This news has been received from: wtop.com

All trademarks, copyrights, videos, photos and logos are owned by respective news sources. News stories, videos and live streams are from trusted sources.

mail: [NewsMag]

DETROIT (AP) — Victor Reyes and Riley Greene hit back-to-back homers in the ninth inning to give the Detroit Tigers a 4-3 win over the Kansas City Royals on Saturday.

With one out in the ninth, Reyes tied the game off Royals reliever Joel Payamps (2-2). It was the first homer allowed by Payamps in 26 1/3 innings this season.

Greene followed with the first homer of his career.

Tigers reliever Joe Jimenez (3-0) pitched a perfect ninth and earned the win as Detroit’s pitchers retired the last 17 batters they faced.

The Royals took a 2-0 lead on Hunter Dozier’s bases-loaded double in the first inning. In the bottom half of the winning, Greene led off with a triple and scored on Javy Baez’s sacrifice fly.

Kansas City made it 3-1 in the fourth on Whit Merrifield’s RBI single.

The Tigers got a run back in the fifth when Greene walked, took third on Miguel Cabrera’s single and scored on a base hit from Eric Haase. Bobby Witt Jr got Kansas City out of the inning, stealing a base hit from Willi Castro. Detroit had two runners on in the sixth, but Amir Garrett struck out Greene to end the inning.

Garrett threw up his hands in celebration, drawing an angry verbal response from Baez, who had been on deck. Garrett and Baez have a tense relationship dating to a confrontation in 2019, when Garrett was with the Cincinnati Reds and Baez was with the Chicago Cubs.

TRAINER’S ROOM

Tigers: Despite facial bruising from being hit in the head by Brad Keller on Friday, Spencer Torkelson entered the game in the sixth inning to pinch hit for Kody Clemens. He remained in the game at first base.

ROSTER MOVE

The Royals activated Payamps from the COVID-19 list and outrighted RHP Daniel Mengden to Triple-A Omaha. Payamps had been sidelined since June 13.

MILESTONE WATCH

Cabrera’s fifth-inning single was the 3,059 hit of his career, moving him within one of Craig Biggio for 25th place on the career list. He is currently two RBI behind Manny Ramirez’s 1,831 for 18th place.

UP NEXT

The teams finish their weekend series with a noon start on Sunday. Detroit’s Tarik Skubal (5-6, 3.75) will face Brady Singer (3-3, 4.50).

___

More AP MLB: https://apnews.com/hub/MLB and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports

Copyright © 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

News Source: wtop.com

Tags: a base hit the first homer his career and scored in the sixth in the ninth kansas city

I just lost it on him: Texas man clubs suspect who tried to steal his catalytic converter

Next News:

Why liberals need to imagine a new democratic future | Opinion

Shortly after the right-wing supermajority of the US Supreme Court struck down Roe, I wrote a piece in which I said that you still have the right to an abortion. You still have the right to privacy. But now, I said, you don’t have the right to federal protection of those rights.

I thought it was important to draw attention to that distinction. First, because the press corps wasn’t speaking in those terms. By and large, the reporting on the court’s heel-turn gave the impression that these rights had poofed, as if the ruling were a consequence of institutional change rather than a consequence of democratic politics.

That the press corps operates in this way is my second reason. Journalism can tell us what happened. It can tell us how and why, to whom and by whom. It can inform us. It can provide the political context for understanding democratic politics, what has succeeded, what has failed. But despite this, even the best journalism is limited to the past tense. It can’t tell us about the present or the future.

READ MORE: 'A feature of democracy': Jim Jordan mocked over tweet that missed the mark on basic legal principles

We need political journalism. We can’t function without it.

But it’s empirical, not creative.

It’s no substitute for the democratic imagination.

Democratic imagination

READ MORE: Donald Trump’s supporters believe 'God anointed him': expert

There’s a third reason.

Liberals need to hear that the right to an abortion – the right to privacy – still exists, because liberals are the first to defer to the authority of facts. But facts are of the past. Journalists report them in the past tense. Therefore, if we limit ourselves to facts, we limit our democratic imaginations. We limit our collective capacity to hope, which, in turn, limits our capacity to feel our faith in democracy.

If we can’t feel our faith, we’ll never imagine a new democracy, which in turn means we’ll never reclaim federal protection of those rights. We’ll never imagine ways of establishing and protecting new rights.

Liberals need to be reminded that democratic institutions like the Supreme Court are not where individual rights come from. The people are the ultimate judges of constitutionality. Liberals need to be reminded that even though liberals in the past fought for Roe, they knew it was a bad idea to let a court tell us what our rights are.

Liberals need to be reminded that liberals in the past yoked themselves to the court, because that was the surest way, they believed, to secure the protection of rights, like abortion, in a time when most Americans opposed abortion. We need to be reminded that liberals in the past imagined democratically how to use the courts, instead of the Congress, to secure those federal protections.

Liberals need to be reminded of these things, because we have largely forgotten, I think, how to imagine democratically. We have forgotten because we didn’t need to remember. With Roe in place, everything was jake. As long as liberals defended a democratic institution – the court – we didn’t need to imagine democratically.

Fascist imagination

Now that a right-wing supermajority has taken over this democratic institution, however, and now that it has begun dismantling a half-century of federally protected individual rights, I sense that many liberals don’t know what to do. What do we have without the court? Their capacity to imagine democratically has atrophied. The result has been a painful lost capacity to feel their faith in democracy.

The right-wing base of today’s Republican Party, on the other hand, has never lost its capacity to imagine. They always believed in their innate authority to rule by right of blood. So instead of a democratic imagination, it was a fascist imagination. Instead of imagining the new, they imagined how to restore the old by knocking down the new. Instead of defending institutions, as the liberals did to protect rights, like abortion, the fascists imagined how to knock those institutions down, in the process knocking down individual rights.

The fascists never lost their capacity to feel their faith, not in democracy, obviously, but in white power. As long as democracy enabled white power, everything was jake. When democracy disabled white power, or appeared to disable white power, as when Barack Obama was elected president, that democracy has to go.

They never lost their capacity to feel their faith in white power and with that faith, they overtook a democratic institution for the purpose of undercutting democracy, thus restoring the white-power order.

We the people
I do not mean to suggest that liberals behave like fascists. I do mean to suggest, however, that we avoid doing what liberals did in the past – that is, pin their (and our) faith in democracy on democratic institutions that are by their nature vulnerable to fascist takeover.

Same thing goes for norms.

If norms that used to run with the grain of democracy are running against it, it’s time to imagine new norms. There’s no sense in preserving something that backfires in the process of preserving it.

Similarly, I think the debate over court reforms is, while needed, too narrow. It limits our democratic imaginations more than it promises to protect individual rights. The people are the ultimate judges of constitutionality. The people are the ultimate deciders of rights.

But the people are neither unless we have faith in being both.

Fortunately, history appears to be on the liberals’ side. In the past, they needed to use the court, because most Americans opposed the right to abortion. Today, they don’t need the court. Their argument has been made. Most Americans support the right to abortion. Indeed, the fascist hope to use the court to reverse that trend.

They may succeed if liberals try to reclaim the glories of the past.

They may fail if liberals imagine a new democratic future.

READ MORE: 'Today’s Republicans are fascist': Conservative activist slams authoritarian GOP candidates

From Your Site Articles

    Other News

    • Warby Parker is slashing jobs as inflation takes a toll on fashion
    • Yankees lose ridiculous 13-inning marathon with Mariners, 1-0
    • Rougned Odors homer in 8th lifts Orioles over Blue Jays, 6-5, bringing Baltimore within half-game of wild-card spot
    • Cardinals: Miles Mikolas makes wrong kind of history in disastrous start
    • Chicago White Sox bounce back for a doubleheader split vs. the Kansas City Royals after falling to 12-23 in series openers
    • Braves: This huge advantage could propel Atlanta past Mets
    • Why the acquisition of slugger Franmil Reyes could be a good fit for the power-needy Chicago Cubs
    • Chicago White Sox fall to 12-23 in series openers after dropping Game 1 of a doubleheader vs. the Kansas City Royals
    • Vermont poised to send first female to Congress with Becca Balint winning Democratic House nomination
    • Mets still getting hit by pitches at record pace; Buck Showalter says they wont budge
    • Third Person Found Guilty In Connection With Omar Wildredo Reyes' Murder
    • Barcelona Ready To Send 3 Players Out On Loan: Report
    • NBC’s Ben Collins Sounds Alarm on Violent Rhetoric Flooding Pro-Trump Message Boards: They Are Ready to Go
    • Why liberals need to imagine a new democratic future | Opinion