at it.
This is the exact thing I addressed in my other post. Let's attack those scary, stupid "climate deniers" cuz they're just dumb-old, gullible Republicans. Can you argue your case? With what do you specifically disagree in that link, Wayne? I want a clean environment too.
I agree, but I think over development of many areas involved replacing forests, wetlands, and fields with buildings and concrete contributes more to these extremes than does fossil fuel. There are also a lot more people living in hurricane and fire prone areas, so we are more aware and there is a lot more damage. The fires in Canada are more due to poor forest management than warming.
I don't know how much human development has impacted the climate, but it's hard for me to believe it's "none at all". For that reason, I try not to be wasteful. I recycle, I use my furnace/AC reasonably, and I drive a fuel efficient car. I may consider a hybrid for my next one. None of these things are perfect and VERY small drop in the bucket overall. What's wrong with at least TRYING to reduce our impact on the environment? Even if it's proven that humans are only responsible for a small percentage of the increased average temps...why not do what we can to minimize it further?
Even if I'm lucky I may only be alive on this planet for another 40-50 years. More than likely, I won't see any major climate crisis in my lifetime. That doesn't deter me, though. I prefer to "leave a place better than I found it." I wish that was an easier thing for more folks to buy into.
I try to do the same thing and plan to get a hybrid for my wife's next car. I figure that my 50 trees make up for the carbon that we produce, so I don't mind spending hours raking leaves every year. We won't give up our gas stove, though.
The Camry Hybrid is becoming the best car we've ever bought. Smooth, quiet, solid and 46mpg in town. And you know J. Thinwallet keeps his AC in line -- 76 in the daytime, 78 at night. Ceiling fans rock.
For as long as I can remember it has been hot in the summer. Sometimes it is a little hotter sometimes not so hot. When Mark Twain said "nobody does anything about it" I believe he was being facetious.
Great Motown pick. I also enjoy the lyrics to Corpus Christi Bay. I’m not a huge baseball person, but I enjoy your slant on quite a few topics. Enjoy the heat!
If, a huge word here, Lodolo and Green return by late August then I definitely sit Abbott out after 3 or 4 more starts. I they don’t then it’s more of a crapshoot and I use the barometer of whether the Reds are playoff-bound and if they are I pitch him the last start or two before the season ends.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people default to attacking those scary, stupid "climate deniers". Why are those people not allowed to have a reasonable questioning of the so-called settled science? Science is not settled, ever. There is PLENTY of reasoned opposition in this matter, from people who welcome any challenges you bring their way. Meanwhile, their detractors shut down debate saying it's settled. Those are the people from whom you should run, and fast! A wise man once said, "A fool and his money are soon parted."
I think the problem is you present the "other side," as if he's even remotely as credible, as if it's not largely a result of decades of intentional deception by industries directly tied to increasing temperatures. You're mad about attacks, others are mad about potentially irreversible damage we're doing to the only habitable planet we have. What's the reasoned opposition against man-made climate change?
I'm not mad about attacks. I just don't get it. If I wanted to convince people to drastically change their lifestyle based on a theory and prediction that the world is gonna end in a fiery death unless we do something drastic right this instant, and we're all at fault, I'd better make damned sure I'm right, and I had better be prepared to deal with questions reasonably. And I wouldn't attack those I'm trying to convince. It's too easy to just keep attributing every negative weather event to fossil fuel emissions and just tell those that disagree to shut up, it's all been settled. Well, no, it isn't settled. If it was so darned obvious, people would move mountains to correct it. You want buy-in? Be more reasonable.
I agree with Jack on restricting the distance that golf balls can fly. Watching Calvin Peete hit it 220 yards straight and true to win golf tournaments was just as exciting as watching today’s bombers cutting doglegs and finding new target lines due to length. There’s no doubt the new generation of PGA Tour golfers are longer but are they as accurate as previous generations? How would you know? I say the game can survive a distance limitation if you keep your ego in a safe place and think of the sport’s future just as much.
As for climate change, I’m all for doing what is possible but tend to believe the cow is pretty much out of the barn on that issue. Now that solar and wind are growing steadily and providing alternatives, the negatives of those sources are more readily apparent. India and China are opening more coal plants every year and don’t look like they give a damn what Greta and her crowd think of them. The developing world says the developed world should pay for their contribution while John Kerry flies jet planes all over the world lecturing people on their bad habits? I’m a supporter of change but don’t have a lot of hope for it.
Finally, I love soul music! Melodies rule the genre, and the voices and musical creativity are off the charts in my opinion. Younger people absorbed by punk and grunge and rap pretty much have no idea how inferior those options are. You can call me an OG crank but the soul music rolling around in my head is a lot prettier than theirs. Just sayin’, of course…
Good column today. We live in the Land of Denial these days, and I'm trying to figure out any trends or patterns, like is there a certain constituency who consistently denies reality in America? I'm not sure. . . Which group regularly denies the existence of climate change despite all evidence to the contrary? Which group denies elections at the expense of the country? Which group denies an insurrection ever happened and the unfitness for office of one man in particular? Which group denied the efficacy of Covid vaccines at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives? Which group denies the main cause of gun violence, insisting the real problem stems from not having quite enough guns in circulation, especially at schools? Which group denies the historical reality of slavery and its traumatic aftereffects? etc., etc., etc.
I guess it's hard to see a pattern, after all. . . It must be both sides at fault, and we should not point fingers.
I could come up with a counter list of idiotic things the left believes (men can have babies, it's OK for ten-year-olds to change their sex, it's OK for men to compete against women, we should pay other people's college tuition, etc.) but I'll fix one of your comments regarding slavery: which party was formed specifically to stop slavery? The Republican Party.
The idea here is to ignore the clear shift on which party supports civil rights etc beginning in mid 1940s? Robert Byrd and other southern democrats were later to the party. Byrd’s been dead what 10/15 years at this point? This whole idea that today’s Republican Party is the party of abolition, equality or one Abe Lincoln would endorse is hilarious.
The “men have babies” is a straw man and routinely made to be common thought, children having any such procedure done is misleading at best, the concern regarding sports is so inane - what was there one such example of this among HS athletes in Ohio?
When you talk paying for “other people’s college tuition” I assume the current system works for you? That the shift away from public colleges receiving public funding to reduce or remove tuition was a good thing?
Saint Ron Reagan was the first to push for public colleges charging tuition in the 1960 as Gov. His logic “get rid of undesirables, those who are there to carry signs and not to study might think twice to carry picket signs.” His words. Not mine.
The result is tuition for “public universities” being funded by tuition near exclusively and said tuition increasing something in the 3500-4000% range since that time. He also rejected the notion of climate change being a concern. A new dawn…thanks so much.
I guess the point is I don’t accept the parallels drawn here. Apples to rhinoceros.
"Apples to rhinoceros".....I like it. Apt analogy. Ron Reagan was always a wolf in sheep's clothing. It was all an act with him. He was as phony as they come.
You love to divide. What are you doing personally to lower your carbon footprint? Do you drive an EV? Have solar? Ditch that gas water heater? In that lofty perch, what are you doing to make our country a better place?
Winning in MLB: Hard. In video game vernacular, it's the God Mode of baseball. So Nick Krall is playing the game on God Mode. So is every single player - professional baseball is borderline impossible, on the field, and in the front office. Especially when you lack financial resources. But that's why the money, albeit earned income, of which a third they'll never even see, is so good. IDK what Krall is making, but this is what he's paid to do - he's paid to bring in a Lucas Giolito to a roster putting itself in contention. So yes, extremely hard, lord knows in three decades, we're more qualified than many to discuss just how hard winning is. But they gotta do it. It must be done, the Reds have to hold of like 5 other teams in the Wild Card, or catch the Brewers, neither of which may be possible with current roster.
We need the Reds' hot stove to look like that heat map you posted, asap. Real shame what's happening btw, how is it we're so casual about slowly killing ourselves?
Trade deadlines in all these sports have changed over the last number of years. It used to be a flurry of deals in the seconds before the whole thing turns into a Pumpkin. Now, most of the impact players are acquired a week to even 3 weeks before these deadlines which i agree with. Why not get an extra 3 weeks of someone, even a rental? Hours before these deadlines it usually looks like the produce section at the grocery store early on a Sunday evening. Whatever the Reds do, i hope they don't wait until all that's left on the proverbial trade shelf are 4 bags of brown grapes from Mexico. That's always been the Reds issue at these deadlines in the last 10 years is indecisiveness. I think it's coming around, but history is history. Please don't repeat it.
Motown was the best. You hit on two of my favorite artists with Temptations and Smokey. Have you seen the movie about the Temptations?
It's also a bit simplistic to say 'the pointy heads got it right'. I don't sense much intense research has taken place, as you can find 'expert' opinions on both sides, some of which acknowledge warming, but contend that it is manageable or overstated, and that human ingenuity will overcome. These usually also regard economic, and therefore human toll of draconian climate policies.
I do know for certain that thus far oil has raised the world quality of life almost incalculably, and if these hated oil companies turned off the spigots the world would descend into anarchy within weeks.
Sensible and not hysterical will get everybody on board and get us through.
And low 90s in Pontre Vedra in late July doesn't sound half bad. Here in Cincy my grass is still green, not a crazy hot summer imo. That may change soon :)
Was unaware of this site until recently and glad to read Paul again.
Wasn't Al Gore an expert? What happened to all of his predictions?
Of almost 12,ooo peer-reviewed, published climate studies *just* from 1991 to 2o11, there was a 97% consensus that humans were causing global warming through industrial use of fossil fuels. We also have extensive evidence of the extensive counter-activities of anti-science climate change denying propaganda *misinformation campaigns* explaining, with evidence, just exactly how that has been accomplished, as well as who has been paying for it (so as to illuminate some of what their motivations might be for doing so). Why would there even be any need for such massive expenditures *countering* a global warming body of evidence w/o that body of evidence existing in the first place? Perhaps you could name a source or two in support or explanation of how you came about this "sense much research [hasn't] taken place"? What exactly led you to generate such 'feelings'? A simple search on "Koch brothers climate denial" (apart from the Weather Channel link, below) alone will give you some idea just how extensive their little corner of climate change denial is ...
https://features.weather.com/course-climate-misinformation/
Check the graph at the bottom. Before it was going up the trend was down. Even if 'nothing' was causing this, the concern is still real. Even more reason to be skeptical of someone telling you not to worry
https://www.factcheck.org/2022/08/unequivocal-evidence-that-humans-cause-climate-change-contrary-to-posts-of-old-video/
Unbelievably, I agree with you on renewing Bell. Not as much as his management as his being a great fit for this young team. Not as big a fan of his bullpen use as you, but he's improved. I hope, if they do make a trade, it's for a lefty in the pen. Maybe 2. Another righty.. Load up, let Casali go( I like the guy, but...) and try to get by until our guys are healthy.
Love Motown, especially the Temptations.
As far as climate change, I'll hold my tongue. Too many danged experts commenting. Think I'll go watch 'The Day After Tomorrow '.
I get tired of the mythical climate change that some people worry about - this past spring I had to wear three layers to get through my 9 hole golf league matches. It always gets hot in the summer - 90’s for a week or so and then I start to worry about the cold fall mornings that slow my swing during my 9 hole golf league. If we average 75 degrees this winter with no snow or ice here in Ohio, I will start to worry.
Pitching less than 200-250 innings is to much for a 24 year old???? If that's true then somebody needs to re-evaluate how we train pitchers... See below regarding a hard throwing right hander:
In response to Gibson’s success in 1968 – along with dominant seasons by dozens of other pitchers – Major League Baseball instituted several rule changes for 1969, including the lowering of the pitching mound. Gibson responded with another 28 complete games that year, going 20-13 with a 2.18 ERA and 269 strikeouts. In 1970, Gibson won his second Cy Young Award by going 23-7 with a 3.12 ERA and a career-best 274 strikeouts.
I am always concerned about giving up top prospects for a pitcher in times of desperation. The Reds basically got Steer, CES, and Benson for Mahle. He has pitched in less than 20 games since then and out this year. The rookies have somewhat cooled off lately, so it will be important to keep the prospects.
I have mixed feelings about climate change. This hot summer has caused some to push the panic button, but I recall hot summers in the past. The summer I worked construction in Cinci in 1969, there were several days of high nineties and a few 100. It was 108 in Walnut Creek, CA on 9/8/1984 when our daughter was born. Topeka temps were commonly above 100 in the five years we lived there, and St. Louis always had severe thunderstorms in the late 80's and occasional softball size hail. I am much more concerned about growing population in desert areas, water supply, and elimination of farmland, meadows, and forests. They provide CO2 conversion to O, and gradually absorb and release moisture. Eliminating forests and farmland to put in solar farms is totally idiotic. I support reduction of fossil fuels. but a gradual transition to hybrids makes a lot more sense than EV's until technology is improved. Solar and wind energy can help, but we really need the newer nuclear power sources to effectively replace natural gas and coal power for electricity. I also don't want to rely on China and other enemies for our batteries to power our personal and military vehicles. As long as China, India, and other developing countries keep polluting like they do now, nothing that we do here will make any difference. The smoke from Canadian fires this year probably counterbalance any benefits from clean energy sources in the Midwest. People also forget that it would be better to produce and refine oil in the US where the cleanest technology is used than get it from overseas sources where there are no rules in place.
It's the extremes that concern me, and the proliferation of deadly weather. Floods, fires, tornadoes etc. seemingly much more prevalent.
Doc, I could be wrong but isn't it possible that the current state of internet (Twitter et al) make us more informed about floods, fires, hurricanes etc. ?
That's just it, Doc. The word "seemingly" is a loaded word. It's a snapshot over a huge history of time. Hurricanes are provably less prevalent and/or severe in the last century. Check out the Medieval Warming Period for hotter times. Most areas thrive when things are warmer. Even when some of the extreme weather does show up, there are reasonable explanations. Why do we always knee-jerk and say it's global warming?
Look, who's not for a clean environment? And who isn't willing to do what's reasonable? Best way to do it is nuclear. It's clean, reliable, and efficient. Check out this link:
https://www.prageru.com/video/how-dangerous-is-nuclear-waste
Using Dennis Prager and his crowd of lying clowns as a source is a good way to get yourself laughed off stage anywhere intelligent and serious people meet to discuss anything of importance.
No, declaring yourself intelligent and serious is a much better way. I merely put information up for discussion. Feel free to take it or leave it.
Sorry, no reasonably cognitive individual should accept Prager U as a reliable, factual source
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/prageru/
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abf1234
LOL. Let's factcheck the factcheckers, while we're at it.
This is the exact thing I addressed in my other post. Let's attack those scary, stupid "climate deniers" cuz they're just dumb-old, gullible Republicans. Can you argue your case? With what do you specifically disagree in that link, Wayne? I want a clean environment too.
I don't waste time in such manner ... you got another link of similar topic to share?
I see. You're too smart. Well, I guess I'll just go along with whatever you say then.
Child, please...
I agree, but I think over development of many areas involved replacing forests, wetlands, and fields with buildings and concrete contributes more to these extremes than does fossil fuel. There are also a lot more people living in hurricane and fire prone areas, so we are more aware and there is a lot more damage. The fires in Canada are more due to poor forest management than warming.
I don't know how much human development has impacted the climate, but it's hard for me to believe it's "none at all". For that reason, I try not to be wasteful. I recycle, I use my furnace/AC reasonably, and I drive a fuel efficient car. I may consider a hybrid for my next one. None of these things are perfect and VERY small drop in the bucket overall. What's wrong with at least TRYING to reduce our impact on the environment? Even if it's proven that humans are only responsible for a small percentage of the increased average temps...why not do what we can to minimize it further?
Even if I'm lucky I may only be alive on this planet for another 40-50 years. More than likely, I won't see any major climate crisis in my lifetime. That doesn't deter me, though. I prefer to "leave a place better than I found it." I wish that was an easier thing for more folks to buy into.
I try to do the same thing and plan to get a hybrid for my wife's next car. I figure that my 50 trees make up for the carbon that we produce, so I don't mind spending hours raking leaves every year. We won't give up our gas stove, though.
The Camry Hybrid is becoming the best car we've ever bought. Smooth, quiet, solid and 46mpg in town. And you know J. Thinwallet keeps his AC in line -- 76 in the daytime, 78 at night. Ceiling fans rock.
Hybrids are great, especially Toyota. They wrote the book on it with the Prius over 20 years ago.
For as long as I can remember it has been hot in the summer. Sometimes it is a little hotter sometimes not so hot. When Mark Twain said "nobody does anything about it" I believe he was being facetious.
Great Motown pick. I also enjoy the lyrics to Corpus Christi Bay. I’m not a huge baseball person, but I enjoy your slant on quite a few topics. Enjoy the heat!
If, a huge word here, Lodolo and Green return by late August then I definitely sit Abbott out after 3 or 4 more starts. I they don’t then it’s more of a crapshoot and I use the barometer of whether the Reds are playoff-bound and if they are I pitch him the last start or two before the season ends.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people default to attacking those scary, stupid "climate deniers". Why are those people not allowed to have a reasonable questioning of the so-called settled science? Science is not settled, ever. There is PLENTY of reasoned opposition in this matter, from people who welcome any challenges you bring their way. Meanwhile, their detractors shut down debate saying it's settled. Those are the people from whom you should run, and fast! A wise man once said, "A fool and his money are soon parted."
Cue the insults in 3...2...1.
I think the problem is you present the "other side," as if he's even remotely as credible, as if it's not largely a result of decades of intentional deception by industries directly tied to increasing temperatures. You're mad about attacks, others are mad about potentially irreversible damage we're doing to the only habitable planet we have. What's the reasoned opposition against man-made climate change?
I'm not mad about attacks. I just don't get it. If I wanted to convince people to drastically change their lifestyle based on a theory and prediction that the world is gonna end in a fiery death unless we do something drastic right this instant, and we're all at fault, I'd better make damned sure I'm right, and I had better be prepared to deal with questions reasonably. And I wouldn't attack those I'm trying to convince. It's too easy to just keep attributing every negative weather event to fossil fuel emissions and just tell those that disagree to shut up, it's all been settled. Well, no, it isn't settled. If it was so darned obvious, people would move mountains to correct it. You want buy-in? Be more reasonable.
Amen
I agree with Jack on restricting the distance that golf balls can fly. Watching Calvin Peete hit it 220 yards straight and true to win golf tournaments was just as exciting as watching today’s bombers cutting doglegs and finding new target lines due to length. There’s no doubt the new generation of PGA Tour golfers are longer but are they as accurate as previous generations? How would you know? I say the game can survive a distance limitation if you keep your ego in a safe place and think of the sport’s future just as much.
As for climate change, I’m all for doing what is possible but tend to believe the cow is pretty much out of the barn on that issue. Now that solar and wind are growing steadily and providing alternatives, the negatives of those sources are more readily apparent. India and China are opening more coal plants every year and don’t look like they give a damn what Greta and her crowd think of them. The developing world says the developed world should pay for their contribution while John Kerry flies jet planes all over the world lecturing people on their bad habits? I’m a supporter of change but don’t have a lot of hope for it.
Finally, I love soul music! Melodies rule the genre, and the voices and musical creativity are off the charts in my opinion. Younger people absorbed by punk and grunge and rap pretty much have no idea how inferior those options are. You can call me an OG crank but the soul music rolling around in my head is a lot prettier than theirs. Just sayin’, of course…
Good column today. We live in the Land of Denial these days, and I'm trying to figure out any trends or patterns, like is there a certain constituency who consistently denies reality in America? I'm not sure. . . Which group regularly denies the existence of climate change despite all evidence to the contrary? Which group denies elections at the expense of the country? Which group denies an insurrection ever happened and the unfitness for office of one man in particular? Which group denied the efficacy of Covid vaccines at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives? Which group denies the main cause of gun violence, insisting the real problem stems from not having quite enough guns in circulation, especially at schools? Which group denies the historical reality of slavery and its traumatic aftereffects? etc., etc., etc.
I guess it's hard to see a pattern, after all. . . It must be both sides at fault, and we should not point fingers.
Anyway, Go Reds!
I could come up with a counter list of idiotic things the left believes (men can have babies, it's OK for ten-year-olds to change their sex, it's OK for men to compete against women, we should pay other people's college tuition, etc.) but I'll fix one of your comments regarding slavery: which party was formed specifically to stop slavery? The Republican Party.
BOOM 💥
What was the name of that group that Robert Byrd the democrat was in??🤔
The idea here is to ignore the clear shift on which party supports civil rights etc beginning in mid 1940s? Robert Byrd and other southern democrats were later to the party. Byrd’s been dead what 10/15 years at this point? This whole idea that today’s Republican Party is the party of abolition, equality or one Abe Lincoln would endorse is hilarious.
The “men have babies” is a straw man and routinely made to be common thought, children having any such procedure done is misleading at best, the concern regarding sports is so inane - what was there one such example of this among HS athletes in Ohio?
When you talk paying for “other people’s college tuition” I assume the current system works for you? That the shift away from public colleges receiving public funding to reduce or remove tuition was a good thing?
Saint Ron Reagan was the first to push for public colleges charging tuition in the 1960 as Gov. His logic “get rid of undesirables, those who are there to carry signs and not to study might think twice to carry picket signs.” His words. Not mine.
The result is tuition for “public universities” being funded by tuition near exclusively and said tuition increasing something in the 3500-4000% range since that time. He also rejected the notion of climate change being a concern. A new dawn…thanks so much.
I guess the point is I don’t accept the parallels drawn here. Apples to rhinoceros.
"Apples to rhinoceros".....I like it. Apt analogy. Ron Reagan was always a wolf in sheep's clothing. It was all an act with him. He was as phony as they come.
You love to divide. What are you doing personally to lower your carbon footprint? Do you drive an EV? Have solar? Ditch that gas water heater? In that lofty perch, what are you doing to make our country a better place?
Winning in MLB: Hard. In video game vernacular, it's the God Mode of baseball. So Nick Krall is playing the game on God Mode. So is every single player - professional baseball is borderline impossible, on the field, and in the front office. Especially when you lack financial resources. But that's why the money, albeit earned income, of which a third they'll never even see, is so good. IDK what Krall is making, but this is what he's paid to do - he's paid to bring in a Lucas Giolito to a roster putting itself in contention. So yes, extremely hard, lord knows in three decades, we're more qualified than many to discuss just how hard winning is. But they gotta do it. It must be done, the Reds have to hold of like 5 other teams in the Wild Card, or catch the Brewers, neither of which may be possible with current roster.
We need the Reds' hot stove to look like that heat map you posted, asap. Real shame what's happening btw, how is it we're so casual about slowly killing ourselves?
The dugout is plastered with signs for a watch store. Just sayin'.
Trade deadlines in all these sports have changed over the last number of years. It used to be a flurry of deals in the seconds before the whole thing turns into a Pumpkin. Now, most of the impact players are acquired a week to even 3 weeks before these deadlines which i agree with. Why not get an extra 3 weeks of someone, even a rental? Hours before these deadlines it usually looks like the produce section at the grocery store early on a Sunday evening. Whatever the Reds do, i hope they don't wait until all that's left on the proverbial trade shelf are 4 bags of brown grapes from Mexico. That's always been the Reds issue at these deadlines in the last 10 years is indecisiveness. I think it's coming around, but history is history. Please don't repeat it.