Well one of the other shoes in the steroid era dropped the other day when is was reveled that Manny and Big Papi tested positive for PED's during the now infamous 2003 steroid test that was supposed to be secret but now isn't. This is the same test which has also gotten A-Rod and Sammy Sosa. Of the 104 players who supposedly tested positive, only about seven names have come out, depending on your source. But of those seven, four have been blockbusters, some of the biggest hitters and most famous players of the past 15 years.
This whole thing has been a nightmare scenario for baseball and the players association. The whole reason these names are out is because the players association kept the test results in the hopes of getting enough false positives on retests to throw out testing altogether in baseball. Instead they somehow lost control of the list and that list was matched up with the players names.
Who ever knows the names seems to be leaking them out a little at a time. Everytime it happens it drags baseball back into the discussion no matter what else is going on. It's death by a thousand cuts.
So the answer is simple, if baseball has this list, release it all at once. Take out an add in every sports page in the country and lets just get past this. If baseball doesn't have control of the list they need to sue to get it, or sue to keep anymore names from coming out. Now I prefer the former rather then the later, but at this rate, what ever works.
And finally, who ever has been definitely linked to steroids should have all there records during the time the were taking wiped out. I'm ready to recognize Roger Maris as the single-season HR champ with 61 and Hank Aaron the all-time champ with 755.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Wanted: Black Cops and Black Firefighters
I've been thinking a bit about the recent incident with Henry Louis Gates being arrested inside his home after police were called after a report of two black men attempting to enter his house. It has really dominated the news for the past 48 hours being highlighted even more by President Obama during his prime-time news conference last night. The purpose of the news conference, even though it wasn't specifically stated as such, was to push the staled health care initiative. As usual Obama was long on promise and short on detail, but I digress. The last question was about the Gates incident. Gates is a friend of Obama and whether it was meant to be a trap question or not Obama paused, and then jumped in with both feet. He said he didn't know all the facts, BUT Gates' had a a right to mad and that the Cambridge police department acted "stupidly".
The police Officer in question, Sgt James Crowley appears to have a great record with no apparent incidents of racial profiling in his past. The facts of the case are in doubt, depending on whose side you fall on. Sgt. Crowley maintains Gates' did not produce ID when asked and became vocal at Sgt. Crowley for entering his home. Gates' maintains that he did show ID and that Sgt. Crowley became angry when Gates' did not follow his orders.
Now I've watched Cops enough to know that you don't argue with the police even if you think you are right. Sgt. Crowley needs to control the situation, and when he can't or the suspect won't allow it he needs to take control, by force if needed. Right now I have no reason to doubt Sgt. Crowley's version of the incident. If Gates had maintained his cool I think the whole thing would have blown over. Unfortunately Gates showed his racism towards whites.
Now interestingly enough none of the other cops on the scene that day have offered their opinions. I'm not sure who this favors maybe no one. But this incident and the New Haven firefighters case has lead me to the crux of my argument and the title of this blog, we need more black cops and firefighters.
Think of it, a call comes in saying two black men are breaking into a house and a black cop shows up and one is arrested does anyone bat an eye? If a black cop had shown up at Gates' house what would his argument have been if he got arrested? This would put the Al Sharpton's of the world out of business. I like to think of Al Sharpton as a racial ambulance chaser. When ever this a possibility of a problem between blacks and whites, he there. Most often to fan the flames then to offer a real solution to the problem. If we had more black firefighters there wouldn't have been a New Haven Supreme Court case.
Now I know this sounds quiet radical and is really almost a step back to a form of segregation, but I'm getting tired of all these racial incidents involving law enforcement and the like. Not ever minority who is arrested is a miscarriage of justice. I'm glad to see the Cambridge Police Department is circling the wagons around Sgt. Crowley. I'm sure there will be an internal investigation, I'm hoping Sgt. Crowley will be exonerated. Then the ball will be in Gates' court. I can certainly see him continuing to make a big deal out of this and Obama's endorsement won't help him or Obama. Perhaps Obama will call him and tell him to forget it because it is taking away from Obama's real issues. Anyway the next few days will be key.
P.S. Don't read the "interview" by Elizabeth Gates of her father about the incident. It is the worst piece of "journalism" I have ever read. And it's really making me reconsider reading the Daily Beast ever again.
The police Officer in question, Sgt James Crowley appears to have a great record with no apparent incidents of racial profiling in his past. The facts of the case are in doubt, depending on whose side you fall on. Sgt. Crowley maintains Gates' did not produce ID when asked and became vocal at Sgt. Crowley for entering his home. Gates' maintains that he did show ID and that Sgt. Crowley became angry when Gates' did not follow his orders.
Now I've watched Cops enough to know that you don't argue with the police even if you think you are right. Sgt. Crowley needs to control the situation, and when he can't or the suspect won't allow it he needs to take control, by force if needed. Right now I have no reason to doubt Sgt. Crowley's version of the incident. If Gates had maintained his cool I think the whole thing would have blown over. Unfortunately Gates showed his racism towards whites.
Now interestingly enough none of the other cops on the scene that day have offered their opinions. I'm not sure who this favors maybe no one. But this incident and the New Haven firefighters case has lead me to the crux of my argument and the title of this blog, we need more black cops and firefighters.
Think of it, a call comes in saying two black men are breaking into a house and a black cop shows up and one is arrested does anyone bat an eye? If a black cop had shown up at Gates' house what would his argument have been if he got arrested? This would put the Al Sharpton's of the world out of business. I like to think of Al Sharpton as a racial ambulance chaser. When ever this a possibility of a problem between blacks and whites, he there. Most often to fan the flames then to offer a real solution to the problem. If we had more black firefighters there wouldn't have been a New Haven Supreme Court case.
Now I know this sounds quiet radical and is really almost a step back to a form of segregation, but I'm getting tired of all these racial incidents involving law enforcement and the like. Not ever minority who is arrested is a miscarriage of justice. I'm glad to see the Cambridge Police Department is circling the wagons around Sgt. Crowley. I'm sure there will be an internal investigation, I'm hoping Sgt. Crowley will be exonerated. Then the ball will be in Gates' court. I can certainly see him continuing to make a big deal out of this and Obama's endorsement won't help him or Obama. Perhaps Obama will call him and tell him to forget it because it is taking away from Obama's real issues. Anyway the next few days will be key.
P.S. Don't read the "interview" by Elizabeth Gates of her father about the incident. It is the worst piece of "journalism" I have ever read. And it's really making me reconsider reading the Daily Beast ever again.
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Last Domino, It was still illegal and time to right a wrong
The title of this entry my seem long but it all has to do with the same topic and that is baseball. These days I'm barely hanging on as a baseball fan. And it's not just because the Mets are in a rough stretch right now. I've never really come all the way back from the 1994 strike. The strike was also around the time my personal baseball career came to an end. Those two events lead to my deceased interest in baseball. I kinda came back a bit in 1998 with the great McGwire/Sosa homerun chase, and about that time the Mets started to awaken once again, but it still wasn't the same as it was.
Now we come to today. Most of what we have learned about the great sluggers of the past 15 years is that they cheated. Or at least had some help. Even those that we don't have proof of are pretty much dismissed as having cheated. This is the category McGwire falls into in my opinion. So I began asking myself what's next, who's next? Is there really anyone left who has not been implicated in steroid abuse that would really shock me. Maybe Griffey, or Thome maybe even Sheffield even though I'm not really a big fan of him. Then I thought there is one person. This player has not even been mentioned in the same paragraph as steriods but since these revelations have had a way of coming out of left field you could never be sure.
The player is Cal Ripken Jr.
Now let me be clear. I am NOT saying Cal Ripken did steroids. I'm just saying he is the last person left who would truly shock me if his name came out as being linked to steroids. Now the time frame in which Ripken plays leads me to my next point. One of the common defenses is that it was not against MLB's rules at the time, or they weren't testing for it. Well I'm pretty sure that steroids were illegal in the regular world so it would stand to reason that you would still be breaking rules, or in this case laws by using them. Also the IOC (International Olympic Committee) has had steroids on its banned list for years. At least since 1988 (see Ben Johnson).
The scariest thing to me about steroids and other PED (Performance Enhancing Drugs) is how well they work. The dramatic increases in these players statistics is proof of how well they work. if these chemists spent as much time on real medical problems like cancer as they do making the perfect steroid that can not be detected during testing, we would be well on our way to curing or treating many terrible diseases.
Last but not least one of the biggest crimes with all these players using steroids is how the record book has been forever tainted. It has been said by many fans and writers that baseball is more linked to "hollowed" numbers then any other sport. Numbers like 714, 755 for homeruns, 56 for hits and lifetime records like 3,000 hits, 500 homeruns and 300 wins. So I think now there is no better time then to bring one of the owners of some of the best all-time numbers, Pete Rose.
Looking back on what Pete Rose did and what is happening now, there is really no comparison. Pete Rose broke a baseball rule no doubt about it. However, there is no question that what he did on the field is legit. The rule against betting on baseball while involved in the game was a knee jerk reaction to the Black Sox scandal of 1919. While I'm not condoning what Rose did, he did always bet on his team and not against while he was manager so it would stand to reason he used his maximum effort to see that they won. Rose has been his own worst enemy over the years but with everyone's numbers in question over the past 15 years and the fact that few people from this era will make it to the Hall of Fame, I think it is time to lift the ban on Pete and welcome him into the Hall for his accomplishments on the field which no one has any reason to question.
Now we come to today. Most of what we have learned about the great sluggers of the past 15 years is that they cheated. Or at least had some help. Even those that we don't have proof of are pretty much dismissed as having cheated. This is the category McGwire falls into in my opinion. So I began asking myself what's next, who's next? Is there really anyone left who has not been implicated in steroid abuse that would really shock me. Maybe Griffey, or Thome maybe even Sheffield even though I'm not really a big fan of him. Then I thought there is one person. This player has not even been mentioned in the same paragraph as steriods but since these revelations have had a way of coming out of left field you could never be sure.
The player is Cal Ripken Jr.
Now let me be clear. I am NOT saying Cal Ripken did steroids. I'm just saying he is the last person left who would truly shock me if his name came out as being linked to steroids. Now the time frame in which Ripken plays leads me to my next point. One of the common defenses is that it was not against MLB's rules at the time, or they weren't testing for it. Well I'm pretty sure that steroids were illegal in the regular world so it would stand to reason that you would still be breaking rules, or in this case laws by using them. Also the IOC (International Olympic Committee) has had steroids on its banned list for years. At least since 1988 (see Ben Johnson).
The scariest thing to me about steroids and other PED (Performance Enhancing Drugs) is how well they work. The dramatic increases in these players statistics is proof of how well they work. if these chemists spent as much time on real medical problems like cancer as they do making the perfect steroid that can not be detected during testing, we would be well on our way to curing or treating many terrible diseases.
Last but not least one of the biggest crimes with all these players using steroids is how the record book has been forever tainted. It has been said by many fans and writers that baseball is more linked to "hollowed" numbers then any other sport. Numbers like 714, 755 for homeruns, 56 for hits and lifetime records like 3,000 hits, 500 homeruns and 300 wins. So I think now there is no better time then to bring one of the owners of some of the best all-time numbers, Pete Rose.
Looking back on what Pete Rose did and what is happening now, there is really no comparison. Pete Rose broke a baseball rule no doubt about it. However, there is no question that what he did on the field is legit. The rule against betting on baseball while involved in the game was a knee jerk reaction to the Black Sox scandal of 1919. While I'm not condoning what Rose did, he did always bet on his team and not against while he was manager so it would stand to reason he used his maximum effort to see that they won. Rose has been his own worst enemy over the years but with everyone's numbers in question over the past 15 years and the fact that few people from this era will make it to the Hall of Fame, I think it is time to lift the ban on Pete and welcome him into the Hall for his accomplishments on the field which no one has any reason to question.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Drop the "Reverse" in Racism
I'm way behind in the blog as usual but there's a topic which has been on my mind. With all the talk about the new Supreme Court Justice nominee Sonya Sotomayor and her supposedly racist views why is it when a minority is accused of racism it is called "reverse racism"? Do whites have a monopoly on racism? Some people would say yes. I say call it what it is, racism. There's nothing reverse about it. Blacks, Asians, Hispanics etc have the same standings Whites do. I think that should also translate over to the topic of racism too. Those groups can be racist towards one another just like white can. I don't think it would be called reverse racism if a Hispanic was racist toward an Asian. By assigning the "reverse" to it, people make Whites the eternal bad guy when it comes to racism and I don't believe that's true.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
To release or not to release.
So the debate is ramping up over the latest reports of photos showing serious abuses at Abu Ghraib. If the reports are to believed this could be a very serious problem for the US. As I have said before I frequent the liberal blog ThinkProgress. The release of these photos has been a pretty hot topic of discussion.
Now it has been said by people on both sides that torture has hurt the US and that US Soldiers and the war effort has been hurt by these abuses and the photos which followed. So why would anyone want these new photos released?
I posed this question the other day on ThinkProgress during one of the threads. I said basically why would you release the photos one previous ones have been so damning and what would you hope to accomplish by doing so? The answer given by some to my second question goes along why to explaining the answers given to the first. Most people said they favored the release of the photos regardless of the reaction they cause. And the reason, most people think they can be used against Bush and Cheney.
As I have also said in the past there is little to no chance Bush and Cheney will ever be brought up on charges in the US and absolutely no chance of them be tried in a foreign country. I explained to some that there are too many people in the chain of command between the people who may have actually did this and Bush/Cheney that it would never get to them. Not to mention the fact that they would need proof that Bush/Cheney ordered the rape of these detainees which would be tough to prove. I said the "bad-apples" defense had been used once before and would probably be used again successfully, so there's really no chance that Bush/Cheney would face criminal charges if these photos show what they claim to show.
The thing that disturbs me most is that people would be willing to potentially increase terrorist recruitment and cause our Soldiers further harm just to try and get Bush/Cheney. This blood lust to see them convicted is starting to become a problem in my eyes. The more it seems Obama will not prosecute them, the more anger and reckless the left is getting. If the photos turn out to show everything they have said they do, then use them in a court of law and then lock them away. They don't do anybody any good. If those types of pictures did then we would see photos of rape victims and gun shot victims on the 6 o'clock news. Well we don't and I pray we don't ever.
One final thought on this issue. If these photos do exist, who takes pictures of these acts? And who is dumb enough to lose control of them when they do?
Now it has been said by people on both sides that torture has hurt the US and that US Soldiers and the war effort has been hurt by these abuses and the photos which followed. So why would anyone want these new photos released?
I posed this question the other day on ThinkProgress during one of the threads. I said basically why would you release the photos one previous ones have been so damning and what would you hope to accomplish by doing so? The answer given by some to my second question goes along why to explaining the answers given to the first. Most people said they favored the release of the photos regardless of the reaction they cause. And the reason, most people think they can be used against Bush and Cheney.
As I have also said in the past there is little to no chance Bush and Cheney will ever be brought up on charges in the US and absolutely no chance of them be tried in a foreign country. I explained to some that there are too many people in the chain of command between the people who may have actually did this and Bush/Cheney that it would never get to them. Not to mention the fact that they would need proof that Bush/Cheney ordered the rape of these detainees which would be tough to prove. I said the "bad-apples" defense had been used once before and would probably be used again successfully, so there's really no chance that Bush/Cheney would face criminal charges if these photos show what they claim to show.
The thing that disturbs me most is that people would be willing to potentially increase terrorist recruitment and cause our Soldiers further harm just to try and get Bush/Cheney. This blood lust to see them convicted is starting to become a problem in my eyes. The more it seems Obama will not prosecute them, the more anger and reckless the left is getting. If the photos turn out to show everything they have said they do, then use them in a court of law and then lock them away. They don't do anybody any good. If those types of pictures did then we would see photos of rape victims and gun shot victims on the 6 o'clock news. Well we don't and I pray we don't ever.
One final thought on this issue. If these photos do exist, who takes pictures of these acts? And who is dumb enough to lose control of them when they do?
Cindy Sheehan needs help...mental help.
Cindy Sheehan has made a mild come back of sorts. I didn't realize it, but she has a blog on this very site. I'm now a follower of her blog. Not because I agree with what she says, I don't, but just to see what she is saying and how close she is to descending into complete madness.
The last we saw her she was running an unsuccessful campaign to defeat Nancy Pelosi. Well I guess she was on plane the other day right before Memorial Day and the pilot made the comment as they were landing to think about the veterans who made the ultimate sacrifice defending our freedoms. Well the best I can tell from her blog Cindy must have heard him say thank Casey Sheehan for defending our freedoms. She talks about how she would have walked up to the cockpit and yelled at the pilot cause her son died for nothing.
I feel bad for her, I truly do. By this point she is so twisted from hate that a simple phrase, something that is said a hundred times around Memorial Day, is enough to set her off. Forget about your feelings towards the Iraq War, what about the millions of other Soldiers who most certainly have died defending our freedoms? Can she not see that this is as much about them as it is her son?
Now what really made me mad is as she continues through her rambling she starts to take very personal shots at those who have served. In one instance she says, "If you watch any one of the cable news networks this weekend between doing holiday weekend things, you will be subjected to images of row upon row of white headstones of dead US military lined up in perfect formation in the afterlife as they were in life. Patriotic music will swell and we will be reminded in script font to "Remember our heroes," or some such BS as that." BS? are you fucking kidding me lady?
She goes to write this gem "A tough, but real, aspect of this all to consider is, how many of the soldiers buried in coffins in military cemeteries killed or tortured innocent people as paid goons for Empire? To me, it is deeply and profoundly sad on so many levels. If I have any consolation through all of this, I learned that my son bravely refused to go on the mission that killed him, but he was literally dragged onto the vehicle and was dead minutes later before he was forced to do something that was against his nature and nurture." So now she is painting all Soldiers who have died in combat with the same broad brush that a few of the people who have been convicted of brutal crimes in Iraq have been painted with. It's this the same MO of war protesters in during Vietnam? Every Soldier is a baby killer? Then she says her son basically refused a direct order. This is a courtmarshall offense. She may think she is portraying her son as brave and standing up for values. To me she is showing him as someone who tried to bail on his fellow Soldiers. That is inexcusable.
One last point. I often wonder in the cases of high-profile casualties like Casey Sheehan and Pat Tillman, are the views that their surviving family members are attributing to these people really theirs, or have they been changed to reflect the views of the surviving family. Did Casey Sheehan really go kicking and screaming into battle? Did he really think the Iraq war was wrong? Did Pat Tillman really turn to his buddies at the beginning of the Iraq war and say that it was illegal as has been written? No one will ever know. I gotta believe they thought differently.
The last we saw her she was running an unsuccessful campaign to defeat Nancy Pelosi. Well I guess she was on plane the other day right before Memorial Day and the pilot made the comment as they were landing to think about the veterans who made the ultimate sacrifice defending our freedoms. Well the best I can tell from her blog Cindy must have heard him say thank Casey Sheehan for defending our freedoms. She talks about how she would have walked up to the cockpit and yelled at the pilot cause her son died for nothing.
I feel bad for her, I truly do. By this point she is so twisted from hate that a simple phrase, something that is said a hundred times around Memorial Day, is enough to set her off. Forget about your feelings towards the Iraq War, what about the millions of other Soldiers who most certainly have died defending our freedoms? Can she not see that this is as much about them as it is her son?
Now what really made me mad is as she continues through her rambling she starts to take very personal shots at those who have served. In one instance she says, "If you watch any one of the cable news networks this weekend between doing holiday weekend things, you will be subjected to images of row upon row of white headstones of dead US military lined up in perfect formation in the afterlife as they were in life. Patriotic music will swell and we will be reminded in script font to "Remember our heroes," or some such BS as that." BS? are you fucking kidding me lady?
She goes to write this gem "A tough, but real, aspect of this all to consider is, how many of the soldiers buried in coffins in military cemeteries killed or tortured innocent people as paid goons for Empire? To me, it is deeply and profoundly sad on so many levels. If I have any consolation through all of this, I learned that my son bravely refused to go on the mission that killed him, but he was literally dragged onto the vehicle and was dead minutes later before he was forced to do something that was against his nature and nurture." So now she is painting all Soldiers who have died in combat with the same broad brush that a few of the people who have been convicted of brutal crimes in Iraq have been painted with. It's this the same MO of war protesters in during Vietnam? Every Soldier is a baby killer? Then she says her son basically refused a direct order. This is a courtmarshall offense. She may think she is portraying her son as brave and standing up for values. To me she is showing him as someone who tried to bail on his fellow Soldiers. That is inexcusable.
One last point. I often wonder in the cases of high-profile casualties like Casey Sheehan and Pat Tillman, are the views that their surviving family members are attributing to these people really theirs, or have they been changed to reflect the views of the surviving family. Did Casey Sheehan really go kicking and screaming into battle? Did he really think the Iraq war was wrong? Did Pat Tillman really turn to his buddies at the beginning of the Iraq war and say that it was illegal as has been written? No one will ever know. I gotta believe they thought differently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
