MM: I think the only reason they can say that is because the numbers haven’t moved the right percentage to officially be called a recession. But when the price of gas goes up 200 percent in four years, homes are going under and people are struggling, I don’t know how you can’t call it one now. OK, the world keeps spinning and I must [jumps down from bench] be going!

To roll around in a big pile of money! WOOHOO! I'M F**KING RICH!!!!

I'd never read that 1997 story on Mussina, and certainly did not know of the connection between his hometown and TWA 800.

Must have made the Lidle accident particularly poignant for the Moose.

Q: How clearly can you recall your first major league appearance?

MM: Very clearly. It was a Sunday afternoon in Chicago. I went 7 2/3, I gave up four hits — Frank Thomas had three of them — and Robin Ventura had the other. I walked the first guy of the game, Tim Raines. I struck out one guy and walked four, which is completely the opposite of what my career strikeout-to-walk ratio is.

Looks like he's just a little off here. Raines actually flew out in the 1st, but did walk later on. Also, Ventura was not the other guy with a hit -- he did walk in the first, though -- but Joey Cora was.

Still, that's not too bad considering it was 17 years ago.

Still, that's not too bad considering it was 17 years ago.

His children should be taken away.

His children should be taken away.

Well yeah, this was pretty disturbing:

MM: Very amateur, I would say, but I enjoy shooting the kids

Yeah, I used that for the headline when I submitted this to FARK: "Yankees pitcher Mike Mussina enjoys shooting kids", with an "Obvious" tag.

The guy does some entertaining interviews. I just spent like an hour reading them all.

Yeah, I used that for the headline when I submitted this to FARK: "Yankees pitcher Mike Mussina enjoys shooting kids", with an "Obvious" tag.

I was thinking of submitting as Politics with the headline "Stanford economist agrees US in recession".

The guy does some entertaining interviews. I just spent like an hour reading them all.

I did too. Zack Greinke seems like a good kid.

The guy does some entertaining interviews. I just spent like an hour reading them all.

I got stuck into them as well. The Joba one sux though, the Erin Andrews one was interesting especially considering the idiot who groped her was mentioned.

I've always enjoyed listening to a Mussina interview. He listens to the question, and actually tries to give a thoughtful answer.

You can tell he's listening carefully because half the time his facial expression gives away his answer before the interviewer is finished asking the question. And if Mussina thinks it's a dumb question, he'll communicate that one way or the other.

"Also, Ventura was not the other guy with a hit -- he did walk in the first, though -- but Joey Cora was."

If I gave up a hit to Cora, I'd lie about it too.

"Also, Ventura was not the other guy with a hit -- he did walk in the first, though -- but Joey Cora was."

If I gave up a hit to Cora, I'd lie about it too.

Bob Feller has been quoted as saying, something along the lines of, "In Europe, they hold onto their history and don't tear down significant buildings, but in the United States, we don't place the same value on old things."

I can think of a certain old thing we pay WAY too much attention to.

And Moose Skowron was 5-11, 195.

Not worth posting twice.

I can think of a certain old thing we pay WAY too much attention to.

Bill Conlin?

I like Mussina. He seems like a nice, intelligent dude to me.

Interviewer: "What would you do if you had a gay teammate?"

Mussina: "Well, I've probably already had one."

The Larry Bowa interview is a good read.

Feller's heroes tore down some of Europe's old buildings themselves . . .

As a European. Our old buildings are a ####### pain in the arse.

He seems like a nice, intelligent dude to me.

And a politician, since he evaded the question nicely.

People like to blast programmers for not anticipating Y2K trouble. Why the hell are nobody blaming builders of the 18-19th century for not anticipating electricity and indoor plumbing?

Yeah, I used that for the headline when I submitted this to FARK: "Yankees pitcher Mike Mussina enjoys shooting kids", with an "Obvious" tag.

I was thinking of submitting as Politics with the headline "Stanford economist agrees US in recession".

Am I the only one here who doesn't visit Fark? I have a hard enough time keeping up with my regular websites.

Am I the only one here who doesn't visit Fark? I have a hard enough time keeping up with my regular websites.

You should start hanging out there on the Politics tab. It makes even the most heated dispute here seem completely civilized.

EDIT: Be warned, however, that there is a ludicrously disproportionate contingent of highly vocal libertarians.

Be warned, however, that there is a ludicrously disproportionate contingent of highly vocal libertarians.

It's like being home at BBTF, then.

EDIT: Be warned, however, that there is a ludicrously disproportionate contingent of highly vocal libertarians.

This is observation made without comment on the merits of the libertarian position, but it seems to me that if one's only knowledge of American politics was taken from internet discussion boards you would think the country was split in rough third between those who generally support the Democrats, those who generally support Republicans and those who generally support Libertarians. It's bizarre.

I think that techies skew more libertarian than the general population.

it seems to me that if one's only knowledge of American politics was taken from internet discussion boards you would think the country was split in rough third between those who generally support the Democrats, those who generally support Republicans and those who generally support Libertarians.

I think that's roughly the same for any smaller group - you don't get to be a bigger group unless you push your agenda, and there's little incentive for those aligned with the dominant group to be as vocal. After all, it seems pretty pointless to endlessly pontificate on how great the status quo is.

For other "fringe" examples which seem to have a disproportionate presence on-line, please see the 9/11 truthers, the aliens-are-here, the flat-earthers, the green party (or Naderites), and so on. Please note as well that the list above isn't intended to be an indictment or affirmation of the libertarian position, but merely a list of other groups generally viewed as being outside of the mainstream of popular discourse.

I think that techies skew more libertarian than the general population.

Really? This techie tends to skew more towards the lefty fringe, and that's the Canadian lefty fringe (not the weeny centrist American version of a lefty).

Not a huge Mussina fan, but it'd be nice if he got 20 wins this year if only to shut up everyone who thinks its some sort of black mark on his career. But for the strike, he probably wins 20 in 1994 and in 1995.

Really? This techie tends to skew more towards the lefty fringe, and that's the Canadian lefty fringe (not the weeny centrist American version of a lefty).

In my experience, techies are fairly evenly split between lefties, libertarians, and "Poliwhats? Leave me alone, I'm trying to code." Very few traditional conservatives though.

"Poliwhats? Leave me alone, I'm trying to code."

They're libertarians, too.

It is my assumption that the subset of people who use the Internet frequently would have a higher objective intelligence than the complete set.

Libertarianism is more popular among the subset of heavy Internet users than it is the population in general. So, too, is atheism.

I'm not sayin'...I'm just sayin'.

So, too, is atheism.

From years of observing theoretical physicists at work, I believe that their atheism stems more from an unwillingness to imagine that anyone, including supernatural beings, has more brainpower than them rather than any deep philosophical reasons. :-)

This makes me wonder if SC caters the Nobel dinners.

It is my assumption that the subset of people who use the Internet frequently would have a higher objective intelligence than the complete set.

It is my assumption that any subset of the population with similar interests thinks they have a higher objective intelligence than the complete set, because they believe their interests are objectively better.

That one statement explains a lot about partisan politics, the media, people who use the internet, sabermetricians, scouts, and possibly the middle east.

He thinks the SUNDAY N.Y. Times crossword is the hardest?! He's obviously never tried the Friday or Saturday crosswords. And he thinks there are only 40,000 words in the English language?!

Deplorable.

This guy is a pretty good interviewer. This question to Zack Greinke is hilaripus:

Q: If everyone in the Royals clubhouse started kung fu fighting, who would emerge as grand champion?

Q: How many points did Camden Yards put on your career ERA?
MM: Oh, I don't know. I didn't have anything to Compare it to back then, and now I'm older. It probably added a couple, but there's a lot smaller ballparks out there these days than Camden Yards.

One-year pitching park factors for Camden Yards while Mussina was with the O's:

98
98
104
107
102
94
100
94
97
96

Some strange business.

1) It is my assumption that the subset of people who use the Internet frequently would have a higher objective intelligence than the complete set.

2) It is [villageidiom's] assumption that any subset of the population with similar interests thinks they have a higher objective intelligence than the complete set, because they believe their interests are objectively better.

If I agree with 2 (which is obviously true), does it logically follow that 1 is just a biased opinion? Or is there empirical evidence to support my assumption one way or the other?

Screw it. I'm going to go play poker instead.