I was just muttering to myself about the whole Clemens/perjury indictment thingy when I happened to read what Scott Henson wrote at his wonderful blog Grits for Breakfast, which said what I was thinking better than I would have.
Here’s Henson:
The post is short, so I’ve pasted it in its entirety:
BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER BIG PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN SOLVED….
Obama’s Justice Department today indicted Texas baseball legend “Rocket” Roger Clemens for perjury related to alleged steroid use, reports USA Today. See the indictment (pdf). The allegations rest primarily on the word of a snitch who turned on Clemens to avoid prosecution himself.
This seems to me like a massive waste of time and resources and an extremely poor exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Making the situation appear even more hypocritical, as I pointed out before Clemens’ ill-advised testimony to Congress, “We couldn’t get Condi Rice to testify under oath about 9/11, and myriad Bush administration officials under the GOP Congress were allowed to appear before Congress without risk of perjury charges if they lied,” but the feds are using Clemens’ Congressional testimony as a perjury trap to go after baseball’s all-time strike leader for no good reason I can identify. Hell, even Henry Waxman who chaired the hearing where Clemens allegedly committed perjury later said he regretted staging the event. The whole fiasco was a bad idea from the get-go and this indictment just makes matters worse.
Perjury is a crime that’s prosecuted very selectively, with many obvious instances routinely overlooked by prosecutors. Federal prosecutors are going after Clemens because of his star power, not because he poses some terrific threat to the public, or for that matter to anyone but a batter on the receiving end of a beanball.
NOTE: I normally don’t snatch whole blog posts, so do me a favor and also go check out the site for other stories, like this amusing vacation post on…um…”graffiti tourism.“)
AND IN OTHER NEWS…..THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLY PASSED BILL SAYING CLERGY CAN MARRY (OR NOT MARRY) WHOMEVER THEY WANT
It was the law anyway (See First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution), but hopefully this bill will make those jittery about the issue feel better. And maybe it will also jam a stick in the spokes of the gay marriage disinformation machine.
Here’s a clip from the statement released by the folks at California Equality.
The California Assembly today passed the Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Act (SB 906) in a 46-25 vote. The bill, introduced by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and co-sponsored by Equality California and California Council of Churches IMPACT, protects clergy from performing any civil marriage that is contrary to the tenets of his or her faith. The bill also protects religious institutions from losing their tax-exempt status for refusing to perform any civil marriage, and deepens the distinction in state law between religious and civil marriage by defining the latter as a civil contract that requires a state-issued marriage license.
“Opponents of marriage equality have falsely claimed that allowing same-sex couples to marry will force clergy to violate the tenets of their faiths,” said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California. “This bill should alleviate any concerns that restoring marriage equality will require clergy to perform weddings inconsistent with their faith.”
“This bill simply affirms that California is a diverse state, and that we can all co-exist and make space for each others’ beliefs without compromising the tenets of any religious group or individual,” said Senator Leno. “With the recent federal court ruling, we know that marriage for same-sex couples in California is on the horizon. Under the Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Act, churches and clergy members who fear their religious views are threatened by marriage equality will have clear and solid protections under state law. In addition, churches that welcome same-sex couples will continue to fully recognize those families within their faith.”
Barry Bonds and Marion Jones’ indictments were dumb, too, Celeste. I’ll trust you were equally as vigilant in saying so at the time of their indictments.
“I’ll trust you were equally as vigilant in saying so at the time of their indictments.”
So, was that comment meant to be as snarky as it sounded? If so, what in the world is the point you are hoping to make with it?
The point I’m making, Celeste, is that the indictments of Barry Bonds and Marion Jones could easily be considered a federal waste of time and resources, too. Where were you to point that out when they were indicted? Why only defend Clemens?
Q: “Where were you to point that out when they were indicted?”
A. Probably focusing on other matters.
Q: “Why only defend Clemens?”
A: Because he’s the story for this week and it happened to catch my attention. (For the record, I’m not defending Clemens, I’m slamming the prosecutors.) Frankly, it likely never would have moved past the muttering stage had I not read the Grits for Breakfast post, which accurately reflected my internal dialogue. Simple as that.
Life’s short. I can’t and don’t comment on everything. Normally, sports doping is not high on my radar.
If you want to spin this into some grand moral and ethical inconsistency, be my guest. (Although you can likely find more egregious cases if you look carefully through three years of my posts.)
Clemens needs to go to prison. He only has himself to blame. He didn’t even get a subpoena to appear before congress. He had given testimony in a deposition prior to the congressional hearing. He chose to go because he “wanted to clear his name”. Every atty. but his own said he was crazy to do it. Everybody knew he was asking for trouble, and he got it.
He needs to go to prison if for no other reason than to allow Sonny to sleep tonight.
The money spent has been a waste from the beginning. If there going to spend it, at least put the liars in jail. If not, what’s the point? The die was cast when they decided to have the hearings.
Where were you to point that out when they were indicted? Why only defend Clemens?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Only one way to interpret those questions. I’ve got a couple questions for Sonny.
Why the veiled accusations? Why not just plainly state what’s on your mind?
What fun is that, ATQ?
Celeste, let’s see here. You’re not defending Clemens, but you say you agree with the following:
” The allegations rest primarily on the word of a snitch who turned on Clemens to avoid prosecution himself.”
(Henson’s attacking the credibility of the informant…that’s a defense, Celeste)
” …the feds are using Clemens’ Congressional testimony as a perjury trap to go after baseball’s all-time strike leader ….”
(all time strike out leader? Espousing on Clemens’ accolades isn’t a defense? The whole point of the indictment is that they believe HE CHEATED to become the all time strikeout leader, and lied to them about it under oath!)
“Federal prosecutors are going after Clemens because of his star power, not because he poses some terrific threat to the public, or for that matter to anyone but a batter on the receiving end of a beanball.”
(Only a drunken Yankee fan could have put it better, Celeste. Jesus H. Christ if Hensen isn’t defending Clemens. And you signed on to his views. So you’re defending Clemens too)
And here’s another thinly veiled point, ATQ. I would be all for acquitting Clemons, just on 2 conditions:
1) The conviction of Marion Jones is overturned, and Barry Bonds is acquitted.
2) Both Bonds and Jones are fully compensated in the money they earned, including salaries and/or endorsements, before their names were ever associated with steroids, from the time they were implicated up to this day.
Surely Celeste and Scott Henson would be on board with this, right? Considering their belief that steroid indictments of star athletes is a waste of time?
Can’t speak for Celeste Sonny. But you’re barking up the wrong tree here. I already said Clemens should go to jail.
Of course that doesn’t do Marion or Barry any good.
So you can bitch about the fact that the scorecard is 2-1 so far. Go to Walgreens and get another box of tissue over it.
The mere suggestion of a fair justice system sure does agitate you, doesn’t it? Anyhow… It certainly does do Marion Jones or Barry Bonds good if Clemens is tried and convicted. It shows them that our justice system is fair. It’s one thing to be convicted by a system that doesn’t discriminate and strictly goes by the law…but to sit in a jail cell for something that others, colleagues, where this is concerned, were allowed to walk free for is a crime in its own right. Justice is either blind or corrupted, ATQ. No two ways about it.
The mere suggestion of a fair justice system sure does agitate you, doesn’t it?
lol. I told you Clemens should go to jail. Keep grasping at straws and fabricating a bogeyman in that deranged head of yours.
I was speaking of your obvious agitation, that you’re still showing. A fair justice system just isn’t easy to swallow for you, despite your acknowledgment that it’s the right thing. And, I’ve noted said acknowledgment. But it’s also clear by your anger that you have at least some instincts that long for a different type of justice. And, unfortunately, I think that attitude helps enable those who corrupt our justice system and carry out biased forms of justice. Your solution is noted. Yet, so is your suspicious attitude.
I’m agitated? lol. Who was it that jumped all over Celeste and started bitching at her and insinuating she was racist?
Anybody who goes back and looks at your first post, the one that opened this ball, can see who the agitated one is.
I stated in post 5 that “Clemens needs to be in prison” and “he only has himself to blame”.
Yet you’re still not happy.
Yeah. Right. I’m the agitated one.
Time for you to head to Walgreens for another box of Kleenex. Don’t you ever get tired of crying?
Your hypocrisy is noted. So is your insatiable need to bitch and cry. lol.
We could play a drinking game based on how many times you’ve said “bitch” on this thread, ATQ. I think it’s revealing as to how you feel about women, which is probably the same way you feel about justice being blind to ethnicity and class. You’re obviously unable to say that Clemens should be jailed without being agitated at the same time, as if you’re being force fed the ideology of impartial justice. It’s like a vegetable that’s peculiar to you. You know it’s good for you, but oh do you hate eating it. And it shows in your face. Because stringing up a couple of black athletes while letting a white one walk is like desert to you. Just hits the spot. But you know it’s wrong. And, I give you credit for admitting it. But oh it’s interesting how your squirm when you do it.
Wherever you need to go in that angry delusional head of yours to beef with people, happy wandering. In spite of what they say, you know what they really mean. You actually expect us to believe you can read minds? That you are some kind of magical soothsayer?
That’s some funny shit. Especially when you can’t even apply basic English translations in the context they are used to bolster your pontifications/opinions.
I’ll help you out. I use bitch as a verb, for what you do…not as a noun to describe your or anyone else’s gender.
Bitch as in whine, complain, snivel.
One thing is evident. You never fail to show us how uneducated you are during your attempts to try and show us how intelligent you are.
Film school instead of college. It shows.
If you insist on trying to play smart, if it’s that important to you, you might consider hiring a tutor to translate the context of other people’s posts.
You’re only making yourself look silly when you attempt it.
You only use “bitch” as a verb, you only use the N word to describe behavior…of course. I’ve heard it all before.
Bitch as a verb is a derivative of the word Bitch as a noun. To accuse someone of bitching is to say that they are in the act of being a “bitch”, which is a term MEANT to demean females. Not your finest hour, ATQ.
Your explanation of the word bitch as a verb is precisely the same as explaining the use of the N word as some sort of verb or adjective. It’s like telling someone, “you’re acting like a *n word*, then explaining it by insisting that you weren’t calling them the N word, you were merely saying that they were acting like one. Laughable. To accuse someone of bitching is the same. It’s to accuse someone of *acting like* a bitch, bitch being a noun commonly used in American slang to demean women, despite it’s proper definition of being a female dog. I’ve read some pretty ridiculous things from you on this blog, ATQ, but this explanation of your use of the word bitch is by far your biggest FAIL ever.
And it shows in your face.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That statement proves Sonny is delusional. He “sees” a face.
Of course, that’s impossible for any mortal being to do over an internet blog. But not for Sonny. He “sees”. He can translate expressions, body language, the most minute of gestures. He can in fact read minds. lol.
Perhaps that’s the reason he “knew” Celeste’s stane on the Clemens issue was based on her racism. lol. Incredible that the guy would ever be taken seriously by anyone.
It would appear he “sees” his bogeyman everywhere he looks.
Thank you for going one comment without degrading women, ATQ. That’s been a problem for you on this thread.