My Thoughts - On the Never Ending Quest for the "Twist" that Makes the Truth Sell (Again)

Anything and everything will be disputed by academia. 

No one gets their name in print by saying "The established understanding of this text/action/ event is correct and there's nothing left to say about it" - even if that established understanding is, in fact, correct. 

No one. No matter how great the writer, or how famous their name. 

It's exhausting.

Before you go labeling me a flat-earther, I'm not talking about fields like medicine and hard science where you should be emphasizing new research and new ideas.

Even in the liberal arts I'm not above revisiting even a well-traveled topic once every few decades or whenever the fundamental basis of our comprehension has changed - if you discover that JFK faked his death, yes, then let's revisit the Warren report, shall we? 

What I *am* saying is that caution should be exercised whenever you see a new secondary source put forth information or a point of view notably at odds with what has come before. It doesn't mean its wrong, and in fact in might be the course-correction needed to put the tale right . . . but too often, especially in biographies, what gets you published is novelty; what gets you sales is dirt, and neither word necessarily includes the concept of "truth."

Comic Strip Jesus - not the real JC - needs to Go

For one thing Comic Strip Jesus implies that those qualities (workmanship, honesty, work ethic) are exclusive to Christians, so of the two folks in the strip it isn't the business owner that's the a*hole. 

For another, I've never understood the point of these comics. I get that the stated intent would be to course correct the behavior of some Christians, but that never seems to be the intent of the people who post these. Instead, there seems to be a distinct subset of Christians who fetishhize the "failure" of other Christians to reach the glorious heights of Godly behavior, and a whole bunch of them enjoy pompous comic strips. 

Last I heard, Christians were humans who do human things for human reasons, and to paint those who stumble as "less than" - when the whole point of the religion is an acknowledgement of failure and forgiveness - is far worse and harmful than just about any venial sin I can imagine.

That's a Lousy Rationale for Explotation

I have never understood this argument from the Left - so slave labor (or at least labor conducted under fear of police action) absent a legal wage/benefits/safety protections is GOOD, so long as the price of your avocado or cheese doesn't go up a quarter? THAT'S your version of right and wrong? 

Heavens, in a past life you must have been aghast at the thought of cotton prices rising if slavery were ever abolished.

My Thoughts on No-Hitters

Just to be clear, a combined no- hitter is a no-hitter but not a real No- Hitter. A No-Hitter is a measure of a pitcher's dominance, certifying that for 27 outs he was literally untouchable. It's a personal accomplishment more than it is a statistical milestone. 

To me, a combined no hitter - esp ones where 3 or 4 pitchers were used - is on the batters. It means that for 27 outs the opposing team couldn't piece together a decent swing even when facing arms of differing quality. That's on them, not the pitcher.

Just my opinion. 

My suggestion for MLB: Offensive Assists

 I might have said this before, and if I have - good. It's worth repeating, because I think it's a good idea. I've done a cursory Google search and come up dry, so it might even be a unique idea. I doubt that - I don't see how - but who knows?

Baseball is a game rife with statistics, where every action, even bat angle and launch speed, is measured. If you get on base and score, you are given a run scored. If you knock in a run, you're awarded a RBI. So why no metric that awards a batter for moving a runner (that subsequently scores) into scoring position? 

Case in point: last week Yelich singled Rowdy doubled, moving him to third. McCutchen waked to fill the bases, and the next batter brought Yelich and Rowdy home. 

Ok. So they both get a Run, and the batter a RBI. But other than adding to his batting average and slugging percentage, Rowdy got no recognition (formal that is) of his moving Yelich into a position that then made it possible for him to score on the subsequent hit. 

There should be such a statistic. And it should be called an Offensive Assist. If you move a runner from first to either second or third, be it by a walk, hit, or fly out, and they score during a subsequent at-bat, you get credit. 

Period pooh. 

 

For real

Sometimes I re-read my old posts and think "Bruh, why so angry? Chill. Egbar."

My Thoughts - The Milwaukee Public Musuem

Repairs are needed, but I'm conscious of the deliberate portrayal of their woes that the Milwaukee Public Museum is crafting in the media. They want a new, smaller, building, and they're in full spin mode to get it. 100 million in (alleged) deferred maintenance does not somehow make a quarter billion dollar move justifiable. My vote is NO.

My Thoughts - Bail and the Waukesha Parade Tragedy

Unpopular opinion: the tragedy in Waukesha isn't a reason to scrap bail reform, nor is it an excuse to add (yet another) law on the books because it makes us feel like we did something, anything, to address the evil. 

The alleged killer had been accused of a violent act and had a history of not showing up for court dates - the system AS IS should have prevented his low bail.  It was human, not systematic,  error.

He's from the wrong party (from my POV) but the DA is right: we don't need NON- violent defendants languishing in jail,  unable to make bail.

My Thoughts -

 One problem with Hollywood inserting diversity into film without regard for historical fact is this: I just watched a fine show, set in LA in 1932. A character, formerly white in all prior incarnations, was now African-American. As was to be sadly expected, esp given his job,, he experienced discrimination, a glass ceiling, and occasionally outright bigotry. I thought the character was actually handled pretty well; he isn't my complaint.

The issue is that while he was handled honestly enough, AT THE SAME TIME the producers inserted African-American extras into every church gathering, every public event, and every street scene. Apparently, American life was fully and serenely racially integrated by 1932. Even the bigots that harassed the beforementioned character seemed nonplussed at sharing a table with a black man, or with white woman spending time alone with an African American man.

So what does that make the character? Is he a victim of racial discrimination - after all, it seems largely confined to only him - or is it just one of those people that inspires dislike in everyone he meets? How do the producers reconcile the conflicting treatment? Aren't they watering down and confusing their message, when 80% of the time a causal, ignorant viewer is seeing racial harmony IN 1932!!?

Truth

"Her/His/Your truth?" No, that makes it opinion. 

 Truth is not malleable.

My Thoughts

The Left controls academia, the news media,  Hollywood, the technology sector,  and most mayoral/city government positions. In other words,  a whole lot of our most important institutions. If institutional racism is real - and I'm not saying it's not - then which "side" is really to blame?

My Thoughts - James Garfield

Am I the only person annoyed at all the newfound love for James Garfield? Through no fault of his own (he was, of course, assassinated as his term began) he had no opportunity to create a Presidential track record. The assumption he would have been great is backed up by nothing but the imagination of unprincipled historians. Bugger off with that sh#t.

Celebrity Opinons

Just another reminder why celebrities should keep their idiotic opinions to themselves.  

It also reminds me of an interview in a current month's archeological magazine where the reporter applauds a research group's diversity. The reply, with no sense of irony, was that the scientist was indeed  proud of that diversity. "To date, all our researchers have been [Jewish] women."

Diversity has abandoned its dictionary definition. To the Left, it just means "no white male, regardless of ability."

My Thoughts

 Im NoT GiViNg up AnYTHiNg FoR LeNT InSTeaD i WiLL bE kINd 2 OTheRs ...uh, pretty sure you're supposed to do that anyway. #DoesntCount

My Thoughts - Judging

Here's the deal-e-o: on a post this AM, while talking about something unrelated,  a woman casually dropped word she has an untreated mice infestation. NO ONE said ANYTHING about the mouse comment and merrily kept commenting on her main point.

F that.  I called her out.

Cue a bunch of people defending *keeping the mice*, saying it "happens all the time,"  and calling me judgey.

Damn right I'm judgey. 

Judgey keeps humans acting within a set of acceptable parameters that facilitate the smooth working of a society. 

Kill the damn mice. And until you do, stop bringing food to the potluck.

Stop the Fawning

While I agree with and applaud Ricky Gervais' Golden Globe monologue, let's not get too wrapped up with praising him. 

In the end, be consistent: his opinion isn't more valuable than that of other celebrities, just because he sided with you. 

This is Common Sense, no?

Idk why this needs explaining, but then again people are stupid: if a famous person dies they receive attention bc the world *knew* them and feels the loss, and it does not diminish or demean the loss of any other person. If your grandpa and mine die on the same day, I do not expect you to spend an equal amount of time mourning MY loved one, nor would I view it as a slight when you don't. Grow up and let people grieve. It isn't a damn competition.

A Poll Answer

 

On Kavanaugh

Assume,  for intellectual purposes, that Kavanaugh is completely innocent, and the accusation merely a  weaponization of the public's [rightful]  opposition to sexual assault.  How do you successfully defend yourself? By saying you're innocent? By trying to prove a negative? By somehow magically determining you were somewhere else (impossible, since neither time nor place nor even year is remembered by your accuser)? 

If there is no opportunity for defense, there is no adversarial process. 

If there is no adversarial process there can be no justice, and it's nothing more than a circus where most of the "jury" - the Democrats on the panel - have already rendered their verdict in the press. 

 It's wrong.  And if you don't think so, so are you.

Makes You Wonder

Since cellphones became common and everyone has a camera at the ready,  the number of UFO sightings has mysteriously plummeted.  It's almost as if it was all the work of kooks and frauds in years past.  Huh. Imagine  that.