Roger Clemens

[Udaman]

So the Mitchell report comes out and we get silence from Clemens for 5 days. Then he releases a statement from his agent. Then another from his lawyers. Then we find out that the claims made against Petitte were admitted by Petitte himself.

Then Clemens does a youtube, and finally he'll appear on 60 minutes, where he admits that he was injected....but only with lidocaine and B-12 (incidentally, to get injected with lidocaine is beyond idiotic, and dangerous as well). And Mike Wallace asks him to "swear" which he does.

Sorry, but this is bunk. My initial opinion was that Clemens was lying. Now I'm convinced of that. The guy cheated, and now he expects us to believe that he took bad injections, but not illegal ones, and that he "swears" so it must be true.

It's a shame and a sham.

What a mess.

[rthomas]

yea, that what everyone says. Vitamin injections or flax seed oil. What does flax seed oil do anyway? Is it like cod liver oil?

You can take Vitamin B-12 in pill form.

[dukie8]

i did not have sexual relations with that woman!

clemens is painting himself into a tiny little corner because the trainer already has obtained a libel/slander attorney who came out today and said that they are suing if he lies on 60 minutes. if he wants to lie under oath -- and not some hokie "swearing" on 60 minutes -- then he is going to go the way of bonds and hopefully finds the way to the pokey.

[Lavabe]

Then Clemens does a youtube, and finally he'll appear on 60 minutes, where he admits that he was injected....but only with lidocaine and B-12 (incidentally, to get injected with lidocaine is beyond idiotic, and dangerous as well). And Mike Wallace asks him to "swear" which he does.

Sorry, but this is bunk. My initial opinion was that Clemens was lying. Now I'm convinced of that. The guy cheated, and now he expects us to believe that he took bad injections, but not illegal ones, and that he "swears" so it must be true.

It's a shame and a sham.

What a mess.

Before we rush to judgement here:
1) Here's a link regarding lidocaine (http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/2001/03_01/rifat.htm) injections (if you scroll to the bottom, you'll see some of the conditions in which lidocaine injections are used). I never had it done on me, but when I burst badly the bursa on my left greater trochanter (and MAN was that hideous), lidocaine injection was one route that was suggested, if physical therapy didn't work. And trust me ... I would have taken it. That's how bad this bursitis was. I couldn't use properly two of my gluteal muscles. I was aggravating the injury everytime I hit stop&go traffic here in Atlanta (I drive a stick). Let's just say, I wouldn't use the word "idiotic" to refer to the injections.

Personally, I'm more leery of cortisone shots. And yes greybeard (wherever you are), I would indeed try Feldenkrais (assuming I could get out of the contorted knots that I seem to get into everytime he offers a "Try this":) )!


2) I can't speak about B-12 injections (I do not have pernicious anemia, and I am not terribly old & fatigued), but if I am not mistaken, doesn't B-12 absorption vary considerably? IIRC, not everyone absorbs the oral form that easily. I'll defer to the MD's of the DBR. After all, I did NOT stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.;)

Cheers,
Lavabe

[Tommac]

2) I can't speak about B-12 injections (I do not have pernicious anemia, and I am not terribly old & fatigued), but if I am not mistaken, doesn't B-12 absorption vary considerably? IIRC, not everyone absorbs the oral form that easily. I'll defer to the MD's of the DBR. After all, I did NOT stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.;)

Cheers,
Lavabe

I am currently receiving B-12 injections for a vitamin deficiency. The reason for the injections is that my body is not absorbing adequate vitamins through the gastric system. The shots gets the vitamins directly into your body. B-12 injections are quite common.

[DUKIECB]

Maybe Clemens' is distantly related to Popeye the Sailor man and was injecting liquid spinach into his fanny.:D I think that makes about as much sense as his lame excuse.

[rthomas]

I am currently receiving B-12 injections for a vitamin deficiency. The reason for the injections is that my body is not absorbing adequate vitamins through the gastric system. The shots gets the vitamins directly into your body. B-12 injections are quite common.


I'm being nosy, but what are your deficiency symptoms?

[tombrady]

well, now the texas conman is screwed.

congress is asking him to testify under oath -- meaning if he lies to them and gets busted, he can go to jail. which he should.

[tecumseh]

Before we rush to judgement here:
1) Here's a link regarding lidocaine (http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/2001/03_01/rifat.htm) injections (if you scroll to the bottom, you'll see some of the conditions in which lidocaine injections are used). Iof the contorted knots that I seem to get into everytime he offers a "Try this":) )!

The problem with this is he did not have joint injection and you would have to be crazy to allow a trainer to inject your joints. The lidocaine makes no sense at all.

[dukie8]

The problem with this is he did not have joint injection and you would have to be crazy to allow a trainer to inject your joints. The lidocaine makes no sense at all.

don't you need to be licensed to be shooting up people with b12 and lidocaine. if clemens really thought he needed to be injected with these substances, why would he have a trainer do it illegally rather than a team doctor? he really is painting himself in the corner.

also, the little that has been leaked from 60 minutes is even more damning. he "swears" that he never injected any "banned" substances. well baseball had not banned hgh and steroids in the late 1990s (when the trainer said he shot him up) so professing not to have done that really doesn't amount to much.

from what little has been leaked, it sounds like ed wallace did a horrible job on the interview and it was along the lines of katie couric and a "gosh, you are AMAZING!" variety. clemens deserved to be grilled to the nth degree on that interview after how dodgeful he has been to date.

[Lavabe]

The problem with this is he did not have joint injection and you would have to be crazy to allow a trainer to inject your joints. The lidocaine makes no sense at all.

What qualifications must trainers obtain before they can give injections? injections into joints? Are they fully qualified to give cortisone shots? Perhaps I am assuming that the trainer is fully medically qualified to inject. Is this, in fact, the case?

Isn't lidocaine used in a number of non-joint applications as well?

Thanks,
Lavabe

[feldspar]

Watching one of this generation's best pitchers lose HoF votes by the day makes for very interesting drama.

[greybeard]

Talking about injections, was it legal for doctors to shoot pain killers into football players who had serious injuries so they could play even if it meant that they would he injured more?

We all know the answer.

What I want to know is, Why? Why was it legal (the docs did take an oath, didn't they), and why did they do it?

Why are those guys, who got themselves shot up so they could win championships and make all pro and what not, deserving of our adulation? Please do not try to tell me that they are not, and that they do not get it.

Now, go out and find some nits to pick. If the Democrats sink so low as to hold another hearing on steroids in baseball, I'm voting for Ralph Nadar whom I'm sure could have gotten whatever needed to be done with none. :(

[dukie8]

Talking about injections, was it legal for doctors to shoot pain killers into football players who had serious injuries so they could play even if it meant that they would he injured more?

We all know the answer.

What I want to know is, Why? Why was it legal (the docs did take an oath, didn't they), and why did they do it?

Why are those guys, who got themselves shot up so they could win championships and make all pro and what not, deserving of our adulation? Please do not try to tell me that they are not, and that they do not get it.

Now, go out and find some nits to pick. If the Democrats sink so low as to hold another hearing on steroids in baseball, I'm voting for Ralph Nadar whom I'm sure could have gotten whatever needed to be done with none. :(

huh? what law was broken when a doctor gave an athlete an injection to help with pain management? also, why was it a fait accompli that they would be "injured more?" what about all the players who got shot up, played well and didn't get "injured more." your conclusions are bizarre.

[dukie8]

What qualifications must trainers obtain before they can give injections? injections into joints? Are they fully qualified to give cortisone shots? Perhaps I am assuming that the trainer is fully medically qualified to inject. Is this, in fact, the case?

Isn't lidocaine used in a number of non-joint applications as well?

Thanks,
Lavabe

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=bryant_howard&id=3181042

according to this article, when the medical staffs of the As and orioles refused to give tejada b12 injections, he resorted to doing it himself. i assume that if mere trainers could do it, he wouldn't have had to have done it himself.

[greybeard]

huh? what law was broken when a doctor gave an athlete an injection to help with pain management? also, why was it a fait accompli that they would be "injured more?" what about all the players who got shot up, played well and didn't get "injured more." your conclusions are bizarre.

It wan't against the law is the point, just against the Hypocritic oath. Come on, don't you watch TV and see the number of cripples from that era who have admitted to getting shot up. That humor book, Dallas 40 or something, documents the practice stunningly. Ask Conrad Dobbler if he was made better by all the shots, which fit nicely with the 7 surgeries he's had on one knee in just the last year.

The point is that there is nothing new about the misuse of medicines to improve performance to the detriment of players, who are cannon fodder. I know that there are many who view the games the pros play with rose colored glasses but you can't pretend to be blind.

If everything Clemens denies is true he has done nothing that a 100 other American Heros who are now cripple or were before they prematurally died. We all knew about it, the shooting up and greenies at the time, but could care less. In my opinion, it would be the same except that scandal sells. It gives the talking heads more to gossip about (there is just not that much about the games themselves to talk about), while the performance enhancement brings people into the stands and buying product who otherwise would never even watch.

So, the question I didn't ask is why people who tolerted the pain killers on guys who were otherwise incapable of playing was okay (that they don't do it anymore tells you the ethics of it) while Roger's alleged steroid use when it was not illegal is NEWS after the fact. I won't even begin to inquire why the old performance enhancers disqualify no one from the Halls of Fame while the new ones do. To me, there is again only one answer: controversy sells!

Not by me, I ain't buyin!

[dukie8]

It wan't against the law is the point, just against the Hypocritic oath. Come on, don't you watch TV and see the number of cripples from that era who have admitted to getting shot up. That humor book, Dallas 40 or something, documents the practice stunningly. Ask Conrad Dobbler if he was made better by all the shots, which fit nicely with the 7 surgeries he's had on one knee in just the last year.

The point is that there is nothing new about the misuse of medicines to improve performance to the detriment of players, who are cannon fodder. I know that there are many who view the games the pros play with rose colored glasses but you can't pretend to be blind.

If everything Clemens denies is true he has done nothing that a 100 other American Heros who are now cripple or were before they prematurally died. We all knew about it, the shooting up and greenies at the time, but could care less. In my opinion, it would be the same except that scandal sells. It gives the talking heads more to gossip about (there is just not that much about the games themselves to talk about), while the performance enhancement brings people into the stands and buying product who otherwise would never even watch.

So, the question I didn't ask is why people who tolerted the pain killers on guys who were otherwise incapable of playing was okay (that they don't do it anymore tells you the ethics of it) while Roger's alleged steroid use when it was not illegal is NEWS after the fact. I won't even begin to inquire why the old performance enhancers disqualify no one from the Halls of Fame while the new ones do. To me, there is again only one answer: controversy sells!

Not by me, I ain't buyin!

i have no idea what this rambling post is getting at. you are aware that what mr clemens was doing WAS illegal? what makes you think that using a controlled substance without a prescription is legal??? is smoking crack or shooting up with heroin also legal in your book?

which american heros have "prematurally [sic] died?" lyle alzado? please. you are aware the PEDs have been in use by pro athletes since the 1960s and it's not like there has been a wave of former olympians, football players or baseball players dropping dead.

if you cannot understand the newsworthiness of the fact that one of the greatest pitchers ever (clemens) and one of the greatest hitters ever (bonds) both cheated to get to their exalted level of excellence, then you can go on enjoying your insouciant life and live happily ever after.

[greybeard]

I am bored by records; they are for playing cards and children.

If history proves anything, it is that fans, players, owners, reporters, etc, care not whit about the ethics of performance enhancemers, drugs and other things, that make the games more exciting.

The NFL was built on the use of painkillers. Doctors shooting up wounded athletes so they could perform. Everybody knew it. Bryant Gumble did a long piece with Conrad Dobbler whose knees are unrecognizable as parts of a human being's anatomy. Conrad has had seven surgies in the last year on one knee; said if a knee replacement does not end the pain, he will. Said the poor slobs that he played with who can't afford such surgeries and whom the league has turned its back to should end their lives rather than live with the pain. He knows about the pain, and that is his advise.

Now I love Gumble, who is on my side with regard to this injury issue, but I found it astounding that he did not ask Dobbler how many times doctors shot him up when he couldn't walk so he could go out and win the big game. Didn't even ask, because we all accepted it then because we wanted to watch and watching was so much more thrilling with Dobbler out there than not.

By the way, you do not know that Lyle's death was caused by steroid use, anymore than Lyle did. He abused the use of drugs, shot anything and everything into his body in a completely irresponsible fashion. For all he knew, he could have shot rat poison. Your use of Lyle as an example about why we should care about the allegations about Clemens is shoddy and unworthy.

The open, nororious, and, from a medical point of view, unethical use of painkilling injections to put injured players back onto the fields of play junked up the record books easily as much as steroid use. Determined championships for heaven's sake.

Question for you: given your concern about steroid use, then you surely must admit that coaches, managers, and owners at some point had a duty of care to investigate. When was it reached? How did a trainer paid by a team get license to be distributing drugs in the freakin locker room? Yeah, I know, you don't condone their lack of vigilence, yadayadayada. I say, play ball; cheatin's part of the game; just ask Bill and the AP guys who voted for him!

[dukie8]

I am bored by records; they are for playing cards and children.

If history proves anything, it is that fans, players, owners, reporters, etc, care not whit about the ethics of performance enhancemers, drugs and other things, that make the games more exciting.

The NFL was built on the use of painkillers. Doctors shooting up wounded athletes so they could perform. Everybody knew it. Bryant Gumble did a long piece with Conrad Dobbler whose knees are unrecognizable as parts of a human being's anatomy. Conrad has had seven surgies in the last year on one knee; said if a knee replacement does not end the pain, he will. Said the poor slobs that he played with who can't afford such surgeries and whom the league has turned its back to should end their lives rather than live with the pain. He knows about the pain, and that is his advise.

Now I love Gumble, who is on my side with regard to this injury issue, but I found it astounding that he did not ask Dobbler how many times doctors shot him up when he couldn't walk so he could go out and win the big game. Didn't even ask, because we all accepted it then because we wanted to watch and watching was so much more thrilling with Dobbler out there than not.

By the way, you do not know that Lyle's death was caused by steroid use, anymore than Lyle did. He abused the use of drugs, shot anything and everything into his body in a completely irresponsible fashion. For all he knew, he could have shot rat poison. Your use of Lyle as an example about why we should care about the allegations about Clemens is shoddy and unworthy.

The open, nororious, and, from a medical point of view, unethical use of painkilling injections to put injured players back onto the fields of play junked up the record books easily as much as steroid use. Determined championships for heaven's sake.

Question for you: given your concern about steroid use, then you surely must admit that coaches, managers, and owners at some point had a duty of care to investigate. When was it reached? How did a trainer paid by a team get license to be distributing drugs in the freakin locker room? Yeah, I know, you don't condone their lack of vigilence, yadayadayada. I say, play ball; cheatin's part of the game; just ask Bill and the AP guys who voted for him!

i expressly asked for some examples of american "heros" who have died prematurely due to peds. you provided none.

i expressly asked for you to explain what laws are broken when a team's doctor shoots up an athlete to block pain so he can play. you provided none.

please provide a single example of a player who got shot up with cortisone who went on to set hr or any other important records and who did NOT use peds. your attempt to equate the use of cortisone with the use of peds in causing athletic records to fall is astounding and shows a complete lack of understanding of what contributes to athletic performance.

"cheatin's part of the game." are you kidding me??? who are you to be complaining about "unethical" medical conduct when you fully support cheating? it is attitudes like this that have caused so much decay in society today.

[j.j. jones]

please provide a single example of a player who got shot up with cortisone who went on to set hr or any other important records and who did NOT use peds.

It was widely known that Sandy Koufax took cortisone shots during his final seasons, due to arthritis, I believe. Don't know if he set records, but his performance during his peak seasons ('62 thru '66) were such that even though his career was cut waaaayyy short, still, he became the youngest player to be inducted into the HOF.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/sandy-koufax-hof.htm


He came back in 1965 and continued to pitch with the help of cortisone shots and ice for two more seasons, winning the Cy Young Award in 1965 and '66 and finishing second in MVP voting both years. He had league-best ERAs of 2.04 and 1.73, and he won 26 and 27 games. He also tossed two more no-hitters, including a perfect game.

However, rather than face the possibility of lifetime arm crippling, he retired after the 1966 World Series. In 1972, when he was inducted in the Hall of Fame, he became the youngest person ever to receive the honor.

[tecumseh]

Again the lidocaine injections make no sense for one reason is lidocaine is a fast acting anesthetic and so it numbs things for about an hour, this is all it does. So Clemens arguments makes not sense. You do not give B-12 injections into joints and the lidocaine only acts locally..injecting it in your butt will not make your shoulder feel better.

Clemens is lying.

[j.j. jones]

To get himself through the games he pitched in, Koufax resorted to cortisone shots in the elbow, Empirin with codeine for the pain (which he took every night and sometimes during the fifth inning), and Butazolidin for inflammation. He would also apply capsaicin-based Capsolin ointment (called "atomic balm" by baseball players) before each game and then soak his arm in a tub of ice. The trainers would leave three beers in the tub; when Koufax had finished them, he would take his arm out.

http://www.bookrags.com/Sandy_Koufax

As far as records, he was the first pitcher to toss 4 no-hitters, the first to average fewer than seven hits allowed per nine innings pitched over his career, and the first to strike out more than nine batters per nine innings pitched in his career. Also:


Among National League pitchers with at least 2,000 innings pitched who have debuted since 1913, he has both the highest career winning percentage (.655) and the lowest career earned run average (2.76); his 2396 career strikeouts ranked 7th in major league history upon his retirement, and trailed only Warren Spahn's total of 2583 among left-handers.

[Lavabe]

If it's football you want, Mike Freeman (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950CE7DD1F3CF930A25757C0A9619582 60&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all)did an article 10 years ago on NFL stars Favre and Jim Kelly (google Mike Freeman Favre vicodin). It's a good article that talks about quasi-ethical use of regulated drugs, all for the pain. The article also highlights Jim Kelly, and a number of other NFL'ers. It also discusses what activity might have been illegal.

PEDs and other regulated substances have been used to mask serious injuries. Lawrence Taylor and Romo (err... Bill Romanowski) also achieved elite status (okay ... Romo not on a par with LT) while shooting up or on illegal substances.

The specific example of someone dying WAY too young is Mike Webster, the all-pro, NFL Hall of Famer from the Pittsburgh Steelers who tragically died a few years ago. Having said that, drug use was one of a number of contributors to his death. Some of the stories going around about the NFL stars of the 60's, 70's, and 80's have been highlighted by Mike Ditka et al.

Likewise, Anthony Cormier (http://nflrpa.blogspot.com/2006/10/simms-case-highlights-nfl-doctors.html) did a piece on the ethical conflicts of doctors who are working for NFL teams. Cormier mentions a book, by former Oakland Raider team doctor Dr. Robert Huizenga, that highlights many of the NFL doctors' ethical issues that greybeard is talking about. Specifically, in Cormier's article, he discusses Huizenga:

"He believes the ethics that guide civilian doctors get lost in the four-month shuffle of the NFL regular season, where big games come with a big price. The title of his book, he said, was taken from a line used by a Raiders doctor to diagnose just about every player who came into the trainer's room.
"Your star quarterback has a concussion before the game, but maybe the
team doesn't tell him," Huizenga said. "Or maybe a player has a severely injured knee before the Super Bowl. Give him an injection of cortisone and send him in the game."

If a drug is used to mask a condition, and allows folks to proceed onto the playing field when they perhaps should not be there, would you not consider the drug to be some sort of enhancer of one's performance and statistics? It would certainly seem to enhance longevity and career records.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[Lavabe]

Again the lidocaine injections make no sense for one reason is lidocaine is a fast acting anesthetic and so it numbs things for about an hour, this is all it does. So Clemens arguments makes not sense. You do not give B-12 injections into joints and the lidocaine only acts locally..injecting it in your butt will not make your shoulder feel better.

Clemens is lying.

Wait a minute... are you alleging that he got an injection into his joint? We have one reference to it being in his "fanny." Earlier you said: "The problem with this is he did not have joint injection..."

Which is it? Please clarify. Also did he really say he was getting a butt injection to treat a shoulder? That WOULD be a bizarre statement.

My example of joint injections of lidocaine was merely going after a specific issue with one of MY joints. I was mostly countering Udaman's confusing parenthetical notion that "to get injected with lidocaine is beyond idiotic, and dangerous as well."

Cheers,
Lavabe

[greybeard]

i expressly asked for some examples of american "heros" who have died prematurely due to peds. you provided none.

i expressly asked for you to explain what laws are broken when a team's doctor shoots up an athlete to block pain so he can play. you provided none.

please provide a single example of a player who got shot up with cortisone who went on to set hr or any other important records and who did NOT use peds. your attempt to equate the use of cortisone with the use of peds in causing athletic records to fall is astounding and shows a complete lack of understanding of what contributes to athletic performance.

"cheatin's part of the game." are you kidding me??? who are you to be complaining about "unethical" medical conduct when you fully support cheating? it is attitudes like this that have caused so much decay in society today.

You "specifically asked?" Really, and I didn't answer. Did you say, "please."

I do not appreciate your suggesting, neigh stating, that it is people like me "that have caused so much decay in society." I find that comment insulting and await your apology.

I am not in favor of hypocracy. I am more concerned with injured, maimed athletes, and the maiming continues as we speak, than the use of "banned" or even illegal enhancements that do not hurt anyone. Sorry, those are my values. I do not think that they lead to decay.

Your arguments are poorly conceived. I told you that real sports fans, of which I consider myself one, do not care one wit about records. If you thought I didn't mean it, think again. If I don't care about them, why would I know about anybody who held them, except for Ruth, who it seems to me abused his body with anything and anyone he could get his hands on, which, if he were alive today, would certainly have included steroids. Hell, the man donned a freakin clown suit for the Brooklyn Dodgers when he could barely walk; you think he wouldn't have taken steroids to earn another 100 large for a few more years, I want some of what you are taking.

Bill Walton won a championship getting shot up with pain killers; he said so. Anybody in the free world anywhere think that Portland beats Philly without Bill and the pain killers. He sued Seattle after the fact, by the way, for ruining his foot. Got nowhere. Seems that having a doctor do the owner's dirty work was all okay, and, after all, Bill was getting paid big bucks.

You really think that the Mick wouldn't have taken steroids if they around. You dreaming. The guy was a walking drug store; he self medicated all the time, legally of course, but you cannot believe that he would have let a little thing like legality get in the way of his being able to swing without pain. Those knees, it hurt just looking at them. And, if those knees didn't hurt, we wouldn't have been talking about no asterisk for all those years and nobody would even vaguely remember the name Maris.

All I know is that Leo "may he live in the dark place forever" D. (nope Lav, I'm not going even to try) stole the signal my hiding a freakin guy with binoculars in the left field scoreboard and robbed my Dodgers at a shot at the series in 51, and nobody is doing anything about it.

Changed the course of history, it did. Had the Dodgers won that year, Wagner would have built what's his name a stadioum, the Dodgers would still be in Brooklyn, the Giants in the Bronx, and no whimpy ex-senator from the mid west would even have thought about coming into that territory ask no stinkin question about Bonds or Clemens. We would have made Mitchell an offer he couldn't refuse. As Tony S would say, "End of discussion!" :)

[Lavabe]

All I know is that Leo "may he live in the dark place forever" D. (nope Lav, I'm not going even to try) stole the signal my hiding a freakin guy with binoculars in the left field scoreboard and robbed my Dodgers at a shot at the series in 51, and nobody is doing anything about it.

HURRAY!! Finally, a reference from before my time (but alas, my dad never let me hear the end of it regarding Leo).:D

You forgot one other thing ... there'd be no Mets!
Cheers,
Lavabe

[tecumseh]

No I am saying that it makes no sense to get a lidocaine injection to help your joints which is what Clemens alleges and the only effect it could have is if you injected directly into the joint the joint would be numb for an hour. So getting a lidocaine injection into your but makes no sense unless you are due for a severe paddling in the immediate future.

[mike88]

When we do joint injections for pain relief (usually for osteoarthritis), we often combine some lidocaine or xylocaine with a corticosteroid (commonly referred to as cortisone). The lidocaine provides some immediate relief, which is then followed (hopefully) by the relief from the corticosteroid. Many patients get substantial relief, but the effect is variable, and the injection needs to be done in the joint. I would not have a "trainer" do it (although it is not real difficult to learn for shoulders or knees).

B12 shots have been (over)used as a general panacea. They wouldn't have any benefit unless you have a B12 deficiency, like from pernicious anemia. B12deficiency is pretty common in older folks, and often has neurological symptoms (mianly peripheral neuropathy- numbness in pain in the feet and hands). It was felt for a long time that treatment of B12 deficiency required injections, since the underlying problem had to do with poor absorption from the Gi tract. When it has been studied in trials, however, it turns out that B12 pills work as well or better than injections (assuming you remember to take your pill each day), even when GI absorption is poor. B12 is not harmful, so it is OK to give high doses- what isn't absorbed or needed just gets excreted.

If Roger Clemens was getting B12 and lidocaine injections in his rear, he was just wasting his time, and we can attribute his unusual performance in his late 30's and 40's to some special "gift." Either that, or he was receiving something else in those injections. . . .

[Lavabe]

Thanks Mike88 for clarification. The AP story mentions nothing about the shoulder, just something about getting shot in the rear for joint pains. I saw no mention of shoulder issues, as per tecumseh's earlier post. Sounds like he'd get no benefit, other than 1 hour or so of being able to relieve some pain in his gluteal muscles...

Cheers and thanks,
Lavabe

[EarlJam]

The 60 Minutes interview: Did anyone else notice how Clemens would look down immediately after talking about anything regarding steroid use? Especially when talking about Pettite. When speaking to anything else (e.g., Torre and getting a legal pain injection before the World Series), he wold look Wallace straight in the eye the whole time.

Just an observation.

-EarlJam

[dukie8]

The 60 Minutes interview: Did anyone else notice how Clemens would look down immediately after talking about anything regarding steroid use? Especially when talking about Pettite. When speaking to anything else (e.g., Torre and getting a legal pain injection before the World Series), he wold look Wallace straight in the eye the whole time.

Just an observation.

-EarlJam

i noticed it as well. first in the preview and then throughout the interview. any shrinks in the house? isn't that a telltale sign of lying?

i also was amused that he repeatedly said "never happened," that he repeatedly claimed that he never would use PEDs because they "cause you to break down" (um, not the ones he was using...) and that he should get the benefit of the doubt because he was good for a long time (notwithstanding the fact that he expressly refused to talk to mitchell).

i'm looking forward to watching him lie to congress in 2 weeks.

[EarlJam]

i also was amused that he repeatedly said "never happened," that he repeatedly claimed that he never would use PEDs because they "cause you to break down" (um, not the ones he was using...) and that he should get the benefit of the doubt because he was good for a long time (notwithstanding the fact that he expressly refused to talk to mitchell).



Good observation. Between that, the eye contact and what seemed to be over-acting with the defensiveness, he didn't do much, in my opinion, to help his case.

-EarlJam

[Lavabe]

Good observation. Between that, the eye contact and what seemed to be over-acting with the defensiveness, he didn't do much, in my opinion, to help his case.

-EarlJam

Umm, let me get this straight. Take steroids and an ear appears on your forehead? What was that?

Sadly, the VIOXX thing is probably true.

Lavabe

[dukie8]

Umm, let me get this straight. Take steroids and an ear appears on your forehead? What was that?

Sadly, the VIOXX thing is probably true.

Lavabe

was that the gym in his house? i saw arcade games in the back and there was a big clemens jersey framed on the back wall. if it was, that was pretty sick.

[Lavabe]

was that the gym in his house? i saw arcade games in the back and there was a big clemens jersey framed on the back wall. if it was, that was pretty sick.

As to the jersey, I've seen worse excess on celebrity "crib" shows.

EJam: I believe the Torre & pain injection story ... I think you're right about the eye thing. And it fits in with what clearly goes on in a number of sports.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[dukie8]

As to the jersey, I've seen worse excess on celebrity "crib" shows.

EJam: I believe the Torre & pain injection story ... I think you're right about the eye thing. And it fits in with what clearly goes on in a number of sports.

Cheers,
Lavabe

i meant sick as in badass. a full court basketball court and pitching pen off the game room is pretty cool. i recall an earlier interview with him (it might have been the 60 minutes one a few years ago) that showed a room in his house that was a shrine to him. it was chock full of all of his awards and doodads he has picked up in his career. it was like the little trophy area most guys set up in high school -- except that it was an entire room and was full of cy young awards and baseballs from world series wins and not varsity letters and all county awards.

[dbb03]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3184646

"According to McNamee, he originally made his allegations to federal authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he didn't implicate Clemens," according to the 14-page petition, obtained early Monday by The Associated Press.

The suit, first reported by the Houston Chronicle, states that when McNamee told others that when he first was interviewed by federal law enforcement last June, he denied Clemens had used steroids or human growth hormone. The suit quotes McNamee as saying he was pressured by Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Parrella and IRS Special Agent Jeff Novitzky -- key members of the BALCO prosecution -- to implicate Clemens. The suit did not attribute where the quote from McNamee was obtained.

"After this exchange, and for the first time in his life, McNamee stated that he had injected Clemens with steroids in 1998, 2000 and 2001," the suit said. "Following his recantation, McNamee has relayed that he magically went from a 'target' in a federal criminal drug investigation to a mere 'witness,' so long as he continued to 'toe the line.' "

The suit said that when McNamee initially refused a request from federal authorities that he speak to Mitchell, he was threatened with prosecution. Clemens said McNamee decided only then to cooperate with Mitchell and the suit said McNamee said the interview "was conducted like a Cold War-era interrogation in which a federal agent merely read to the Mitchell investigators McNamee's previously obtained statement and then asked McNamee to confirm what he previously stated."

[j.j. jones]

Here is the full transcript from the 60 Minutes segment:

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2008/01/clemens_on_60_m.html

I don't know who to believe anymore, but I think Clemens has a point when he says no one wants to give him "an inch." "Guilty until proven innocent." This McNamee fellow sounds kind of weasely--- he emails Clemens a few days before the Mitchell Report comes out, supposedly as a friend, and talks about fishing, but mentions nothing to Roger about the MR and the accusations that were about to come out.

[pigs2k1]

Here is the full transcript from the 60 Minutes segment:

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2008/01/clemens_on_60_m.html

I don't know who to believe anymore, but I think Clemens has a point when he says no one wants to give him "an inch." "Guilty until proven innocent." This McNamee fellow sounds kind of weasely--- he emails Clemens a few days before the Mitchell Report comes out, supposedly as a friend, and talks about fishing, but mentions nothing to Roger about the MR and the accusations that were about to come out.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2008/01/07/2008-01-07_source_roger_clemens_private_eyes_asked_.html
"The News reported on its Web site Sunday night and in its editions today that Clemens was aware of what was in the Mitchell Report on steroids in baseball about a week before its release, despite his claims on "60 Minutes" Sunday night that he did not know of the report's contents."

[rthomas]

Here is the full transcript from the 60 Minutes segment:

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2008/01/clemens_on_60_m.html

I don't know who to believe anymore, but I think Clemens has a point when he says no one wants to give him "an inch." "Guilty until proven innocent." This McNamee fellow sounds kind of weasely--- he emails Clemens a few days before the Mitchell Report comes out, supposedly as a friend, and talks about fishing, but mentions nothing to Roger about the MR and the accusations that were about to come out.

Here is the interview if you missed it (I did):

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3680216n&channel=/sections/60minutes/videoplayer3415.shtml

[A-Tex Devil]

Has anyone listened to the taped recording from January 4th? Interesting stuff. Luckily such a recording is legal in Texas (and several other states) without telling the other party. Linda Tripp was in the wrong state.

Other than the underhandedness of the taping itself, I think the conversation itself helps Clemens some.

[Lavabe]

Has anyone listened to the taped recording from January 4th? Interesting stuff. Luckily such a recording is legal in Texas (and several other states) without telling the other party. Linda Tripp was in the wrong state.

Other than the underhandedness of the taping itself, I think the conversation itself helps Clemens some.

Got a link? This is getting more confusing by the day.
Thanks,
Lavabe

[jma4life]

I really don't know what to make of the tape but I will say it was pretty bizarre hearing it. I mean, right now, I just don't know what to believe. On the one hand, Petitte has already confirmed what Mcnamee said about himself. In addition, I always believed that Clemens was on juice. Yet he seemed relatively convincing recently.

All I am going to say is that at this point, I'm going to say innocent until proven guilty whereas yesterday, I viewed Clemens as guilty until proven innocent.

[A-Tex Devil]

Got a link? This is getting more confusing by the day.
Thanks,
Lavabe

I listened to it on TV. I'm sure it's on line somewhere. Try www.chron.com.

Roger says the trainer reached out to him!! Unbelievable.

[greybeard]

The thing that I love about what Clemens has had to say, I mean really, really love, is what he has had to say about the Hall. Never liked the guy, myself, too surley for me, but hey, anybody who tells the sports writers that their self-importance is silly, and that they can take their Hall of Fame and stick it, can't be all bad.

We got a mortgage crisis; we got an infra structure crisis; we're fighting a war; we got runaway national debt; we got enough crises to keep a Congress busy for some time, don't you think? And yet the Democrats who fought so hard to get control of the institution are busy sullying it by convening a second hearing just so they can try to rough up ole Rog.

The only thing that bores me more than watching baseball on TV is watching a committee conduct a hearing. This, however, I am gonna watch. Roger, you go boy!

[j.j. jones]

I listened to it on TV. I'm sure it's on line somewhere. Try www.chron.com.

Roger says the trainer reached out to him!! Unbelievable.

I listened to the whole conversation, about 15 to 20 minutes. Velly velly intellestink. But fishy. Roger didn't sound like a guy who was guilty. Now, even if he were guilty, I feel pretty sure that he, and anyone in his position, would lie. That's what makes this one so tough. One thing's for sure, and 60 Minutes made mention of it, is that no one trains and works out harder than Roger Clemens. I think that has to count for something. It's not like he was kickin' back and letting the PEDs do their thing. Even if he did take something (and I'm not convinced that he did) his work ethic is the best in the business.

The recording with McNaweasel is also telling. Worth listening to.

And Rudra... oops I mean Greybeard, is correct in noting that Clemens is, at this point in time at least, not interested at all in the HOF. Any ballplayer worth his salt stays focused on today and plays for the here and now, not for future honors.

It may be true that McNaweasel has correctly targeted certain players, such as Pettite. But, that doesn't mean he is on the mark with everyone. IIRC, most of us believed David Justice when he strongly defended himself against the MR.

In the end, as Roger noted, he will have to spend millions defending himself, and in the end, all he will probably get is an apology. (Assuming the MR's allegations prove to be unfounded.)

[A-Tex Devil]

I listened to the whole conversation, about 15 to 20 minutes. Velly velly intellestink. But fishy. Roger didn't sound like a guy who was guilty. Now, even if he were guilty, I feel pretty sure that he, and anyone in his position, would lie. That's what makes this one so tough. One thing's for sure, and 60 Minutes made mention of it, is that no one trains and works out harder than Roger Clemens. I think that has to count for something. It's not like he was kickin' back and letting the PEDs do their thing. Even if he did take something (and I'm not convinced that he did) his work ethic is the best in the business.

The recording with McNaweasel is also telling. Worth listening to.

And Rudra... oops I mean Greybeard, is correct in noting that Clemens is, at this point in time at least, not interested at all in the HOF. Any ballplayer worth his salt stays focused on today and plays for the here and now, not for future honors.

It may be true that McNaweasel has correctly targeted certain players, such as Pettite. But, that doesn't mean he is on the mark with everyone. IIRC, most of us believed David Justice when he strongly defended himself against the MR.

In the end, as Roger noted, he will have to spend millions defending himself, and in the end, all he will probably get is an apology. (Assuming the MR's allegations prove to be unfounded.)

One thing that Clemens had to be very careful of in that recording was not to coerce the trainer (can't ever remember his name). If CLemens was saying "You need to retract your statement" "You need to tell them that I didn't do it," he could be seen as coercive which does have some legal implications.

People are asking why Clemens didn't straight up ask "Why are you lying?" That's why. He needed the trainer to say he lied unsolicited, which didn't happen.

[Mal]

Couple thoughts:

1. Overall impression: methinks thou dost protest too much, Roger.

2. As to no one giving Clemens the benefit of the doubt he thinks he deserves, he can place all blame squarely on his own shoulders for that. That's what acting like a sullen, arrogant jerk with serious anger management problems for 20 years will do for you. You want the benefit of the doubt? Don't be throwing shards of broken bat at your opponents. Also, here's a little advice: during the press conference you hold, try not to do a couple of things, such as (a) intimate that McNamee would be physically harmed if he came to Texas, (b) sarcastically ask if you can take a drink of water, and then (c) storm out of the press conference you yourself called after insulting everyone there in an expletive-laden tantrum. The man is a child. He's also confusing public sentiment with criminal procedure. In the current climate, no one gets the benefit of the doubt when their name pops up in the Mitchell Report (Sammy and McGwire and Raffi made sure of that), but especially not this guy.

2. I think the taped conversation was mostly 15 minutes of nothing. Anyone can take whatever they want from it. But I'm certainly skeptical about the motives of anyone who would surreptitiously tape record a conversation (while their lawyers are likely sitting there handing them notes about what to say). The fact that Clemens had such an organizational/preparatory advantage in the conversation and McNamee still doesn't come off looking very bad is perhaps more important than anything actually said. Also, how many times does McNamee ask Clemens "what do you want me to do, Roger?" and the response is NOT ONCE "Tell the truth"? If you're so deeply convinced you're being slandered, don't you think that suggestion might come out of your mouth?

3. Clemens' statement that he had no warning whatsoever that McNamee had named him has now been contradicted by his own attorney's timeline of events. Tough to gain the upper hand in a "he said, he said" situation when you're out there lying on 60 Minutes.

4. What it this vindictive rant about the Hall of Fame and money all about? I don't expect him to speculate on what this will mean to his now pending candidacy, but to claim it's never crossed his mind? What a load. And Pete Rose doesn't care, either.

Also, what exactly is "the private sector" as compared to Major League Baseball? Is pitching for the Yankees government work now? That must be like G-4,237 on the pay grade. Is someone in said "private sector" going to be offering Roger Clemens $15,000,000 for three months' work in the future?

[Lavabe]

2. I think the taped conversation was mostly 15 minutes of nothing. Anyone can take whatever they want from it. But I'm certainly skeptical about the motives of anyone who would surreptitiously tape record a conversation (while their lawyers are likely sitting there handing them notes about what to say). The fact that Clemens had such an organizational/preparatory advantage in the conversation and McNamee still doesn't come off looking very bad is perhaps more important than anything actually said. Also, how many times does McNamee ask Clemens "what do you want me to do, Roger?" and the response is NOT ONCE "Tell the truth"? If you're so deeply convinced you're being slandered, don't you think that suggestion might come out of your mouth?


Umm, the link doesn't go the full 15 minutes, but the end of the first clip (before it goes to the press conference) clearly has:
McNamee: "what do you want me to do, Roger?"
Clemens: "I need somebody to tell the truth, Mac."

It's down about 3/4 the way on this transcript page (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl//5435352.html).

Clemens asks at least three times on the transcript page. McNamee claims once he told the truth.

Also, the Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/5438386.html) is now reporting that the trainer may have lied to detectives in the past.

I now side with jma4life's closing comment. This story has a few more legs to it. In the meantime, I'm awaiting greybeard's latest bit on why Zoubs should have played a little soccer ... and maybe a stanza or two from Dylan.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[dukie8]

One thing's for sure, and 60 Minutes made mention of it, is that no one trains and works out harder than Roger Clemens. I think that has to count for something. It's not like he was kickin' back and letting the PEDs do their thing. Even if he did take something (and I'm not convinced that he did) his work ethic is the best in the business.

the fact that he trains hard is completely irrelevant. it's not like lazy people have a higher probability of using PEDs or highly motivated people have a lower probability. moreover, if you DON'T workout, PEDs don't do a damn thing. one of their biggest benefits is that they enable highly motivated people to do ridiculously hard workouts, recover overnight and then do a ridiculously hard workout the next day completely recovered. no PEDs and you are too wrecked to do the hard workout the next day.

if he really were innocent, then he would have met with mitchell. frank thomas did. if you haven't done anything, then there isn't anything that could go wrong by meeting with mitchell and telling the truth. as soon as he told mitchell to shove it, he has nobody else to blame than himself.

[Lavabe]

the fact that he trains hard is completely irrelevant. it's not like lazy people have a higher probability of using PEDs or highly motivated people have a lower probability. moreover, if you DON'T workout, PEDs don't do a damn thing. one of their biggest benefits is that they enable highly motivated people to do ridiculously hard workouts, recover overnight and then do a ridiculously hard workout the next day completely recovered. no PEDs and you are too wrecked to do the hard workout the next day.

if he really were innocent, then he would have met with mitchell. frank thomas did. if you haven't done anything, then there isn't anything that could go wrong by meeting with mitchell and telling the truth. as soon as he told mitchell to shove it, he has nobody else to blame than himself.

Although I agree with your first paragraph, I now have an uneasy distrust of Mitchell. If this last story from the Houston Chronicle is correct (that the trainer lied to investigators previously about a rape investigation), one of the two main bases of the report is suspect. Mitchell failed to vet his material properly. At that point, I go nowhere without a lawyer, no matter how innocent I am.

And FWIW, Roger now claims he took the injections in his lower back.

Whatever.
Cheers,
Lavabe

[greybeard]

Couple thoughts:

What it this vindictive rant about the Hall of Fame and money all about? I don't expect him to speculate on what this will mean to his now pending candidacy, but to claim it's never crossed his mind? What a load. And Pete Rose doesn't care, either.



I don't get it. You think the Mick was concerned about getting into the Hall? Mick was concerned about getting over that night, not what was going to happen years after he retired. What about the Babe? Give him a pretty blond, or what's behind door number 2, a piece of wood with a scribbed likeness of him in a town, if you can call it that, in upstate NY. "Er, I'll take what's behind door number 1, two of em if you have. Thanks."

You have to have it that Rog cares about the Hall because if he don't, he also don't care about you. People's adoration, unless they're real cute (Mickey and Babe are smilen whereever they are), don't drive the bus for most athletes, is my guess. Posterity? Most athletes, especially baseball players spell worse than me, which is pretty freaken bad, and don't worry about nothing except being able to get around on the high inside fast one.

Your disbelief that Roger doesn't care about the Hall is belied by Rog's having flipped off virtually all the people who will have a say in the matter--current sports writers and any aspiring yutts who might enter what used to be a profession that actually fit with the culture that they covered. That culture, Mal, includes guys like Ty who sharpened his spikes and came in with them flying because it pleased him; Billy Martin, who'd punch your MaMa in the mouth if she so much as questioned a single move he made; choir boys like Whitey who showed the public one thing and every cutie he met another.

The Hall is for kids and sports writers, and guys who could never stand up to a high inside fast one, much less even think about hitting one. And, it does take a certain nasty, I-am-in-this-to-win-and-you-better-know-it, attitude to throw those high inside fast ones. It isn't hALLS, my good man, that drives the bus for pitchers like that. As for that bat incident, that was another medias driven moment that didn't amount to nothing; don't believe me, just ask Johnny Roseborro.

[Mal]

Lavabe, thank you for the correction. Apparently I wasn't listening very closely, and focused on the other more vague responses to that line of questioning.

I guess I don't think it changes my opinion all that much. My gut feeling is that there's not a whole lot of trust to be had all around, but one of the two of them spoke to the Mitchell group, knowing it would all go public, and presumably was fully aware of the repercussions of creating a story out of whole cloth about Roger Clemens. His naming of others seems pretty accurate at this point. That has to lend some credibility. Of course he's lied to people investigating steroids in the past - everyone involved has tried to cover it up at various points, to save their own professional reputations and those of their player clients. McNamee just couldn't stand the heat anymore, so he's come clean. Some others haven't. I also think Clemens is acting like a 4-year-old and trying way too hard for someone who really believes in his own complete innocence. That may be colored by my obvious distaste for his public persona, though, I admit.

Greybeard, what decade are we discussing here? Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle? Who's talking about those guys? The Hall of Fame wasn't even in existence when Ruth and Cobb were playing.

If you think players don't give two hoots about the Hall of Fame, I think you should go watch some induction speeches. More philosophically/psychologically, why do we play games and sports and enter physical contests? To win. And why do we want to win? Because winning leads to others recognizing our physical superiority. I was a jock - it's about wanting to win because winners get the babes (or cuties, if that's more to your liking :)). It's all about the ego boost - we're biologically hardwired for competition. That's why it's such a thrill to play in the big stadium with a lot of people watching - even if you don't consciously think it, you know all those people out there are marvelling at your abilities.

Election to the Hall of Fame is the ultimate form of recognition and ego stroking from the public, a big giant pat on the back and a "Hey, you're one of the best. All the cuties want you."

I'm fairly certain I just said Clemens' claim of total apathy about the whole thing is disingenuous, not that it should consume him or any other ballplayer. Clemens pretty clearly has a large ego. If he were so into just playing for the fun of it, perhaps he'd be playing for full seasons, instead of saving himself for the last half so as to limit fatigue the last several years. If he were for some reason not to get into the Hall of Fame, it would kill him. He would never say so, of course; he would just insult people and get into fistfights, instead, directing his anger elsewhere.

Of course the HOF is also for the fans, both kid and adult. So is Major League Baseball. Or any other professional sports organization. Without the adulation of kids and the attention of sports writers, the game disappears (see ego point above). Is whether someone's in the Hall of Fame or not given too much prominence in discussions of the merits of players and the game? Sure. But remember that it's baseball, the sport most susceptible to comparisons of players from different eras (I know that's being put to the test lately, of course), and the sport followed with the most religious zeal of any. Enshrinement of past stars fits perfectly into the world of baseball.

As to the Piazza bat-slinging incident, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but if you think it was nothing, or that it reflects well on Clemens, then we'll have to agree to disagree. Watch the tape again, recalling that the last time he had faced Piazza, Clemens hit him in the head, and the time before that, Piazza hit a grand slam off him. Is that behavior setting a good example?

[Lavabe]

Mal,
Greybeard is talking about the 1960's great SF Giant pitcher, Juan Marichal, who was later inducted into the Hall of Fame. He hit Roseboro's unprotected head with his bat. Clemens bat throwing was nothing compared to the Roseboro-Marichal incident. Seriously.

As far as all-time pitching greats with 'tudes, Clemens is not as bad as Carlton. And as far as folks who wouldn't think twice about throwing at someone's head, I'd be more scared of Bob Gibson or Don Drysdale. At least those two wouldn't have let Piazza hit a grand slam. They'd have beaned him again.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[EarlJam]

Mal,
Greybeard is talking about the 1960's great SF Giant pitcher, Juan Marichal, who was later inducted into the Hall of Fame. He hit Roseboro's unprotected head with his bat. Clemens bat throwing was nothing compared to the Roseboro-Marichal incident. Seriously.

As far as all-time pitching greats with 'tudes, Clemens is not as bad as Carlton. And as far as folks who wouldn't think twice about throwing at someone's head, I'd be more scared of Bob Gibson or Don Drysdale. At least those two wouldn't have let Piazza hit a grand slam. They'd have beaned him again.

Cheers,
Lavabe

What about Bob Feller? Didn't he have a reputation of not backing down from anyone?

[j.j. jones]

Lavabe;81931 And as far as folks who wouldn't think twice about throwing at someone's head, I'd be more scared of Bob Gibson or Don Drysdale. At least those two wouldn't have let Piazza hit a grand slam. They'd have beaned him again.

Cheers,
Lavabe

Don Drysdale, he was the poster boy for the high-inside bean ball. That was his forte. Oh yeah, I'd be scared of him as well.

[greybeard]

The guy nobody wanted to even think about hitting a home run against was Bob Gibson. You did that, and you were going to remember it. Actually, whoever mentioned Drysdale picked another good one; with that three quarter arm delivery of his, ducking out of the way required special training.

Sal Maglee was way up there too. They didn't call him "the Barber" for nothing. Jackie Robinson liked Sal so well that he laid down a bunt to first base once so the first baseman would have to field it and he could take Sal out. Only the second baseman covered; I forget the guy's name but I believe that Jackie put him out of the game for good. Not "nice" of Jackie, even if Sal was an overt racist who I'm sure provoked Jackie with his mouth as much as high tight fast ones aimed at Jackie's head.

Baseball players as a group are not particularly civilized, at least historically. I think that Clemens is a borish bully-type of the sort I always hated, but only secretly, because I was chicken that they'd be one of the few bullies who would actually do what they acted like they would.

Nobody with half a brain would have responded to the accusations contained in the Mitchell report by shooting from the hip. Nor would anybody even remotely consider suing Mitchell or Bud, both of whom have sullied the game more than any single steroid user possibly could. Mitchell was chosen by this nation to try to negotiate a Middle East peace. He takes that high honor and sells it to Bud for a few pieces of silver. the shame of it! Then he collects a huge fee for a document filled that ain't worth the paper that it is written on, certainly not in a court of law.

Bud thinks that the paper is going to get him and the rest of the owners off the hook. However, after having profiteered off the stellar performers of the 1990s who brought baseball back from the brink, the least Bud and his boyz should have done was to stand up at the plate and take a few high hard ones for the players who they are now trashing for allegedly having done precisely they wanted--that is, to produce the type of numbers that would allow the owners and the fans to place them on pedestals built with strings and mirrors--junked up balls, pushed in fences, diluted pitching staffs, and yeah, jucied up players.

That would have been the manly thing to do here, precisely the type of thing that Don, and Bob, and Jackie, and, dare I say it, Roger would have done in a heartbeat.

[Mal]

Dudes, just for the record, I'm fully aware of the Juan Marichal bat incident. And also aware that Roseboro later said they'd become pals and he never really had any hard feelings (despite filing suit against Marichal asking for what was, in that day, a rather large sum of money).

We're not discussing Juan Marichal, we're talking about Roger Clemens. Different circumstances, different eras. The insignificance of the violence/danger/harm of one episode compared to the other doesn't speak to whether the actions in the lesser are or are not sportsmanlike, or socially acceptable.

[greybeard]

Dudes, just for the record, I'm fully aware of the Juan Marichal bat incident. And also aware that Roseboro later said they'd become pals and he never really had any hard feelings (despite filing suit against Marichal asking for what was, in that day, a rather large sum of money).

We're not discussing Juan Marichal, we're talking about Roger Clemens. Different circumstances, different eras. The insignificance of the violence/danger/harm of one episode compared to the other doesn't speak to whether the actions in the lesser are or are not sportsmanlike, or socially acceptable.

I've been around organized sports for 50 years, well, maybe a few years less, and "socially acceptible" behaviors have infused all of them at every level.

Roger's actions in tossing part of a broken bat in Piazza's direction pales in comparison to sideline/fan behaviors I have seen by adults at just about every organized sports game I have attended since my kid was 9. And, once things get even a little for real "competative," forget it. The kids themselves are often being coached to employ intimidating and dangerous tactics, with the Dads and Moms going wild when they do and it has the desired result. "Man, that kid plays hard." And, we haven't begun to talk about the "professional coaches" leading a group of talented 10 year olds into "battle," the thankfully isolated cases of some adult bashing another's face in over a bad call or something. but, they do clap when some kid gets helped off the field when another ten year old bashes him in the head with his in a futile attempt to actually head the ball, while the referee had signalled "play on" because it was just "hard play." Don't get me started.

[greybeard]

Clemons, by calling his accuser a liar, is of course calling Senator Mitchell a hack. So, we learn today that the Congressional hearing on this matter has suddenly been postponed for a month so that a US Attorney from somewhere who has nothing better to do can review the tape recordings Clemens made and counsel for the committee can do likewise so they can get to the bottom of an issue of national importance--not whether Clemens took steroids, but whether he slandared the guy who said that he did and therefore besmearched the reputation of one of the Senate's finest.

I forgot for a second, how come we voted for a change in who controls Congress?

In the meantime, a federal judge has ruled that no crime has been committed by the CIA's destruction of the video tapes of what occurred in those interrogations even though all such tapes had been subpoenaed but not turned over in any number of court proceedings brought by people who claim that they are in prison for no damn reason and are being tortured only they can't get a hearing. The former CIA operative who apparently knows at least some of the skinny on this declared before that ruling that he was not inclined to cooperate in any investigation, doesn't think he'll testify.

Cuse me, I gotta go lie down.

[dball]

Let's see:

sports figure(s) accused

high profile politician involved in accusation

despite accuser's inconsistent testimony, many vilify sports figure(s)

attitude of guilty until proven innocent prevails

60 Minutes runs story on event

issues with no real bearing on substance of accusation are used to "show" how sports figure(s) must be guilty

instance of inappropriate behavior used in broad strokes to destroy entire body of work

Think I'll sit this one out and assume innocence until proof shows otherwise.

[Mal]

dball - I see at least three of the factors turning you off to this subject as potentially stemming from my posts on this thread. If not, please disregard this, but if so, let me retort, if I may:

1. Where you list "despite accuser's inconsistent testimony, many vilify sports figure(s)" you forgot to note the inconsistent statements and actions of the sports figure, and a good bit of anecdotal evidence and statistical anomalies. It's not like there's no smoke here.

2. Re: "attitude of guilty until proven innocent prevails" - this is not a criminal matter, at least at the moment. Whatever the Mitchell commission is (and FWIW I think it's something of a joke, as is anything else Bud Selig does/has done in response to the performance-enhancing issues facing MLB [Greybeard, we found common ground. Let's toast and go home!]), it's certainly not a federal prosecutor. For the most part, I hope I'm keeping an open mind, and I wait to see what else comes out. My initial point in this thread was that Clemens has engendered enough bad will and negative karma over the last two decades (and during his recent press conference) that it should come as no surprise that people are disposed to think him a liar and/or cheater.

3. On "instance of inappropriate behavior used in broad strokes to destroy entire body of work," please. If you're referring to my reference to the Piazza feud, please refer me to where I've used that instance for any purpose other than to make my point in (2) above. I have never, in this thread or any other, tried to even discount, much less destroy, Clemens' body of work. If you took all performance enhancing questions out of the game and were left with just performace, Clemens is clearly the best right-hander of the last half-century and perhaps of all-time. He's one of the best pitchers in the history of the game, period. My opinion of his personality doesn't change that. I'm on the "don't care all that much" side of the median on the steroids/HGH/PED spectrum, anyway. Which means that I should probably just sit this all out along with you. I was just interested in the drama of it all and relatively shocked (though not surprised) by what a jerk Clemens came off as at his press conference earlier this week.

[Ben63]

The hearing is this morning. I cant wait to see it. At first I gave the benefit of the doubt to Clemens but I now beleive McNamee.

Thoughts...

[A-Tex Devil]

I hate this whole mess. Congress and the Mitchell report and the press have officially made me not care whether or not Clemens did steroids or McNamee lied to Mitchell. I simply don't care and I think our Congress is wasting its time. If Clemens goes to jail over this, well he screwed up by lying, but there better be some fricking proof other than other people's testimony. Honestly, without a smoking gun or a MArion Jones like confession, there is no way either guy gets perjury charges over this.

While I won't deny the entertainment value for many, it's so so so so so stupid that Congress is wasting its time with this. What about all the other guys named in the Mitchell report that denied using? WHy isn't Congress going after them? Cause they get to gladhand then grandstand with a superstar, that's why, and that's what our congressman do best. Make a 5 minute speech with a 5 word question to look good for constituents. Waxman is a smart guy and does well in other areas from what I understand, but he needs to look in the mirror and get his priorities straight. There are thousands and thousands of things more important than whether an athlete lied about taking steroids. I understand Clemens is bringing a lot of this on himself by his vehement denials, and maybe HE thinks it's necessary. But, man, it would have been nice if COngress just said -- "Guys, we simply don't have time. Just work it out via the defamation suit and countersuit and have a nice day."

Ridiculous.

[pamtar]

I don't get it. What are they going to do today? Will there be proof one way or the other?

[DukieInKansas]

I agree with A-Tex Devil. Isn't there more important work that Congress should be handling?

[dkbaseball]

I hate this whole mess. Congress and the Mitchell report and the press have officially made me not care whether or not Clemens did steroids or McNamee lied to Mitchell. I simply don't care and I think our Congress is wasting its time. If Clemens goes to jail over this, well he screwed up by lying, but there better be some fricking proof other than other people's testimony. Honestly, without a smoking gun or a MArion Jones like confession, there is no way either guy gets perjury charges over this.

While I won't deny the entertainment value for many, it's so so so so so stupid that Congress is wasting its time with this. What about all the other guys named in the Mitchell report that denied using? WHy isn't Congress going after them? Cause they get to gladhand then grandstand with a superstar, that's why, and that's what our congressman do best. Make a 5 minute speech with a 5 word question to look good for constituents. Waxman is a smart guy and does well in other areas from what I understand, but he needs to look in the mirror and get his priorities straight. There are thousands and thousands of things more important than whether an athlete lied about taking steroids. I understand Clemens is bringing a lot of this on himself by his vehement denials, and maybe HE thinks it's necessary. But, man, it would have been nice if COngress just said -- "Guys, we simply don't have time. Just work it out via the defamation suit and countersuit and have a nice day."

Ridiculous.

Yeah, Congress really needs to get on that New England Patriots video case. [Remove tongue from cheek] I couldn't agree more with this post.

[Shammrog]

Yeah, Congress really needs to get on that New England Patriots video case. [Remove tongue from cheek] I couldn't agree more with this post.

I agree with all above. This is silly; but it gets these egotistical blowhards on TV.

As a side note; I bet Clemens is toast. Waxman just pointed out that, while Roger claims Andy Pettitte misunderstood a conversation about HGH in 1999; and that Clemens was in fact referring to his wife -- BOTH Clemens and McNamee have claimed that said wife was given HGH. Problem was, it was in 2003...

UH OH.

[allenmurray]

Waxman also didn't take to kindly to Clemens' attorney threatening a federal law enforcement officer. Probably not exactly what Hardin meant, but given his years of experience how could he say anything so stupid?

Upon hearing that IRS agent Jeff Novitzky might attend the hearings, Hardin responded by saying, "I can tell you this: If he ever messes with Roger, Roger will eat his lunch,"

Perhaps he didn't mean it as a threat. However, Waxman responded by saying in his letter to Hardin, "I do not know your intent in making this statement, but under one interpretation it can be seen an attempt to intimidate a federal law enforcement officer in the performance of his official duties . . . it is not your clinet's perogative to dictate who attends these hearings . . . I urge you to clarify the record."

Whether or not Congress should be carrying this out, making even the most veiled threat toward a federal investigator is not too bright. And while I am inclined to agree with those who say this is none of the federal government's businesss, I also realize that the federal government and baseball already have a complicated relationship due to the anti-trust exemption. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

http://www.slate.com/id/2184190/entry/2184192/

[Channing]

One thing that, at least imo, has been clarified is that an argument that was made during the Bonds investigation is not true. I dont remember anyone specifically, but I seem to remember several people/ groups saying that Bonds was being targeted because he is an African American, and that other Caucasian players who had admitted to using steroids were not being vilified nearly as much.

Watching the whole Clemens thing go down over the last 3 months, it is clear, to me at least, that the only distinction made by the press is celebrity. If someone is a celebrity (or a superstar in this case), the media is going to have a field day with them - white, black, or green.

[dkbaseball]

One thing that, at least imo, has been clarified is that an argument that was made during the Bonds investigation is not true. I dont remember anyone specifically, but I seem to remember several people/ groups saying that Bonds was being targeted because he is an African American, and that other Caucasian players who had admitted to using steroids were not being vilified nearly as much.

Watching the whole Clemens thing go down over the last 3 months, it is clear, to me at least, that the only distinction made by the press is celebrity. If someone is a celebrity (or a superstar in this case), the media is going to have a field day with them - white, black, or green.

I think you're right, and it's interesting to watch how the media calibrate degrees of celebrity to determine who gets attention. Albert Pujols showed up in the Mitchell report, and he's on track to break all the slugging records, but the media haven't shown the scantest interest. He plays in a flyover state, and has a low media profile.

[rasputin]

I think you're right, and it's interesting to watch how the media calibrate degrees of celebrity to determine who gets attention. Albert Pujols showed up in the Mitchell report, and he's on track to break all the slugging records, but the media haven't shown the scantest interest. He plays in a flyover state, and has a low media profile.

Albert Pujols does play in a flyover state. He has a low national media profile, but not a low local media profile. And he was NOT in the Mitchell report.

[allenmurray]

Albert Pujols showed up in the Mitchell report

Huh?

[Dukiedevil]

I hate this whole mess. Congress and the Mitchell report and the press have officially made me not care whether or not Clemens did steroids or McNamee lied to Mitchell. I simply don't care and I think our Congress is wasting its time. If Clemens goes to jail over this, well he screwed up by lying, but there better be some fricking proof other than other people's testimony. Honestly, without a smoking gun or a MArion Jones like confession, there is no way either guy gets perjury charges over this.

While I won't deny the entertainment value for many, it's so so so so so stupid that Congress is wasting its time with this. What about all the other guys named in the Mitchell report that denied using? WHy isn't Congress going after them? Cause they get to gladhand then grandstand with a superstar, that's why, and that's what our congressman do best. Make a 5 minute speech with a 5 word question to look good for constituents. Waxman is a smart guy and does well in other areas from what I understand, but he needs to look in the mirror and get his priorities straight. There are thousands and thousands of things more important than whether an athlete lied about taking steroids. I understand Clemens is bringing a lot of this on himself by his vehement denials, and maybe HE thinks it's necessary. But, man, it would have been nice if COngress just said -- "Guys, we simply don't have time. Just work it out via the defamation suit and countersuit and have a nice day."

Ridiculous.

I initially agreed with you about this but heard a pretty compelling argument the other way this morning on Mike and Mike. Greenberg suggested that the reason this is important to congress is that the point of the Mitchell Report is to prove there is a problem and to pass legislation on performance enhancing drugs. If Clemens proves (somehow) that any part of the report is false, then that pretty much calls into question the validity of the whole report. I thought that was an interesting explanation and probably has some merit... I think it also says that this actually wouldn't be a waste of time, especially if things like this act as a deterrent to other players.

In regards to whether he did it, I initially was inclined to believe Clemens because of his vehement denials without the legalspeak. Since the Pettite thing, I'm fairly convinced he's lying.

[duke74]

I initially agreed with you about this but heard a pretty compelling argument the other way this morning on Mike and Mike. Greenberg suggested that the reason this is important to congress is that the point of the Mitchell Report is to prove there is a problem and to pass legislation on performance enhancing drugs. If Clemens proves (somehow) that any part of the report is false, then that pretty much calls into question the validity of the whole report. I thought that was an interesting explanation and probably has some merit... I think it also says that this actually wouldn't be a waste of time, especially if things like this act as a deterrent to other players.

In regards to whether he did it, I initially was inclined to believe Clemens because of his vehement denials without the legalspeak. Since the Pettite thing, I'm fairly convinced he's lying.

Granted, I could only watch for about an hour...but McNamee came off as believable and Clemens was being shredded by a few of the congressmen (MD and MA). Does this extrapolate to the whole?

[dkbaseball]

Albert Pujols does play in a flyover state. He has a low national media profile, but not a low local media profile. And he was NOT in the Mitchell report.

Guess I didn't get the update. (I'm trying unsuccessfully to link here a story about Pujols' outrage at being initially and incorrectly linked to the Mitchell report; sometimes my computer will do this, and sometimes not). His name showed up on the list in the early news story I read. As a Cardinal fan, I'm ecstatic that he's clean. (And to all fellow Cardinal fans, I use the term "flyover" as ironic disparagement of the national press.)

As a side note, let me add that Clemens may well have juiced, but the stories seem to suggest he started doing so in the late '90s. But I remember well seeing him in Fenway in '94, and being surprised at how bulked up he was then.

[greybeard]

McNamee is an admitted drug dealer. Clemens is an alleged user. When my friends were prosecutors, they used to give deals to users to get to dealers.

The notion that they needed a Mitchell report to form the basis for legislation against steroids is nonsense. First, there is legislation; steroid use is unlawful. Second, steroid use is rampant and among athletes who have no hope and know it of making it to the Show.

The War on Drugs declared by Richard Nixon was the stupidest war ever waged in the history of the world. It is also the longest, and the most costly in the history of mankind. The jails are filed with the victims, and society is the worse for it.

These hearings are ridiculous.

My favorites, the Congresswoman from DC asking Clemens why he didn't fire McNamee after McNamee had done him wrong, implying wrongly that it must have been because they had illicite dealings. Why did her honor continue dealing with, you name em, the mayor of the district, the president of the United States, etc.

This guy is a ballplayer and a star; if he put aside everyone who misused their relationship with him there would be few left. McNamee let him down; Clemens says that he was poed, vented, and got over it. Makes sense to me.

McNamee is the one who should not have gotten a deal. That he did is precisely what I have been saying on many threads is wrong with the criminal justice system. They should have slammed him for what they had on him; he would have talked anyway, for a little leniency. That they, the federal prosecutors, gave him a walk is insane. That Congress is okay with this is obscene.

[allenmurray]

Guess I didn't get the update. (I'm trying unsuccessfully to link here a story about Pujols' outrage at being initially and incorrectly linked to the Mitchell report; sometimes my computer will do this, and sometimes not). His name showed up on the list in the early news story I read. As a Cardinal fan, I'm ecstatic that he's clean. (And to all fellow Cardinal fans, I use the term "flyover" as ironic disparagement of the national press.)

As a side note, let me add that Clemens may well have juiced, but the stories seem to suggest he started doing so in the late '90s. But I remember well seeing him in Fenway in '94, and being surprised at how bulked up he was then.

As I recall, Pujol's outrage was about someone saying he was in the report when in fact he wasn't. I would think that is an appropriate thing about which to be outraged.

[dkbaseball]

As I recall, Pujol's outrage was about someone saying he was in the report when in fact he wasn't. I would think that is an appropriate thing about which to be outraged.

Well, "someone saying" amounted to an early news story with a list of names that included his, because I'm certain I read it. Obviously, he should be outraged. There may be plenty of people, like me as of two hours ago, who still think he's on the list.

[Mal]

dk - my recollection was that the initial leaked list included about 5x as many prominent players and outright stars' names as the eventual actual report. And that Pujols was one of the many bigger names on that leaked list and not the actual. If I recall, Pudge, Sheffield, and pretty much anyone else who's ever been suspected or looked a little too buff was in the initial leaked, and quite inaccurate, list.

As for this whole Clemens thing, I know it seemed like I really cared about this in the thread a few weeks ago about Clemens' press conference where he flew off the handle, but I don't. It's all a ridiculous waste of time. Not to move this to PPBland, but we can take this beyond the general "this is a ridiculous waste of time" to pretty apt specific analogies: John Cole noted today that Arlen Spector now intends to interrogate Roger Goddell and the NFL about the Patriots Spygate issues. So, there's a distinct possibility that the NFL or New England Patriots will be more harshly punished for spying on practice sessions than the Administration and telecoms will be for spying on U.S. citizens in violation of FISA. And Clemens is getting grilled far harder about potentially lying than Alberto Gonzalez ever did.

[alteran]

Guess I didn't get the update. (I'm trying unsuccessfully to link here a story about Pujols' outrage at being initially and incorrectly linked to the Mitchell report; sometimes my computer will do this, and sometimes not). His name showed up on the list in the early news story I read. As a Cardinal fan, I'm ecstatic that he's clean. (And to all fellow Cardinal fans, I use the term "flyover" as ironic disparagement of the national press.)


As has been mentioned lower down, he was on a leaked "Mitchell list," but not on the ACTUAL Mitchell list. Google has lots of background (http://www.google.com/search?q=Pujols+mitchell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a).

[pamtar]

Pujols still does steroids. Just look at him.

[mr. synellinden]

Pujols still does steroids. Just look at him.

2006 StL 143 535 119 177 33 1 49 137 92 50 7 2 .331 .431 .671 1.102
2007 StL 158 565 99 185 38 1 32 103 99 58 2 6 .327 .429 .568 .997


I always suspected that Pujols stopped using them before this season due to all the public attention, testing, scrutiny, etc.

He looked smaller this year also. The dropoff in HRs and Slg % is also significant.

[greybeard]

Those pictures from different periods of Clemens' career, all showing roughly the same size, were interesting. Could well be compelling for a jury what with all the emphasis having been placed on Bonds' change in size. (by the way, has anybody looked at pictures of Asron early and late?)

Does anybody think that there would have been hearings on this if say, former Governor of Cal. Jerry Brown had done this report for MLB. Hey, that was pretty funny, right?

Education and controlled use is the only answer. Making roids and HGH illegal will not work; history in other sports, track and biking, prove that.

More importantly, given the benefits of properly controlled use for the well being and performance of pro athletes and some regular folks or not (anybody see Clemens' wife, wink, wink), why outlaw them entirely? On what theory, other than the record books?

Nope, I'm not joking, and I am all for health in sports (you think).

[greybeard]

1. First, he's a coward. One thing for prosecutors to want to hold his testimony back so he can't be cross examined; if there is a prosecution, that would be benefitial to the prosecution but would not help getting to the truth. However, if he is telling the truth, he should have done so on a public stage. He owed his friend that.

2. Why does everybody believe that he did HDH just twice. Suppose he did it many more times. More precisely, let's suppose that he first did it when he made that comment to his wife. You know, sort of like DeNiro in his first encounter with the shrink in Analyze This--I got this friend who has this problem. You know, he floated a trial balloon to see her reaction, and found out that she was aghast, dead against it. So, he left it at that, let it stand that Clemens had brought up the subject, because he did not have the stones to own up to his own shortcomings.

I think that what is set forth in no. 2 is at least as plausible as Andy's claim that Clemens spoke to him only twice in all the years that they knew eachother, working out with the same trainer, about the subject of getting juiced, when the trainer says that Clemens shot up many more times? Why only twice?

Am I saying that this proves that Andy is lying? No. But, it sure makes his testimony not worth listening to, at least in my view. Twice? Anybody believe that? Why just twice, and why then, and not earlier, when he was really, really cooking?

And, Andy's stature as a saint only harms his credibility. If he lied to his wife back in 2000, later used again, and never owned up to it, would explain why he'd perpetuate the lie now. Nobody likes to lose the stature of staint, especially when girls are involved.

And, if he was a repeat user, not no two-timer (pun intended), wouldn't his wife have reason to help him cover that up, to lay the focus on Clemens and hide his own foibles. Has this happened before in history, with supposed honorable men? I'm no historian, but I do watch TV, where it's everyday fare, especially among the guys on the big stages.

"I got no further use for this guy." My cousin Vinnie

[Karl Beem]

John Cole (http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=9680).

[feldspar]

Dan Burton (R-IN) made a complete ^$%^$%^$% out of himself today. If I were in his District I'd be making a phone call to his office.

Anybody know why overwhemingly the Dems side with McNamee and the Repubs side with Clemens??

[dkbaseball]

Dan Burton (R-IN) made a complete ^$%^$%^$% out of himself today. If I were in his District I'd be making a phone call to his office.

Anybody know why overwhemingly the Dems side with McNamee and the Repubs side with Clemens??

I've often thought that when baseball fan George Bush envisions the Merka he loves so much, Clemens is the first person who comes to mind -- an affluent suburbanite driving a big, hulking SUV, beloved child of the free market, lets his arm and his work ethic do the talking for him in a 1950s sort of way. I think this notion I have may be rooted in something Bush once said about how he just felt he understood what Merka was all about attending a high school baseball game in an upscale suburban Houston neighborhood where the boosters provided the school with gobs of money. In any case, I'm pretty sure Clemens is pals with G.W. and G.H.W. Bush, and probably has found his way onto the links with any number of fat cat Republican types over the years.

Just caught Burton's act. What a total jackarse. Regardless of party affiliation, it's embarrassing that somebody like that sits in the nation's legislature.

[greybeard]

Dan Burton (R-IN) made a complete ^$%^$%^$% out of himself today. If I were in his District I'd be making a phone call to his office.

Anybody know why overwhemingly the Dems side with McNamee and the Repubs side with Clemens??

Mitchell is a Democrat, the former Majority Leader of the Senate and Clinton's peacemaker in the Middle East who pulled in some chits for a pot of gold. I am a lifelong Democrat, my father was a Democrat. Mitchell is a well dress and well paid sell out and Waxman, in my mind, looked like an idiot, and he was the best that the Dems had to offer.

The first questioner is less than an idiot. If he thinks that Andy Petitt is credible just because he has yet to be torn apart he is naive also. Twice my foot!

[Olympic Fan]

Just caught Burton's act. What a total jackarse. Regardless of party affiliation, it's embarrassing that somebody like that sits in the nation's legislature.

Ron Burton has been a bad joke for more than two decades. This is the guy who introduced legislation in 1990 mandating the death penalty for drug dealers ... four years later, his oldest son was arrested for transporting eight pounds of marijuna for sale ... while awaiting trial for that crime, police raided his apartment and found more than 30 marijuna plants and a shotgun -- which carried a mandatory federal sentence of five years, plus three years in the state pen. Somehow, the son of the congressional anti-drug crusader got off with community service.

Burton was one of the most vocal Clinton critics, calling the ex-President "a scumbag" for his relations with Lewinski. It turned out that he had fathered a child by one of his office workers in 1983 and was one of the biggest skirt-chasers on Capital Hill.

Burton passionately believed that the Clintons had Vince Foster murdered -- to that end, he re-enacted the crime in his back yard with a pistol and a pumpkin. He chaired a committee that spent more than $7 million investigating Democratic fund-raising abuses -- and found nothing. The chief result of the probe was that he released recordings of interviews with Webster Hubbell that turned out to be edited to distort their meaning -- an action that earned him a rebuke from no less than Newt Gingrich.

Burton is famous for influence pandering -- he attended a fundraiser sponsored by AT&T when chairing a committee that just happened to award a big telecommunications contract to AT&T. He was exposed by the Bolivian ambassador for demanding kickbacks from lobbyists for access.

This is the guy who thinks McNamee is a liar ... well, if Burton is against him, then I have to think maybe McNamee is worth listening to.

[throatybeard]

Could someone tell me how long this is expected to take, so that I know when I can watch SportsCenter again without having to hear about the Clemens circus?

[greybeard]

This is the guy who thinks McNamee is a liar ... well, if Burton is against him, then I have to think maybe McNamee is worth listening to.

Burton is all that and more, imo.

But, McNamee is a former cop turned drug dealer who, if he is to believed as to Clemens' use, kept the stuff in a can either to later blackmail Clemens with or for a get-out-of-jail free card.

Worth listening to? Why? Oh, I remember the records and the Hall.

Don't you love it when politicians say "it's for the kids; I'm doing it for the kids." That's always when I read the fine print. Anybody believe Waxman on that one, even a little? He did it for Mitchell! Period. End of discussion!

Why would believe that Petitt just used it twice? I mean, the guy would not even subject himself to questioning by the likes of Burton, couldn't even confront his friend with this story. Why would he stop at just two times. Didn't have no more injuries that he needed help with? It didn't work? We'll probably never know, but I have real trouble believing that number; it's too cute--enough to back up McNamee but not enough to completely sully his name. He could still pitch and everybody would be okay with it.

Interesting how that number two came up again, as in the number of times during all those years that Clemens just happened to mention to Petitt that he Clemens had used HGH, no mention of roids mind you, just HGH. And, Petitt didn't say, "Me too."

I almost hope Clemens gets indicted, because I'd love to watch Petitt's cross examination. Hey, I think we just did.

[Olympic Fan]

I almost hope Clemens gets indicted, because I'd love to watch Petitt's cross examination. Hey, I think we just did.

It may not require an indictment. Remember, Clemens has sued McNamee for defamation of character -- if that one ever goes to trial, we arfe very likely to see Pettite on the stand under oath, facing cross examination.

[Lavabe]

2. Why does everybody believe that he did HDH just twice. Suppose he did it many more times. More precisely, let's suppose that he first did it when he made that comment to his wife. You know, sort of like DeNiro in his first encounter with the shrink in Analyze This--I got this friend who has this problem. You know, he floated a trial balloon to see her reaction, and found out that she was aghast, dead against it. So, he left it at that, let it stand that Clemens had brought up the subject, because he did not have the stones to own up to his own shortcomings.



Pettite first claimed he only used HGH once; now he claims he used the stuff twice. I wonder how many more times he'll claim under oath.

THIS is a strong witness?:rolleyes:

Pettite looks very silly. Get Vinnie (and Marisa Tomei) on this case!

Lavabe

[JasonEvans]

If someone is a celebrity (or a superstar in this case), the media is going to have a field day with them - white, black, or green.

http://www.thebatsite.co.uk/images/yvonne_craig_as_slave_girl_marta.jpg

--Jason "sorry, I could not resist... just as Kirk could not resist Yvonne Craig's** charms" Evans

**- bonus points if you know that she was the very hot Batgirl too http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/6/67/200px-Yvonne_Craig_Batgirl.jpg

[SilkyJ]

I initially agreed with you about this but heard a pretty compelling argument the other way this morning on Mike and Mike. Greenberg suggested that the reason this is important to congress is that the point of the Mitchell Report is to prove there is a problem and to pass legislation on performance enhancing drugs. If Clemens proves (somehow) that any part of the report is false, then that pretty much calls into question the validity of the whole report. I thought that was an interesting explanation and probably has some merit... I think it also says that this actually wouldn't be a waste of time, especially if things like this act as a deterrent to other players.

In regards to whether he did it, I initially was inclined to believe Clemens because of his vehement denials without the legalspeak. Since the Pettite thing, I'm fairly convinced he's lying.

Well that shouldn't be very compelling to you if you knew that steroids ARE ALREADY ILLEGAL

[EarlJam]

http://www.thebatsite.co.uk/images/yvonne_craig_as_slave_girl_marta.jpg

--Jason "sorry, I could not resist... just as Kirk could not resist Yvonne Craig's** charms" Evans

**- bonus points if you know that she was the very hot Batgirl too http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/6/67/200px-Yvonne_Craig_Batgirl.jpg

Oh.....my......GOD!

That is one BEAUTIFUL green chick!

-Earl "look at those legs!" Jam

[Lavabe]

Oh.....my......GOD!

That is one BEAUTIFUL green chick!

-Earl "look at those legs!" Jam

... that was 40 years ago.

[pfrduke]

nice brief parody on the situation (http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2008/02/this-parody-was.html)

[EarlJam]

You know, I'm no big fan of Clemens but my God. This thing sure went from no news, to reputation-damning news, to potential life-destroying news in a flash.

He's looking at serious jail time now? It just seems a bit out of control at the moment.

Agree? Disagree?

-EJ

[BlueDevilBaby]

Totally agree. I think he's definitely going down.

[TillyGalore]

Is it wrong for me to smile ever so slightly about Clemens' situation?

[BlueDevilBaby]

Well . . . he did bring it upon himself, so :) .

[pamtar]

You know, I'm no big fan of Clemens but my God. This thing sure went from no news, to reputation-damning news, to potential life-destroying news in a flash.

I think you have mis-remembered this particular series of events. It was potentially life-destroying as soon as the Mitchell Report came out. ;)

[TillyGalore]

Well . . . he did bring it upon himself, so :) .

BlueDevilBaby, I love the way you think! :D

[BlueDevilBaby]

TillyGalore! That's much bigger than a slight smile.;)

[wilson]

We've (sadly) discussed this a lot around here recently, but the most sure-fire way to hack the Feds off is to lie to them, especially in court. I agree with EarlJam that the fallout is perhaps a bit excessive, but by cheating and then lying about it, Clemens has brought this entirely upon himself.

[greybeard]

We've (sadly) discussed this a lot around here recently, but the most sure-fire way to hack the Feds off is to lie to them, especially in court. I agree with EarlJam that the fallout is perhaps a bit excessive, but by cheating and then lying about it, Clemens has brought this entirely upon himself.

I disagree (surprise). I know it was more than reasonably forseeable, but why did Congress, Waxie I am referring to here, think it in the national interest to send out a Congressional investigator with my money to speak to Roger? What interest did that serve?

In a lead story, the Washington Post reported, and I think that this is a correct number, that 1 out of every 100 American males is in prison, a great percentage of them for drug related crimes. Waxman did his boy Mitchell a political favor by sending an interviewer after Clemens to uphold Mitchell's reputation after Mitchell had already sold it. Mitchell got paid handsomely by MLB to publish a gossip paper naming names but meaning no one any harm as far as being punished by baseball or anyone else, unless you challenged Mitchell, who is oh so well connected don't you know. When Clemens' challenged Waxman's former leader, Waxman did his boy a large and went after Clemens who now would need to eat his public words or go to jail for them. Wow, government at its very best.

Then, when the announcement of the referral was made, Waxman wasn't man enough to go out there and announce it himself. He got the minority leader of the Committee to do it for him.

And, yet there are still some who decry the lack of bipartisanship as an impediment to meaningful progress on the hill.

There was no reason for that interview! In Bonds' case, at least, they made believe that there was a reason that they needed him to talk--to get to Balco, the drug dealer. Here, they had the drug dealer dead to rights and gave him a pass to make Mitchell important and let him earn.

Meanwhile, it remains the case that the principle users of anabolic steroids are not pro athletes or even aspiring ones; they are the hard bodies you see in the gyms, so said an in depth piece on the subject on Cable the other day. Waxman lives about a mile from my gym; if he wants to come down, I can point to at least 5 guys working out at any given time who I just know are dirty. I'll be waiting.

[ojaidave]

I have not followed this too closely and am not an avid baseball fan (since 94) so I don't really have a dog in this fight. That said, I see that you feel strongly about this Greybeard, but I don't understand what you're saying.


I disagree (surprise). I know it was more than reasonably forseeable, but why did Congress, Waxie I am referring to here, think it in the national interest to send out a Congressional investigator with my money to speak to Roger? What interest did that serve?

In a lead story, the Washington Post reported, and I think that this is a correct number, that 1 out of every 100 American males is in prison, a great percentage of them for drug related crimes. Waxman did his boy Mitchell a political favor by sending an interviewer after Clemens to uphold Mitchell's reputation after Mitchell had already sold it. Mitchell got paid handsomely by MLB to publish a gossip paper naming names but meaning no one any harm as far as being punished by baseball or anyone else, unless you challenged Mitchell, who is oh so well connected don't you know.


So drug use is a significant problem in the US. A report, commissioned by MLB to figure out how prevalent the problem is, comes out indicating steroids are a problem and proceeds to name some names (I'd assume that the report's authors felt on rock solid ground for those named). By gossip paper, I'm assuming you don't think the report was legit. Why did MLB commission this then? Bargaining power on the next labor agreement? What was the motivation, to taint ball players?



When Clemens' challenged Waxman's former leader, Waxman did his boy a large and went after Clemens who now would need to eat his public words or go to jail for them. Wow, government at its very best.

Then, when the announcement of the referral was made, Waxman wasn't man enough to go out there and announce it himself. He got the minority leader of the Committee to do it for him.

So Waxman in beholden to Mitchell. To defend Mitchell, Waxman went after one of the most famous players named in the report. I think I'm picking up what you are laying down here. What I don't understand is the referral part. You mean referred to Congress? What Committee?



And, yet there are still some who decry the lack of bipartisanship as an impediment to meaningful progress on the hill.


I assume this is a humorous aside, but I don't understand it. Do you mean that Waxman and the minority leader of the Committee are on different sides of the isle? If so, wouldn't that lend some amount of credence?



There was no reason for that interview! In Bonds' case, at least, they made believe that there was a reason that they needed him to talk--to get to Balco, the drug dealer. Here, they had the drug dealer dead to rights and gave him a pass to make Mitchell important and let him earn.

But if one of the concerns of MLB (and Congress I suppose) is that steriod/drug use by sports stars may be seen as a tacit endorsement, doesn't it make sense to go after the star and not the dealer?



Meanwhile, it remains the case that the principle users of anabolic steroids are not pro athletes or even aspiring ones; they are the hard bodies you see in the gyms, so said an in depth piece on the subject on Cable the other day. Waxman lives about a mile from my gym; if he wants to come down, I can point to at least 5 guys working out at any given time who I just know are dirty. I'll be waiting.

I can't speak to the report's accuracy, but one of the claims made in the report is that following the extensive coverage of Mark McGuire's androstenedione usage, sales of the supplement increased 1000%! So maybe those hard bodies at the gym are influenced somewhat by what the professional athletes are doing.

Greybeard, I've certainly not tried to misrepresent anything you've written and I'd hazard a guess that you are much, much more familiar with the minutiae of the Mitchell report and the political background. For the sake of argument though, do you think Clemens took HGH?

[YmoBeThere]

I disagree (surprise). I know it was more than reasonably forseeable, but why did Congress, Waxie I am referring to here, think it in the national interest to send out a Congressional investigator with my money to speak to Roger? What interest did that serve?
Ummm, they got paid out of my allocation(taxes), so it served my interest...

[greybeard]

1. I begin with a central premise that reflects the reality: wars on drugs generally have never worked, and the war on steroids in sports is no different. Steroids have been illegal and their use in baseball is epidemic (man, did we need Mitchell to tell us that!).

2. Why has the war on steroids in baseball been such an abysmal failure? Here are a few: money, 160-day regular seasons, money, injuries--the kinds that keep you from playing, but more importantly, the kinds that don't but that degrade your performance and put you to shame before your teammates, ESPN, your city, and the kids, we all do it for the kids. Oh, did I mention money?

3. If Congress wanted to investigate steroid use in baseball, how was it possible that it decided to contract out the task to the people who supply the money, hire the trainers who supply the dope, and publicize the stars and the record chasing and what not that make them fortunes? How is it possible that Congress walks past the source of problem, the only people who can control it, and gives them the key to the hen house? Why, the owners hire one of their own, and for big, big bucks too, that's how!

4. If Congress were serious about investigating this issue, seems to me that they would do some fact finding: a. what does it take out of an athlete to play an 160-game regular season and then be expected to perform under extraordinary pressure until way late in the Fall in an incredibily long and drawn out second season? b. what impact does (a) have on the use of steroids? c. what have the owners and the media focused on to sell the sport, and how does their focus on records, record chasing, super human efforts, have on the use of steroids? d. what are the incidence of serious injury in baseball and what are the consequences career wise and personally for those that incur them? e. what are the incidents of repetitive motion injuries (pulled this or thats, sprained thises or thats, sore thises or thats), and what is it like for an athlete to watch himself make a fool of himself by playing with those injuries and performing in a manner that not only embarasses and frustrates him but lets down everyone in the baseball watching world? f. what is the gate (both at the stadium, advertising dollars, espn revenues, product sales etc) when the Bondes and Clemens and Pettites of the world are able to play on a regular basis and when they are not.

5. When those issues are investigated and a report is issued, it seems to me then Congress would need to ask whether baseball and society would be best served by: (1) making steroid use legal, doing considerable research into how they can be used most safely and efficaciously, providing top flight medical supervision for all players, and stop being hypocrites; or (2) whether to escalate the war on steroids and, in the name of doing so, put on a dog and pony show that seeks to ruin the reputations and invade the privacy further of the heroes that baseball has created in order to market itself.

6. If Congress was hell bent on continuing this war on steroids, and it appears that it was, without at least inquiring as to the root causes of at least some of the problems and demanding reform of them (that would cost the owners money and Mitchell would not like that), then the least that they could have done was man up themselves. How could they do a hand-off to Mitchell, who is just a hired gun for the executives who drove the bus and reeped the rewards during the steroid era.

7. Mitchell Report: As to Clemens, one has to conclude that it was the least impressive document in the history of investigation. The key witness, McNamee, is the drug pusher who was a trainer for the Yankees. He walks into a Congressional hearing and says, "I lied when I told Mitchell that Clemens had only used a few times; he was an addict, and used all the time." So, now we have a drug pusher who lied to a former Senator while purporting to come clean. And, why does he say he lied? To protect Roger of course, but when Roger denied the accusation, why then, all bets were off and now he was telling the truth. Only, not quite; see, he didn't tell the government investigators about the soft drink can and the supposed dna evidence.

My view, Congress sullies itself by bringing forth this evidence, by relying on this evidence. Now, maybe there is some good reason for this? The good reason is usually to go aftert the higher ups, the Lays and other Enron honchos, or at least the important middle men to make a case against the Lays. Here, what exactly was it that they were doing? The Mitchell Report was out, everybody was on page that they now knew what every kid in the ballpark knew all along--steroid use is riff in baseball--and they were going to do something about it. But, wait, Clemens called McNamee a liar and by implication Mitchell a hack, which is exactly what he is. He certainly was not investigator since he let McNamee dictate the entire show, not only how the investigation was to be conducted, but what it would say, without regard to the actual facts.

So, to protect Mitchell's reputation, Congress set out to investigate the truth of an allegation about Clemens's use that they by their own adminission had no interest in discovering. They had no intention of punishing past use or even looking into it; they and everyone else was satisfied that use was rampent. So this was a political show to help a guy, Mitchell, who sold his stature as a former leader of the Senate to produce a white wash--a report about steroid use in baseball that took its root causes as a given and sacrosanct because the persons paying his salary demanded that that be so.

By the way, anyone who believes Pettite's story that he used just twice, had just two conversations with McNamee about HGH, had but two conversations with Clemens about Clemens use but did not mention his own and Clemens said nothing about steroid use, even though McNamee says that Clemens was a regular user, well, thos persons ain't counting the soda cans--there definitely is one with Pettite's name on it and it don't have no Dr. Pepper in it either.

[greybeard]

Pain killers are the most abused drug in America today. In Va alone, mostly the coal mining part, oxycontin overdoses have caused the deaths of 240 people last year, far more than any other drug. Workers in the mines start using the drug on prescription; their habbits soon grow.

Might the use of steroids to avoid the painful conditions be a better treatment. Steroids aren't patentable. We'll probably never know.