Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    21,583
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    49

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by TheLeviathan

  1. It's been fun playing Texas, I'd like to see the positives continue a bit longer before we buy in too much, but it's been a nice small sample. Grossman, Rosario, Buxton, and Kepler is a nice foursome but we really need Buxton to take the next step. Vargas has looked legit since coming back, his approach at the plate has been wonderful to see. He looks like a totally different guy up there. (Other than, along with Sano, looking more like a WWE tag team than baseball players) I'd really like to see Polanco get some playing time the rest of the season. Fit him in somehow.
  2. No, it's good. There are just a lot of abbreviations and such that I'm not familiar with because I'm not Canadian. That's all.
  3. Can anyone help me translate Canadian so I can read North's link? Seemed promising....
  4. Look, the term is confusing to many people, but you're missing the point of it. I saw a meme going around, but it's right on - if you go to the doctor and say "my wrist is broken" and the Doctor puts you in a full body cast because "all bones matter" - do you think that makes one ounce of sense? No? That's sort of what your response is.
  5. Deal Santana if you get good value. Ditto Dozier. Ditto basically anyone other than Buxton-Sano-Berrios-Kepler. Those are the only guys I'd make untouchable on the current/or near current roster.
  6. 1) Is it really surprising the head of the union is a total d-bag? Do people not realize what unions largely are at this point? If you're a liberal, I suggest you look at Kroll real close - that's what you largely support when you support unions. Guys like that who could give two *@$% about truth and integrity and only about keeping their pockets lined and their position of power intact. 2) Protesting on a highway is always a stupid, thoughtless action. I hope they do charge those people. Go stand outside the Police Chief's house or wherever, ust don't block a place amublances would have to use.
  7. I think the author was getting at one part of the issue - that proportionally to the number of encounters between police and black men (typically, it's always men, regardless of race), there isn't a higher rate of violent endings. So the idea that black men are killed or attacked more frequently than their rate of population is backed by the data, but when compared to the rate of arrests/encounters, there doesn't appear to be as clear a difference. So the real discrepancy seems to be in the number of encounters, not so much how they end. (Though, the other link does show that cops tend to be more "hands on") I would fill in the blank with race as the prime factor for why there are more encounters, however. I don't think the author was daring to go that far though. For me, the reason black people are disproportionately (to the population) having encounters with police is likely due to poverty which is a byproduct of generations of socioeconomic racism. That seems to be the real problem, but it is worth pointing out that some of the "blacks are killed more often" rhetoric may not be the entire story.
  8. For safety and ease of their job, cops should have plenty of incentive. But we have to get their union to understand that.
  9. I will be surprised as well. Whatever the result, I'm confident people will line up in their ideological tribes and go after each other again. We've seen it time and again in these situations regardless of what results. It shouldn't be that hard for us to sit down and look at police procedure and find ways to make it safer for all involved. To look at the underlying problems and make that better for all. Really, at the end of the day, that's what we all want. But that will take some concessions and that seems like something really hard for people to fathom these days. (I highly recommend that link by the way)
  10. I agree, but so is talking about off-duty cops at a Lynx game which is where that issue came up. Sure, I don't disagree that this looks pretty open and shut. It doesn't have any of the rampant false narrative problems the Ferguson case had. But if you're going to argue for the sanctity of the presumption of innocence, you need to do that even for the officer. Hell, what good are our rights if we won't fight for them when it's the hardest to do so? There has been a lot of rhetoric tossed around here that doesn't offer the officer that same presumption and I find that troubling. My personal opinion is that he probably should get charged here, but I'm not going to call him unjustified, or a cold blooded murderer, or anything else yet. No matter how emotionally opposed I am to what he did, presumption of innocence has to remain important for everyone. It's one of my deepest convictions about where he went wrong as well.
  11. I never said that, nor meant to imply that. I don't think either side is refusing to negotiate wholesale, the problem is who we allow to the table. Those people have to be willing to listen and work for change in their own ranks. We won't solve this merely by police reforms. We'll also need fundamental changes in assisting those in poverty. We'll also need black men and women, in their neighborhoods, to work with police once those changes happen. It's going to take a combined effort.
  12. You think a solution will happen without negotiation? Well, I believe we've found the issue then. That's just naive and totally unrealistic. Seriously, that paragraph is just way out of whack with reality. Not to mention seriously unliberal-like as an approach to unions. Dialogue, almost by definition, requires listening. And that means both sides get a voice and both sides get consideration. Some issues don't deserve a dialogue. But this issue is not simple, it is very complicated with a myriad of considerations that have to go into any solution. So I encourage you to rethink that last paragraph as well.
  13. Who said that? I lobbed blame at them. I just didn't post that without also acknowledging their are a lot of bad actors on the other side either. Balance and honesty are necessary to a solution, not part of the problem. All you're advocating with that message is ideological tribalism and that will always (always!) fail. Afterall, there is an inherent contradiction in what you want: you want the police to give but you want to grant them no measure in return. Not even the measure of listening. And, hell, you rightly want them to be honest and call out their own but you can't even manage to do that yourself when the stakes are much, much lower. I find that really hard to side with.
  14. I don't disagree, but your link and ben's response came off as blaming and I see a lot of that from one ideological tribe but very little attempt to balance that. (I should clarify, see it here in this thread. Nationally there is plenty hurling around from both sides. I'm more than tired of seeing stupid "blue lives matters, delete me if you disagree" BS on my facebook) Personally, I take one's true willingness to come to the table from their ability to be consistent, fair, and willing to call out their own. If it's always hammering in one direction, I start to seriously question that willingness.
  15. Matt Welch, sadly, probably has this right. Open dialogue doesn't work if no one is listening.
  16. Are those of you lobbing shade on the officers here also going to lob some the way of protesters on highways? Just curious because most of the people on this thread are operating under their own form of tribalism, but more of ideology. It saddens me because all this talk of "open dialogue" is nonsense unless we come to the table in a fair, understanding, honest, and humble way. I like what Maya Moore said, she seems to get it. These officers, not so much. Any protester blocking a highway, not so much. And too many around the world who are stuck in their ideological camps aren't getting it either.
  17. Is it totally impossible that the shooting isn't justified? Are we ruling out even the small chance that Castillo WAS drawing on the officer? I ask, because your second point somewhat contradicts your first. Shouldn't we wait a bit before making that declaration? We can talk about it being tragic, even about it being unlikely to have gone down in a way that justifies the officer's actions, but to rule it out altogether seems like a willfully dismissing the presumption of innocence. I'll ask again, just as Castillo deserved the presumption, shouldn't this officer get it as well? Also, this is an interesting study. I don't draw any conclusions from it beyond the fact that a deeper, more expansive study might be helpful in correcting police-work.
  18. I wish that first premise was understood, because it's rapidly becoming a terrible problem at colleges. But kudos to this guy for this.
  19. It's understandable. This thing is really, really layered and it can be hard to genuinely want to fix things without (sometimes) overstating things. Or missing part of it that deserves a look. I can't remember who it was on CNN during hte Dallas thing but he made the point that true leadership, that could look at the concerns of both sides, was the only way to fix this. He was exactly right, but I fear how many people can actually be that in today's world of tightly policed group think. (No pun intended)
  20. Well, if those comments aren't happening here....don't you think you're, perhaps, unfairly characterizing posters here? I mean, I know what your average Hannity viewer is doing...but if it's not happening here then it isn't fair to bring up. And, yes, I do expect to be pulled over for a tail light. I have twice in fact (thanks to driving junker cars as a pup), but I also didn't expect to get shot. Nor did I have any such fear of it. That's something I know many black men and women have different experiences of.
  21. Ryan kept Plouffe and forced our best player to RF. That's where things started going horribly off track. And that ain't on Molitor.
  22. C'mon. No one is justifying it, but those sorts of questions are worth asking. How do we have cops pursue fugitives if not, basically, harassing people to varying degrees. Sometimes that's by netting informants, sometimes by random stops, or probably a host of other strategies I'm not aware of. They also might inform us of the cop's mindset, which could also be valuable in revising police policy. Was this cop's reasoning pretty strained? Seems that way, but I don't think there is an easy answer to this question. Those answers get even harder to find if you can't at least entertain an honest question in an honest way.
  23. What presumption is the cop allowed? Since, it would seem, some of Willihammer questions are hinting at. It would seem some of you also aren't holding that principle for all.
  24. Unless he was driving around with a sign that says "I'm unlicensed", you totally missed the point. I'd have quite the list of violations too if I'd been pulled over 52 times. That's overzealous. And that's with acknowledging that most calls go to police about black suspects and all that data. It's still over zealous.
×
×
  • Create New...