December 07, 2006
A Moral Quandry
The St. Louis Cardinals may be interested in Barry Bonds, leading Will Leitch to question his belief system:
But talk about the ultimate test: It appears our beloved (and defending champion: Woo!) Cardinals are considering making a run at Barry Bonds. To be honest, this was something we had in the back of our mind before word got out that Tony LaRussa wanted to "speak" with the slugger; the Cardinals could use another power bat in the outfield, and LaRussa historically has had few moral qualms with steroid guys on his team. (Though we wonder: As a vegetarian, does he have a problem with Bonds using cattle steroids?) The notion of a Pujols-Bonds one-two punch is, theoretically, terrifying, in pretty much every conventional use of the term.
It's all preliminary, of course, and it still seems unlikely Bonds will be anywhere but San Francisco next year. But the questions remains: Could we root for a rather blatant asshole like Bonds, particularly when almost no one -- including us -- wants him to break Hank Aaron's record next year? After years of going after the guy, could we suddenly switch?
We prefer to think of it as compartmentalizing our brain. In the real world, where human beings peacefully co-exist in an atmosphere of common humility and concern for the collective welfare of all humanity, we would hate Bonds and would find it difficult not to cringe when we see his picture on screen. Fortunately, we have a feeling that we would feel that way about a majority of athletes if we met them in real life; they are not like you and I, after all. Could we make that transformation into a Bonds fan if he were wearing the Cardinals red? With the bases loaded, and Bonds up in the ninth inning, with the Cards down two to the Cubs, in August ... yeah, we could probably make that transformation. We wouldn't feel good about ourselves ... but we could. We accept your scorn. We deserve it.
St. Louis interest in Bonds could be the one thing that drives his price up, as other NL teams decide any price is worth not putting Barry and Albert in the same lineup. (I can just see Edmonds and Rolen dancing around as Barry signs, chanting, "We're going to drive in 200 runs each!")
As for the bovine steroids, a high ranking member of PETA uses insulin derived from research on dogs. I guess they don't want to her animals unless it can save their lives!
I thought I was conflicted when Terrell Owens came to the Eagles. If Bonds were to come to my favorite team, that would really cause some sleepless nights.
re: LaRussa & Barry Bonds
why not? it's a perfect match of two guys who apparently want to win so badly they're both willing to cheat to win.
LaRussa I've commented on numerous times. He, according to Bryant's recent book on the subject and numerous other sources, oversaw the development of the steroidal regime under Jose Conseco & Mark McGwire and Dave Smoke Stewart in 1988-90 in Oakland; saw it perpetuated under Mark McGwire again in St. Louis in 1997-2001; and LaRussa turned a blind eye to allegations that McGwire was on Androdiesterone during the 1998 season when McGwire was blowing through Maris' record and a reporter found the steroids in McGwire's locker.
LaRussa had the reporter banned from the locker room, issued a statement with McGwire denying that andro was a steroid, and turned a blind eye to the whole thing.
No, I believe that Bonds and LaRussa both want to win so badly that they will turn a blind eye to each other's bad conduct in order to find a way to win.
they certainly deserve each other. LaRussa is also a bit of a jerk, having pinch hit for McGwire and Rolen in the playoffs, benched Rolen in the Playoffs and having sent Conseco packing in a trade after the guy was his big hitter for the As in the late 80s.
LaRussa certainly has no loyalty to his best players. In fact, he is probably the biggest jerk to his players since a guy named Leo the Lip Durocher, who once wrote that nice guys finish last.
--art kyriazis, philly
Benching Rolen in the playoffs worked out very well. We had a near-superstar bench player who filled in admirably, and it lit a fire under rolen's arse.
(and andro ISN'T a steriod, and wasn't banned in the US until 2004. It wasn't illegal in the US until 2005).
What's with the shot at PETA? One could quite easily square concern for animal rights with use of medication derived from medical testing done on animals.
Did you ask this high-ranking official what his views on the subject are, or did you just try to get in a quick cheap shot at those weirdo freaks at PETA?
I'm a steak-loving, 100% carnivore married to a strict vegan. They're nice people, especially if you stop making fun of them for having a conscience and trying to listen to it.
Are there no contradictions or dilemmas in your beliefs?
PETA is collection of gangsters, food nazis and the like. Everyone is entitledto their beliefs, but not to impose them on others. PETAites can go to hell. Vegans are cool, yanks are not.
And Art did an admirable job of summing up Tony La.