McCain: Baseball 'can't be trusted'

[T-Bone]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-03-20-congress-steroids_x.htm?csp=25&RM_Exclude=Juno

 

[Matthew D]

McCain's an ass anyway, he doesn't think that anyone can be trusted.. reminds me of a certain senator from Wisconson in the 1950's... McCarthey anyone?

 

[CEDeoudes59]

McCain can't be trusted

 

[buffb2]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-03-20-congress-steroids_x.htm?csp=25&RM_Exclude=Juno

Dont they (goverment) have anything better to do. This is a waste of taxpayers money and there time to be dealing with these baseball issues. Its the MLB that needs to set standards/rules/testing about drug use. The US has laws that steriods are illegal but the problem in baseball is the MLB/BASEBALL problem let them deal with it. This is a joke!!

 

[Beowulf]

Politicians can't be trusted.


that is why it drives me nuts when people are crazy gung-ho about a candidate from either party. Bush has a shitty record and is a liar, and so is Kerry. You might prefer one to the other, but don't go lickin' their ass with exaggerated fondness.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Dont they (goverment) have anything better to do. This is a waste of taxpayers money and there time to be dealing with these baseball issues. Its the MLB that needs to set standards/rules/testing about drug use. The US has laws that steriods are illegal but the problem in baseball is the MLB/BASEBALL problem let them deal with it.

Great point. Steroids are already illegal what are they going to do make them double illegal? The only thing they can do is arrest dealers and users. Once again that's a law enforcement issue not Biden or McCains. What they are essentially saying is we don't like how you run your business so we are going to run it for you if you don't change your policies to what we like.

 

[griz145389]

bullshit

Anyone else think that when this witch hunt has finished with baseball, they will turn their eyes to another sport such as bodybuilding?

 

[joecski]

The thing I find personally galling about the whole debate is the fact that baseball is being unfairly targeted. What about football or wrestling where the guys are giants. Does anyone really think they naturally got to be that way? Who cares what an athelete does to prepare for the game, it's the results that matter. I don't see Congress criticizing athletes for spending too much time in the gym, or eating too healthy. This is a ridiculous waste of time and taxpayer money. Baseball was dead after the strike, it only made a comeback because of the McGuire/Sosa quest for homers. People want to see the best of the best, and if that means chemically altering nature to make improvements, so be it. The athlete understands the risk compared to the payoff, and I am sure they feel the risk is worth taking. One final point, we give steroids and antibiotics to animals to make them better - bigger and tastier that is. Congress doesn't seem to have an issue with this. Why is the government taking over baseball, because it is a national pasttime? I guess politicians will do anything to make headlines, and baseball makes an easy and attractive target.

 

[houseman]

The thing I find personally galling about the whole debate is the fact that baseball is being unfairly targeted. What about football or wrestling where the guys are giants. Does anyone really think they naturally got to be that way? Who cares what an athelete does to prepare for the game, it's the results that matter. I don't see Congress criticizing athletes for spending too much time in the gym, or eating too healthy. This is a ridiculous waste of time and taxpayer money. Baseball was dead after the strike, it only made a comeback because of the McGuire/Sosa quest for homers. People want to see the best of the best, and if that means chemically altering nature to make improvements, so be it. The athlete understands the risk compared to the payoff, and I am sure they feel the risk is worth taking. One final point, we give steroids and antibiotics to animals to make them better - bigger and tastier that is. Congress doesn't seem to have an issue with this. Why is the government taking over baseball, because it is a national pasttime? I guess politicians will do anything to make headlines, and baseball makes an easy and attractive target.

Hey fucker!

You leave football out of this. It is a good, clean and pure sport!

 

[CEDeoudes59]

Anyone else think that when this witch hunt has finished with baseball, they will turn their eyes to another sport such as bodybuilding?

you know that's a good point, but supposedly the IFBB has 'good testing' in place.

 

[natedogg]

you know that's a good point, but supposedly the IFBB has 'good testing' in place.

That's funny.

The way I see it, if baseball had solved this problem years ago it wouldn't be in the position that it is now. Bud Selig and company brought this upon themselves. I agree, Congress shouldn't have to get involved, but sometimes drastic times call for drastic measures. I suppose we'll see how things go this season.

 

[Matthew D]

what is drastic about the times? As someone pointed out, we add some many chemicals and WHY does this whole side discussion go ahead of needed real world people are going to die discussions..

 

[CEDeoudes59]

OH DEAR GOD! Steroids are ruining Bodybuilding too!!!

 

[jjjd]

mccain et al are using the (way abused) commerce clause to encroach on PRIVATE ENTERPRISE (yes, baseball teams are private, not govt. entities)

they (feds) did the same thing with medical marijuana in california. they claimed jurisdiction over somebody growing medical mj for their own use, on their own private property, and pursuant to the law in california

another example of encroaching federal wanking is the VAWA where the feds claim jurisdiction to revoke somebody's right to carry a firearm in all states of the union because in a civil hearing, the person was found by a mere preponderance of evidence, to have committed a crime of domestic violence

again and again and again people bend over and let the feds intrude into state and private matters that they should have no jurisdiction over

baseball's internal policies (UA's, suspensions, etc.) should not be under the control of congress in any way, shape or form

one could make a case that in cases involving interstate commerce and public safety (like interstate trucking), that the feds DO have jurisdiction over private companies (policies regaRding drug testing for CDL's and regulating truck drivers) but NOT baseball players

 

[hogiejoe]

i understand why congress has gotten involved. what if the steroids in professional sports got so out of control you basically had to do steroids to compete as an average player(which might be the case i dont friggin know). well then that pretty much garuntees that kids aspiring to be professional athletes will have do steroids well before the magical 21 year rule in an attempt to reach that level. we all agree that steroids before this age is dangerous right? so why is congress so wrong in doing this? maybe it is an abuse of power but maybe they their intentions are good.

 

[jjjd]

good intentions are no excuse

it is not up to CONGRESS. there are already laws against possessing steroids w/o a scrip. that is not what congress is addressing. congress is addressing the internal policies of PRIVATE companies, in regards to policing their OWN employees. that is wrong

every single encroachment of rights/liberties comes with either "it's for the good of the children" or some such

IF the scenario is as you state it then

1) people can boycott professional baseball - refuse to go to games, for instance
2) advertisers can pull advertising
3) individual players and managers can work at changing policies FROM WITHIN

that is how it is done in a society that respects rights

 

[VanillaGorilla]

maybe it is an abuse of power but maybe they their intentions are good.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The bottom line here is you have the government attempting to tell a private organization what to do and/ or how to do it.

 

[hogiejoe]

congress could do it this way or they could start busting athletes and having them serve jail time. either way the government is going to do what they want. i really dont see the point in defending steroids in sports. it is against the law and thats the bottom line. you do realize that stupid asses like barry bonds will be the fall of supplements and other performance enhancers.

 

[milwood]

funny to hear a politician state that ANY particular entity can't be trusted. That is absolutely beautiful.

I think McCain is a pro wrestling fan.........

 

[gobig1]

Why didn't the AIDS activists get involved with this Steroids issue, my point being that they are dying of AIDS/HIV and doctors are legitimately prescribing steroids to KEEP THEM ALIVE! If steroids were so BAAAAAAAD as congress wants everyone to believe then why are they prescibed to the sickest people on earth???? That is a huge group of people that should be telling congress how healthy and beneficial steroids has been in prolonging their sickly lives.

 

[natedogg]

Because steroids were created for this purpose, not to hit more home runs or to look more aestetically (sp) pleasing.

 

[hogiejoe]

exactly

you can't compare terminal patients to sports players when justifying the use of steroids. they are dying man.

 

[joecski]

Because steroids were created for this purpose, not to hit more home runs or to look more aestetically (sp) pleasing.

Steroids may have been created to treat illness, but the fact is they allow people to perform better and look better.

Surgery was created to cure disease, and look how many people get implants, lipo, or facelifts to improve their looks.

This whole discussion seems filled with hypocrisy, I guess that makes it perfect for Congressional debate!

 

[Matthew D]

But it begs the question, why in the hell is it illegal in the first place? Why does steriods carry the same penalty as herion in jail time? Perscription yes.. class III I don't think is a fair classification..

 

[houseman]

But it begs the question, why in the hell is it illegal in the first place? Why does steriods carry the same penalty as herion in jail time? Perscription yes.. class III I don't think is a fair classification..

Because they can and the majority of people do not care. They don't understand what steroids are, what they do (and don't do) and how they CAN truly benefit people.

Doctors and Politicians will have the public beleive they are a relatively new substance that hasn't yet benefited from years of research to determine just how harmful or helpful they actually are.

Problem with that is, we in sport, know how long most of these substance HAVE been around and can show the scientific studies conducted on them.

I've said this from day one and I'll say it again. They are doing this because this is a war they can win, and publically win. They CAN'T win the war on rec. drugs but this one they can definitely win. It's an easy battle over Columbian druglords.

 

[griz145389]

i understand why congress has gotten involved. what if the steroids in professional sports got so out of control you basically had to do steroids to compete as an average player(which might be the case i dont friggin know). well then that pretty much garuntees that kids aspiring to be professional athletes will have do steroids well before the magical 21 year rule in an attempt to reach that level. we all agree that steroids before this age is dangerous right? so why is congress so wrong in doing this? maybe it is an abuse of power but maybe they their intentions are good.

Since when is it any business of the government to entitle anyone to play sports? Even if it was necessary to take steroids to compete at a professional level, I fail to see how this is the government's business. We are entitled to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a contract in the majors. No one is forcing anyone to play professional sports, if somneone chooses to do so, well that is their own business, just as it should be their own business what they put into their own body, as long as it is not directly dangering anyone else. Whenever I hear the "for the kids" argument, I want to vomit. How bout this; parents get involved in your kids life, and influence their decisions, not some jackass millionaire.

 

[natedogg]

The fact of the matter is kids DO look up to these professional athletes. Last time I checked I haven't gained 2000 yards on the ground or hit 70 home runs in a single season. This happens believe it or not. If my unborn son becomes a great quarterback, he's not going to look up to me. He's going to look up to guys like Manning or Brady. Whether you like it or not, THEY ARE role models. And by being a role model, they have to set a positive example. And BTW, last time I checked steroids were illegal. Are using steroids setting a positive example for my child. **** NO! As a father it's my duty to teach my child of the dangers associated with illegal drug use and hopefully in the end he will choose the right path.

 

[Matthew D]

Nate, as a father to a son, the day that your child doesn't look up to you.. then you are doing something extremely wrong IMO
Yes they are role models but everyone around your kids are role models and the ones that impact their lives more are the ones that are the closest to them. Parents, teachers, coaches all have a bigger impact on them that some pro a million miles away from them. And most of the pros these days I use as things NOT to do with your life..

 

[hogiejoe]

Since when is it any business of the government to entitle anyone to play sports? Even if it was necessary to take steroids to compete at a professional level, I fail to see how this is the government's business. We are entitled to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a contract in the majors. No one is forcing anyone to play professional sports, if somneone chooses to do so, well that is their own business, just as it should be their own business what they put into their own body, as long as it is not directly dangering anyone else. Whenever I hear the "for the kids" argument, I want to vomit. How bout this; parents get involved in your kids life, and influence their decisions, not some jackass millionaire.

you are way off. governments do have a little bit of control of companies, for example trusts and also insider trading is illegal. now steroids are illegal as well so why is everyone so surprised that the government is getting involved. it does not matter who you are, if you break the law and some section of the government knows about it there will be repercussions. this is very simple logic. of course you may not agree with the law but who cares. i don't like stopping at stop signs but if i don't stop at one i will get a ticket.

"We are entitled to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a contract in the majors", that line is exquisetly ridiculous in this argument. killing people makes me happy so i should be able to do it.

as far as the classification, how do they determine what it will be classified as? doesnt it have to do with the possibilty of abuse? if that is the case i would consider the classification a little over the top as well.

 

[natedogg]

Nate, as a father to a son, the day that your child doesn't look up to you.. then you are doing something extremely wrong IMO
Yes they are role models but everyone around your kids are role models and the ones that impact their lives more are the ones that are the closest to them. Parents, teachers, coaches all have a bigger impact on them that some pro a million miles away from them. And most of the pros these days I use as things NOT to do with your life..

I agree Matt. But what about these kids who have no father figures in their lives. I'm just saying it happens. Not everyone is a good parent...you know.

 

[CEDeoudes59]

I agree Matt. But what about these kids who have no father figures in their lives. I'm just saying it happens. Not everyone is a good parent...you know.

nate where can I email you at? I've lost your mail....

 

[natedogg]

nate where can I email you at? I've lost your mail....

Check my user profile. It should be in there.

 

[CEDeoudes59]

thanks YGM.

 

[griz145389]

"We are entitled to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a contract in the majors", that line is exquisetly ridiculous in this argument. killing people makes me happy so i should be able to do it.

QUOTE]

You are taking my quote out of context. Later on I said that athletes should be able to put into their bodies what they wanted as long as they were not harming someone else. Please argue with the points I am making, not a tangent that I was not implying.

The pursuit of happiness is a guarantee as long as you are not harming anyone else. The day that any of my children respects a pro athlete more than me is the day that I have failed as a father.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

McCain's an ass anyway, he doesn't think that anyone can be trusted.. reminds me of a certain senator from Wisconson in the 1950's... McCarthey anyone?

BUMP...McCain is a douche bag...I can't stand the guy.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

..
Surgery was created to cure disease, and look how many people get implants, lipo, or facelifts to improve their looks....

I like that analogy

But it begs the question, why in the hell is it illegal in the first place? Why does steriods carry the same penalty as herion in jail time? Perscription yes.. class III I don't think is a fair classification..

Exactly...I can agree with something like an age limit or an RX (w/ Dr. supervision), but to make these drugs "AS" illegal as heroin, cocaine, etc (drugs that literally destroy the lives of MASSES) is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

....Are using steroids setting a positive example for my child. **** NO! As a father it's my duty to teach my child of the dangers associated with illegal drug use and hopefully in the end he will choose the right path.

But Nate, don't you or aren't you considering using juice??? Haven't you used PH's?

IMHO, if you're going to tell your kids not to do it, don't do it, period. Or, at least don't do it WHILE you tell your kid not to. It'd different in hindsight when you realize that you "were" wrong. But when you "are" doing something then it just doesn't seem right to preach the opposite.

This is one of the things that lost my respect for my dad. He's smokes pot and is an alcoholic, but he rails on people who do the same. He trashes my bro for being a pothead...

I may be the only one, but given my current level of knowledge, if my kid was in his mid twenties and educated on the subject and he made the decision to use steroids responsibly, I'd help him out on cycle. Hell, if I can honestly say I'm going to use steroids, why would I bother to tell him no. The only reason I would tell someone no is if they do not have the proper level of education and / or experience.

 

[natedogg]

But Nate, don't you or aren't you considering using juice??? Haven't you used PH's?

IMHO, if you're going to tell your kids not to do it, don't do it, period. Or, at least don't do it WHILE you tell your kid not to. It'd different in hindsight when you realize that you "were" wrong. But when you "are" doing something then it just doesn't seem right to preach the opposite.

This is one of the things that lost my respect for my dad. He's smokes pot and is an alcoholic, but he rails on people who do the same. He trashes my bro for being a pothead...

I may be the only one, but given my current level of knowledge, if my kid was in his mid twenties and educated on the subject and he made the decision to use steroids responsibly, I'd help him out on cycle. Hell, if I can honestly say I'm going to use steroids, why would I bother to tell him no. The only reason I would tell someone no is if they do not have the proper level of education and / or experience.

I would never codone the use of recreational drugs to any child of mine, whether it be pot, coke, or steroids. My wife and I will try our best to educate them on the conciquences of drug use, the rest is up to them. Now, like you stated, if my son was educated on the subject of steroids and he was an adult and there was no way I could talk him out of it, yes, I would help him to the best of my knowledge. BUT, I would still let him know that they are dangerous if used incorrectly and illegal and that the consequences for getting busted with them can be the same as getting busted with any other drug.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

I would never codone the use of recreational drugs to any child of mine, whether it be pot, coke, or steroids. My wife and I will try our best to educate them on the conciquences of drug use, the rest is up to them. Now, like you stated, if my son was educated on the subject of steroids and he was an adult and there was no way I could talk him out of it, yes, I would help him to the best of my knowledge. BUT, I would still let him know that they are dangerous if used incorrectly and illegal and that the consequences for getting busted with them can be the same as getting busted with any other drug.

Understandable

 

[jjjd]

the issue is not one of whether or not professional athletes use steroids and/or whether that is a bad example for kids, etc.

assume for the sake of argument that steroids are terrible evil drugs, that baseball players using them sets an awful and dangerous example for kids, and that there are peer reviewed studies proving that kids emulate the steroid use of public sports stars in large #'s

EVEN GIVING THAT, the ***issue*** is that congress has no place in telling probaseball how to police itself internally. period. pro baseball is private companies (teams) and congress is blatantly abusing (and twisting) the commerce clause to subpoena and strongarm these private companies. they are PRIVATE. their internal policies are their choice, and their choice as to when to conduct UA's and what to do about them

the govt. (fed and local) CAN prosecute for possessions/dealing, they can investigate, set up stings, heck they can even insert an undercover operative into MLB. all that is within their authority.

but what they are doing is not. regardless of whether it's for a "good cause" (for the sake of argument)

 

[VanillaGorilla]

EVEN GIVING THAT, the ***issue*** is that congress has no place in telling probaseball how to police itself internally. period. pro baseball is private companies (teams) and congress is blatantly abusing (and twisting) the commerce clause to subpoena and strongarm these private companies. they are PRIVATE. their internal policies are their choice, and their choice as to when to conduct UA's and what to do about them

To me that is the bottom line. Alcohol and drugs harm and kill more people than steroids. It is also pretty clear that kids are abusing alcohol and drugs a hell of a lot more than steroids. Why not have hearing on that? The equivalent would be holding hearing on the music industry because kids look up to them too. Maybe McCain should tell the music industry how to implement drug testing policies so musicians are tested if they have a record deal. It's none of their business. It is not the governments job to tell a private organization how to run the business.

 

[jjjd]

right. and like i said, the CClause should be narrowly interpreted, because it is (in actuality) narrowly drawn. it is not an excuse for the federal govt. to stick its nose in everything. it's anti-federalism run amok. look at, for example, the VAWA. look at medical mj (and the fed's response).

i think that, for example, in the case of interstate transport (trucking companies), one could argue the commerce clause gives the feds some teeth. that's the kind of limited use of the cclause i can support