Stick to baseball, 5/27/17.

My one Insider piece this week was on Luis Robert, his deal with the White Sox, and the poor history of Cuban position player free agents. I did not hold a Klawchat, and will have another mock draft up on Tuesday.

Smart Baseball continues to sell well and I am very grateful to all of you who purchased it. I have about 100 signed bookplates that I can send out to readers who’ve bought the book, and I’ll get that info to everyone soon – probably in my next email newsletter.

And now, the links…

Comments

  1. The thing that I find most difficult to understand about the Gianforte story is that some of his supporters applauded him for what he did and weren’t bothered that he lied about the incident. How do you even talk to people like that?

    As for Abbott, let’s not forget he signed a law overriding the Austin law that offended Uber so much they left Austin: http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2017/05/not-missed It’s getting harder and harder to stay here in this little oasis of decency.

  2. Mr. Law,

    Thank you for this list. I always it read but don’t comment on how much I appreciate it. Thanks.

  3. I couldn’t take that Morrissey article seriously after Rossiter said that, “The person that committed this atrocity is as much Muslim as I am Martian.” Unless he knows something about life on Mars that the rest of us don’t, that statement is blatantly (and dangerously) wrong.

    • I think you may have missed his point. Just because someone professes to be Muslim, or Christian, or patriotic, or smart, or whatever doesn’t mean they actually are.

      Timothy McVeigh, for example, identified as a Christian, but was about as un-Christian as it gets.

    • I don’t think I missed the point at all. Islamic terrorists are absolutely Muslim. Do you dispute that?

    • I dispute that. They’re just as Muslim as Eric Rudolph (who killed two and injured over 100 in multiple terrorist attacks) is Catholic.

    • Osama bin Laden wasn’t a Muslim? The Westboro Baptist Church isn’t Christian? Religion makes people do really stupid and unethical things.

      One can make a pretty strong argument that Islamic terrorists are doing exactly what the Quran and other teachings tell them to do. Making a religion more progressive just proves how ridiculous religion is in the first place. Holy books are either the word of God or they aren’t. (Hint: they aren’t.)

    • One can make a pretty strong argument that Islamic terrorists are doing exactly what the Quran and other teachings tell them to do.

      One can make a stronger argument on the other side.

      I agree with A Salty Scientist. Religion is a justification, and a tool for indoctrination, but not the cause. If this was what the Qur’an tells Muslims to do, then why don’t we have tens of millions of such bombers? There are a billion Muslims in the world, so if killing civilians is what their holy book tells them to do, then we should have attacks like this every few seconds.

    • A Salty Scientist

      Religion makes people do really stupid and unethical things.

      Religion is the justification, not the cause. I have no doubt that if raised in a different time and place, Adam Lanza, Dylan Roof, James Holmes, et al. would become *Islamic* terrorists.

    • I don’t think that’s true. And that’s the problem with not singling out Islam for being particularly harmful. Islam takes plenty of intelligent people (with no mental illness other than believing in a religion) and convinces them to kill themselves to kill others.

    • Islam, like most religions, have been made more progressive. But as I pointed out above, that really makes no sense.

      Also, if you look at poll numbers of Muslims living in Western countries, it’s quite staggering how many of them take the Quran literally, believe in sharia law, and can justify suicide bombings and other unethical things. It’s not 1% like one would hope. Just because there isn’t a bombing every second doesn’t mean Islam (even moderate Islam) doesn’t have barbaric views.

      I find it ironic that these links and the corresponding discussion, as I see them, speak out against misogyny, homophobia, and anti-science, and then everyone defends a religion that is the epitome of those things.

    • then everyone defends a religion that is the epitome of those things.

      That’s hyperbolic; I’m not defending the religion per se, but arguing that those who kill in the religion’s name are, if we’re being really charitable, misconstruing the religion’s teachings. The same would be true of those who kill for Christ.

      BTW, Islam as anti-science is, at best, an oversimplification. Islam was at one point more pro-science than Christianity, and there remains today a broad spectrum of views within Islam on science, even though religious authorities in power in the near and middle easts can themselves be hostile to science. (The scientist-author interviewed in that link is a non-theist, but defends Islam from the charge of being anti-science.)

    • *has (bad grammar…)

    • A Salty Scientist

      Islam takes plenty of intelligent people (with no mental illness other than believing in a religion) and convinces them to kill themselves to kill others.

      I’m going to need a citation on this one. Why would this particular religion take otherwise intelligent and well-adjusted individuals and convince them to become suicide bombers? Was Shintoism the *cause* of kamikaze attacks?

    • Michael: I would like you to make your best guess. What percentage of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims? You can either give me your guess for the U.S., or for Europe, or for both.

    • What religious group is overwhelmingly the victim in ISIS and Taliban terrorist attacks around the world? Muslims. Much like the IRA wasn’t a Catholic terrorist group and the UDA wasn’t a Protestant terrorist group. All these groups are primarily political organizations, even if ISIS and the Taliban want to create a theocracy.

    • Seems to me that religion, given its supernatural bailiwick, is open to interpretation, so I’m hesitant to declare who is or isn’t Muslim, Christian, etc. While the overall trend in the major religions is to bend towards the expectations of an increasingly civilized world, advances in communications, freedom of travel, and availability of weaponry have proven a countervailing force, as those who would enforce the more rigid and brutal aspects of religious doctrine are better able to organize.

    • It’s less “this person is/isn’t Muslim” than “this person is representative of all Muslims.” The former is a theological debate that really doesn’t matter unless you’re part of the religion. The latter informs policy, or reveals the speaker’s prejudice.

  4. Man, not Boar’s head.

  5. Ryan (Snellville)

    You can add Atlanta to the list of cities who are reducing the amount of affordable housing available to the “invisible” workers. Not sure if you were able to see all of the f luxury apartments going up every day on your visit here but it is getting pretty ridiculous. It has been great for the restaurant scene but terrible for the people who can’t afford to live in the luxury apartments.

  6. Hey Keith,

    One more long read you might be interested in. On the tactics used involving DAPL protesters and activists by The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2017/05/27/leaked-documents-reveal-security-firms-counterterrorism-tactics-at-standing-rock-to-defeat-pipeline-insurgencies/

  7. Hi, thanks for all this, but this sentence confused me:

    “A Republican lawmaker there claims rules to let parents opt out of vaccination mandates hurt ‘parental rights,’ oblivious to the irony that it hurts the rights of those parents’ kids to avoid preventable diseases.”

    Why, I thought, would a vaccine not complain about being allowed to opt out?

    Then I read the link and I see that the problem is “stricter” rules. It would have been good to mention that in your sentence.