User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5768 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Aw come on, Texas, this is funny. Lighten up Francis!
Shame.
Cuz that's like only 95% of SanFran dude!
Cuz that's like only 95% of SanFran dude!
Typical. People say San Francisco, but what they're describing is Berkeley. (My hometown.) The City is full of yuppie and hipster potheads.
Why? Shouldn't we celebrate those who know their limits? Those who can drink 3 or 4 bars at the local watering hole, drink a glass of water, wait a bit and drive home? Why this obsession with abstaining addicts?
I don't get it. I mean, I do get it (people are weird) I just don't understand people sometimes and the media by extension. What is worth celebrating (and is noteworthy as well) about an abstaining addict?
Those people better weigh 300 pounds or wait longer than a bit.
you are dealing with a world that thinks being drunk is a bigger crime than reckless driving... I mean seriously, instead of wasting time with bac, let's focus on the quality of drivers... I made a joke to my girlfriend that the highest percentage of drivers on cellphones has got to be soccer moms in mini-vans....it should be a law that a cop should pull female drivers in mini--vans over to protect the rest of the drivers on the planet :)
Now if you're going around drinking four 20 oz bottles of 8% IPA, all bets are off.
Er, no, you mean a world that thinks being drunk and driving is a bigger crime than reckless driving. Because I was just outside among a bunch of drunk people. No one was getting arrested.
Unless you're getting tagged at a checkpoint, actually getting caught drunk driving implies that you were driving recklessly.
It IS the law... here anyway (Ontario). You will get pulled over for using a cellphone while driving.
As for the rest... YES drunk driving is a bigger issue than reckless driving. And YES we should celebrate someone overcoming adversity in order to excel.
How are these even up for debate?
Just wait. It's early.
That and the "Really?" meme. The "never saw him xxx" one is still good for me, though.
disappointing to hear that from a LeRogue, that one has never been funny.
It's not really, but I kick out of its stubborness as a meme. It's like the world's wiliest hamster in a room full of cats.
Is there a meme that hasn't quickly burned itself out?
Yes, but Matt H's point is that being able to control yourself is overcoming adversity, while what Hamilton's done is just avoiding his problem (in a way).
Overcoming addiction is commendable, but I too don't get why we celebrate it.
Yes. It's not near the Top 10 of Overused Memes, but yes it is tired.
I'm with #23 as well. I don't understand how "Never saw him _____" even became a meme. Most memes and jokes make a kind of sense. They're clearly attempting to be funny. Even ones I don't find funny I can still see why some people do. Not so with "Never saw him _____". There's no actual joke there, not even a failed one. It's just a non sequitur. I don't understand the appeal of that.
Rant over. My bile level has been reduced from "Daniel Plainview" to its normal "Curmudgeon" status.
It derives from the Christian conception of virtue as deriving from overcoming temptation. Those who have been tempted the most (Mary Magdalene, say) and have turned their lives onto the straight and narrow are the most virtuous. If you don't really feel the urge to overindulge, you get no credit for not doing so.
It only works in the context of Ray driving people crazy which I've grown to appreciate as good entertainment.
The Prodigal Son and all that. I'm a secular dude, but the moral challenge to accept things like this is the best thing about religion. If you were the good son, wouldn't your prodigal brother piss you off? Is the torture of an innocent worth our expiation? Etc etc. It's why Dostoevky is my favorite writer.
I literally have no idea what it refers to.
It's more of a case of an inside joke I'm not privy to than a worn out meme from my perspective I guess.
Knowing the unfunny origins would only make it more annoying and unfunny.
It's from post 26 here. Learning the context only confused me more.
Shooty, your explanation in #30 makes some sense. Though IIRC Ray once implied that he was kind of pleased that he'd spawned a meme.
I agree. Feels icky in here. This thread is not covered in glory.
This argument 'drinking in excess' and 'alcohol addiction.' It's a wonderful thing that our society is now willing to celebrate people who fight their addiction by going sober, because it reflects an understanding that for alcoholics in this sense the temptation never goes away - and so it's a constant battle to not give in.
Saying we should celebrate people capable of having 3 or 4 and not falling down the rabbit hole have no real sense of what it is actually like for the real addicts.
Obviously there are some problem drinkers who are just stupid kids with poor impulse control - who could easily mature into a capacity for moderation. But there are a lot of people where the ability is just never going to be there. To say that someone like this who goes sober is just "avoiding the problem" is simply incorrect.
Another internet-communications trend that I have grown to loathe is when you quote something and say "This."
Is that even legal?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
The only thing more dull than the meme is the origin of the meme. Consider yourself lucky.
This is a good argument. I was a bit crass above; I do realize that it remains a battle for former alcoholics to keep from falling back into their problems.
That being said, I do think we over-recognize their accomplishments a bit. It's not that we shouldn't give recovering addicts credit for their accomplishments, but we do need to keep in mind that it was their bad behavior (and yes, I understand they might not be 100% responsible) that led to the act that's being celebrated. Josh Hamilton had a big problem, something that should most definitely NOT be celebrated; he corrected it, which is great, but I've read too many articles and comments making him out to be some sort of hero for it.
You and your above it all mien. Now excuse while I head over to LOLcatz.
Behold! It's a trap!
Is there a level above "Daniel Plainview"?
I'm still a sucker for a reference to Matt Wieters being more awesome than awesome at any time.
As for the redemption/avoidance of temptation thing, I'm a bit split. While I admire Hamilton and others for bouncing back from where they were, I wish we as a society would spend more time lauding those on the straight and narrow from day one.
I do have to laugh at the description of San Francisco in the article as a "normally classy city" though, when it is one of the most aggressively in-your-face offensive cities in the country. Hell, it takes enormous pride in its status as a countercultural beacon and wears it as a badge of honor.
Getting there.
"Really? Seriously?" will be stuck in my brain for life.
But "Amirite?" will never get old. 'YMMV', gah! I can't stop!
blecch, you are as evil as a clone made from the DNA of Steve Garvey and Chris Truby
Haters gonna hate.
"Hungover Dalek". That level is mostly just random screaming, vomiting, and killing things. Edit: Never mind. I think Joey just answered your question.
I can think of several possible reasons for society's favoring redemption over temperance. There's the narrative: what's more dramatic, someone who spectacularly fails then painstakingly rebuilds their life, or someone who quietly succeeds from day 1? There's the very American love of a person reinventing themselves and the implication that you, too can overcome daunting odds. And I think we find it difficult to identify with a spotless record (be it in drug use, academic achievement, or professional success). We all fail sometimes. We more easily identify with people who visibly have than people who (apparently) haven't.
Yeah, The City is great. I can't wait to get back next week.
Not to start a whole thing here (and I know next to nothing about San Francisco) but I always assumed that a region's lack of "class", (as odd of a word that is to apply to a region) had connotations of uneducated, provincial, working class noobs who uncultured and inhospitable to outsiders.
While I wouldn't term counterculture hippies as "classy", unclassy doesn't seem particularly apt either. Hippies seem like fairly generous, hospitable people. Hygeine maybe is a strike against them in the classy game. It's just interesting to me in that it would never occur to me to associate "class" and "counterculture" as relating to one another in any way.
I might be belabouring the point, but I've been reading about notions of 17th century honour and its amazing how one can assume there's a prescreptive definition of the term, but people in the same society are able to hold such multifaceted and at times contradictory definitions of words like "class" and "honour".
Most definitely, this is the case. And that's the lesson of the Prodigal Son story; even if you've been a bad person in the past, there's still time for you to find God.
#27- but I too don't get why we celebrate it.
What both of you are not understanding is the difference between exercising choice and living with the permanent biochemical change within the brain that is addiction, whether alcohol, cocaine, heroin, or whatever.
An addict has had a permanent change, IIRC the scientific description is of a literal switch in how certain molecules arrange themselves in the brain. Once this switch takes place, it is permanent, and leaves the brain/body involved with a an unending desire for the particular chemical involved (again alcohol, cocaine, heroin, or whatever). There is no cure.
So an addict, every addict, wakes up in the morning and deals with his morning routine, shave shower etc, has breakfast and departs on his day, whatever it encompasses, and deals with his bodies desire for the chemical. He goes through his day, work, play socializing etc still dealing with his bodies desire/demand for the chemical and ends his day going to sleep still dealing with his bodies desire for the chemical. It never stops. Addicts I know state that dealing with issue is easier or harder from day to day, some days requiring them to do some serious exercise of willpower to deny themselves the chemical, other days are a breeze and they are only briefly aware of the need to say no.
So you are at a bar or attending a party and get to exercise your choice of how much or little to partake.
An addict wakes up to another day of self denial. And the day after and the day after, and the day after that, until he dies. There is no choice to it.
"Remember the Alamo? You guys lost that one, too".
"But who won the war?", should be the rejoinder.
Whataburger?
"I never thought [Bert Blyleven] was a Hall of Famer when he was playing, and I saw him play his entire career."
"[His popularity] is based on a lot of younger people on the Internet who never saw him play."
"It's not about stats...it's about impact."
- Jon Heyman on MLB Network, 1/12/09
Naw. It was definitely Ray's remark in the Harwell thread.
Obviously Britain has Trafalgar and Waterloo...but they also have a deep memory for The Charge of the Light Brigade and the Somme. And for Prussian culture in the 19th century the Battle of Jena seemed to rival the Battle of the Nations for cultural importance.
The Battle of Kosovo for Serbians.
Obviously the Alamo as well.
Maybe it's not all that common a phenomenon and I just latch onto it because I'd rather lose dramatically than win. I've always wondered what the '72 series would have meant to Canada had Henderson not scored.
The analogy really doesn't hold, unless you're totally into the holistic health thing. One's a disease of the body and treated as such. The other's a disease of the mind and, by some recovering alcoholics' reckoning, a disease of the spirit.
Sonoran fox touches on some of this, but to an addict/alcoholic the need to be active in recovery never ends. That's one reason why relapse rates are so high; all it takes is one fleeting moment of thought and however much time spent in recovery is lost. Hopefully the addict can pull out of it, but sometimes they can't.
I don't see why you can't celebrate both, but to each his own.
Matt my understanding is that is a binary switch. Once the switch occurs there is no going back. As for how much use of a particular chemical is needed to 'trigger' the switch the evidence is very much: It varies a lot, and I am not aware of anyone having any kind of handle on being able to accurately forecast when the switch will occur.
Whataburger?>>
Mmmm... Good!
Shooty knows his burgers!
You really have no idea how much time I spend over there. And I'd move back to San Francisco in an instant. Maybe we should work on a startup, Shooty. I hear that this internet thing is a cash cow.
Poltava for Sweden, and man was that a defeat. There's no better way to become a heroic warrior king in the history books than to piss away half your kingdom.
Josh Hamilton drinking jokes are funny. Period.
If you drive drunk and don't wreck, you've done nothing wrong.
Tim Lincecum needs to cut his ####### hair and act like a grown man for a change. Same goes for the closer.
You said drunk, so let's go with that word. Teetering and completely drunk.
Spinning around in public with a blindfold and two loaded guns and firing at random without hitting anyone would be doing nothing wrong? Or, doing it drunk?
Going out hunting on the first day of the season drunk?
I'm a little surprised at this statement (although not your sniping at the Giants), so I'm just looking for a bit of elaboration. We're not talking about the laws, and how good or bad or BAC, you made a statement about driving around drunk being no-fault, and that's what I'd like to hear a bit more about.
If you get home safely, you have created no public hazard. You have no done no public damage. The fact that you acted in a way that might potentially endanger the public is not an actionable crime. Well, it is, but it shouldn't be. If you drive drunk and kill someone, the conditions of your vehicular manslaughter - that you were driving drunk - should be considered at your sentencing, perhaps even to the point of pushing the manslaughter up to murder. But if you harm no one, you should not be tried for potential crimes. That's akin to trying someone for thought-crime.
And Lincecum *does* need to cut his damned hair. So does Matt Cain, but at least he's shown the emotional maturity of a 14 year old so far. That's better than his teammates, sad to say.
Yeah, after re-reading my post I suppose you're right. My intent was to describe how Marty's nonstop praise of Hamilton made his refusal to praise Dunn all the more apparent. Mainly I'm just bitter about how Dunn was treated by the Cincinnati media, so I look for reasons to complain about it - sort of like how Walter compares everything to Vietnam in "The Big Lebowski."
The blue highlighted text allows you to click away from this particular page at any time.
The risk isn't absent just because your hedge fund or oil rig didn't explode today.
True, but it's not criminal to drill either.
I get what you're saying there, which is why I was trying to get you to elaborate on the circumstances. I.e., the (somewhat tired, yet still relevant) shooting randomly in public blindfolded. "But if you harm no one, you should not be tried for potential crimes." I'm fine with you not finding this action a crime, but I want to make sure I understand where you philosophy travels in this regard.
Is that action not a crime if no one is hurt and there is no damage?
No, it's better to point and laugh at the morons who think that this is a reasonable activity.
I'm simply amazed at the sheer number of otherwise seemingly intelligent people on this site who are continually pro drunk driving.
If they PTB are concerned about how the site looks, this is doing more damage than if I say #### #### poopy
Disagree. A grown man using the word "poopy" is worse than driving drunk and wiping out a school bus full of medics who work in low-income areas for no pay. No civilization can endure if it tolerates such madness.
"Impairment" is dangerous.
"Over .08" might not be -- especially if it's only measured by police breath machines. Those things are garbage.
Well, for one thing we'd all be speaking Canadian!
Lisa: How do you mean, Dad?
Homer: Well, he fell down a well, and... he can't get out.
Lisa: How does that make him a hero?
Homer: Well, that's more than you did!
It depends on whether or not there is a city ordinance against discharging firearms. If there is, then it's a crime by definition. If there isn't, it isn't. The act of firing the gun is not itself a crime outside of ordinances that specifically ban the firing of guns. If I go out into the woods and shoot a gun and hit nothing (it may have happened once or twice) I have not committed a crime. If I do this same thing in the center of Brooklyn I've committed a crime on paper only.
now like WHY should tim lincecum cut his hair?
you like to paint everyone with the uptight conservative brush iffn we don't live in freaking austin and its BAD traffic - you got a problem with long hair???
This is not illogical, but... it's almost Libertarian in its dismissal of context and circumstance, IMO. I could have taken ten shots straight out from my front porch every day for 15 years growing up and hit nothing living but trees. This is not going to be the case from my window out onto Fifth Avenue in Park Slope. It is perfectly justifiable to me to make such a thing a crime due to the irreverence for damage to life and property that such irresponsible activity entails.
now like WHY should tim lincecum cut his hair?
Because.
Because grown men do not wear their hair like that. When he's playing and it's sweaty and stringy he looks like Paul Ruebens jacking off in the back of an adult theater. When he's not playing he flat irons it out like it's 1977 and he's feathering the mullet out for a Rush show. He needs to cut the damned hair.
Don't even get me started on Brian Wilson and that ####### dyed beard.
There used to be a thing called "leftist libertarianism." This was before the Randian ######### started dragging their slime trails all over everything. It was a good time. Regardless, I don't have a problem with the punishment for accidents caused by drunk driving to carry greater sentences than accidents caused by simple mistake. I just think it's a waste of time and resources, as well as one more crack by which the police state slithers it's rats ass in the door. If you decide to celebrate your birthday in the Afghan style, and you kill someone, try your ass with murder. But if you don't hurt anyone, why involve the repressive arm of the state at all? "But something might have happened, that didn't happened, but it might have if something else had happened than what actually did" is not enough to justify detention and incarceration.
What about "he kicks children in the face" is not clear?
ahhh
thank you.
grown men most definitely DO wear their hair long. get ovah it mr. liberal in everything except for mens' hair
you gonna go after jayson werth too?
and those dyed black beards are hilarious not intimidating
Well, nobody's perfect.
No, they don't.
I will not, even if you eventually come to grips with my actual politics rather than a crude caricature thereof.
I have no problem with the beard. I have a problem with the dye, and the hipsterism run amok that brought it about. Again, grown men do not to that. Children who happen to have million-dollar arms do that.
If it was good enough for Liszt, it's good enough for Lincecum.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main