Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I will give you this, conservatives themselves are the best argument against evolution.

A real conservative, an old school one, the extinct variety, understood that he who ignores the law of unintended consequences is not truly evolving. He's usually setting up the next Really Big Problem.

Progressives are great in terms of tolerance. I'm a progressive in that regard. I don't think one can have a brain and not be a progressive on social tolerance issues.

But progressives aren't terribly different in terms of restrictive policies than "fake conservatives." Both groups think they know how to do things best and want to direct people regarding what to do, how to live. You'll hear progressives pushing restrictive policies or policies aimed at social engineering say variations of the following: "We know what's best for everyone." This was also said by every religion since man walked upright. It's the arrogance of someone about to interfere with things, about to pass laws, to increase red tape. It's that officious Tracey Flick mindset that characterizes the dumb and loathsome side of progressivism.

The problem with the most strident progressives and "conservatives" is their actual intelligence is inverse to their self-perceived intelligence. They pass big policies, start big wars, make a fucking mess of things down the road, all in the name of "Trust us, we know what's best for everyone." Then when it fails catastrophically later they disown it and blame the other side.

In a perfect world, progressives and conservatives would adhere to the simplest of rules: 1. Leave things alone unless intervention is needed; and, 2. Thou shalt not predict the future (from Warren Buffet, or maybe it was Ben Graham).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Double post. Deleted.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

By swinging at the first pitch? Seriously? When you've got a tired pitcher who wants to throw strikes, of course you're going to swing.

Have you ever actually played a sport? If you take the first pitch, what is that tired pitcher going to be on the next pitch? That’s right; more tired. You guys swinging gave him 3 pitch innings.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You credit progressives with being much more important than they are. The people who deny climate change do it for a variety of reasons. Some for the reason you cite. Some because they work in fossil fuel industry. Some just because they're suspicious of everything.

"Over the past two decades, Republicans have grown increasingly doubtful about climate change, even as Democrats have grown increasingly convinced that it’s happening and is caused by humans." NYT. I'm sure there are conservative skeptics and fossil-fuel industry employees, but neither category explains the way conservatives have reacted to the mainstream (not just progressives, but the conventional understanding that climate change is a big problem and one that requires government action.

I think they're doing it because they're in the pocket of the fossil fuel industries, and because one of Bannon's planks was dismantling of the regulatory state. This has to do with Libertarian politics more than it does with grievance.

Sorry, that's nuts. You're not mischaracterizing libertarian views, but very few voters are libertarian.

I don't know what definition you are using for conservatives, but it seems to be "populist." Why not just use "right wing populist"?

Because they call themselves "conservatives."

No you weren't. You were arguing one side is at fault for everything. You know that's not accurate. You understand the tango that brought us here. It's complex, and annoying to hear people search for something or someone to blame when confronted with a complex problem.

No. You brought up polarization. I am describing polarization. If you buy my explanation but you are a conservative, you can blame the mainstream for driving conservatives away. Happy to talk about blame at some other point, but that's a separate conversation from what I was saying.

Is the GOP worse on climate than the Democrats? Yes. But Republicans are embracing the urgent need to do something about climate change. The polls reflect that shift. They can be and are being brought around to it. And many have been there all along. More efforts toward expanding this emerging bipartisan consensus are useful.

Bull. Shit. Conservatives do not embrace the urgent need to do something about climate change. Republican climate policy for the last three years has been to deny climate change, muzzle climate scientists, undo what Obama did, and de-regulate. There is *no* bipartisan consensus, in large part because conservatives are allergic to the idea of bipartisan consensus. Just for example, the Trump Administration just said it's going to roll back California's authority to promulgate higher tailpipe emissions standards, which we have had for fifty years, and opened an antitrust investigation of auto companies for agreeing to those standards. Did you see Republican politicians disagreeing with that?

All you have to look at is the conservative reaction to Greta Thunberg, which has been deranged. She pointedly avoids specific policy prescriptions -- she just keeps saying there is a huge problem. Conservatives cannot stand it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Have you ever actually played a sport? If you take the first pitch, what is that tired pitcher going to be on the next pitch? That’s right; more tired. You guys swinging gave him 3 pitch innings.

This exchange would be more useful if you knew something about baseball. Thanks for trying to answer my question.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Baseball query. Read this. I don't get it. What were the Sox doing wrong? Swinging at the first pitch in the late innings against a tired pitcher who you think will be throwing strikes? The writer seem to think the Sox were intentionally making non-K outs, but that's loopy.

This is the dumbest shit I've ever read. You want 200 Ks, but you're upset because people are swinging and making contact? Wtf? If they make contact such that you can't strike them out, you didn't strike them out. Imagine Pedro or Johnson or Ryan or Verlander or Clem[...er, nevermind on that last one] reacting like this. What a joke.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Look at each issue out there:

Building a wall. Rational policy? No. what motivates it? Assholes.
Putting kids in tents and cages. Rational policy? No. What motivates it? Assholes.
Trade. Rational policy? No, totally moronic. What motivates it? Assholes.
Police. Again, do they have a rational policy? No. And you get the gist.

On any issue, ask yourself "What would an Asshole do?" and your answer will be the Republican conservative agenda.

There are all kinds of names for this type of reaction to the world. I'm related to a lot of these people. Their approach to life is quite bitter and their view of the world very bleak. They have taken over the Republican party, the conservative movement, and every other trapping of the right in America.

The wall is a moronic policy.
Putting kids in cages is definitely asshole policy.
Trade war is a dumb policy, but there are argument for disciplining China.
Police state shit is 100% asshole.

But these aren't the only policies of conservatives.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Have you ever actually played a sport? If you take the first pitch, what is that tired pitcher going to be on the next pitch? That’s right; more tired. You guys swinging gave him 3 pitch innings.

I am confused by this entire conversation. If you see a guy going for a strikeout goal, you know he's coming with a fastball. Fuck your stupid goal. I want a hit. Why shouldn't I take advantage of your stupidity? This "play the right way" bullshit, which amounts to "give me a strike so I can reach my goal" is ridiculous. This huge "book" of unwritten rules is stupid. If you can strike me out, I will shake your hand. If you can only do it if I give you the first pitch for free, you can't fucking do it, so shut up.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I am confused by this entire conversation. If you see a guy going for a strikeout goal, you know he's coming with a fastball. Fuck your stupid goal. I want a hit. Why shouldn't I take advantage of your stupidity? This "play the right way" bullshit, which amounts to "give me a strike so I can reach my goal" is ridiculous. This huge "book" of unwritten rules is stupid. If you can strike me out, I will shake your hand. If you can only do it if I give you the first pitch for free, you can't fucking do it, so shut up.

Thank you.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Baseball query. Read this. I don't get it. What were the Sox doing wrong? Swinging at the first pitch in the late innings against a tired pitcher who you think will be throwing strikes? The writer seem to think the Sox were intentionally making non-K outs, but that's loopy.

Whole lotta meh.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

By swinging at the first pitch? Seriously? When you've got a tired pitcher who wants to throw strikes, of course you're going to swing.

The writer seemed to be suggesting that they weren’t swinging at good pitches, thus the weakly balls, and using “contact swings”. Didn’t see it but can imagine preferring a ball in play to deny a strikeout.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You can't call someone an asshole for having different interests and not paying attention to yours.

I know this is your brand and all, but you absolutely can. We’re living in an era where Godwin’s law has been suspended, so I’ll go right to the extreme: if you aren’t paying attention and/or don’t care about Nazis, you’re an asshole.

This is also true farther from the extreme.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I am confused by this entire conversation. If you see a guy going for a strikeout goal, you know he's coming with a fastball. Fuck your stupid goal. I want a hit. Why shouldn't I take advantage of your stupidity? This "play the right way" bullshit, which amounts to "give me a strike so I can reach my goal" is ridiculous. This huge "book" of unwritten rules is stupid. If you can strike me out, I will shake your hand. If you can only do it if I give you the first pitch for free, you can't fucking do it, so shut up.

TM

Mainly I was fucking with Ty. As I said I can’t imagine why the Red Sox would care enough to screw up their at bats. That said, and I haven’t had any interest in baseball for a year or two, but IIRC the Red Sox take pitches cuz it helps them get hits?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

This is the dumbest shit I've ever read.

TM

Don’t you really keep having your standards exceeded or are you prone to hyperbole?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

This exchange would be more useful if you knew something about baseball. Thanks for trying to answer my question.

If ty and bank were in 3rd grade together:

Ty “I know you are but what am I?”
Hank: POW
Ty: “teacher Hank hit me!”