mickeef2 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I guess Manny felt the need to get back at the Sox and rejuvenate his career after his days with the team ended. Thankfully, we're still clean and our legacy is intact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakeMeSomeFoodHo Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I guess Manny felt the need to get back at the Sox and rejuvenate his career after his days with the team ended. Thankfully, we're still clean and our legacy is intact. bwahahahahahahahahaha..yeah, Mark Belhorn, Bill Mueller, Daivd Ortiz, Pedro, Nomar, Damon ect never did steroids while playing for the Red Sox...face it Mickeef..your 2004 championship team was full of juicebags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 the under wins :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakeMeSomeFoodHo Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 the under wins :lol: hahahahahaha you couldnt have been more accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullsOnParade Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 :lol: :lol: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LorfTVP Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 No respect for Mueller? I always thought that he was one of those gentlemen of the game like Mike Sweeney, Sean Casey, Tony Clark, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 sean casey? you mean the guy who went from 25 homeruns a year to single digits in one season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plow Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Just wanted to quote mcqueef from the Arod thread I wouldn't be so quick to suspect a guy like Manny. From all accounts, the guy works harder than anybody else no matter what team he's on, so I'd have to see some proof before I convict him.-mcqueef just wanted to make sure you are held accountable for what you said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickeef2 Posted May 8, 2009 Author Share Posted May 8, 2009 You are right, Plow. Manny Ramirez is a PHD user. I'm just glad he didn't start doing it until after leaving the Sox. On a related note- A Rod's back tonight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakeMeSomeFoodHo Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 You are right, Plow. Manny Ramirez is a PHD user. I'm just glad he didn't start doing it until after leaving the Sox. On a related note- A Rod's back tonight! we all know youre not a smart guy, but are you really this dumb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so-cal dub Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Oh we're supposed to believe he NEVER touched a PED while with the Sox? Get the fuck outta here and the next person to get popped is going to be Varibitch or Ortiz as soon as Selena Roberts dries the well on Arod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Oh we're supposed to believe he NEVER touched a PED while with the Sox? Get the fuck outta here and the next person to get popped is going to be Varibitch or Ortiz as soon as Selena Roberts dries the well on Arod. That well is bone dry. Not even top 100 at Amazon and it hasn't even been a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 That well is bone dry. Not even top 100 at Amazon and it hasn't even been a week. thats what happens when you write a book full of anonymous sources Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakeMeSomeFoodHo Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 thats what happens when you write a book full of anonymous sources and by a women who obviously hates men. first the duke lacross team, now alex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringe Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 and by a women who obviously hates men. first the duke lacross team, now alex. that's good knowledge. plus she blames everything on the fact that he grew up without a father- how trite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 i think jason whitlock (my fav writer) sums it up perfectly http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9542614...dibility-issues Bio hazard: A-Rod author has credibility issues by Jason Whitlock Jason Whitlock brings his edgy and thought-provoking style to FOXSports.com. Columnist for the Kansas City Star, he has won the National Journalism Award for Commentary for "his ability to seamlessly integrate sports and social commentary and to challenge widely held assumptions along the racial divide." A-Rod biographer/hunter Selena Roberts is beginning to remind me of Rev. Al Sharpton. Sharpton separated the crime from the culture, too. When he gallivanted around New York in the '80s seeking justice for alleged victim Tawana Brawley, his target was the culture of racism more than the six white men falsely accused of rape. Tuesday, as I listened to Roberts defend her New York Times columns that painted the Duke lacrosse players as rapists, cowards and liars during an interview on Jim Rome's nationally syndicated radio show, I couldn't help but notice she went with the Sharp-tongue defense. "I wrote about the culture at Duke, and there's no doubt about that. I stand by that today," Roberts said. "I separated the criminal investigation from the culture." Maybe it's a New York, freedom-fighter thing, this amazing ability to ignore the innocence of the criminally accused while making your justifiable point that America suffers from and with racism and sexism. Roberts' writings/rantings on Duke lacrosse have become relevant again because she's asked us to trust her anonymous investigative reporting and speculation about Alex Rodriguez, the confessed steroid cheat and home run hitter. According to Roberts' new book and her interview blitzkrieg, Rodriguez used steroids in high school, tipped pitches to opposing batters, tipped Hooters waitresses a paltry 15 percent, was nicknamed "Bitch Tits" in the locker room and is caught up in being perfect because his father abandoned him as a child. Her sourcing for the most damaging allegations, by her own admission, is either anonymous or non- existent. She wants us to trust her, and her New York Times- and Sports Illustrated-highlighted résumé. Unlike Bob Costas, the producers at ESPN and the steroids-obsessed baseball journalists, I don't trust Roberts or her book, and I expressed some of my reasons in a Kansas City Star column that ran on Sunday. The Times and SI can kiss my ass. Jayson Blair worked at The Times. Mike Price won a settlement against SI for the lies the magazine published about him. And years ago, an SI writer wrote a profile about me for the Columbia Journalism Review and, among other journalistic crimes, lifted a quote from an old column and passed it off as something I said to him. Never trust a publication. Hell, the more prestigious the publication, the more pressure there is for the writers to cut corners in pursuit of a good story. Place your trust in the writer. And Roberts' reaction to the exoneration of the Duke lacrosse players calls into question her credibility. By refusing to acknowledge her mistakes in the Duke case, she creates the impression that her agenda trumps the truth. She looks like a feminist version of Al Sharpton. Jim Rome asked Roberts about the questionable sourcing for the allegations she levels against A- Rod. "You give people a litmus test, Jim," she said. "You say to them, you go back to them over and over again and you say, 'Is it consistent what they're saying to me? Have they changed at all? Do they have a credibility issue? Is there anything in their past that might make me wary of this person?' " You see, Selena Roberts thinks like me. Is there anything in her past that would make me wary of her allegations against A-Rod? Rome asked her specifically about my column contending that the Duke lacrosse case should make us suspicious of her reporting about Rodriguez. "First of all (Jason) needs to go back and read the columns that I wrote about Duke lacrosse," she said. "It doesn't exactly jibe with what he's saying now. I have always separated what the crime was ... and what the culture was. It didn't have to rise to the level of a crime to rise to the level of a column. And I wrote about the culture at Duke, and there's no doubt about that. I stand by that today." She later added: "What I did about Duke is I separated the criminal investigation from a culture. Now we know what is irrefutable about that night. These women had pornographic pictures taken of them and distributed on the Internet. These women had racial slurs yelled at them. That is indisputable. There were broomsticks waved at them. That is indisputable. The issues that happened that night, separate from the crime, were in my opinion — and people can disagree with this — were worth writing about." Here's what's also indisputable: At no time in her original Duke lacrosse-bashing column did she mention anything about pornographic pictures, racial slurs or broomsticks waved at strippers. She wrote about rape, robbery, strangulation and a hate crime. You can read the column for yourself here. You can read a detailed analysis of Roberts' many Duke lacrosse errors at this blog. It is embarrassingly disingenuous for Roberts to suggest that her columns about Duke lacrosse weren't founded on the belief that the players sexually assaulted the false accuser. Her refusal to admit this mistake and apologize makes me wonder what other truths she's willing to fudge. During her interview with Jim Rome, she claimed she went into her investigation of Rodriguez believing he had never used steroids. She said that A-Rod's interview on 60 Minutes convinced her of his innocence. "I didn't think he was dirty," Roberts said. "I thought he was clean." This is nearly impossible for me to believe. Roberts is a cynic, at least she is in her column writing. When she worked for The New York Times, she wrote numerous columns about A-Rod with the same theme: Rodriguez is a phony. Read this, this and this and then read this blog for examples of her A-Rod cynicism. In those columns, does she come off like someone who would take Rodriguez at his word? She comes off like someone who doesn't believe a word that comes out of A-Rod's mouth. What I'm about to write is pure speculation. Selena Roberts believes America is a safe haven for sexism (I happen to agree, but that's beside the point). She wanted the Duke lacrosse players to be shining examples of how deep-rooted and protected our sexism is, and she was more than willing to ignore their innocence to make her point (this repulses me). Selena Roberts believes professional sports — the money, fame and power they primarily give young men — are corrosive of good values and a haven for sexism (I happen to agree, but that's beside the point). She wants Alex Rodriguez to stand as a shining example of what's wrong with American sports, and she just might be willing to ignore flattering truths about A-Rod and publish hearsay and gossip to make her point (and this is unfair). She's written a celebrity-gossip book, "A-Rod: Game of Innuendo." Maybe you despise Rodriguez so much that you don't care about her methods and whether the rest of the alleged mainstream media characterize her work properly. I bet the Duke lacrosse players and Tawana Brawley's victims could explain to you why you should care. You or someone you love could be the next criminally innocent, shining example of a New York freedom fighter's social agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lubeck Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 I like Whitlock. Sometimes I disagree with him but most of the time he is spot on and he is almost ALWAYS writing about controversial issues and taking a strong side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 im almost always in agreement with him on the controversial issues. plus he always cites the wire so he's A+ in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now