Cowboy Joe West not first umpto blow postseason interference call

Rightly, baseball fans in general as well as Houston Astros fans, are ragging on Cowboy Joe West for taking away a two-run homer from Jose Altuve last night and instead calling him out on fan interference committed against Red Sox outfielder Mookie Betts.



Per ESPN, the MLB rule is clear. One the ball goes over the wall, you cannot call interference. A fan has a right to that ball. And per replay, the ball was clearly over the wall. So was Betts' glove. Whether Cowboy Joe is more blind, re replay, or more an idiot, re the rule, I don't know. But the only interference was him interfering with the game of baseball.

But he's not the first. The two other most egregious interference blown calls in the postseason were about player interference, though.

I still remember the throwing error by Carlton Fisk when Ed Armbrister dropped a bunt to advance Cesar Geronimo, and home plate ump Larry Barnett did NOT call interference when Armbrister got in Fisk's way, because he claimed it was not "intentional." Intent is not part of the interference rules because you can't divine intent.



On the other hand, intent was pretty obvious when Reggie Jackson used his hip, non-running from first to second, to block Bill Russell's throw to first to double-play Lou Pinella.



True that Rule 7.09F requires player intentionality in some subsections. But, per subsection (d), Reggie was "gather(ed) around any base." And subsection (e) doesn't require intentionality.

And, Cowboy Joe didn't even have the worst blown call on fan interference. That would be Rich Garcia blowing the Jeffrey Maier call and giving Derek Jeter a home run as Tony Tarasco waited to catch it.



Oh, Sawks fans? In 2013, that WAS interference, or technically, obstruction by Will Middlebrooks against Allen Craig. Not blown. Because, again, intent isn't part of the rule, and Middlebrooks wasn't making a play on Craig.

Feel sorry for newspaper employeesbut not newspaper owners and corporations

With a number of mid-sized daily papers having recently engaged in further whacks, and even large-sized dailies engaging in some trims, the distinction in the header is important.

Newspaper employees — writers, editors, photographers, op-eds people, graphic designers, even those ads people — deserve sympathy for being in a struggling industry, even as people say they want news, and even as the industry, after a decade or more of early blunders, still tries to find the best way to make money.

But, do NOT feel sorry for owners and companies, at least not anywhere above the smallest mom-and-pop level.

As long as newspaper companies continue to buy newspapers from other newspaper companies, they're obviously profitable enough to not deserve a lot of sympathy.

As long as newspaper companies trim staff while saying they're profitable even before the cuts, they don't deserve sympathy.

This is even more true for larger newspaper companies that are still privately owned, and therefore don't have to (and usually won't) disclose just how profitable they are.

Here in Texas, I'm looking at you, Hearst. (Per Brains in comments, Nancy Barnes has bailed. And also per him, the sympathy for employees focuses on editorial staff, of course.)

And, per my comment, nobody watches videos more than 3-4 minutes long of news stuff unless hugely compelling.

Beto takes split decision over Ted, probably not enough

I didn't watch last night's debate between Beto O'Rourke and Ted Cruz, but I did follow the Twitter hashtag enough to agree with Brains: Beto won a split decision.

He did have the boxing gloves on enough to use the "Lyin Ted" epithet. But the punches didn't seem to have huge force and even seemed scripted a bit (beyond Cruz calling them that).

Per Brains' one link, O'Rourke could have pushed harder on Cruz corruption. (It even alliterates!)

Per another link, did Beto move the "framing" away from immigration and the economy being the top two issues among likely Texas voters? Brains and I both know that Beto doesn't actually back single payer, but he has a lot of people believing he does and Lyin Ted scaremongering over it. Doesn't do any good for Beto, whether true or not, if it's not a top voting issue. (It is No. 3.)

At the Dallas Observer, Rice prof Mark Jones, a dean of Texas academic political analysts, says O'Rourke could have hammered Cruz on reproductive choice. In another piece, Jim Schuetze seems open to the idea that generational enthusiasm might push Beto forward; if nothing else, it's a way for him to kick establishmentarians in the Dallas County and Texas Democratic party hierarchies.

Sidebar from that last link: Trump has a nearly 20 percent net negativity rating in Arizona. That helps explain the shrillness of wingnuts against Kyrsten Sinema, a ConservaDem, in the Arizona Senate race. (And it is shrill; state GOP there, and national, and the wingnuts at Powerline are dredging up a bunch of "radical" bullshit. Attacking her on the antiwar angle [Powerline is Israel-fellating neocons] could backfire in a  place like Arizona with libertarian-leaning types who are antiwar themselves.) A smaller net negative may mean Dean Heller is in trouble in Nevada; small positive helps explain Phil Bredesen's struggle in Tennessee, while a bit bigger net positive in Missouri probably won't be enough for the Rethugs to defeat Claire McCaskill.

Beto has also, himself, and not third-party PACs, upped the campaign ad heat after the debate.

Libertarians hit Northeast Texas

For voters wanting Option 3 in some statewide races, Libertarian Party candidates for the top three spots on the ballot were in Northeast Texas last week selling their alternative message. (Unfortunately, between a mix of deliberate Democratic cock-block maneuvering on a state court of criminal appeals race in 2016 followed by a state Green Party semi-implosion since then, there is no Option 4 on the ballot.)

Mark Tippetts, Libertarian candidate for governor, Kerry McKennon, the Libertarian standard-bearer for lieutenant governor, and Neal Dikeman, the party's candidate for the U.S. Senate, were at Back Story Brewery.

Dikeman, who has been facing the "spoiler" question for months because of the relative closeness of the Ted Cruz-Beto O'Rourke battle, says he relishes being called, and being, a spoiler. He said he hoped it made one or the other of both mainstream candidates expand their reach.

(Sidebar: In a previous non-political life, Dikeman blogged about clean technology issues. His angle is market-based, of course, but, for people who aren't ConservaDem fans, that means a possible alternative to undervoting.)

He also blasted the duopoly on the War on Drugs as well as the War on Terror.

Tippetts said fighting government-business cronyism expressed via tax abatements and the state enterprise fund were one big issue, followed by opposing Trump's border wall.

McKennon had the most controversial stance, saying he wanted to abolish all property taxes, period, while looking for alternatives. Just when you think it might be safe to think about Libertarians, well, then, it's obviously not, as this shows.

All three were honest in noting these were aspirational stances; in other words, none said they expected to win.

TX Progressives offer pre-early voting roundup

With early voting by mail already on, and early voting in person starting next week, the Texas Progressive Alliance is ready for voting to begin as it brings you this week's roundup.

Brains and Eggs continues to call out Beto O’Rourke for not fighting back against Ted Cruz instead of singing Kumbaya.

Off the Kuff interviewed Attorney General candidate Justin Nelson, and Harris County Judge candidate Lina Hidalgo.

SocraticGadfly was at an education-related campaign forum for a group of statewide and Northeast Texas regional candidates and offers a few takes.

Stace reports on a GOTV rally and concert held in Houston's East End featuring Little Joe y La Familia and a cast of Dem favorites.

Everything turned out well at Prairie View in the end after an arrest of a campaign employee of Mike Siegel.

At the Dallas Observer, Jim Schutze notes that with Dwaine Caraway off to prison, the Dallas City Council is again for sale to the highest bidder. His comments about a long-proposed “deck park” across I-35 in Oak Cliff, similar to the one across Woodall Rodgers, are also worth a read.

Also at that site, and as further warning to people who think that money always buys elections in Texas? Stephen Young looks back six years ago to Zodiac Ted’s first Senate run and mentions two words: “David Dewhurst.”

Five Death Row exonerees will speak Oct 20 at the March to End the Death Penalty.

David Bruce Collins  calls out Facebook censorship of antiwar and other alt-media sites.

Grits for Breakfast discusses a guard killing a prison inmate and other issues, including Ted Cruz “shedding his last remaining libertarian bona fides.”

Juanita sees some hope in evangelical women.

Paradise in Hell is glad to see the Catholic Church finally releasing names of priests who have been credibly accused of sexual abuse.

 Rick Casey is skeptical of the latest agreement regarding the Alamo.

 Therese Odell has had it with Melania Trump.

 The Current salutes Texas hero Joe Bob Briggs.

 Finally, the TPA wishes Texas Leftist all the best as it transitions from blogging to podcasting.

Calling bullshit on Yoda's "no try"

As this blog simmers and marinates more over the years, I've added more non-politics and non-sports stuff to it.

A fair part of those additions are personal thoughts related to psychology and sociology, and they're only going to grow as I get older. Because there's a lot of bullshit out there that needs to be countered.

Per the header?

"Do. Or do not. There is no try." — Yoda, from "The Empire Strikes Back."

This is New Agey bullshit from George Lucas. No, it's not even that. It's just recycled "business world positivity" bullshit that was espoused by Dale Carnegie, Napoleon Hill, Norman Vincent Peale and many others in the past, and on to Tony Robbins and others today. Sadly, many people who think this will force them to be better employees or whatever buy into this without reckoning with other issues.

The reality is much different.

There are many things we try to do, but where are attempts are blocked by forces beyond our control.

I try to grow rich, but I don't have inside connections, or 130 other people have already marketed my brilliant idea, or I don't have a dad named Fred Trump, or whatever.

I try to hook up with Kate Upton, but her liking rich, handsome athletes like Justin Verlander is beyond my control. Ditto for me trying to win Giselle; she has this thing for a Patriots quarterback. Ditto for me trying to woo Gabrielle Union away from Dwyane Wade. Or telling Khloe Kardashian that I'm better than BOTH Lamar Odom and Tristan Thompson. Or that Miss Universe Amelia Vega should dig me over Al Horford.

I try to make cool sci-fi movies, but I didn't marry Marcia Lucas, and no other film editors who know what I should be doing better than I do myself will touch me with a 10-foot pole. Put that in your pipe and puff it, George. (And, yes, from people like Mark Hamill as actors, and other directors who know the backstory, this is all true; Marcia edited the original Star Wars, especially, into being an actual move; George was semi-fucking-clueless.)

Beyond running into obstacles I simply cannot overcome, there's pure, dumb luck. People like Bill Gates admit that luck played a role in their fiscal success. (That's why Gates favors keeping estate taxes, or even going back to where estate taxes were 20 years ago; so do many other rich.)

Beyond that, there's the whole issue of "success." Too many people are afraid of failure. Too many others treat too much of life as a competition. And they, like the business gurus, cite bullshit like this. Beyond the general competitors, there's the Randians, Social Darwinists, etc.

So, in reality?

"There is fuck off. There is no succeed or not entirely on your own skill, without luck."