The Mitchell Report on performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball comes out later today. The 300-plus-page study promises to name upwards of fifty names. Former Senator George Mitchell apparently runs a tight ship. As of just a few hours before the report's release time, no names have been leaked. If your favorite player makes the ignominous list, will you think less of him? With Major League Baseball tacitly approving steroid use for more than a decade, and reaping millions off its promotion of the steroid-aided Sammy Sosa-Mark McGwire home run chase, it strikes as hypocritical and slimy for MLB to attaint all these players who really just did what MLB allowed them to do. If there's no punishment to a rule violation, as was the case with steroid use in baseball for a long, long time, one can't really surmise that the rulemakers cared so much about the rule. This is a bombshell of a baseball story, the kind that excites people who never seem to get excited about the games on the field. The official punishment that offending players eluded while on the juice or on growth will be amplified tenfold by the public scorn that will now follow their names.

I agree that it is slimy on the part of MLB. However, if any Red Sox are listed on the report, I will be heartbroken.

As far as I know MLB doesn't have any rules against beating your wife but if players or managers beat their wives and are found out it would be a scandal and surely they would feel justified in at least making a statement against the player's actions or possibly even imposing some punishment.

Also, MLB has general rules of "sportsmanship" and "fair play." Are they really supposed to anticipate every specific means of violating the integrity of the game explicitly in the rule book? So they should say have a rule against the use of dna splicing of Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, and Pedro Martinez to create a petri dished raised super-pitcher cyborg? Obviously steroids is not the same thing, but my point is you are encouraging an unrealistic legalism. As in, "there was no rule against using cyborgs so it isn't cheating!"

My point is that it was illegal to buy steroids and HGH in likely all the cases that will be cited in this report. If states and the national government have laws against something (whether they should isn't the issue), be it wife beating, drunk driving, theft, or steroid usage, then MLB does not need to apologize for condemning those illegal acts, even after the fact. To mitigate the players responsibility to NOT BREAK THE LAW irregardless of whatever rules MLB has in place is off base in my view.

That being said, I don't think MLB is off the hook, and yes they "allowed" it, profited off it, etc. There is plenty of blame to go around for both sides. I see no reason to try and play the culpability of one side off on the other to minimize either.

Personally, I have no problem with performance enhancing supplements.

Take this stuff out of the professional sporting equation and the entertainment value decreases. Not by a lot, but I like my gladiators to be the best they can be.

I understand that they are considering removing the Grateful Dead from the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame for using performance enhancing drugs.

You have that wrong Homer. It was The Dead's fans that needed the drugs just to be able to get through the alledged music.

If Ron Leflore is on this list I will be sad. I saw the Ron Leflore story as a little boy and it inspired me to steal cars and bases. I hope he is not on it. It will tarnish ABC after school movies and baseball

Clemens and Pettite are on it, big time dopers.

Btw, you realize Dan that Baseball has banned steroid use since 1991 right? The problem was that they had no means to enforce it as no testing in place b/c of a combo of the player union and their own unwillingness to force the issue (read Selig is the worst commish ever).

Ohhh...right. You were the one who thinks Lenny Kravitz really "jams", right? Or was it the Black Crowes? They can really throw down that jive, man...

I can dig it.

Nope. They $uck too. Poser and Garage Band.

Veritek? Not really that surprised. But again, who cares.

Oh, I thought that was you.

Oh well, [insert your fav band] sucks.

Induct Pete Rose!

Varitek isn't mentioned.

Homer,
You mean performance dehancing drugs, right?

You people clearly have no taste.

How many tabs does it take to make a Jerry Garcia solo sound good, I wonder? Maybe that's my problem, I've never dropped acid. Tell you what, tell me your favorite Dead album and I'll borrow it from my neighbor and give it a fresh listen. Maybe I'm missing something.

There aren't any Rangers on the list... So that's why they've been so bad.

Actually, I'm just messing around. The Dead are not for everyone. Though, American Beauty is just a good solid album.

And for the record, 0. But 1 or 2 can't hurt.

Is 'Joe' the secret word to turn a post into an 'Open Thread' Friday? I know that The Dead took a lot of drugs but don't remember a Jerry Garcia playing first base for anybody.

He sung the national anthem at a Giants game once and threw out the first ball. Doen't that count?

Personally, I think they should let all the professional athletes take anything they want. No testing whatsoever. Then let the kids who use these guys as role models watch them die between 35 and 40. Big sports is big business and some guys will find a way to get an edge no matter what. Let’s enjoy the games but not waste our energy trying to keep these guys off drugs or out of jail.

I agree AM. With the help of engaged parents who know better and with the ultimate result of drug use meaning early death for a number of pros who do it, it should be enough to turn most kids away from using the stuff themselves.

When you think about it, the fact that today's athletes need synthetic enhancements to be as good as they can be highlights the accomplishments of athletes from days gone by. As the sign said at a Giants game "The Babe did it with hot dogs and beer.'

But let's consider: if the juice was available to the Babe, would he not have taken it?

San Francisco is such a f'ked up place. Where else would they want a drug adled old hippie of questionable talent sing our National Anthem and throw out the first ball? How American is that?

What's next, Nancy Pelosi singing 'Ballgame' at the seventh inning stretch?

BTW Batman, you're right about Veritek. PMSNBC had his name listed erroneosly with some other players including Puljols. If I were those guys, I'd sue. Especially as once your name is linked to something like this, no matter if you're innocent or not, it has a tendency to stick.

Surprised Buckholz wasn't on the list. ;-)~

How can anyone really take this report seriously? There's really no evidence in it. All this does is rehash names of people accused of steroid use. MLB has needlessly dragged players' names through the mud based, essentially, on two former clubhouse attendants. And at the end of the day, there's no resolution to the steroid problem.

Well, I don't know about open threads...I just know that if whitey riots, we'll trash a Nordstroms or a high end electronics store. I'll all over that.

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/14843952/detail.html

Hold on Homer, you can't highlight items like this 'cause we all know that it's Whitey who are the racists and who discriminate and attack based on skin color.

Come on man, get with the program!

As long was we as a society continue to turn our heads away from this kind of thing in the name of political correctness, the closer we get to chaos and the further degradation of our society through lawlessness.

Unfortunately, it's a prevailing mentality.

I'll never forget when the verdict was read after OJ was cleared of double murder and they showed his peeps whooping it up.

Contrary to popular belief, Whitey is not the most racially discriminitory animal on the planet.

I don't know what you're talking about.

All I'm saying is: Where's MY new DVD player? Where's MY designer jacket?

I just want to see justice served.

From the descriptions I've heard on talk radio, the inclusions of Brian Roberts and Mo Vaughn, seem, on the evidence presented, unjust. Roberts' case is apparently based entirely on an overheard conversation. Vaughn's case involves human growth hormone to overcome an injury at a time when the illegality of HGH was questionable, and its legality/illegality within MLB was not clear. Vaughn, according to Kirk Radomski, refused steroids when the subject was brought up. The other descriptions I've heard seem slam dunks.