TheLeviathan

I think there are only two important things to emphasize: Get Sano back. Fix Buxton. I don't know what the issue is but he's had nothing more than a month or two where he's been outrageous and the rest of the time he's so bad at the plate he starts to make me remember Drew Butera. And I don't like to remember Drew Butera. We already have Bobby Wilson for that anyway.

I was coming to this thread to ask the same question. Seeing Ryan Pressley in his 408th straight game makes me feel pity for the guy and wonder why Hughes wasn't the first guy in to eat the middle innings. If you don't trust him....dump him.

I wonder if Realmuto's price would be even more inflated given the timing and circumstances. Feels like trading for Bradford in August. I'd still try to do it, but I'd definitely be ok with Swihart as well.

Since I think Realmuto is a pipe dream.... yeah. He's not Bobby Wilson. Case closed.

And yet if you listen to right-wing radio all they talk about is how organized, coordinated, and efficient the left is and all their swampy right wingers should take notes from them. You can almost laugh at the absurdity if it wasn't painful for all of us.

I think if he hit right-handed he'd be up already.

Jeebus.

That's fair, I've just never put much stock into the argument that ubiquitous references to deities were likely to impact anyone very much. Or that they are a small drop in the bucket compared to much more overt attempts to influence. Similarly, I don't think being in the same room with a liberal is somehow going to make you one by osmosis. Nor will watching 10 minutes of ABC News a night. That complaint of the right, IMO, is a trumped up boogeyman that is part of the very brainwashing I'm concerned with. It preys on a long-standing human response you outline in that last paragraph. There are times that response has validity, but in Republican circles that response is largely hysteria. And it's feeding a dangerously insulated mentality.

I guess I've always been resistant to the idea that "God" on our money or putting my hand on my chest on the pledge was having any kind of significant impact on me. As a generally non-religious (but not anti-religious) person, the inundation with Christianity throughout my life did nothing to keep me there. Now maybe it does for some, but I've always been dubious of that claim. I've tended to believe that things need to be more willfully done for them to stick. It's part of why I'm dubious of the claim that merely having left-leaning people in your life, be it as teachers or reporters or clergy or doctor, is somehow brainwashing you either. And even if both of those are true and my opinion about their impact is wrong, I'm still not sure it's important. I believe those kinds of bias/suggestion are of a completely different magnitude than the problem of what Jones, Levin, Hannity, and Limbaugh have done to Republicanism. And that's the kind of vile brainwashing I see happening on the right.

I'm not sure how this would ever really happen and I echo others that suggest it doesn't solve anything. This is not, IMO, because of short attention spans. It's because of a variety of other factors fully within baseball's control that they have chosen to ignore: 1. They have priced young people and families out of consistent opportunities to experience the sport. 2. They have chosen marketing dollars over quality of product. Meaning they would rather extend commercial breaks and please their cable benefactors over making sure the game translates well. 3. Too often fun is policed out of the game. They share some of these concerns with other sports, but none of those sports play 162 games and are around for half a year. The length of the season makes it less vital to be present/tuned-in for every game, which puts a different onus on baseball to keep people's attention. These three things hurt that IMO.

This strikes me as political theater designed for the mid-terms. The Middle East seems like a dicey place to play politics with.

Would've been nice to have that one to get to .500, but it's hard to be anything but overjoyed with a 7-3 road trip.

I'd rather target Realmuto anyway. (If, in the unlikely case, we were targeting a catching upgrade)

MLB.com seems to think Pressley is getting screwed....this thread seems to verify that huh?

As much as I'd like to see him starting....he has to be a reliever this year right?

My wife and I were having this discussion today in light of how much we both loved "This is America"..... Who are the most amazing multi-dimensional talents in our world today? Our top 3 (actually 4, we had a tie) were as follows: 1. Donald Glover - Perhaps the most breath-taking artist alive and so talented in music, comedy, acting, and all the artistic elements he blends in. 2. The Rock - He might have even more range as a performer than Glover, but not the same musical chops 3A. Jennifer Lopez - Not my cup of tea, but you have to tip your cap 3B. Kris Kristofferson - The accolades during this man's career are hard to fathom Did we forget anyone?

But Bannon, Jones, Limbaugh, Levin, and Hannity are the fringe!!!!!!!! The last major Republican I voted for is fighting a host of difficult medical conditions after a lifetime of service to this country. And the leaders of his party are mocking his mortality. That pretty much says it all right there.

If only we could dream of John Kasich being the face of Republicanism.

It's rather weak corroboration compared to what I'm putting there though...isn't it? I'm talking about how right wing politics are using powerful, influential individuals/platforms to push narratives to their voters about their party. You can find studies where people self-acknowledge their politics as being left-leaning, but that isn't the same as showing this vast left-leaning brainwashing of children you first asserted. To do that, you'd have to measure how much those political leanings actually come through. Now, I'm not denying they don't. I'm sure there are plenty of implicit and explicit examples. But you have a long road to show that data is anywhere near the same level as the explicit nature of right-wing media. At this point, it's still your perception as to how much it is actually influential. And, lastly, I have to call out those perceptions. You listed a whole bunch of news services as "left" that I don't think objective observers would agree to. If your perceptions about those news outlets can be so mistaken, shouldn't we also question your perception here? And this is part of the right-wing brainwash - don't trust "X" because "X is part of the left-wing media". Instead trust "Y". And then this large array of right-wing radio all starts saying the same thing as "Y" and pretty soon you have something the resembles more of a cult than a political ideology. For one example: National Review. A group I would hope we can all agree is not left-leaning. They have been viciously rejected and mocked in many corners of right-wing radio and TV for having the audacity to stand by their principles in the wake of Trump. They are a pariah. Why? Well, they had the audacity to break rank. They are the cult member who had the guts to say "Hey...guys....this punch drinking thing seems like a bad idea.....amiright?" And the rest of the brainwashed masses on the right rose up to denounce them as a heretic. Now they are part of the "left-wing media" (I actually just heard this said the other day on a right-wing radio show). To shift perceptions that thoroughly about an idea so preposterous....speaks to an awful lot of power of suggestion. Frankly, I think your entire point about heavy left-wing indoctrination of youngsters to be a boogeyman you bought in to. A boogeyman far less scary than your imagination likes to pretend.

You continue to demand everyone else provide you with facts and logic, but when asked to do the same you give snark. I see evasions when your assertions are pressed. I'll try again - you listed media outlets, education, and a variety of other things as clear left-wing influences. You have beat this drum repeatedly and it is central to many of your posts. So it would be nice for you to provide some basis for that. Too many on the right assert this, not with fact, but with feeling. (Feelings I'd argue are part of the very brainwashing I referred to)

That "whole list" is of your subjective invention. The objective data suggests your opinion is largely false. If it doesn't fail the logic test, it fails the factual test. So one has to ask then...how did you form your list? Alex Jones is not representative, but he is very influential. And he was but one example. He has cordial relationships with people like Tucker Carlson on Fox News. He had the future President praising him openly. He's is not some fringe, he represents a fairly significant demographic of Republican support. Something Louis Farrakhan or no other severe, left-wing idealogue can boast. We know his motives are impure. I think the motives of men like Limbaugh, Hannity, and others are less impure, but no less problematic. I think they want nothing more than fame, power, and wealth. And they will cast truth aside to get it.

I'm not implying it. I'm flat out stating it. And some of them have even admitted it publicly.

Except your basis for asserting this is in a flawed notion of what is or is not leftist in media. Much of what you suggest is causing this left-wing influence is not really left-wing. "Not right wing" is not equal to "left wing" and that is one of the trademarks of this influence on the right. And it's flawed logic you have employed a few times now. I suppose it is helpful to define terms. By "brainwashing" I meant - systemic pressure to believe something radical/non-rational/ridiculous. What you mistake as being a mere sycophant or gullible/cult-of-personality type....I call the net result of years of this systemic pressure to turn anyone who isn't a Republican into a villain. And even turn many Republicans who aren't "right enough" into villains or complicit swamp monsters. They have literally created boogeyman and convinced a sizable portion of the nation that he exists, is in your closet, and waiting to get you as soon as you fall asleep.

Here's what was telling to me, I've seen that chart before but really looking at it to answer Carole's question made me realize this: I know of pretty much every outlet in the bottom right hand corner. I know they have significant influence and viewership. The bottom left? Haven't heard of any of them southwest of HuffPo. They could be imaginary for all I know.

I can't see 538, but PBS is listed as not having a bias, right in the middle near ABC news.