posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 02:06 PM
Mark McGwire said that he was not in front of the Congressional Committee to testify about the past. Has anyone ever tried to explain to him that
testimony is "about the past"?
We don't ask people to swear under oath about what is going to happen in the future; we ask them to opine on such topics and if we want to gauge their
level of confidence about said opinions, we offer them the opportunity to wager on them. [Imagine the idiocy of swearing in a witness and then
questioning him on his bracket picks for the NCAA Tournament...]
Maybe Congress should have informed McGwire of their interest in "things past" and told him to answer their questions on "things past". The problem
with that is that would require the Congressthings to have recognized on the fly the absurdity of McGwire's contention that such commentary was beyond
the scope of his testimony. I doubt that any of them did.
After hearing from the families of the kids who committed suicide after taking steroids and the effusive sympathy offered to them by the
Congressthings, you need to look at what those exchanges accomplished. Yes, I know they accomplished the purpose of making the Congressthings look
human and empathic and all that, but what else? Remember, the Congressthings kept telling everyone that it was important to send the right messages to
"the children". So here is the logical consequence from their hearings:
1. Kids, don't take steroids. They aren't good for you.
2. Parents, you better pay strict attention to what your kids are taking because steroids - like drugs - are not good for them.
3. Kids, if you ever start taking steroids, don't stop taking them; because after you stop, you might commit suicide. Steroids aren't good for you,
but suicide is a lot worse for you.
4. Congresthings, that's one of the messages you left out there "for the children". Would you like a chance to "revise and extend" that message?
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
Copyright The Sports Curmudgeon