Posted on 01/10/2008 8:35:18 AM PST by canuck_conservative
I don’t know if Clemens is lying or telling the truth. I just know that appearances can be deceiving.
The problem is that its the evidence that points to Clemens' guilt, irrespective of the conclusion drawn by the media.
Clemens' phone call is indicative of guilt, not innocence.
The idea that multi-millionaires would let non-authorized untrained people give them injections of legal medicines, is frankly laughable. However, it makes sense if it's an illicit substance.
Clemens' career, not only the chart of success but also his bizarre psychological breakdowns in high-pressure games, suggests steriod use.
Also, he's just plain dumb enough to do all of it.
If this is the case, well hell, ever wonder how Hillary got that big second wind campaigning in N.H. and carried through to win? Yep, it was me. I gave her a gulp of my private illegal hooch stock.
I agree. Everyone except Bill Clinton. He displayed that kind of anger because he he was caught.
Thanks for making my point. Clemens made the phone call so he is guilty? Would be innocent if he hadn't made the phone call?
My thoughts, as well. McNamee had no incentive to lie to the feds. He was a friend of Clemens, so why would he say Roger took steroids if it wasn't true? McNamee told the ruth because he knew he'd go to prison if he didn't.
Now does anyone still believe him?
All one had to do is look at her physique to know she was lying.
I will not be too hard on players who used steroids. MLB knew they were being used and turned a blind eye to the usage of them.
Like Britney Spears.... ehehehehehehehe....
The most obvious thing to me? None of these guys today....compare to Bob Gibson, Johnny Bench, or Micky Mantle. Their use of various medical achievements...whether legal today or illegal tomorrow...make today’s players (since the mid-90s)...a step down from the great stars of years ago. It puzzles me that we have to pay $150 for a family of four to attend a game...that doesn’t even match up to a game in 1968.
If a professional athlete wants to take steroids or HGH it none of the Government’s business.
If a professional sports league wants to ban these substances or even coffee, vitamins and aspirin, that is their business and not the government’s.
Let me be PERFECTLY clear.
Your answer would be a good one, if we were talking about someone of normal intelligence.
However, Roger Clemens is a retard.
And this retard thinks that his guilty-as-all-hell performance on that call actually exonerates him.
Guilty, AND stupidity on display for the whole world to see besides.
Great job, Roger.
As I phoned into Sound Off here in Mobile, I find it more than coincidental that the author of the Mitchell Report is on the payroll of the BoSox - strange that the majority of those named played for the Yankees, the hated Yankees, and the most pages written about one player was in fact Clemens - a former BoSox - who’s as maligned by BoSox fans as the Yankees are.....just my humble, Yankee-loving opinion!
I don’t know if Clemens used Steroids and neither does this BoZo. This smells of Duke Rape case journalism. Surely the witness there wasn’t lying. Right.
If Clemens lies under oath, he should go to jail(if proved). If he didn’t take Steroids, why can’t he defend himslf?
um, if they were mob-backed wagers wouldn't they be illegal, and the people making them equally guilty of involvement with, and subsidizing, organized crime?
I’m going to have to look up more about Frank Beard and his part in the scandals. While the actual transgressions happened before I was born, I remember when the scandal broke - though I was a tiny tyke.
There was a cover of LOOK or Life magazine with an electric shaver mowing down big red “whiskers.” My hometown in OK was intimately involved with Beard’s b-ball activities, because our locals were the other half of that winning Olympic team and a friend’s dad was the coach.
They were all heroes to us and I don’t remember the taint associated with Beard or any other of the KY players, if there were others involved. Thanks for the article.
I’m still undecided about Clemens - as I’ve posted before, I *want* to believe him, but down deep in my heart, I don’t yet do so “beyond a reasonable doubt” (yeah, I know, I don’t have to - in his civil suit, it just takes a preponderance of evidence). Unless McNamee has some kind of proof of his allegations - and I’m not sure what it would be - it’s still *he said/he said.*
Well, your logic runs like this:
The Duke rape 'victim' was a liar.
The Duke victim was a witness.
Therefore all witnesses are liars.
ERROR!
BTTT
That’s the most convoluted response that I have ever seen. I love the way you create a pseudo-syllogism out of one statement (mischaracterized at that) and then make up the remainder yourself. I guess there are actually two Bozos out there on this subject, not one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.