Mike and the Mad Dog did an informal phone in poll after the testimony ... 30 don't believe Clemens, 4 do. That's not too good ...

Newsday ... about 70% down on Clemens.


Personally, I thought the Republicans embarassed themselves by carrying Clemens' water ... Mad Dog, whose a Republican was clearly angered as well.

Why'd they do it?

Waxman's pathetic rantings were the miserable climax of a string of showboating performances by a bunch of assholes who need to find something better to do with taxpayer dollars.

Charlie, you've just described 99% of ALL Congressional hearings. And even the good ones like Watergate and Iran-Contra wenen't immune to douchebaggary.

I tend to believe Andy, though. He's a far more credible witness, and Clemens' explaination that he was talking about his wife just doesn't have the ring of truth.

I am unfortunately old enough to have watched even the Watergate charade after coming home from elementary school, so I am well aware of the idiotic showboating that's the earmark of hearings.

However (being no Clemens fan, mind you), I was endlessly amused by Waxman's desperate defense of that indefensible lying moron McNamee. That was truly pathetic. Why are the Dems making him out to be a hero? Silly silly.

But the best part was Clemens revealing that he had no idea what a vegan is.

Vegans suffer from dietary deficiencies.

I'm wondering what's up with the lawyers for all parties here. I realize hardly anyone gets prosecuted for perjury in congressional testimony any more, but Clemens' lawyer has to tell him that there's a point at which the truth simply doesn't matter an more, and to just shut up or waffle. As it is Clemens seems to be backing himself into a legal corner at every opportunity, giving any prosecutor the best chance of finding a prosecutable statement.

And what's up with McNamee? Exactly how is McNamee going to win here? McNamee is completely unemployable: nobody in any sport will risk hiring him, whether they like Clemens or not. He now has no career and no prospects.

And McNamee's lawyer? How is that lawyer expecting to get paid? Trainers aren't exactly rich and there's no way to extort money from Clemens at this point. And what was the point of those stupid pictures of the needles, which don't seem to be even remotely associated to Clemens in any way, other to guarantee that McNamee is unemployable (think the NFL would permit McNamee after that pic)?

Your points are well taken JRV, but isn't the bigger question "Why the fuck is congress doing this in the first place?"

Who really cares if some professional athletes used performance enhancing drugs - particularly since it wasn't even against the rules during some of the relevant time periods.

It's totally bizarre how congress has (and continues to) wasted precious resources on this foolishness.

Congress granted MLB an exemption to the Sherman Anti-Trust act in the 1920s around the same time as the Black Sox scandal and has maintained an informal oversight role ever since.

True, there are much more important things to debate, like Iraq, Health Care and the pisspoor economy. But have you ever heard of a politician, in any country, willing to cede so much as an iota of his/her authority, whether real or percieved?

In the end, the hearings are an attempt to make it seem like they're actually doing something up on the Hill. Panum et Circensis.


EDIT: Filed under "Ask and ye shall receive..."

House Cites 2 Bush Aides for Contempt

The House of Representatives voted Thursday to cite Joshua B. Bolten, the White House chief of staff, and Harriet E. Miers, a former White House counsel, for contempt for refusing to testify about their participation in the firing of federal prosecutors.

The measure calls for House officials to seek enforcement of the contempt citation by the courts if, as expected, the Justice Department declines to act on the resolution.

The vote was a lopsided 223 to 32 in favor of the contempt citation, after most Republican members walked out to protest what their leaders called a political move. Instead, they said, the House should be voting on the extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act approved by the Senate earlier this week.

The resolution would seek to compel testimony from Ms. Miers, who was the White House counsel when several United States attorneys were replaced; Democrats contend that the prosecutors were replaced for political reasons.

It would also order Mr. Bolten, the president’s chief of staff, to produce documents related to the dismissals.

The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, said that the House vote came about six months after the Judiciary Committee voted for contempt and that the White House resisted any effort to reach a reasonable compromise.

Both Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten were instructed by the White House not to comply with the Judiciary Committee’s requests for testimony and information and neither appeared before the panel. The White House has cited executive privilege in directing the two not to testify before Congress.

Ms. Pelosi framed the dispute in constitutional terms, saying that if Congress could not compel testimony from White House officials, it would lose it power of oversight on the administration’s actions.

Republicans said the House was wasting its time on a partisan stunt while the nation’s security was being endangered by allowing legislation allowing advanced eavesdropping to expire.

SOURCE

Actually anything that distracts Congress from actually trying to do something is usually a good thing. Congress is pretty much a couple of big committees who hold meetings everyday. Anyone here that has ever had to be part of some kind of committee at their job ever accomplish anything significant when their committees meet?

Let me say from the get-go that I despise both Hank Steinbrenner and The New York Post. Having said that, Here's something I wasn't aware of, no one I know was aware of, and, seemingly, the entire sporting press was unaware of:

Quote:

---

HANK: FOCUS TOO MUCH ON YANKS


February 19, 2008 -- TAMPA - The New York Yankees were once again in the center of the HGH storm yesterday as Andy Pettitte made his public televised apologies, but Hank Steinbrenner said the Yankees lefty should not be criticized too harshly in opposing ballparks.


Especially, when it comes to visiting Fenway Park, where life is never easy for the Yankees.


"I don't think they would want to be hollering too loud at Andy up in Fenway," Steinbrenner told The Post. "They had plenty of players doing this stuff, too. It's just that those players weren't mentioned in the Mitchell Report.


"That's my biggest problem with the Mitchell Report. We'll make sure we give Andy all the support he needs in Fenway and other ballparks..."

Twenty-two current and former Yankees were named in the report along with 12 current and former Red Sox; however, there were no prominent current Red Sox named in the report.


The biggest Red Sox named was Mo Vaughn, who also is an ex-Met...


Steinbrenner admitted that has bothered him about the report since it was first released. Mitchell is a Red Sox director.

---

Puts a different light on things, dontcha think?

Not really, Dick Vitale has stood up for every college basketball coach this side of Dave Bliss in history too and he thinks Kelvin Sampson is a goner.