Barry Bonds....

...used to be my favorite player of all time. Used to be.

I've held the view I develop below here for quite awhile now, but the raid on two pharmacies yesterday morning in Florida and Texas for illegal steroid distribution that has already turned up the name of athlete Gary Matthews Jr. as a client has made all this fresh on my mind one again.




Sooooo, I used to respect Barry Bonds.


I even gave him the benefit of the doubt when the accusations of steroids came out in force, precisely because he was such a dominant force in the game before that point. No one, and I mean no one in the game of baseball EVER has been a talented in their raw tools as Barry Bonds. That might be a bit contentious to say, but I think it's true. I mean, for the love, in 1990 (his fourth full season in the majors) the boy hit .301, cranked 33 homers and 114 RBIs, stole 52 bases, won the MVP, AND won his first of EIGHT Gold Gloves in left field. Ridiculous talent there that he was living into in a BIG way.

In 1998, when Sammy Sosa was on his way to 66 homers (probably with the help of steroids) and Mark McGwire hit 70 homers (definitely with the help of steroids) as they "saved baseball", Barry quietly hit .303 with 33 homers and 122 RBIs. How one "quietly" does such a thing is tough to understand, though the obsession with Sosa/McGwire explains a lot, but without a doubt Barry's time out of the spotlight started the downward spiral that we are well aware of today. You could sum what precipitated that spiral in one word really. JEALOUSY. Supplemented by a false charge of the racism of the suits in the MLB offices against Sosa and Bonds and all black athletes everywhere, basically.

Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams quote Bonds in their book Game of Shadows as saying

"They're (MLB) just letting him (McGwire) do it because he's a white boy," (though several short seasons later, Bonds broke his record....hmmm.....). "The pursuit by Sosa, a Latin player from the Dominican Republic, was entertaining but doomed," Bonds declared. As a matter of policy, "they'll never let him win," he said. Link to the quote in full here.


It just so happened that 1999 (physical growth) and 2000 (numerical explosion) marked Bonds' prodigious growth and assault on the record books, with him reaching the pinnacle of achievement in 2001 (73 homers) and 2002 (batting an absurd .370 while shattering the MLB record for on base percentage (.582) that he promptly broke again two years later by getting on base a superhuman 60 % (.609) of the time). And just to quantify the change in Bonds' physique in this time, in his time with the Giants, Bonds grew from a size 42 to a size 52 jersey; from size 10 1/2 to size 13 cleats; and from a size 7 1/8 to size 7 1/4 cap, even though he had taken to shaving his head.

"The changes in his foot and head size," Fainaru-Wada and Williams write, "were of special interest: medical experts said overuse of human growth hormone (HGH) could cause an adult's extremities to begin growing, aping the symptoms of the glandular disorder acromegaly."

All because of JEALOUSY. Because Barry wanted his. All he had to do was wait the home-run-driven media firestorm out (especially since McGwire and Sosa had such steep dropoffs soon thereafter), keep producing like he always did, and he would have been a lock for the greatest five-tool athlete to ever play the game (maybe the best ever all around). But now, today, he has lost all respect in the eyes of fans around the game and worse, now is the model athlete held up as the seedy, disgusting, cheating element of competition instead of one to look up to in all manner of ways.

Sometimes I feel like I want to throw up now, that I ever invested this much and cared this much about an athlete like him (maybe that's a commentary on the nature of our society to exalt certain individuals in importance solely for their athletic prowess or good looks or a couple good movies rather than people of integrity who have worked hard to get where they're at; people who recognize they are looked up to and live into that responsibility). At one time, Bonds was my second-favorite athlete of all time behind (though leagues behind) Cal Ripken Jr, and just in front of Lawrence Taylor (and HE's a big winner too; if you want your kids to smoke crack, then by all means, have them look up to him, or Mike Vick, or Ron Artest, or Jason Grimsley, or Steve Howe). Today, I'm a bigger fan of the Dallas Cowboys than Barry, and for those who know me, that's saying something!

Fainaru-Wada and Williams document now in the afterword to their book added following 2005;

"For those who cared about the game (2005) was a difficult time, as Dodgers radio announcer Vin Scully, the dean of baseball broadcasters, told the Los Angeles Times. Scully had been at the microphone in 1974 when Atlanta's Hank Aaron hit his 715th home run, against the Dodgers, to break Babe Ruth's record. Scully cherished that memory, but he wanted no part of Bonds making history.

"With Aaron, it was a privilege to be there when he did it," Scully said. "With Bonds, no matter what happens now, it will be an awkward moment. That's the best word I can think of now. If I had my druthers, I would rather have that awkward moment happen to somebody else."

Keep shifting blame on others forever, Barry, and you'll die a sad, sad man knowing you have no integrity, cheated on your wife, were a poor example of fatherhood for your children, and carried no awareness of accountability to yourself or the beautiful game of baseball you stained with your decision. Today, you're a pariah, an overbulked joke of a man who used to be one of my heroes. I'm sorry I ever looked up to you. Maybe I can again someday. I hope to, because I'm in the pits now.

Insight into evangelism?

"I'd look at one of my stonecutters hammering away at the rock, perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet, at the hundred and first blow it would split in two, and I knew it was not the blow that did it, but all that had gone before."

- Jacob August Riis

And no, I'm not talking about evangelism as a series of crippling blows...look at the Riis comment as a metaphor of long-term action and caring, not a direct parallel. :)

On the dangers of blind following...

So Pat Robertson's a "Christian" leader, huh? I'm glad the church is more and more holding him accountable for his words AND his actions, but if there was any consistent pursuit of accountability, broadcasting stations would refuse to run his shows and/or folks would turn their brains on and quit watching his shows...but that sort of thinking could be applied to TBN as well.

You know what I think? I think those of us who know the religious hucksterism (see Steve Martin's movie Leap of Faith ) being pushed by Pat and the TBN folks should speak out louder and more often about how destructive this sort of "evangelical broadcasting" is to the message of the gospel. I often watch just long enough to either laugh or feel so angry or intensely sad that I want to cry/hit a heavy punching bag, then walk away.

But people watch these guys and ladies and think they're legitimate. Really.

Do I hold incorrect beliefs? I'm sure. Am I willing to be accountable to others for these beliefs? I endeavor to every day. Am I making millions off others in the perpetuation of twisted beliefs? No, and if I did, I'd have to trade in my soul...

Peter King words of wisdom...

Leave it to a sportswriter to provide one of the most insightful political comments I've seen in awhile...




"There's a fairly significant decision coming in this country in 2008. We in New Jersey and New Mexico and New London and New Wherever have one simple request as you mull over the candidacies of a black man, a white woman and many white men in the coming presidential debate: Treat them as candidates, not black candidates or female candidates or white candidates."

I agree in principle with King's comments, because it's almost suffocating to live in this politically correct society sometimes.

I think it's downright lazy to vote for Hillary solely because she's a woman, and downright lazy to vote for Obama solely because he's black. With that being said, I don't think that flavor of downright lazy is any worse than voting for a candidate as a Christian solely because they're "pro-life" or "anti-gay marriage," as if those are the only moral issues on the table to figure out if a candidate is "really" Christian or not. I hate abortion (because I believe I'm called to value all life from conception to death), but I just may vote for a candidate who's pro-choice but much more consistent with my beliefs across the board: how the gospel's deep respect for life touches on the environment, the poor, war, marriage, etc.

As a result of that thinking, I'm a pretty big fan of Sen. Brownback from Kansas, who's a social conservative (with significant reasons to back up his positions; most Republicans use abortion, etc as election ploys and pay no attention to the issue in their job), is committed to reformation of the twisted aspects of government, and is opposed to the war in Iraq (though this is more likely a one-time thing). I think the guy's got his ducks in a row in a way that George W. couldn't even sniff at. I like Obama, even though I'm not a big fan of his social liberalism; I think he's a breath of fresh air.

p.s. Let's not forget Michael Jesus Archangel and Rev. Edward Allen Buck...legitimate candidates in my book. *cough cough*

With the warning of single-issue laziness being said, I certainly would LIKE to see a woman in the presidential office some time in America, and I would especially like to see a black person in office...given the social struggle they've had to undergo for equality in America (which is supposedly the land of the free but only granted equality under the law for blacks and other full-citizen minorities in 1964). So, while their gender or ethnicity might be a contributing factor among a host of other contributing factors for why I vote for them, I won't vote for them solely b/c they're a woman or a minority. You could apply this thinking to suggest to me that abortion is a more important issue among a host of important issues for you, and I'd be ok with that, but I'd want a conversation on why you think so. There are philosophical reasons behind being pro-life that apply equally to the death penalty, poverty, the environment, and war, but people don't often consider those because their churches aren't equipping them to be more educated voters, they're telling them how to vote. And that's dead wrong, both on the parts of church leadership and those who sit there and do exactly what they tell them without stopping to consider why in the world a responsible Christian should only care about two issues.

So I may vote for Obama, I may vote for Brownback, I may vote for McCain, and I may vote for Al Gore (if he runs). I know I won't vote for Hillary (well, I should qualify that; if it ended up being Hillary vs. Giuliani or Gingrich, I'll have to reconsider a bit), because she's just as flip-floppy as John Kerry was in '04, though I voted for him because the alternative was George Bush (who I'm not sure has ever allowed himself to try to connect the dots between his views on social conservatism [which I like] and how that intersects with big business, the environment, and the demand placed on his life by Christ to love his enemies).

In addition to all this, I need to revisit the discomfort I felt after voting for John Kerry; precisely because I felt the choice in 2004 was between bleh and double bleh. There are very legitimate third (or fourth or fifth) party candidates out there who I think more completely reflect my beliefs than the two political machines we call Democrat and Republican that often churn out candidates that I really don't care for (but feel compelled to choose between because any other vote is a "wasted" vote in our winner-take-all presidential elections). Is it socially irresponsible for me to vote for a candidate I know doesn't have a chance in hell of being elected, or is it the most socially responsible thing I can do to vote for that candidate, because I'm being true to the big picture of what I believe and subverting the system that demands I choose between two "legitimate" candidates? Is that a wasted vote or a maximized vote?

If all of this sounds like gobbledy-gook to you when you're reading it, it may be because it IS gobbledy-gook (I certainly allow for that ever-present possibility), or it may be because you haven't had enough time to grasp the big-picture reasons that drive me to think about politics, the state, and social issues in a certain way. It really boils down to two words for me as to my central concerns: primarily, Jesus. secondarily, church...somewhere way down the priority list, society. This commitment plays out in my thoughts often, and I'll leave it at that for now.

Bleh

From Time Magazine's Feb 5, 2007 issue.

"The 2008 presidential campaign may show that race, religion, and gender don't matter, but money still talks, and more loudly than ever. In 2003, John Edwards surprised everyone by raking in $7 million in campaign donations in the the first three months of the year. That amount will be like Monopoly money after 2008. Strategists says the two eventual party nominees could well spend up to $500 million each before the general election."

Nine words, folks.

What. in. the. world. is. wrong. with. this. picture?

Evangelicals Behaving Badly...

Christian Smith has written a tremendous article regarding the misuse of statistics by the church spun a certain way to get people alarmed and off their tushes...

"American evangelicals, who profess to be committed to Truth, are among the worst abusers of simple descriptive statistics, which claim to represent the truth about reality, of any group I have ever seen. At stake in this misuse are evangelicals' own integrity, credibility with outsiders, and effectiveness in the world. It is an issue worth making a fuss over. And so I write..."

Check this article out. It's entirely worth it. Seriously.

Just for the hey of it...

I've thrown a widget a little further down the right side of my page that's recording the total and rising cost of the conflict in Iraq.

I've inserted it not because I think the economics of the situation provides a compelling argument why the United States should never have invaded Iraq (though in many ways it DOES underscore a raw, quantifiable cost of war), but as one thing among a host of others that George Bush is accountable for.

I mean, you tell me...what's better spent? 350 billion dollars to destroy a country and build it back up to be your lapdog (I guess the U.S. didn't learn from the Iran experiment in the 1970s). Or 350 billion dollars in invest in the infrastructure of your own country, to dedicate towards alternative fuels, to dedicate towards welfare reform, to dedicate toward educational reform, or to dedicate towards health care reform within your own borders.

I pray for George Bush, I do. I'm trying to respect him by not slandering him. So I'm not going to attack his character. But it's clear to me that his time as president will go down in history for an almost complete neglect of domestic issues for the sake of an ill-fated vengeance campaign against another sovereign nation that turns the clock back 70 years on international perception of the United States.

Domestic policy: failure (though there's a little more to discuss here)
Foreign policy : failure (not much wiggle room here)

And even worse, I hope and pray that George Bush really wasn't planning the attack in Iraq before he was even elected and, if so, repents publicly and comprehensively at some point in the future; as a confessing Christian, he is accountable to the church at large and centrally to God. I certainly would not want to stand before the judgment seat as GDub for his actions up to this point in history.

Let's raise a glass to '08 and the hope that Obama and McCain win their party nominations so I have to finally (for once!!!!!) decide between two qualified, principled, candidates of integrity who aren't so dagblasted deaf-in-the-ears when people express alternative approaches and opinions!



Like everything else, this is clearly my subjective opinion...I'd love to talk if you wanna; in person, or here