Full House at the Rangers game right now

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

I recognize I live in a Democracy.

Actually, you live in a Representative Republic, which has a constitution that protects individual rights.

Example, Gilligan's Island. If it's a democracy (majority rule) the 5 non-rich castaways take the Howell's money from them. The 4 men vote to make the 3 women do all of the domestic work. And, finally, Gilligan is confined to his hut by the other 6, so they might have a chance at being rescued.

In a Representative Republic, with laws protecting the rights of the minority, these things couldn't happen.

If the majority in this country think I must eat potatoes at every meal, I needn't comply, because I have Constitutional rights that protect me.

By the way, on the virus thing, I have no firm opinion. It's just bad news all around with no good options.

[brianp-beme]

First Padres no-hitter in their history (Joe Musgrove) not only knocked the bats out of Texas player's hands, but perhaps also helped minimize the amount of respiratory droplets from exiting the noggins of unmasked Rangers fans.

Brian (congrats Padres, finally!)

[FrankWakefield]

Representative Republic... I don't think so.

Constitutional rights... no Sir. Read the Constitution. It doesn't give you freedom of speech, for example. That's what we were taught in school, what we hear... but take a couple of minutes and read it.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment does not give you freedom of speech. The Constitution doesn't give citizens any rights. It is not a right-giving document. It is a power-limiting document. It limits the power of Congress / the federal government / the Union. Founding Fathers came from 13 colonies, they wanted to create a 14th entity, the Union of States. It was to give a united front in international affairs, keep the states from setting up tariffs on commerce between the states, protect us from enemies... and the idea was that everything else would remain in each state's hands. The document says that the Union will maintain a navy, and raise an army when necessary (being a Navy football fan I like the unequal footing that affords). The Constitution was a document designed to limit the power of this new govenment / Union.

The US government fast tracked and paid for the vaccine. And they can distribute it to states. Once in the hand of the states, the feds can't totally control how some states are ready to vaccinate everyone, and some still have age restrictions.

States have differing license requirements for driving, doctoring, selling insurance, and such... The states held onto a lot of power.

So... that first amendment... Congress shall make no law... It doesn't say I have freedom of speech, it says Congress can't mess with my freedom of speech (whatever that might be).

Baseball... I like fans being at games. 100% seems nuts. Masks seem sensible. The opening up's around the world (including here) are followed by more outbreaks and an occasional mutation variant. If people could hunker down and stay safe, then the spreading and mutating would diminish, and we'd get this behind us.

Baseball... in another thread I saw an Art Girabaldi Zeenut and read that he'd played for the Cardinals. I didn't have his card among my Zeenuts. But now I have one!

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

So... that first amendment... Congress shall make no law... It doesn't say I have freedom of speech, it says Congress can't mess with my freedom of speech (whatever that might be).

A distinction without a difference. You say po-tA-to, I say PO-Ta-TO.

[Jason19th]

Originally Posted by Mark17

A distinction without a difference. You say po-tA-to, I say PO-Ta-TO.

It actual isn’t a distinction without a difference and illustrates what people often get wrong about what the first amendment means. A totally unabridged right to speech would mean that no one could suffer any consequence from speech, even private consequences like losing a job or being barred from joining a private club. The phrasing of the 1st amendment simply prevents the GOVERNMENT from penalizing your speech. So it’s actually a pretty big difference

Also McDonal’s French fries are magic not science

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

It actual isn’t a distinction without a difference and illustrates what people often get wrong about what the first amendment means. A totally unabridged right to speech would mean that no one could suffer any consequence from speech, even private consequences like losing a job or being barred from joining a private club. The phrasing of the 1st amendment simply prevents the GOVERNMENT from penalizing your speech. So it’s actually a pretty big difference

Also McDonal’s French fries are magic not science

I certainly understand that the meaning of the simplified term "free speech" has limitations, like not being able to shout "Fire!" in crowded places, not being able to slander others or break legally binding non-disclosure agreements with impunity, and so on. But in the struggle between government and individual rights, what the government can't restrict confers to the individual.

Time for a non fungible digital fantasy asset:

[FrankWakefield]

That's a nice Hogsett card. He's one of the players I read about before I was a teenager. I read about the 1934 World Series, while all other kids seemed interested in Mickey Mantle; but then it was the mid-60's and as a kids, we knew nothing.

Leon's toes... not a laughing matter. Toes are critical to controlling balance. I hope the feeling returns.

I didn't realize Texas had an independent power grid. With hindsight, that's a mess, a disaster waiting to happen. Texas should join the national grid, East or West, either is fine.

I recall, as a kid, asking my Grandfather what the TVA was. He had driven by a dam in northern Tennessee and mentioned that it was a TVA dam. I was a nerdy, inquisitive kid, and my Grandfather knew 'stuff'. I listened about the WPA, depression recovery, putting people to work, electrification (which was not very far along, even in the 1950's), affordable electricity, flood control, reliable sources for public water... and I asked him why the government owned the TVA. He explained that all of that needed doing, but that it would be maybe 55 to 65 years before the TVA could reach a point where it could have debt paid down to the point where it could be profitable. He mentioned affordable electricity again and said that where we lived we paid less for electricity than many of the people in the country. He said that business men, companies, corporations, they would not undertake a course of action that would not show a profit in a man's lifetime. But that government could do that. So the TVA was necessary to develop the system in the southeast... a system that helps with flood control, manages water resources and water recreation areas, and provides affordable and reliable electricity.

Texas needs to be on the national grid. Seems likely to me that the state government office holders, having received oil money supporting campaigns, couldn't vote against local oil and private power interests; so the citizens of Texas are stuck with a flawed yet replaceable system.

I'll offer a prayer tonight for those toes, that isn't a laughing matter.


I'd like to buy an example of that green background Wagner portrait card... that looks great!