Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Buy American Pop Lit at Barnes & Noble
Buy American Pop Lit at Amazon
Tweets
Fun Stuff
- A Tale of Two Literary Worlds
- Literary Nomenklatura
- The Literary Story Examined
- American Literary Apparatchiks
- The Believer ULA Essay Part I
- The Believer ULA Essay Part II
- The Believer ULA Essay Part III
- The Believer ULA Essay Part IV
- End of the Pods
- The Timid Generation
- Three Question Archive
- Jonathan Lethem and Postmodernism
- What Kind of Revolution Is It?
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(228)
-
▼
February
(26)
- The Prisoner of Planet XYZ
- The Society Page
- Meanwhile
- Who Wants Change?
- The Halfwayers
- Misconceptions
- Today's Question
- New Postings
- Ideas or Tactics?
- More Carver II
- Today's Question
- Lish Is Responsible
- Today's Question
- More Raymond Carver
- Blog Report
- My Strategy
- Gordon Lish Meets Tolstoy
- Inside Tip
- Today's Question
- Done with It
- On Raymond Carver
- Today's Question
- Now Up
- More CIA Fun Stuff
- Today's Question
- The King Wenclas Lit-Blog Network
-
▼
February
(26)
Links
- New Pop Lit
- Fast Pop Lit
- NPL News
- New Pop Lit's Open Mic
- New Pop Lit Extra
- American Pop Lit
- Happy America Lit
- The Literary Circus
- Crime City Blog
- Detroit Literary
- Election Follies 2012
- Literary Mystery
- Blitz Book Review
- El Cid Project
- Philly Zeen
- Populist America
- Philly Literary
- Happy Writing
- Petition to PEN
- ULA
- ULA Poetry and Fiction
- ULA Review
- ULA Press
- Wred
- How Publishing Is Rigged
- Dust Bowl Poetry
- Books Inq
- New Yorker Commas
- Random Rae
- American Dissident
- Blue Collar Holler
- Idiom Poets
- Piggy Plutocrats
- A Practical Policy
- Remnants
- Litkicks
- Complete Review
- Emerging Writers
- Germ Books
- Fran
- Salome
- Syntax
- First Line
- You Are Here
- Josh Saitz
- Sunday Salon
About Me
- King Wenclas
- The ultimate literary outlaw. "I could be bounded in a nutshell and call myself a king of infinite space." -William Shakespeare
5 comments:
Yep. No question about it.
I'll say no for now. We'll accept or reject heroes too easily these days. Seems like much of the evidence against Clemens was provided by a squirrelly trainer, a guy who just turned over a bunch of used syringes from years ago. Sounds like a shakedown to me!
And looking at the "authority" behind this investigation, George Mitchell and Bud Selig... oh my god why are these goofs given any credibility? They should have been put out to pasture years ago. Selig was even a laughingstock in MILWAUKEE of all places before he became the commissioner. Perfect guy to clean up the sport, him and Jose Canseco!
Well, I think we have now 3 forms of evidence against Clemens:
1) Statistical. His #s dramatically improved after the dates MacNamee says he injected him.
2) Circumstantial. Testimony by MacNamee who was under oath with federal investigators when he gave testimony to George Mitchell in the Mitchell Report. Also, Andy Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch corroborated Mac's testimony about them using steroids, lending him credibility.
3) Material. Gauze pads, needles, etc., from when Mac injected Clemens, which should have Clemens' DNA on them, as well as residue from the drugs.
And all we have on Clemens' side is what he has said. Seems like a slam dunk case to me, unless the lab tests from the material evidence come up inconclusive.
Clemens did win a Cy Young w/ Toronto in 1997. He met McNamee the following season and won another Cy Young. (Uhoh, Jose Canseco was on the 98 bluejays)...but Roger really can't be that dumb, can he?
Material evidence could have been altered by the trainer back when he still had access to Roger's dna.
true, but when everything's taken together as a whole, including there being zero reason for macnamee to lie about clemens' steroid use, i find it hard to believe the "rocket."
Post a Comment