So, the weather forecast in Boston last night? Rain. Downpours, even. Through the whole game. Riddle me this, folks: If it's clear that there is no way an entire game can be played, why even start? It was raining when the game began, you knew it was going to rain hard very shortly. What, did I close my eyes and the game got transported to Landshark Stadium (I love that name...no, ma'am, I'm a porpoise), where the gate might actually matter? What difference does it make in Boston, where the team is printing money? In case you didn't notice, ump, half the ticketholders weren't even there, because it was FUCKING POURING. Ohhhh, but this is the only time we play the Marlins, had to get the game in to avoid any inconvenience, you say! Well, I'll tell you what inconvenience is: it's being on the short end of a 2-1 decision after less than six full innings of play because the downpour everyone predicted actually came to pass! In fact, it's still pouring here this morning, two hours north. Idiots. A game lost for no good reason. That really fries me, especially considering the Yanks lost too and it was a good opportunity to further the lead. But noooooooo....can't inconvenience anybody at Fenway Park! No sirree Bob!
Of course, I wouldn't be quite so ticked off if the Sox had managed any offense at all off a guy who sucks on any other given day, but managed to look Kofax-esque against the Sox last night. WTF was that? One hit over (almost) six innings? In the meantime, Jon Lester wasn't great but at least he was mostly getting out of his jams (I know, it's hard to get out of a jam that goes to the Volvo sign, but you know what I mean) Ummm, a little help here, guys?
Oh, well. Blame it on the rain.
Braves are coming to town tonight. Now, I generally like interleague play (at Fenway Park, anyway. I think the NL plays by knuckle-dragging, neanderthal rules. Who the hell really wants to see pitchers hit anymore? One, two, three, grab some bench. It's like watching quarterbacks play point guard. One game, one set of rules, folks.) but eighteen games is really too much for my taste. Nine would be sufficient. But I digress...for some reason, I just can't stand the Braves. Probably has to do with Chipper Jones and Bobby Cox. They would be a really good team for Dice-K to break out of his funk against.
I am not a racist, but it worries me how many latino players play in the Majors these days. I read it's like 35-40%, and that there are only around 8% black players left, and then a small percent being Asian and the rest are white guys. What's the deal here? Pretty soon, teams will have more than half of their players being Spanish speaking only. Is there not enough talent coming out of America? The Colleges and Universities? What's going on here. What got me thinking about it was this photo I saw on Yahoo sports from the Mets/Marlins game today when their was a fight. Check it out. I realized that every player or coach in this caption was Spanish, except for Dan Uggla. Sandy Alomar Sr., Miguel Olivo, Jose Reyes, Fredi Gonzalez and Miguel Cabrera are all hispanic and in the picture frame. It really made me wonder, and then I took a look at all of the 30 teams rosters, and there are so many Dominican Republic, Cubans, Venezuelans, etc. I don't have a problem with this, but come on, don't we have a big talent pool here in America? I can understand that hispanics might represent 10-15 % of the majors, but it's closing in on 40%. And these guys aren't homegrown talent, they are foreigners coming to America to play baseball, some of them fleeing Cuba illegally to come here, i.e. Betancourt from the Mariners. I don't have a problem with a smaller %, but one day, the hispanics might make up 75% of baseball, like blacks make up 75% of football and 85-90% of basketball, and as a white guy, you start to say, "where did all the white athletes go??" We have hockey, but that's about it. Does anybody else feel this way?
Money quote here? "I don't have a problem with a smaller %, but..." In other words, come on in, play ball, but only a few of you, and not to the point where you threaten my white privilege. Sounds very familiar to anyone who's been reading the prolific Buchanan for a while: "If we do not get control of our borders, by 2050 Americans of European descent will be a minority in the nation their ancestors created and built. No nation has ever undergone so radical a demographic transformation and survived...The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted by a different people."
This dude is making a similar argument-if baseball doesn't get control of it's borders, there won't be any white people playing ball, and where will that leave us? First, those brown Catholics were taking all the plum jobs in slaughterhouses and sugar fields, then they were forcing Spanish down our throats, and NOW they're taking over MLB! Oh, the horror!!! Pretty soon we'll ALL be watching ESPN Deportes!!!
(Insert eye rolling emoticon here)
Bottom line? Buddy, anytime you have to preface a statement with, "I'm not a racist," then you are making a racist statement-and a stupid one at that. I mean, MLS must have at least as high a proportion of Caucasians on their rosters as hockey does...right?
According to Kevin Kiernan at the freak show known as the NY Post, the Red Sox have an unexpected ringer:
First off, a disclaimer-I never read Schilling's blog. Ever. I have absolutely no interest in watching the guy polish his own dong, frankly, or make excuses for George Bush. That doesn't mean I don't think he has a right to say whatever he wants-I mean, I do the same thing-but I'm just not interested in hearing it.
However, I was inadvertantly directed to a post over on the WEEI page (where right wing freakazoids breed like rabbits) entitled "Shocked? You Just Can't Be Anymore," a self-righteous diatribe over Alex Rodriguez and how Mr. Sanctomony never took steroids in his whole widdle life (whatever, Curt. You're the only guy in the world who can make me feel like defending ARod.) In reading the post-the usual preening Schilling claptrap, don't bother going there if you haven't already read it-I couldn't help but notice what came before and after it. Schilling, in concert with the rest of the right wing, is practically self-immolating over the fact that Barack Obama has been elected president and everything he believed to be true over the past thirty years has been exposed as nothing but one big self-serving conservative lie. Like the rest of the goose-steppers, he even quotes Karl Marx to promote his point. What's most amusing, though, is that he hasn't got the smarts to put it into words himself-he's using his blog to recycle the words of others. The far-right Palin-loving Charles Krauthammer is reproduced in full, for example. So is the far-left Paul Krugman, as Schilling tries to make it appear he's giving equal weight to ALL points of view. But, you see, while Krauthammer's piece is introduced as being recommended by a friend who is "educated and versed in finance" (probably a guy like the right-wing Steven Moore, a WSJ economist who said we were in great shape a year ago) Krugman's piece is from "a ‘left wing’ mouthpiece that has never had issues reporting ‘facts’ that aren’t, as facts."
What a complete, passive aggressive asshole. You think I could let that lie? No. My response:
“I have no issues reading and hearing from any side in an argument and hearing input that is relevant and truthful.”
Which is, of course, why you IMMEDIATELY-and insidiously-dismissed the column as coming from the left wing NYT. While the eidtorial page itself is definitely left wing, it’s very fair to say the reporting is neutral (who do you think broke the Whitewater story?), and the Times has given *more* than enough face time to neoconservative propaganda machine and Palin apologist Bill Kristol (who told us the Iraqis would NEVER descend into sectarian madness, they’re all so secular), conservative pseudointellectual gasbag David Brooks, and torture cheerleaders/apologists John Yoo and John Bolton, to name just a few.
Grow up, and stop using that tired “media bias” argument. It would also be nice if you could actually write a post yourself explaining your views, instead of falling back on the intellectually lazy postion of reproducing the works of smarter and more articulate people on either side of the aisle. Or, you could just stick to sports, which you actually know something about.
I'm still in "your comment is awaiting moderation" mode. We'll see if it gets published, and if I get a snappy answer from Mr. Red Light himself.
So here we are in the wilderness between the NFL and MLB-yes, I know the Celtics are playing and I do watch them, but the NBA just isn't the same for me-and then lah-dee-dah, this comes along the wire to shake us all up and keep us mesmerized for the next few weeks until opening day, when the buzz should REALLY get interesting:
In 2003, when he won the American League home run title and the AL Most Valuable Player award as a shortstop for the Texas Rangers, Alex Rodriguez tested positive for two anabolic steroids, four sources have independently told Sports Illustrated.
When approached by an SI reporter on Thursday at a gym in Miami, Rodriguez declined to discuss his 2003 test results. "You'll have to talk to the union," said Rodriguez, the Yankees' third baseman since his trade to New York in February 2004. When asked if there was an explanation for his positive test, he said, "I'm not saying anything."
Ahhhh, yet another Yankee with the scarlet "R" on his forehead, another one who can take his HOF plaque and stick it right next to the ones celebrating the eerily similar achievements of Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds. Another egomaniac who wasn't satisfied with the talent God gave him and thought he needed chemists to give him more, make him more. Now he's just another blight on our beloved sport...although I'm always very glad to see a smackdown of the strutting, overbearing Yankees and their insufferable fans, I'm a lot more angry than smug about this. ARod is one of the greatest players of our time, and, well, I wanted him to be clean. I mean, he told Katie Couric he was clean, right? "I've never felt overmatched on the baseball field. I've always been a very strong, dominant position. And I felt that if I did my work as I've done since I was, you know, a rookie back in Seattle, I didn't have a problem competing at any level. So, no," he told us, in a fit of magical thinking believing somehow we'd never find out. He lied to our faces, like Clemens and McGwire and Palmeiro and Pettitte and Bonds before him. A veritable "Who's Who" of liars and dopers. I wanted him to break Barry Bonds' record and do it without a hint of controversy, and now that's not going to happen. What a complete, narcissistic ass. I tell you, If ARod thought the ragging he got at Fenway was brutal after he hooked up with the stripper, just imagine what it's going to be this year. My guess is that he may take it a little hard at the new Yankee Stadium, too. He is not, after all, the sacred cow that fellow Yankee doper Andy Pettitte is.
To paraphrase Jon Stewart...Alex Rodriguez, can't you do anything right?
All in all, it hasn't been a good couple of weeks for ARod, considering that Joe Torre also dropped a dime on him in his new book, telling the world ARod was a jerk whom even his teammates mockingly called "Afraud." Evidently not satisfied that he'd really driven the point home, and not wanting to be confused with a classy guy or anything, Torre told Costas on the MLB Network yesterday that Rodriguez was a cloying faker with Derek Jeter envy:
"Alex tried just so desperately to be that guy, all the time... I don't care how talented you are or how much money you make, this is Jeter's ballclub. I think what he tried to do was be close to Derek and to try to -- I don't want to say imitate him -- but just try to get a feel of what the personality is supposed to be on this ballclub."
Ouch. That's harsh. Well, maybe waking up in Madonna's arms every morning makes all that pain go away. Good luck this season, Alex. You're gonna need it.
If his smarminess and sanctomony weren't enough for you, check this out: He shows up peddling a book this afternoon on The Rush Limbaugh Show. Way to show your true colors, Tony.
I'll never for the life of me understand why a woman or person of color would ever cast a Republican vote. It's like polishing the gun and loading up the bullets for your own assassin. But even if one could convince oneself that a guy like, say, Eric Cantor wasn't all that bad (even though he is), it's hard to believe that anyone paying attention doesn't know what Rush Limbaugh is. You know, I'm not certain that Rush himself is a bigot-I think he's more of an exhibitionist than anything-but he certainly doesn't mind getting his rocks off with and taking the money of people who are. And over the years he has had to keep getting more and more outlandish to keep his audience satisfied. Rush has said in the past, for example, that he doesn't care about the opinions of black people because they make up only 12% of the population; and that the NFL is made up of gang members; that Katrina victims were to blame for their own fate; that we shouldn't be so quick to throw slave holders under the bus because hey, they kept the streets safe; and dismissed Colin Powell as less relevant than the ignorant Joe the Plumber. Principled African-Americans and others have taken a stand on this: Michael Wilbon, the African-American sports writer for the Washington Post, threatened to boycott ABC when they inexplicably and ill-advisedly hired Limbaugh for a short-lived (short because he made a racist remark about Donovan McNabb, natch) stint as a football commmentator.
But not Tony Dungy! Tony evidently doesn't care that Rush is nothing better than an old klan member who's gotten too fat to even lift a burning cross anymore. So we're left to assume that either the contrite, gay-hating, Bible-thumping Dungy has no real principles concerning matters of race in this country-and hey, maybe he doesn't-or he agrees with Rush that the NFL guys he has spent his entire career working beside and mentoring really are gangbangers, and that McNabb is an affirmative action quarterback. Because to appear on the show and to be treated with any respect by Limbaugh is in reality to tacitly endorse his views, and that should make guys like Reggie Wayne and Dwight Freeney feel a real thrill up their leg when they think about their old coach. Yeah, he was all charm and niceties to you today, Tony, calling you "a man of deep faith" and all that happy horsehit. But just imagine what would have come from the comedian's mouth had you gotten into a discussion of the NFL rule mandating teams interview one minority applicant for each open head coaching job...
Another reason to root for the Cardinals: Limbaugh's a Steeler fan.
I admit, in my personality-disordered, addled state, I am never happier than when Roger Clemens is being punched in the gut. To wit:
HOUSTON -- The Roger Clemens Institute for Sports Medicine, which opened in January 2007, will no longer carry the embattled pitching great's name.
The Memorial Hermann Hospital Health Care System announced Saturday that Clemens' name will be removed, effective Thursday, as the fallout from the Mitchell report continues to haunt the winner of 354 major league games and seven Cy Young awards.
The facility will be renamed the Memorial Hermann Sports Medicine Institute.
In its statement, the hospital said the decision to take off Clemens' name was made "to better reflect its commitment to all sports and athletes" and that "the move reflects the desire to promote the broad range of sports medicine services and programs offered by Memorial Hermann."
In November, the New York Daily News reported that Clemens has been asked to end his involvement with a charity golf tournament in Houston that he has hosted for four years.
First Mangini, now this...will the schadenfreude ever end? I sure hope not!
Happy New Year, ya bastahds.
Guess I'm still as much of a Yankee hater as I ever was. I admit to occasionally lurking on their boards this season just to soak in as much Yankee fan misey as I possibly could before ol' Hanky went out and blew everything up in the offseason, probably even offering Ted Kaczynski a minor league deal if he could prove he could hit a curve ball (reminds me of a great movie line: "What the hell league you been playing in?" "California Penal...")
Anyway, one only need peruse the "official" Yankees fanboard to realize that losing isn't for sissies, and when both your team lost ugly and your candidate is losing ugly, well, it can just about drive you to distraction. Take a look at some of the threads on the front page of that looney bin:
"Teixeira is a stat padder" (from 10/9)
"ACORN-Voter Fraud raid!" (from 10/7)
"Farrakhan says BHO is the Messiah!" (from 10/9)
"More Boring to Watch Pitch: Wakefield or Matsuzaka" (from 10/10)
"Rays Haven't Done Once What Yankees Have Done 26 Times" (from 10/6)
"Liberal Media: AKA Mainstream" (from 10/8)
...plus a bunch of bumped up old threads about the Giants winning the SB because, of course, no one lives in the past the way Yankee fans and McCain supporters do (what's more annoying-"26 rings" or "maverick"?). The entire bottom of the page is anti-Obama threads, and there are very few actual baseball discussions going on there-although that's true even when the baseball season is in full swing and the Yankees are winning.
Sad, sad, sad, angry people...just a thought, but I would have had a lot more respect for John McCain at this point had he chosen ARod as his running mate.