Again, Mitchell’s desire for baseball to “move forward” is undermined by his decision to name names.  I wish the government was spending its time and money on anything else.

And I continue to believe that Mitchell’s conflict of interest has unfairly put the spotlight on the Yankees.

Anything that humiliates Clemens is fine with me.
I would love to see him become as reviled as Bonds.
Gotta wonder how Ms. Waldman is dealing with this.
Hey lads. Go look at Babes 1923 stats. Nice season.

THE NATURAL is on TCM tonight.If I was 9 again it might be my favorite film ever.

SAS The government is spending our money on important shit , like not helping injured vets get the help they need, while their familys get evicted from dumps we wouldn’t let our pets live in.
I’m sure Obama and Huck can fix it all.

can i ask a really stupid question?

why were only yankees called? 

seriously, WTF?

You would think Brian Roberts (at least) would be called as well, since he has admitted to it.  Who’s the chair of that committee, a representative from Massachusetts?

Again, Mitchell�s desire for baseball to �move forward� is undermined by his decision to name names.

It is amazing how many of the same legislators who are so concerned about the rights illegal immigrants and terrorists at Gitmo are so dismissive of the fundamental rights of baseball players. Why investigate baseball players and not movie stars? Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears would make for much better television than Clemens and Pettitte, would they not? What worries me is that the majority of Americans seems to believe this is a legitimate exercise of congressional authority.

I wish the government was spending its time and money on anything else.

The government does not have ‘its’ money, it is OUR money. I do realize that government performs some essential functions.  Those items usually get crammed into the tail end of the congressional session and elicit little debate. I wish the government would spend most of its time playing video games.

can i ask a really stupid question?

seriously, WTF?

There are two kinds of people, Yankees fans and Yankees haters. There are more Yankees haters, and they vote!

Besides, all they have is the Mitchell report, and those were the big names. These are politicians we’re talking about, they have no interest in going after the small fry. They need headlines, they want BIG names. Their Presidential aspirations demand face time.

I can’t help but believe a lot of this also goes back to Selig’s animosity for the Steinbrenners. Selig’s grievance is that he blames Steinbrenner for driving up both MLB player and MILB draft salaries, costing him big money. I am mystified that the player’s union has not objected to the current arrangement. The commissioner should not have any ties to a particular team.

“I am mystified that the player�s union has not objected to the current arrangement. The commissioner should not have any ties to a particular team.”

I agree that the situation is f’ed up, but the players and their union don’t have a say in choosing the commissioner.  It might be nice if they did, but I doubt the owners want to give up that lever of power. 

Besides, from a labor standpoint, it is a bit unreasonable—“not only do I want a say in my salary and working conditions, I want to choose my boss!”

Note that I am pro-labor.

Yup, Mike K., CT Yankee:

This is not an anti-Yankee conspiracy.  Roger Clemens has very publicly disputed the findings of the Mitchell Report, so the House Oversight Committee is exploring the issue.  How is that confusing?

misterjost, I think the point is that Congress shouldn’t get involved with the Mitchell report, or steroids in baseball, at all.  That Clemens disputed Mitchell’s findings has no relevance to Congress’ intervention in the matter.

fgasparini -

Here are the direct quotes:

“Why were only Yankees called?”

“You would think Brian Roberts would be called.”

“This goes back to Selig’s animosity for the Steinbrenners.”

Those statements do not question Congressional involvement.  They suggest that the witness list reflects an anti-Yankee bias, which is silly.  I agree with you that Congress should not get involved, but if they are going to be involved, the people on the witness list are exactly the people they should be talking to.

This is not an anti-Yankee conspiracy.  Roger Clemens has very publicly disputed the findings of the Mitchell Report, so the House Oversight Committee is exploring the issue.  How is that confusing?

yes, i am not an idiot (despite what my friends and family would say).  i fully understand why Roger Clemens was called.

but after calling Clemens and Pettitte, of the other 75 names on the list, why was the 3rd player called Chuck Knoblaugh??  and why no one else?

i think these are fairly obvious and legitimate questions to ask.

did i miss some particular reason in the report (which i may have) why Knoblaugh has been singled out?

McNamee was the trainer for Clemens, Pettitte, and Knoblauch.  Since the other three have already made their positions public (albeit not under oath), Knoblauch is probably the most important witness of all.

why no one else?

Who said no one else?  It says “witnesses will include…”  The list is not complete.  The linked article notes that Mitchell, Fehr and Selig will testify the day before the players and trainers.

Also, check out some of these quotes from committee members and staffers:

“Mr. Clemens has raised concerns about the accuracy of the Mitchell report,” Phil Schiliro, the chief of staff to Committee Chairman Henry Waxman…

Said [the committee’s Republican staff director, David] Marin: “We’re not into ‘gotcha.’ This is a pretty thorough and comprehensive report from Senator Mitchell. Members of Congress think it’s important to speak to the findings and recommendations. And if there are high-profile players who are taking shots at that report, then we need to hear from them, too.”

“[Virginia Republican Tom] Davis’ position is this: This was a high-profile report. It cast a tremendous cloud over Major League Baseball,” Marin said. “The fact that a player of the stature of Roger Clemens disputed a critical finding in that report concerns Davis. That’s why he thinks Clemens deserves a chance to speak further before Congress and the American people. Only then can Congress determine how much credibility to give to the report.”

It sounds like they’re at least trying to create the appearance of open-mindedness and objectivity, rather than the appearance of a witch hunt.

Mitchell�s desire for baseball to �move forward� is undermined by his decision to name names.

Maybe Mitchell will lead off the hearings by saying something to the effect of, “My initial instinct was that it would be counter-productive to name names in this report.  That instinct has proven to be absolutely correct.  I really made a huge mistake when I allowed Mr. Selig to change my mind and include names.”

Failing that, maybe he will at least repeat the assertion he made when he released the report that the 85 names included were anything by a complete list, and that upwards of 25% of all players probably used PEDs between the late 1980s and the early 2000s.