Dear Cleveland, All Of Northeast Ohio and Cleveland Cavaliers Supporters Wherever You May Be Tonight;
As you now know, our former hero, who grew up in the very region that he deserted this evening, is no longer a Cleveland Cavalier.
This was announced with a several day, narcissistic, self-promotional build-up culminating with a national TV special of his "decision" unlike anything ever "witnessed" in the history of sports and probably the history of entertainment.
Clearly, this is bitterly disappointing to all of us.
The good news is that the ownership team and the rest of the hard-working, loyal, and driven staff over here at your hometown Cavaliers have not betrayed you nor NEVER will betray you.
There is so much more to tell you about the events of the recent past and our more than exciting future. Over the next several days and weeks, we will be communicating much of that to you.
You simply don't deserve this kind of cowardly betrayal.
You have given so much and deserve so much more.
In the meantime, I want to make one statement to you tonight:
"I PERSONALLY GUARANTEE THAT THE CLEVELAND CAVALIERS WILL WIN AN NBA CHAMPIONSHIP BEFORE THE SELF-TITLED FORMER ‘KING’ WINS ONE"
Now, we can all argue whether or not this rant showed the class worthy of an NBA owner. It's certainly going to give pause to other NBA players. Jesse Jackson sees this rant as something more sinister.
He speaks as an owner of LeBron and not the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers. His feelings of betrayal personify a slave master mentality. He sees LeBron as a runaway slave. This is an owner employee relationship — between business partners — and LeBron honored his contract.
LeBron James made north of $60 million in salary while playing basketball for the Cleveland Cavaliers. He made exponentially more than that in endorsements over the same period. In fact, he's made so much money so quickly that James plans on being a billionaire and even befriended Warren Buffet who gave him some financial advice.
I could pretend Jesse Jackson speaks for such a tiny minority that his inflammatory, predictable and misguided remarks about LeBron James and Dan Gilbert are unworthy of rebuke.
But then, I’d have to ignore the mountain of e-mails that poured into my laptop from African-American brothers and sisters making the same argument.
Jesse has a constituency, a passionate group of idiots who believe the best way to combat white-wing political bigots such as Limbaugh and Hannity is with black-wing political bigotry.
And so, in defense of LeBron’s narcissistic ego explosion and Gilbert’s emotional reaction to it, Jesse compared Gilbert to an 18th-century slave owner.
Race relations will never take another step forward if comments like this are not only allowed but endorsed.
Ben Roethlisberger was suspended for six games on Wednesday for violating the NFL's personal conduct policy, the NFL announced.
The Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback also was ordered to undergo a comprehensive behavioral evaluation. Commissioner Roger Goodell will evaluate Roethlisberger's progress before the season and might consider reducing the suspension to four games.
In this past Sunday's sports section of the Chicago Tribune is the amazing story of Thulon Henry. Henry is the half brother of Aurrelious Benn. Benn is the former U of I stand out received that declared early for the NFL and should be picked in the first round.
Henry is 25 years old and will start his first year in the U of I football program this spring. That's because his is an unusual and remarkable journey. When Henry was 18 years old, his family was struggling. He foolishly decided to rob a convenience store he worked at with his uncle. He was caught and wound up spending five years in jail.
He got his second chance when the college of Dupage in Northwest suburbs of Chicago gave him a chance at the junior college level. Henry took full advantage. He wound up the team's captain and eventually on the honor roll. His hard work has earned him a scholarship at the Big Ten school. He's recently married with a two month.
In the pinnacle scene in the movie Quiz Show, the main character, Charles Van Doren, finally comes clean in his own involvement in the scam in which constestants were fed answers ahead of time on the quiz show, 21. That admission was followed by a series of lawmakers congratulating Van Doren for his integrity and honesty in admitting his faults. Finally, after a series of lawmakers congratulated Van Doren, the scene ended with this statement.
When McGwire admitted that he cheated, I shrugged. After all, we already knew that. I know why he admitted it now. Now that he's hitting coach for the Cardinals, he didn't want this to be a distraction so he admitted deep in the offseason. That way it becomes a major story now but it won't be a major destraction as the season goes along.
If that's the reason, I don't really care. I, for one, hope that Mark McGwire spends the rest of his life redeeming himself. I don't much buy his admission or his reasons. To say that he only did steroids to recover for injury is a reason, if that's the reason, and not an excuse. He cheated and he shamed the game. Everyone deserves a second chance and that includes McGwire but that goes forward.
I'm really encouraged that he would step forward," La Russa told ESPN. "As we go along his explanations will be well received."
Selig, in a statement released by Major League Baseball on Monday, said he was pleased with McGwire's admission.
"I am pleased that Mark McGwire has confronted his use of performance-enhancing substances as a player. Being truthful is always the correct course of action, which is why I had commissioned Senator George Mitchell to conduct his investigation. This statement of contrition, I believe, will make Mark's re-entry into the game much smoother and easier," Selig said.
There are others like it. John Kruk was all over ESPN telling everyone that he'll never know how good he could have been if he had cheated the way almost everyone around him did. McGwire, and others like him, robbed guys like John Kruk who played clean. That's what people should focus on. No one should be congratulating McGwire for at long last telling the truth. There's no nobility in that. I hope that McGwire finds peace and redemption but now is the time to confront the fact that he cheated and nothing else.
When is a minor traffic accident not merely a minor traffic accident? It's when that accident involves a celebrity. Since Friday, the media has bordered on near obsession with the traffic accident involving Tiger Woods, a fire hydrant, and a tree. It's not merely a sports story. It's not merely a celebrity story. It's a news story. It's now the story that a Fox News is leading with.
As most people know sometime around 2 in the morning on Friday morning, Tiger Woods got into his SUV, backed out of the driveway, and nailed a fire hydrant and then a tree. That's all we know. We don't know why? Only Woods himself knows why and so far he's not talking. Because he's not, the endless speculation has begun.
As far as mysteries go, this one is among the most boring. How interesting could a traffic accident be? If this was merely a boneheaded move by Woods, I'm sure he can afford the fine. If this was the result of a domestic dispute that's a problem for Woods and his wife. If there was a crime committed, we'll know soon enough.
What's a lot more interesting is how fascinated our society has become in this story. My rule of thumb for any celebrity story is would I care if the same thing were happening to an average person. On that level, this story fails miserably. There's absolutely no to care. Yet, most of us do because it's happening to Tiger Woods.
If ever there was proof of the coarsening nature of our celebrity culture, it this story. A minor traffic accident turns into a major story and a story that involves endless speculation. Worse yet, it's a story that runs the gammet of media: sports, gossip and straight news. All our media isn't only giving attention but endless attention to a traffic accident. We've all become voyeurs. We've all become so fascinated with Tiger Woods that we need to know every detail of his life including the state of his marriage, his driving skills, and by extension we need to know every detail of his life.
The world moves forward. Iran is building a nuclear weapon. Health care moves forward. Dubai is about to default on nearly a hundred BILLION dollars worth of debt and our media is speculating endlessly on a traffic accident. Welcome to our endless obsession with celebrity in all its ugliness.
Michael Gaynor is at it again and responding to my latest expose on his relationship with Michelle Malkin and Anita Moncrief. Frankly,Gaynor is a side show. He's a distraction. Malkin is the main player here and she continues to hide like the coward that I called her. Gaynor is the attack dog for those forces that Malkin deems below her and he's glad to do it.
He's unreadable and insignificant. So, he doesn't matter. He only matters in that he's part of this corrupt relationship. What really matters here is once again I call Michelle Malkin a coward and it's Michael Gaynor attacking me. He also did it very early in the morning which is interesting.
Clearly, however, Michelle Malkin can't fight her own battles. Instead, she has Michael Gaynor attack for her. That's cowardly. That's her M.O. Malkin will attack the New York Times, Washington Post, and other media mercilessly. They have a higher profile and they don't respond. In this case, she can't bring herself to respond herself and instead has Gaynor attack me himself.
The only thing I gathered from the article was that I am protecting President Obama. Anyone that's read my work knows I generally have no use for President Obama. My motivations have nothing to do with that. I wouldn't call Anita Moncrief a whistle blower under any circumstances since I've done many stories about whistle blowers and there's simply a huge difference between the heroism exemplified by a true whistle blower and Moncrief's opportunism. Gaynor refers to an article I wrote months ago, and I simply didn't know her whole story then. She wasn't the subject of the piece, ACORN was. Of course, ACORN was and is targeting her. After all, her theft was less than $2000 whereas Dale Rathke's was in the neighborhood of one million dollars. When a group goes after the $2000 theft but not the one million dollar embezzlement, I'd say they're targeting someone. That ACORN is targeting Anita Moncrief doesn't make her actions heroic. Frankly, she's given that organization plenty of ammunition to target her with. After all, she committed theft and fraud and wrote about it in admission.
Frankly, if someone refers on occasion to Anita Moncrief, or anyone, and calls her a whistle blower, I wouldn't care. It wouldn't matter. Both Gaynor and Malkin write about Anita Moncrief obsessively and they obsessively refer to her as a whistleblower. They have a duty then to provide proper context. Pointing to some article I wrote months ago doesn't provide context. In my last article, I pointed to the story of Dr. David Gossman. He noticed that his employer, Lahey Clinic, had ties to a medical device firm, Medtronics, that was inappropriate. He reported this relationship to administration and he was fired. Anita Moncrief did no such thing. While working at Project Vote, she didn't report on any wrongdoing. In fact, she, herself, engaged in wrongdoing. It was only after she was fired that she reported on the wrong doing. So, if Gaynor and Malkin insist on writing obsessively about her, they must explain to the audience what they mean by whistle blower. That carries an aura of courage and integrity. Moncrief's actions were neither courageous nor had any integrity, but were full of opportunism.
Frankly, this is going round and round at this point, it's boring having a back and forth with Michael Gaynor since his work is unreadable.
Every time Michael Gaynor writes about me, I refer to Bobby Knight. That's because in the movie about him he chewed a player out. The player was dejected. Then a teammate came over and said not to worry. You only need to worry when Knight ignores you. It's when they ignore me that I worry. I'd also suggest to Gaynor that blogging protocol requires that you link to a piece when you write about it. I have no problem linking to his pieces. He should have no problem giving his audience, all four people, the opportunity to read my work in whole.
Epilogue:
MGM (that's an acronym for Malkin, Gaynor and Moncrief) have been making this thesis. They believe that ACORN 8 is too blinded by ideology to go after the president and that's why they refuse to get on board with Anita Moncrief about her expose of the connection between Obama and ACORN. ACORN 8 are all current and former board members of ACORN. They are true believers in the cause of ACORN. In fact, to this day, they want to see ACORN reformed not destroyed.
Yet, this ideology didn't stop them from taking on the leadership of ACORN. They all risked their positions on the board of ACORN to challenge the leadership for a series of crimes and wrongdoings they discovered. So, MGM would have us believe that the same group of people that risked their place on the board of ACORN to expose its corruption are now simultaneously hiding a key piece of ACORN corruption because that would be bad for the president. They are blinded by ideology. Ideology didn't blind them from taking on ACORN but it is from taking on the President. Some of ACORN 8 have been associated with ACORN for two plus decades. That long history didn't stop them from putting ideology aside to take on ACORN. Yet, these same people can't bring themselves to take on the president even though that would take on ACORN as well.
Beyond that, Michael Gaynor has both indicated that he and Michelle Malkin do maintain contact and that they aren't in contact. Here's what he said in a previous piece about me.
I emailed Ms. Malkin making the same point THE DAY BEFORE!
If Ms. Malkin and I were co-conspirators, that biography would have been updated to include Culture of Corruption and I'd have an autographed copy of Culture of Corruption, but we are not, it is not and I do not.
The next time I have the pleasure of meeting Ms. Malkin will be the first time.
So, it appears as though whether Michael Gaynor knows Michelle Malkin depends on the point he's making. Both have said they are in constant contact with Anita Moncrief. No other journalists write nearly as obsessively about her as the two of them. If they aren't in constant contact, maybe Anita Moncrief should make an introduction. Furthermore, if they don't know each other, then why is Michelle Malkin quoting Michael Gaynor, without identifying him, while Gaynor attacks a third party.
Michael Gaynor noted at the time in response to McCray: “Tellingly, Mr. McCray did NOT complain about keeping the information from prosecutors and the public. Perhaps that is because ACORN 8 leaders also kept important information from prosecutors and the public and put off the possibility of legal action to protect then presidential candidate Obama’s election prospects. Incredibly, Mr. McCray essentially claimed that bad leadership is ACORN’s only problem. Mr. McCray admitted that the ACORN 8 are out to replace the current ACORN control group, but the ideological difference is limited…Mr. McCray and the ACORN 8 did not complaint that ACORN has functioned wrongfully as an unofficial arm of the Democrat Party for many years. Instead, Mr. McCray celebrated ACORN’s “effectiveness” and complained only about ACORN leadership corruption.
So, there's only two possibilities. Malkin doesn't know Gaynor. In that case, she quoted someone she doesn't know, didn't identify him, and didn't allow the party, Michael McCray, Gaynor was attacking to respond. On the other hand, the three of them are in constant contact and in that case they have been orchestrating and coordinating these attacks all along. Pick your corruption.
Finally, I like the title of Gaynor's piece, The ACORN 8 Schill is Really Shrill, but he makes the insinuation that I am beholden to ACORN 8 and this is all really being written on their behalf. Keep in mind that Gaynor has no other sources near ACORN, besides Moncrief, and neither does Malkin. I just finished three interviews with Wade Rathke. Let's just say he and ACORN 8 don't see eye to eye. For Gaynor to make that accusation at me is the height of absurdity. He's written obsessively about Anita Moncrief since last spring and he says I'm a shill for someone. I just finished doing three interviews with Wade Rathke and I'm supposed to be a shill for ACORN 8. Is that really a serious accusation?
Anyone that thought we've made progress on the issue of race was in for a rude awakening in the entire affair surrounding Rush Limbaugh's unsuccessful bid to buy the St. Louis Rams. In fact, all of the ugly undercurrents of race, racism, and race baiting were on full display in the affair. It's hard to choose the worst but in my opinion it was this comment by Warren Ballentine.
At the end of what wound up being a heated debate, Warren Ballentine told Juan Williams to "go back to the porch" indicating that Williams was selling out his race in standing up for Limbaugh.
If that was the worst, it had a lot of competition. One MSNBC commentator suggested that Limbaugh would use his ownership power to create a "plantation". MSNBC, CNN, and the Huffington Post all attributed quotes to Limbaugh that simply were never said by him. DeMaurice Smith, head of the Player's Union, suggested that Limbaugh's assention to an owner would create mutiny within the player ranks. Only after the whole fiasco fell apart was it revealed that Smith is a supporter of Obama. Notorious race baiters Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton both suggested that Limbaugh was a racist and thus unfit to own a football team. Some football players suggested they wouldn't play for the Rams if Limbaugh owned the team. (a suggestion that commentator Stephen A. Smith scoffed at)
The NFL saw they were stuck between the proverbial rock and hard place. They chose the path of least resistence, or at least the least resistence they perceived. They threw Limbaugh under the bus rather than getting in the middle of a cultural and race war. That didn't surprise me, and it shouldn't have surprised anyone. The NFL wants to avoid controversy at all costs. Furthermore, the folks that Sharpton and Jackson would fire up could do a lot more damage to the NFL than the folks that are sympathetic to Limbaugh. That doesn't make it just reality.
The only truly racist remark that can be attributed to Limbaugh happened back in 1970 when he told a caller to "take that bone out of your nose". While there's no excusing it, that statement was nearly forty years ago. Limbaugh is on the air for three hours each and everyday and all that can really be attributed to him happened nearly four decades ago. Limbaugh mocks, derides, and makes fun of his opponents. There's no question about that. His opponents saw an opportunity. Whether it was political, racial, or opportunistic, people saw an opportunity to get him. Get him they did. That said, fear not for Limbaugh. He still has his megaphone and his platform. For the most part, people now realize that most of the attacks were totally without legitimacy.
What's really troubling is the randomness of it all. Fergie of Black Eyed Peas is currently a part owner of the Miami Dolphins. She's said plenty in both song and in regular comments that are much more controversial than anything Rush ever said. Yet, it was Rush that was deemed "too divisive". Who was he deemed too divisive by? He was deemed too divisive by his opponents. Fergie is a singer. In that business, you don't get opponents and enemies the way you do in politics. So, you can say all sorts of loopy things and no one deems you divisive. Rush is in the middle of a cut throat business, and so he has enemies. Those enemies can stir the pot and remove him from the NFL. This isn't about right and wrong. It's not about who is and isn't divisive. It's about moment and opportunity. Rush's moment to own a team brought about an opportunity. His opponents took that opportunity and made the most of it. As they say, be careful what you wish for. One of these days, the shoe will be on the other foot and someone else will seize another opportunity. The only thing that suffers is race relations and our culture.
Rush Limbaugh is expected to be dropped from a group bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams, according to three NFL sources.
Dave Checketts, chairman of the NHL's St. Louis Blues and the point man in the Limbaugh group attempting to buy the Rams, realizes he must remove the controversial conservative radio host from his potential role as a minority member in the group in order to get approval from other NFL owners, the sources said.
Conservatives are already calling Rush a sacrificial lamb. That maybe so. It's entirely without any rhyme or reason why a controversial guy like Mark Cuban can own a sports franchise while Rush Limbaugh cannot. It's entirely without rhyme or reason why a race baiter like Jay Z can be a part owner in a sports franchise whereas the racially charged comments by Rush Limbaugh are now deemed unforgiveable.
Still, in the world of the NFL, perception is reality. For reasons that are still unclear, it was Rush Limbaugh that drew the kind of controversy that was deemed unacceptable. It matters not that the most outrageous quotes attributed to him weren't actually said by him. It doesn't even matter that most of those now attacking Rush include race baiters themselves, and football players known for their off field antics as much as for their ability on the field.
None of this is fair, but fairness has nothing to do owning a sports franchise. The reality is that Rush attracts controversy. The National Football League is not a place for society's culture wars to play out. It's a place where the football games play out.
As soon as Rush's name came out, every political opponent and opportunist came out of the woodwork to attack him. Whether or not that's good for Rush, it's bad for the NFL. Ultimately, the best interest of the NFL trumps the best interest of Rush Limbaugh. The attacks on Rush may not be fair. Most that make them are hypocritical and selective in their attacks. Rush's controversial nature doesn't seem to be any different than several that own sports franchise. Yet, in this world perception is reality. Rush's attempt to buy a football has become divisive. The NFL doesn't need that and that's why he had to be pulled out.
The head of the Player's union in the NFL wrote Commissioner Roger Goodell in opposition to Rush Limbaugh's bid for the Rams.
NFL Players executive director DeMaurice Smith on Saturday made a move to solidify the union against a bid by conservative talk show radio host Rush Limbaugh as part of a group that aims to purchase the St. Louis Rams.
In an e-mail to the union's executive committee on Saturday specifically addressing Limbaugh's bid, Smith said, "I've spoken to the Commissioner [Roger Goodell] and I understand that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred.
The article goes on to say that seven players have publicly come out against Rush's bid to buy the Rams. Rush was always a controversial figure in and of itself. He became very controversial in the NFL following his racial comments regarding Donovan McNabb.
This is a tough call. I don't think that Rush is a racist though he certainly made several comments that are racial. Whether it's right or not, if this move divides the league, it's not a good idea. Rush has amassed many enemies in his life and many of them can stir the pot to derail his bid. The good of the NFL is more important than the good of Rush Limbaugh. It appears his bid is going to split the league. In that case, it's not good for the NFL, whether it's fair or not.
Now, I went to another one of these a couple weeks back. At the last one, the Olympic Committee squared off with a group that didn't want the Olympics in Chicago. The difference here was that this particular "town hall" was put on entirely by the Chicago 2016 Olympic Committee. As such, this was something akin to a public propaganda campaign tour. The Olympic committee is holding one in each of the city's 50 wards. The presentation was a big dog and pony show. It had two former Olympians, both now local college softball coaches, on the stage to describe the Olympic experience. They put on a quick power point presentation in which the committee assures the city that: there will be $22.5 billion in economic activity, 315,000 jobs created, and that the city would not pay one single dime t put on the games. It's important to note that these numbers come from a study commissioned from the Olympic Committee itself.
The real fireworks started when the questions started. The questions were about 75-25 skeptical to supporting. The questions ranged from skeptical budgetary issues, displacement of the poor, transparency, to statements of support for how exciting it would be to have Chicago host the Olympics.
One questioner summed up the cynicism of the entire exercise. She wondered why these town halls were being held now a couple months before the bid is decided and not a year and two ago. The bid was officially kicked off in March of 2007. There was little media attention about, it then, and the mayor even snuck in a commitment of $500 million from the city to pay for the games in 2007. (even though he continues to guarantee that the city will pay no money to host the games) The reason they're doing these dog and pony shows now is because the bid has finally received some serious negative publicity in the last few months. First, the mayor sprung on the city the need to sign a host city contract in May which would hold the city liable for any and all expenses above and beyond that which the IOC would set aside in the beginning. Then, there was the revelation that Michael Scott, a major player in the Olympic Committee, secured a sweetheart land contract near Washington Park, where some of the events would be held. Finally, there have been a series of scandals and the debacle regarding the parking meter. As such, one could call these late scheduled town hall meetings a sort of damage control.
The most probing question came from a member of No Games Chicago. No Games Chicago represented the other side at the previous town hall I was at. As the no implies, No Games is trying to stop the games from coming to Chicago. A member asked about their budget projections for the Olympic Village. According to their projections, the village would cost about $1 billion even though that village has about 7000 units while the one in Vancouver will also cost $1 billion even though it has only 1000 units. The committee responded by insisting that their budget has been scrutinized by independent sources and the Chicago Civic Federation will run their own audit later this month.
Speak of the Chicago Civic Federation, one questioner pointed out that the Federation's top award in 2007 went to Pat Ryan. Pat Ryan is one of the top folks on the Olympic Bid Committee. She pointed out that the board and higher ups are full of folks with ties to the Olympic bid. This is very important. That's because Alderman Flores told me last Friday that the Civic Committee's report will be treated with a great deal of deference. If in fact they aren't objective, that report will have little meaning. I confess that I didn't know about the Federation's ties to the Olympic Committee and will be sure to ask the Alderman about that.
I even got a question in. One individual asked how much was going to be spent for "capital projects". In other words, how much will the budget be for all the stadiums, velodromes, and pools. The moderator said that the budget was $980 million. This seemed dubious. Millennium Park cost about $450 million. That was about three times the original budget. Now, the Olympic Committee is proclaiming that the entire Olympic capital project would only cost twice as much as Millennium Park. This seemed dubious and I asked about this. The moderator went into a song and dance about how Millennium Park was a sort of organic project that changed and evolved over time and that wouldn't happen in the Olympics because as she proclaimed, "a track field is just a track field". In other words, the Olympic Committee would have us believe that building multiple tracks, stadiums, and pools is a less complicated project than Millennium Park. That speaks for itself.
There were concerns about crime, affordable housing, and schools. The questioner that crystallized the issue for me was senior citizen that identified herself as living in the 46th ward for 58 years. She screamed about how an area by Addison and Sheridan (right next to Lake Michigan and about four blocks from Wrigley Field) that was reserved for a green area set aside for birds was going to have 13 Olympic sized tennis courts built near it and thus ruin the green area. She emphatically screamed, "the citizens of the ward weren't consulted and we don't want it" (referring of course to the tennis courts) I had a chance to speak with her afterwards. She believes that her Alderman, Helen Shiller, has made a deal with Mayor Daley. Shiller is a big proponent of low and moderate income housing. She serves a ward with a fairly health population of poor and moderate income folks. It's seen a dramatic increase in high rise and condos during the boom. Now, she's gotten a huge political victory. That victory is a the Wilson Yards project. The Alderman recently secured construction of this project and this is a major construction of low and moderate income housing in her ward. This lady believes that the Alderman received funding for her pet project (which is listed on her web site) in exchange for support for the Olympics.
Obviously, we'll never know how deals were made when they were made behind closed doors. The problem is that games have been done entirely without the public's input. These 50 ward by ward town halls were done only in response to public outcry. During the debate, I felt as though the city is on the brink of its own tea party over this issue. The Olympics is all part of a deeper web of corruption and cynicism embedded in Chicago. Most people see the Olympics as nothing more than a boon for Daley and his lackeys. They don't believe the pols and the Committee when they claim that there won't be any tax payer funds used. I feel as though the city is on the brink of critical mass and I'm almost ready to predict a tea party over the Olympics though that might be more wishful thinking than objective analysis.
To Chicago, the Olympic bid is much like health care is to the country. The politicians and the elites tell the rest of us how great it will be, while the public at large doesn't want it. Most polls suggest the residents aren't terribly excited about the Olympics. The public definitely doesn't want it if tax payer money is used. There is a level of distrust of city government in Chicago never seen during Daley's tenure. The difference between the Olympics and health care is that Daley rules Chicago in a way that Obama only wishes he could rule D.C. Unlike D.C., whatever Daley wants he gets. As such, even though the public is overwhelmingly against spending all this money for the Olympics, the city will move forward regardless of what the public thinks. There may still be time and I for one hope that a Chicago Tea Party is formed to take on all of the corruption that surrounds the Olympics bid.
Finally, it appears that I should have gone outside after the town hall because Alderman Shiller was chased out by a group of protesters protesting gang violence.
The most talked abut and controversial sports story surrounds the signing of Michael Vick by the Philadelphia Eagles. Before I weigh in, I should disclose a few things. First, Vick was a favorite of mine in fantasy football. That's because his out of this world talent made him the perfect, potentially, fantasy football player. There was nothing more exciting in fantasy football than watching Michael Vick when he was on your team. Also, I am not especially an animal lover. I don't have any pets and I never have had any pets. (as I say, I have enough trouble taking care of myself)
There's no excusing what Vick did and no words can describe the brutality of his acts. I don't know if Michael Vick is sorry about what he did or going through the motions in order to get back on the field. He's paid his debt to society but that doesn't mean he deserves to play football, let alone in the NFL. Playing in the NFL, as the cliche goes, is a privilege not a right. There is no reason that anyone should ever embrace or forgive him. If a sports fan treats him as a villain for the rest of his life, that is a position I can understand. His acts of brutality were not merely criminal but sociopathic. I don't know that he resolved whatever pathology caused him to engage in dog fighting.
That said, I am willing to forgive him and have no problem with him joining the NFL with the Eagles. On one level, my reason is frivilous. Vick is such a unique athlete that I want to see what his potential can finally amount to. His skills and talent come along once in a lifetime and it doesn't seem right that they won't have a chance to blossom to see how he can change and affect the game. His combination of speed and arm strength has never been seen and he has the ability to change the game. If he doesn't come back, the game can never know what is possible of the position of quarterback.
Beyond that, I have a more human reason. While his crimes are brutal and unspeakable, there is no way for him to go back and change them. Ruining the rest of his life doesn't change what he did. Maybe, on some level, he deserves to live the rest of his life in infamy working at the local grocery store barely struggling to get by. How does that help anyone? It won't change what he did.
Vick's life is ruined in a way that no one can imagine. He must constantly walk around in shame. There must be a self loathing that he is expected to have. Anything less and everyone assumes that he isn't remorseful. So, do we want, as a society, to have him ruin the rest of his life, or do we want, as a society, to give him a chance to redeem himself?
I know that he treated life with a lot less regard than I am giving to his, but I'd like to believe that his time in prison has shown him the evil of what he did. I'd like to believe that when he says he'll be part of the solution he means it. Maybe, for what he did, he doesn't deserve redemption, but I, for one, would rather that the next chapter in Michael Vick's life ends in redemption not in misery. Some people can't forgive Vick. The brutality of his actions are simply too much. (I hope those same folks don't forgive Ray Lewis and Donte Stallwoth either, who's acts were even worse) I am not one of those folks. As a football fan, I forgive Michael Vick and hope the rest of his life and career leads to redemption.
The folks at No Games Chicago refer to the manner in which the Chicago Olympics 2016 committee comes up with their numbers as "Enron accounting". Enron famously hid their costs by moving those costs off the books. As such, they "cooked" their books to the tune of hundreds of millions in inflated profits for years until their pseudo ponzi scheme was discovered and the company disintegrated.
The 2016 Chicago Olympic committee claims that no tax payer has or will be used to put on the games. Yet, the city has already spent $80 million to purchase the former Michael Reese Hospital. That structure will be torn down and turned into the Olympic Village. The cost of the Olympic Village will be $1 billion. In fact, according to a recent Chicago Tribune report, the price tag at $1.18 billion. That includes $100 million for streets and sanitation and the aforementioned $80 million to purchase the property. Even this figure is likely light. This figure doesn't include about $11 million to demolish the site, $1 million to provide security, and tens of millions to clear and clean the medical waste that will be caused.
Furthermore, construction of the Olympic Village will cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $1 billion. This isn't counted into the Olympic Committees figures either. That's because the city expects to find some private construction company to foot the bill. (then afterwards, the same construction company will turn the village into condos and presumably the project would pay for itself) In fact, in both Vancouver, which will have the winter Olympics in 2010, and in London, which will have the summer games in 2012, their citizens heard the exact same thing. Now, both cities are footing the bill for construction of the Olympic Village.
On top of this, the city is creating a Tax Incremental Fund to pay for all this. A TIF, as they're called, is when property taxes are capped for their intended purpose and then the rest of the bill goes into a general fund, or even a slush fund. If the Olympics will be paid for, why would the city need to create a TIF to pay for the Olympic Village? That's what the folks at the Tribune company asked.
Asked how this squares with continuous pledges not to use taxpayer money for the games, Chicago 2016 spokesman Patrick Sandusky said, the village infrastructure wouldn't siphon money from existing tax bases, but would pay for itself.
"There's no village there now, so there are no incremental taxes," he said.
In other words, they haven't started collecting the taxes yet to pay for this. The Committee says that if they don't get the games, they have up to five years to sell the property and expect to make a profit on the $80 million investment. Of course, in the meantime, that is a loss they aren't accounting for.
The "Enron" accounting doesn't end there. The Olympic Committee says that the games will pay for themselves. Yet, the expenses are all projected. It's been centuries since this city has had a project come in within budget. Millenium Park was originally scheduled to cost about $150 million and wound up costing about three times that. The Olympics will cost exponentially more than that and these projects are years in the future. Furthermore, streets and sanitation costs along with costs form security aren't factored into the expenses. In Vancouver, the estimate for security costs will be $1 billion.
It's about seven years before the games and the city is already $100 million. Chicago's security costs will be exponentially greater than that. So, in effect, there's no way to know just how much the games will cost. In effect, bringing the games to Chicago gives the mayor a blank check to spend on putting them on.
Yesterday's Chicago Tribune broke a major story of corruption involving Chicago's Olympics effort that unfortunately no one is surprised about. Michael Scott Sr. is a local businessman, power broker, and political insider. He's of course a prominent contributor to Daley's campaigns. He is also on the 2016 Olympic bid committee. In fact, Scott is on the Outreach Advisory Committee for the Olympic bid which is tasked with making sure that the economic benefit from the Olympics is spread fairly. So, it's ironic, if not surprising, that the Tribune reported yesterday that Michael Scott's real estate development company was involved in a transaction near Douglas Park. Douglas Park is located on the Southwest Side of the city. The park will also be host to several Olympics events including a cycling velodrome and a BMX bike course. The development of the park for the Olympics will almost certainly be a boon to the surrounding community and thus make all land in the area significantly more expensive. As such, this investment, if Chicago gets the Olympics, should be a boon for Scott.
The 2016 Olympics will guarantee billions, if not, tens of billions in contracts that the city will have to dole out for construction, security, street cleaning, etc. There is already a standard operating procedure for how these sorts of contracts get doled out now. They go to Daley's friends, admirers, and allies. Only now the budget is infinitesimal compared to what it will be if the Olympics comes here.
The problem of course is that this particular deal is almost certainly one of many in which political insiders will use their influence to move city contracts their way. There is a web of corruption and conflicts here that are the standard operation procedures for any corrupt endeavor. When I wrote my expose of Grady Hospital, I pointed out that its one time Chairman of the Board, Robert Brown, once directed a massive expansion to his own architecture firm. Here we have Michael Scott in a position to know and suggest the locations of economic developments in Chicago as a result of the Olympics at the same time he is angling for a real estate deal in an area that will be developed.
Scott is himself no stranger to corruption. Here's how the Tribune characterized previous run ins with influence peddling.
He was criticized in 1990 for his insider connections when he left his job as city government's chief cable administrator to go work for a cable company.
Scott is also President of the Chicago Board of Education. In that role, he has been linked to a separate and concurrent story of Chicago corruption. There is currently an internal probe going on about influence peddling at some of the top magnet and charter schools in the city. We recently learned that a top aide of Michael Scott's used "back channels" to get a relative into the presigious Whitney Young High School. (the alma mater of our current first lady Michelle Obama)
The relative of a top aide to Chicago Board of Education President Michael Scott got into prestigious Whitney Young High School through back channels before withdrawing after questions arose, in a case that's now part of an internal probe, sources told the Tribune on Wednesday.
District officials found out earlier this year about the incident involving Gregory Minniefield, a senior manager for the board. His relative was accepted into Young for the upcoming school year outside the regular application process, and officials "flagged" the admission, sources said. Shortly after, the relative was withdrawn from the ultracompetitive school, sources said.
In fact, Scott was recently called in front of a grand jury on the matter. The investigation into all of this influence by the school system is being conducted by CPS CEO Ron Huberman. When news of that scandal broke, Mayor Daley expressed "confidence" in Huberman. (Huberman hasn't yet been linked to any criminality or unethical behavior) Daley should have confidence in Huberman. After all, Huberman was recently his own Chief of Staff for about two years. Prior to that he ran the same CTA that Robinson is on the board of for two years. Prior to that, he was a beat cop. This is all very reasonable. Since cronies are given free reign to use the full weight and power of the city's resources for their own benefit, it only makes sense that another crony should investigate them when their influence peddling is discovered.
This latest revelation should put to rest any belief that Ramirez' recent positive test was an anomaly. As for Ortiz, if this report is accurate that means that his entire career has been manufactured. Ortiz was a marginal player until he arrived in Boston in 2003 and his stats exploded. To put it into perspective, in all his time in Minnesota, seven years, he only had 57 home runs total. He had 31 homers in 2003 and 30 or more for five straight years in Boston. Yet, his time in Boston coincides with this positive drug tests.
This indicates that Ortiz was a marginal player that struggled to make a major league roster. Then he began cheating and he wound up being a perennial All Star. Much like Eric Gagne, there is now strong evidence that Ortiz manufactured a career and a life by cheating. If the timeline is accurate in both the Mitchell report and in this latest revelation, then both were marginal players, began cheating, and turned into perennial all stars. Both wound up in the record books, made tens of millions, and Ortiz even won two World Series titles during periods when they cheated. (again assuming everything is accurate)
To put this into perspective, this latest revelation should makes both World Series titles by the Red Sox totally corrupted and thus ought to be voided. Both Ramirez and Ortiz were the two heavy hitters in the middle of that line up for both titles. If they cheated to produce their numbers, then how else should we treat those titles.
The problem with all of these after the fact revelations is that in reality almost everything that happened in the fifteen years or so that steroids were prevalent renders almost all results worthless. If we knew the full truth, then we'd likely find out that major stars on almost all World Series winners were cheating. If cheaters were major contributors to a World Series title, how can it be judged as anything but tainted?
For baseball, this all couldn't be happening in a worse way. The sport would like nothing more than to move forward. Instead, we are treated to random revelations that remind everyone just how corrupt it all was for years. Unfortunately, the whole thing is much deserved. The sport pretended that none of this was happening when systemic steroid use lead directly to more homers and that lead directly to more fans. Now, some would like to move on and forget that anything happened. Of course, that's impossible. Baseball reaped the financial rewards of mass cheating in the form of more fans. The powers that be took on a see no evil hear no evil approach. The sport is now in an untennable position. Fifteen years produced so much cheating that everything that happened at the time is ultimately rendered worthless. All records and championships are rendered meaningless. How does the sport move on from there? The sport would like to put that inconvient fact behind it quickly but instead we have a drip, drip of bad news that comes out and it reminds us all just how bad it was.
When I heard that it was reported that Sammy Sosa had failed a drug test in 2003, I thought it was anti climactic. After all, it was by now common knowledge that Sosa had in fact been cheating for years. Sammy Sosa was my favorite baseball player starting in the mid 1990's. I often defended him against charges that he wasn't clutch as well as a cheater. Finally, when he was traded to the Baltimore Orioles and suddenly saw his production get cut by about 60% even I couldn't be blind to the obvious. So, it had been years since I made my peace with the idea that my favorite baseball player had created most of his success through cheating.
The only thing that this revelation does is continue the ongoing debates that years of mass cheating are bound to create. There is now an idea being floated that sports writers that they create categories of baseball players. These categories would be used as a guide as to exactly how much evidence there needs to be against a certain player in order for them to no longer be eligible for the hall of fame. This is what the game has come down to. We are now trying to figure out just how evidence there needs to be of cheating in order to exclude someone from the hall.
This debate has been mostly in the context of Ivan Rodriguez. Rodriguez has never been linked to any steroid use except in the book of Jose Canseco. Besides this, the only other evidence is purely speculative. For instance, Rodriguez just happened to lose about 20-30 pounds of muscle in 2004. That just happened to be the first year that baseball would implement testing. Now, as a friend of mine often says..."hey, he wanted to lose all that weight to help with his defense". That he looks like a smaller version of himself in the late 1990's must all be just mere coincidence. Yet, at this point, his purported steroid use is only mere conjecture. Presumably, any standard would NOT include merely being mentioned by Jose Canseco. As such, if such a standard were to be created, Ivan Rodriguez would be eligible.
The problem with the entire debate is that it focuses on things that are ultimately fairly trivial. The Hall of Fame is important. The records are important. Here's what no one wants to face up to though. I was at the game at which Sammy Sosa hit his 60th homerun in 1998. The Cubs came back from down seven twice to win 16-12. It was the most exciting baseball game I'd ever witnessed and ultimately all that excitement was totally manufactured. In fact, about fifteen years of baseball were totally manufactured. It wasn't that one or two people cheated but that so many people cheated that ultimately the integrity of everything related to that time period is totally void.
Nothing done during that time period can be trusted. No record, no result, no victory, can be trusted. So many people cheated that none of the results ultimately mean anything. Someone in front of me said that we had just witnessed history after Sosa's 60th. In fact, we hadn't witnessed anything at all but a cheater put up the sort of numbers that cheating create. That wasn't history but excitement manufactured by cheating.
The term "integrity of the game" is often overused. During all those years the integrity wasn't just threatened but obliterated. What no one can face up to is that this fifteen years or so nothing that happened in baseball meant anything. None of the results meant anything. All our heroes turned out to be cheaters.
In a letter to the school the NCAA says an unknown person took the SAT for a player, with his knowledge, and then the player used that test to get into Memphis. The NCAA said the athlete in question played for the Tigers in the 2007-08 season and the 2008 NCAA tournament. The only person who played just that season was Rose.
...
The Chicago Sun-Times reported Thursday that someone with access to Rose's academic records at Simeon High School changed a D to a C on his transcript. The newspaper reported that Rose was one of four athletes at the school whose grades were boosted for a one-month period after their June 2007 graduation and then changed back after the bogus transcripts were sent to colleges.
If the allegations are accurate not only did Rose have another student take the SAT's for him but he even had his grade changed temporarily. All of this lead Rose to being able to qualify to play for Memphis in their run to the national championship game. It means that Memphis played that entire season with an ineligible player. They cheated the entire basketball world.
Worse yet, all those directly involved are now not around to face any punishment. Rose has taken his skills to a multi million dollar contract in the NBA with the Bulls. John Calipari has moved onto Kentucky. The program was likely to sputter without Calipari and now it will be damaged in a way that will take a very prolonged time to recover.
What's more troubling is the lack of outrage by most of the media. This story has certainly gotten coverage but not nearly the coverage it deserves. If true, Rose cheated and by extension so did the entire Memphis basketball program. He didn't have the grades to qualify to play Division 1 college basketball so he cheated to be able to do it. That's absolutely no different than Manny Ramirez using performance enhancing drugs. Cheating is cheating and one reason it goes on so often is that there is a lack of moral outrage when it happens. Ramirez is currently in line to get enough fan votes to make the all star game.
Everything about the way Derrick Rose plays basketball says he cares about the concept of "team." He's unselfish. He's a wonderful passer. He's as far away from having a me-first attitude as a worker ant is.Everything about the allegations of fraudulent test-taking and grade-changing suggest he or the people around him never really cared about anything beyond his pursuit of an NBA career.
...
If the NBA were a realistic goal from early on, how much could Rose's state titles at Simeon and his one year at Memphis have meant to him? That's the problem with the AAU-dominated world in which we live. There's a toe-tapping impatience all around when it comes to an extremely talented basketball player. We're always talking about "the next level," with the clear implication that the current level doesn't mean squat.
Morrissey makes the point that this case points out the absurdity of not allowing those that clearly want to pursue a basketball career of not pursuing it at their own schedule. In Europe, players are allowed to enter into basketball academy in their youths. They can play for money in their teens. In the U.S. we force our NBA players to be at least one year out of high school forcing most high school prospects to spend a year in college. That's the only reason Rose even went to Memphis, because he was forced.
All of this maybe true but none of it excuses the cheating that Rose engaged in. One of the biggest problems with cheating in sports is that we often refuse to call it for what it is. Folks like Gaylord Perry spend their entire career cheating and they were rewarded with an induction into the Hall of Fame. The stigma of cheating has faded and the rewards have long outweighed the potential pitfalls. Last summer, I wrote about Eric Gagne. Here was a baseball player that was a marginal talent. He was barely making major league rosters. Then, he exploded onto the scene suddenly and he now owns an MLB record for consecutive saves and a Cy Young. We have since learned that during the time of his dominance he was also mentioned in the Mitchell Report. In other words, not only his entire career but frankly life has been manufactured. He cheated his way to fame, fortune, records, and wealth. He also took all those away from someone that didn't cheat like him. His punishment for all this is a current contract valued in the neighborhood of 10 million yearly.
Rose cheated and wound up playing Division 1 basketball when he should have played at a junior college or in Europe. As a result, the team he played for wound up going to the National Championship game when they likely would have been knocked out in the regionals. Almost everyone associated with that team is now gone and bettered professionally and financially of their association with Rose. All of it helped ultimately by cheating. So far, no one who deserves any of the punishment will get punished. So, where is the lesson?
Unless you are fanatic for baseball or sports in general, you may have missed one of the greatest upsets in sports history. In a game that started this morning, the Netherlands defeated the Dominican Republic in the World Baseball Classic. To put this upset in perspective, the Domincan Republic has 23 current major league players while the Netherlands has 2. The Domincan Republic had a line up stacked with such names as David "Big Papi" Ortiz, Hanley Ramirez, and Miguel Tejada, while the Netherlands was anchored by major league journey man Sidney Ponson.
While all Americans are of course rooting for the U.S. in the Classic, if you are rooting for the globalization of baseball then you are rooting for teams like the Netherlands, Italy, and Australia. Teams like the U.S., the Dominican Republic, Japan, and Cuba are filled with players that would be perennial all stars in the majors. Most of the other teams have a wide range of talent. For instance, the Canadian team have two perennial MVP candidates in Justin Morneau and Russell Martin along with journeyman players like Mike Johnson.
This range of talent allows the up and comer to make a name for themselves by competing well against top pros. For instance, the 2006 WBC was the coming out party of Daisike Matusaka and he landed a multi million Dollar contract with the Red Sox directly as a result of it. You can bet that several players on the Netherlands will be looked at closely by MLB scouts in their next game. In fact, professional baseball in the Netherlands has been played since 1922, however it takes a serious backseat in that country to sports like soccer. You can bet, though, that if the Netherlands wins their next game and makes it to the medal round that the country will take notice. In fact, you can bet that at the next classic the Netherlands will have a lot more than 2 major leaguers on its roster.
Baseball has been able to spread all throughout North America, Latin America, and now the Far East. Only a few years ago, it was only mainly Japan in the Far East that produced major league players at any consistent level. The Classic allows countries like Korea and China to showcase their talent against major league calliber talent. A great performance in the Classic against the best in the world is the best way to stand out with such a massive amount of professional leagues in the world.
Baseball has become partially globalized. Yet, it has a long way to go before it is truly globalized. the World Baseball Classic is one of the best routes toward total globalization. Upsets like the Netherlands over the Dominican Republic do more than decades of player development. True globalization of baseball only takes a few more upsets on the scale of the Netherlands over the Domincan Republic.
Sometime between the cancellation of the World Series, the home run race of 1998, Barry Bonds breaking Hank Aaron's record, Congressional hearings, and Alex Rodriguez' admission to using steroids, it appears that Commissioner Bud Selig has finally found religion on cheating in baseball.
Suddenly, Commissioner Selig is angry about and he's ready to take drastic action. He is floating the idea of punishing A-Rod for his admission that he used steroids between 2001-2003. Now, far be it for me to defend A-Rod, however this seems like an awfully random and draconian punishment. After all, the rules of baseball at the time, under the direction of Selig, didn't technically outlaw steroids. Furthermore, A-Rod only tested positive in a test that was supposed to be anonymous and used only for surveying purposes.
Furthermore, A-Rod is not the only person to have failed said test and he's not the only player to admit prior cheating. If Selig takes disciplinary action against A-Rod wouldn't he also have to punish other admitted cheaters like Jason Giambi and Andy Pettite? Wouldn't he have to also punish the other 103 folks that failed the same test that A-Rod did?
Of course, Selig isn't done floating drastic action. Selig is also considering putting an asterisk next to Barry Bonds' all time home run record. Of course, this raises other questions. If Bonds' record needs an asterisk, doesn't Roger Maris also deserve to have the single season record as well. After all, isn't there just as much evidence against Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa as Barry Bonds? A friend of mine had a much more draconian idea. He said that we should put an asterisk next each and every record set during the period beginning in 1998 and ending in 2003. As such, Greg Maddux consecutive record for 15 win seasons would also have an asterisk even though we're all certain he wasn't cheating. That maybe draconian but its fair in its medievel punishment.
Then again, you all have to give Selig some slack. After all, he is a late comer to the righteous indignation at systemic cheating in the game he has presided over for fifteen years plus. He wasn't nearly so outraged when cheating brought records and fans came back to the game as a result. It's only now that the cheating has finally come home to roost, put the game and everyone it it in an untennable position, that Selig has found the religion of being against steroids in baseball.
The whole thing is unseemly. For more than a decade, either Selig knew what was going on and didn't care, or he simply didn't want to know what was going on. While he looked the other way, the cancer spread and caused a black eye that will take decades and generations to heal. Now that the game has suffered irreperable damage from his lack of oversight, Selig finally finds religion. Suddenly, he treats cheating with righteous indignation. The cynicism is overwhelming. If he were really a man of courage, he would shown this sort of indignation in 1998 while it was all festering. He would have won no favors. He likely would have lost his position as commissioner. In fact, it's not even clear if anyone would have ever noticed his courage. His action then might have stopped the momentum before it grew and it's likely no one would have realized how big it might have grown. Had he done it then, that would have been real courage. Instead, he wields righteous indignation now long after the problem has become irreversible.
Steroids have probably been around for decades, and the current explosion probably had its roots in the 1980's at the earliest. Still, to appreciate the explosion of steroids in baseball I would start with another year, 1994. That year the player's strike ultimately ended the season and there was no World Series played. By the time baseball came back the next season, attendance and ratings were down. The next several years the sport was in a spiral down. Interest was down and fans seemed to refuse to forgive the sport for cancelling the World Series.
The sport seemed to be spiraling into oblivion and no one in power could figure out how to regain interest. All of this continued until 1998. That's when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa began their monumental chase for Roger Maris' single season home run record. The rumors were out there but no one fans, players, or management wanted to face up to the realization that this race was chemically induced. Instead, everyone wanted to idealize and pretend as though two players chased a near forty year record through merely a remarkable athletic achievement. By the end, not only was a monumental record broken but baseball was back in favor.
Following the 1998 season, attendance grew again and so did ratings on television. The problems caused by the work stoppage were all solved by the home run race. That both competitors, McGwire and Sosa, cheated to create this race was overlooked and dismissed. Baseball had found its golden goose. With baseballs flying out of ballparks at remarkable rates, attendance and ratings were also finding new heights.
With this baseball was creating a monster. The attention that Sosa and McGwire received was contagious and steroid use was exploding at rates that were alarming. One baseball writer once surmised that he believed that 90% of MLB was on steroids.
Now, MLB was facing a new crisis. The attendance crisis was resolved by the homerun race. Yet, the home run race was created by cheating. Now, the cheating was out of control. Baseball was in a very tenuous position. Records were being broken all over the place and no one knew who cheated their way to the record. For years, baseball simply refused to do anything about. Only in 2003, did baseball finally test. Yet, this test was anonymous and only to guage how prevalent it was. Baseball refused to do anything of substance until Congress finally stepped in. Only under the threat of Congressional mandate did baseball finally institute policy that had some teeth.
That's what adds insult to injury. Baseball screwed up the sport because millionaires couldn't agree with billionaires how to split up the pie. As such, we had no World Series in 1994. The fans rejected the game. In order to get the game back in favor, homers started flying out at record rates. Yet, they were flying out only because the hitters were cheating. Baseball looked the other way because it was bringing fans back. Now, baseball has no easy answers. Records are falling and no one knows who is clean. There is no way to punish fairly. Yet, this systemic cheating was allowed to go on because that's what brought the fans back.
Of course, it goes without saying that Barry Bonds, like everyone else, is Innocent until proven guilty. Yet, if the reports are true, then Barry Bonds fell prey several of the deadly sins. He exhibited the same character flaws that fall upon individuals everyday.
1) Envy
If the reports are correct, then Barry Bonds began using steroids because the attention that both Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa received in 1998. In 1998, he hit a pedestrian 37 home runs. This was pedestrian compared to the 70 and 66 for Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa. We can only assume that Bonds knew that both Sosa and McGwire got to their totals through cheating. All the attention showered on the two was something that Bonds yearned for. As such, began cheating nearly immediately following the 1998 season. By 2001, Bonds had broken the home run record himself when he hit 73 homers. By 1998, Bonds was already a hall of famer, and one of the greatest of all time, but that wasn't enough. He was envious of the two new superstars and that envy caused him to compromise the game that gave him everything.
2)Pride
His grand jury testimony was sealed. Furthermore, he would have received full immunity for any crime he would have admitted to under oath. Yet, Bonds couldn't bring himself to admit to cheating. Instead, he claimed that he took steroids unknowingly. Rather than coming clean at the most important moment, he had far too much pride to admit that he did anything wrong. It was this very pride that now puts him on the brink of jail.
3) Gluttony
By 1998, Bonds was on his way toward 500 career home runs for certain. He had a good chance to get to 600 home runs. He even had an outside chance to break 700 and become the all time home run king. This, he could have done without cheating. His career was already remarkable. He was a certain hall of famer, and he would have been on every one's short list for all time great outfielders. Yet, this wasn't enough. He wanted even more. He wanted something that even his great skill couldn't reach naturally. So, he cheated. His gluttonous desire for more greatness than he already had was his final deadly sin.
Please note. I welcome any and all comments from any political perspective. I will not stand or approve any swearing, and personal attacks will likely also not be approved.
