Charlie Gibson just said something quite curious.

[Rockholm]

OK, I ranted on GMA yesterday, but I am a sucker for punishment.

In showing the White Sox clip from last night, Charlie Gibson commented that "The umpires shouldn't be deciding the game, the players should."

This statement really plays into the RW mantra regarding "activist judges." They say that judges shouldn't me "making law." Here in Massachusetts, there is an attempt to "let the people vote: regarding gay marriage.

Dis anyone else hear Charlie's comments? Am I off base on this? Am I reading too much into this?

[mrgorth]

1. Yes.

It's a sports comment. Calm down.:)

[rfranklin]

2. That's loony! Players making the calls? Totally loony!

I think it's just part of the insane mindset that right wing nuts display.

[Boo Boo]

3. Beats me... But he's off base anyway.

The ump just called the guy out on strikes. The batter thought the ball hit the ground so he ran to first base---it happens all the time. The catcher should have immediately tagged the man or thrown down to first base if he had any doubt at all, and considering the way he caught that ball there was ample room for doubt. After all, there was doubt in the hitter's mind about whether or not he was out yet, so why is the catcher running off the field? It's baseball 101. Tag the guy. Make sure you get the out.

The ump didn't decide the game; sloppy play by the catcher did.

Gibson must be an Angels fan.

[Grillydad]

4. You're reading too much into it

It's one of those standard sports cliches. Like "Let them play" and "What game are you watching?"

[sendero]

5. The comment is loony...

.... but I don't necessarily think it had political implications.

Imagine, "let the players decide". Imagine just how well that would work. Is there no limit to the dopeyness here?

[shenmue]

6. Gibson=silly

Maybe nobody likes the rules but they are there for good reasons. To keep the game played to a certain standard and with consistency; to help ensure people don't get hurt; to make it something professional instead of just an elaborate sandlot business. Think if there were no umpires, how would we ever get anyone to agree whether something was a ball or strike? Players would obviously only want the calls that favor their own side. There are always going to be some calls that somebody doesn't like, but there must be someone with the power to make a final decision.

Gibson seems to be speaking from a very familiar spoiled-brat neo-conservative point of view. I can see how it's a bit similar to what the RWers say about the judges. They only call them names when the rulings don't go their way.

[1932]

7. GMA wouldn't want the "players" to decide the "game" either if they

didnt' have total control of MSM.

They just want people whose opinions they can control to make the decisions.