Worse than Daniel Murphy?

I'm not sure Minky isn't a better hitter than Anderson at this point and probably a better OF too.

I suggest he goes back to making insipidly sweet kosher wine.

Mientkiewicz is still dealing with an arm injury after having surgery last year. I don't like Garret Anderson, but the reasons he's making the team is because the team feels he can hit with power in a PH role, and you generally don't have to worry about OBP as a PH.

I don't like Garret Anderson, but the reasons he's making the team is because the team feels he can hit with power in a PH role, and you generally don't have to worry about OBP as a PH.

Also, he can play OF and they see Anderson as a better pinch runner than Minky.

I can't imagine they can't find a better pinch runner/OF than Garret Anderson.

Cots says Dougie Mienalskjgoaihwrtz has 10.013 years of service time, enough to qualify his family for health insurance which should cover his wife's previously uninsurable heart condition. Good for him.

Yup, he guaranteed the service time when he was injured most of last season after making the team. The injury was both real and exceptionally convenient.

The injury was self inflicted. He chose to intentionally dive head first into 2nd despite the ball being nowhere near him and an play not being made.

Are you serious?

you generally don't have to worry about OBP as a PH

Whyever not?

The PH will generally be batting for the pitcher, which is 99% of the time the ninth spot, and so if he gets on base it brings up the top of the order, who are supposed to be your best hitters. Surely this is a spot where OBP matters more, not less.

The places in the order where OBP matters least are surely around 6th, 7th and 8th in the lineup - depending on how many outs are left in the inning.

I remember when Manky played for the Twins there being a lot of talk in the local media about him being a future coach. I also remember him having a reputation as something of a blowhard, so perhaps that's just the natural response.

About Doug Mientkiewicz's injury? Yes. I was watching that game and was dumbfounded on why he slid for no reason. Alex Cora did a similar thing and injured his thumb in a game against the Giants at San Francisco as well.

Wow. A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do, I guess.

"... to qualify his family for health insurance which should cover his wife's previously uninsurable heart condition."

Non-coverage of pre-existing conditions--yet another stupid facet of our ridiculous system of quasi-private, for-profit, highly subsidized by government health insurance. Canada, where the system costs half as much and covers everyone, has no such thing as "uninsurable heart conditions." The Canadian insurance program has its flaws. But ours is vastly worse in almost every respect.

By 2014, under the Obama plan, it will become illegal to deny coverage to American adults with "pre-existing conditions":

... the healthcare reform bill signed into law Tuesday by President Obama will end this situation by outlawing denial of insurance coverage to those with preexisting conditions. ... The rollout starts with children. Six months from the day the bill was signed, insurers will no longer be able to exclude children with preexisting conditions from being covered by their family policy. For current policies, that means insurers will have to rescind preexisting-condition exclusions. Insurers will not have to take the same steps for adults until Jan. 1, 2014.

For the next four years, the Obama program has a more direct subsidy, called Plan B, for those who cannot get private insurance, due to an existing ailment:

The new reform law does create a temporary backup plan for those uninsured who have health problems. This Plan B is a short-term, national high-risk insurance pool. US citizens and legal immigrants who have preexisting conditions and have been uninsured for at least six months will be eligible to enroll in this pool and receive subsidies to help them afford the premiums.

Under the law, the premiums for this pool will be the same as would be charged for a standard population of people with varying risks. Maximum out-of-pocket cost sharing for enrollees will be $5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for families, per year.

Covering these heretofore "uninsurables" should increase the cost of insurance for everyone in the system. However, it's not clear that including them will make the costs to our entire system--of which half the money directly comes from government, today--more expensive. Why not? Because these uninsured folks, save a few who just die cheaply, end up getting medical care at some point. That is, they drain all of their own resources, trying to pay their own doctor bills, until they are broke. And then they go to hospitals or ERs and get treatment and most of that expense is covered by public or private welfare. So it's not costless to the system to have these folks uninsured. And often, I would think, their treatment is more expensive, due to the deterioration of their health after being uninsured.

As such, insuring these folks could just be a redirection of costs. I don't think it will save much money for the system as a whole. But it will likely be a small savings or a wash.

The Obama plan would have been far better, in my view, if we started with the honest truth: We already have universal care in the United States, in that once a person goes broke paying for his own healthcare, Medicaid will end up paying his bills, if he does not die first. And given that, universal coverage with a government monopoly health insurer, as they have in Canada, is far more affordable systemically, in that the buying power of the insurer is so strong it can drive down all costs for services, tests and drugs. But with our quasi-private, quasi-competitive, pass the subsidy system, which remains in place under Obama care, we pay double or triple what every other country pays, and that in and of itself is a terrible burden on our economy.

Oh Rifkin, you have to do this to a perfectly good thread....

"Oh Rifkin, you have to do this to a perfectly good thread...."

Yes.

Why do you care about "ruining a thread" anyhow? There are thousands of unspoiled threads which get 20 or fewer posts and just die a natural death. So if this one gets a few replies that have nothing to do with Doug Manishewitz, it harms no one. ...

One more note on a lot of the agitated teabaggers: I hear them screaming all the time about how they hate a "government takeover of healthcare." But it seems like an insincere scream, as they don't say they want to get rid of government subsidies for healthcare or Medicaid or Medicare for the elderly. In fact, a lot of the teabaggers are old folks on Medicare. They really would prefer private insurance companies to decide whether or not they want to cover 80 year olds?

EDIT: Apparently, they do want to get rid of Medicaid and Medicare.

Why do you care about "ruining a thread" anyhow? There are thousands of unspoiled threads which get 20 or fewer posts and just die a natural death. So if this one gets a few replies that have nothing to do with Doug Manishewitz, it harms no one. ...

Given the name calling and banning that these threads result in, I'm not so sure about that last one. More to the point, Jim and Dan have made it pretty clear they don't really want politics threads here, doesn't seem much to ask to respect their wishes.

We'd like to keep politics out of the mainland as much as possible as there's too much baggage.

In general, I'll let it go on, but at the first sign of trouble, it gets forumed.

For obvious reasons, I don't want new readers who learn of us from ESPN Magazine to visit here and have the busiest action be people calling each other names over HCR.

The thing i enjoy most about discussions here is that they are always done in a sort of relaxed style where nobody really goes out of their way to attack eachother except in the politics threads where everything gets really nasty pretty quickly.

double post

I think the main problem with the health care debate is that there are too many morons in the United States and a lot of them are in Congress.

there are too many morons in the United States and a lot of them are in Congress.

I always think of this line of argument the same way I think about the generic "observational" humour of "What's the deal with airplane food?"

It's way too boring, and no one is going to be all that interested in debating that point.

However, I do find that there is at least one member of Congress that you Americans should be happy to have.
Anthony Weiner is never going to get that far in politics if he keeps being blunt and confrontational (using facts), but he is entertaining when he goes on the attack.

Weiner's too smart and honest to get farther than the House, but I'm glad he's there.

re 14: Tell it, Rich! Good stuff.

Thanks, 22. Go f yourself too.

And given that, universal coverage with a government monopoly health insurer, as they have in Canada, is far more affordable systemically, in that the buying power of the insurer is so strong it can drive down all costs for services, tests and drugs.

Relying on a government monopoly to drive down costs is pretty optimistic. Because they will want to ensure quality, and the only way they can do that is to erect a wall of red tape.

Thanks, 22. Go f yourself too.

One thing you can say about Freeball, his level of engagement never changes.

Relying on a government monopoly to drive down costs is pretty optimistic.

Indeed it is. My limited optimism is based on the difficulty government will have making health care in the U.S. worse than it already is.

For obvious reasons, I don't want new readers who learn of us from ESPN Magazine to visit here and have the busiest action be people calling each other names over HCR.

Personally, if I were going to start "fixing" things, I'd start with the database connection errors.

Just my opinion, though.

Well Al I logged onto Primer to see what had happned to my old pal Doug Mientkiewicz and I see they are all up set about Barack Obrella and socialist medicine and what some Primate named Rich Ripken has to say in favor of folks not dying. Now Dan Whose Name Must Not Be Spelled says what if some gentle man reads about us on ESPY and also wants to learn more about Doug Mientkiewicz only when he gets here hey presto we are talking about the Tea Baggers like every 1 else on the Intranet. He has a point but thats Primer Al. Why there are one 1,000,000 base ball forums where you can go and the comments you read are Doug Mientkiewicz? He was good he hit .270 life time and the next guy says Doug Mientkiewicz? .270 is not so good and the next guy says You Sleaze Bag Moron. But only here can you read about Doug Mientkiewicz in 1 sentence and the National Health in the next and then Qing Dynasty Tapestries in the next. Well it is all a manner of Taste Al and I am not here to talk about the Past except to say Go Sox and I hope Butler wins the Basketball too.

The injury was self inflicted. He chose to intentionally dive head first into 2nd despite the ball being nowhere near him and an play not being made.

Circling back, will Obamacare have a cure for poor base running skills?

Dan Whose Name Must Not Be Spelled

This makes me feel I'm posting to a bizarre Harry Potter novel.

Personally, if I were going to start "fixing" things, I'd start with the database connection errors.

Just my opinion, though.

And the user interface design. it's hard for me to imagine that a new visitor wouldn't look at the main page of the site and be pretty confused about where to click for the real action. Not to beat a dead horse, since I'm pretty sure I made this basic point six years ago during the beta test, but I still don't see why the main content is buried, referred to by multiple names, and surrounded by other blogs that have been dead for years.

Circling back, will Obamacare have a cure for poor base running skills?

This is where the death panels come in, unfortunately they will have to be careful not to apply their criteria in a racist way. The Molina clan will go a long way to show that it is not just white players that can't run.

And the user interface design. it's hard for me to imagine that a new visitor wouldn't look at the main page of the site and be pretty confused about where to click for the real action.

Wait; there's real action on this site? Where? Where?

DB

Circling back, will Obamacare have a cure for poor base running skills?

If it does, they might actually bankrupt us providing medication and treatment to Jorge Posada

Wait; there's real action on this site? Where? Where?

TALK TO REAL LIVE SABER-NERD GIRLS!!!

0800-XXX-ERAPLUS

VISA/MC ACCEPTED

TALK TO REAL LIVE SABER-NERD GIRLS!!!

0800-XXX-ERAPLUS

All their measurements changed last week, though!

If it does, they might actually bankrupt us providing medication and treatment to Jorge Posada

Bionic legs for all the various Molinas!

[25]

And given that, universal coverage with a government monopoly health insurer, as they have in Canada, is far more affordable systemically, in that the buying power of the insurer is so strong it can drive down all costs for services, tests and drugs.

Relying on a government monopoly to drive down costs is pretty optimistic. Because they will want to ensure quality, and the only way they can do that is to erect a wall of red tape.

Military procurement is a good example of this, with its history of $1000 toilet seats and hammers.

Medicare does push down prices for drugs it buys (but less than it could) and the other buyers with less power get soaked.

IMO "insurance" is really a misnomer in our health care system. It's more about aggregating buyer power than spreading risk.

Doctors and hospitals are already moving away from the practice model, combining and becoming more "corporate" in order to preserve their power as sellers.

I just wanted to point out most Americans are indeed happy about one member of COngress: their own.

NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, March 13-14:
"In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Congress is doing?"

Approve: 17
Disapprove: 77

"And how would you rate the congressman or woman from your district? Do you approve or disapprove of the job your representative is doing?"

Approve: 45
Disapprove: 41

We love our member. Throw the other bums out!

It's amazing that seeing your bum up close would improve your opinion.

As long as his member and my bum don't make any contact with each other, it's all good.

#35 and #36 are awesome.