I'm no expert, but my guess is that a "reader" is a pitcher who lifts his leg in the wind-up, then take a quick read of the first base runner before making his move to home plate or coming to first (there are some esoteric aspects of the leg kick such as crossing over and whatnot, but a "reading" pitcher has a leg kick designed to allow him to go to either home or first). Pitcher usually have a first base move with a leg kick (a "read") or the snap throw ("nonread")

In this instance, the pitcher has not been a reader. His leg kick was always towards home plate and he didn't even check the runner during his move. He only checked before the leg kick and threw over. So using the manager's theory, by starting his leg kick he is signaling a move to home plate that the runner is entitled to rely upon. By only going to first in the middle of his leg kick in this one instance, he is deceiving the runner (the key to a balk).

The ump was essentially saying that he doesn't look at subjective stuff like whether the pitcher is a "reader" but instead only looks to the direction of the step. If the guy steps to first, no balk. If the guy steps to home, balk.

Just a guess though.

Pretty sad that we need a comedy show on basic cable to do some actual reporting in this country. The corporate shill media is a pathetic sight to behold. That was 5 minutes of the most damning stuff possible to poke a big hole in the balloon of bullshit pumped up by the McCain/Palin slime machine.

To quote Jon Stewart to Palin and her "unamerican" nonsense:

Fuck You!

Indeed. It is a perfectly cromulent word.

If you look all around the table and can't spot the fish, you are the fish.

If you look around and all of your fellow conservatives are jumping off the ticket, you have a bad ticket and you are the idiot.

Mediacurves: Who won?

Republicans 18% Obama, 70% McCain

Democrats 81% Obama, 10% McCain

Independents 60% Obama, 30% McCain

Both the anecdote and the analogy made me smile. Thanks for that.

CNN poll of debate watchers:

Who won the debate?

Obama 58

McCain 31

CBS instapoll.

53% say Obama won debate, 22% McCain, 24% say tie

Even Luntz couldn't get a focus group to give it to McCain.

This comments thread is pretty much proof of how much myth-making surrounds this issue.

The only myth making going on is by you. Read all of the studies and legal opinions out there. Fraudulent voting is a myth. The cases of actual voting fraud can be counted on one hand. ONE HAND. Courts and commissions have had to look back 100 YEARS to find individual instances to justify their "anti-fraud" crusades. It's an excuse and a patently nonexistent one. You still haven't provided a single rational basis for why someone would commit this act yet you assert it is going on to such an extent that it can swing a state-wide election. You are a joke.

are a worthless piece of scum when you rationalize disenfranchising voters by (instead of actually providing a coherent rationale that would make a modicum of sense) asserting that the benefit people get from committing voter fraud is to gum up their own, highly advantageous voting districts. What kind of idiot employs that kind of logic? Ya, people risk jail time to make it harder for people who vote overwhelmingly in favor of their chosen party to actually vote. What?

You may be able to lie to yourself to sleep at night, but don't bring that kind of nonsense around here. It's offensive to people who have the decency to use their brains instead of spout worthless partisan bullshit.

You are a disgrace. Repent.

If you were harassed it was because you were trying to disenfranchise people who have fought long and hard for the ability to vote without the harassment that you were there to inflict. You should be ashamed of yourself and beg their forgiveness rather than heaping scorn upon them. Your actions are the modern day equivalent of the poll tax and should be relegated to the ash bin of history like every other scandalous means that your kind has attempted over the years.

Voter fraud as a concept is a lie. It makes no logical sense. Why on earth would a person commit a crime that: 1) is difficult to pull off; 2) has serious consequences; 3) has virtually no personal gain attributable to it; and 4) has a miniscule chance of affecting the outcome of an election. Answer: no one ever does. At most it is a few cranks that have no effect on anything. It's merely a means of gumming up the works, creating long lines, interfering with the process and generally being an ass.

The only fraud in your whole equation is you.

These assholes just convinced an en banc panel of the 6th Circuit that all new registrations in Ohio must be matched with another government data despite the near impossibility of doing so before the election happens.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27188603/

The GOP knows no shame. The phony "voter fraud" nonsense is disgusting to watch.

Sorry to intrude on your little bubble, but George W. Bush of all people actually adopted a lot of Ayers' principals with respect to juvenile justice matters (the subject of his book).

Does anyone seriously think that McCain has any role in the running of his campaign at this point? Seems like he is just being swept along.

Interesting. Especially since Hugh McColl, the guy who built BoA to where it is today for the most part, just recently endorsed Obama. The crowd reaction will be interesting as John & Cindy were previously booed at the Sylvania 300. Of course that was New Hampshire instead of North Carolina.