Tim McG

I hate to be the one to break the news, but there's about a 99% chance that your allergy medications contain steroids. My advice to you would be that you ask no further questions. I mean, why would anyone want to know what someone was shooting into their body...especially if the person administering the injections wasn't a physician or even a medical professional? If Bonds didn't ask those questions, then they should drop the perjury charges immediately and arrest him for stupidity. Then you would be 100% wrong. The shots do not contain steroids. These are shots to develope immunity so that I can tolerate pollens. It is a two year process. No muscle gain, either. So you check for each and every ingredient in the meds you are given by the doctor....really? I find that very hard to believe. Especially the sweet Italian sausage from Claro's. Yum.

I suppose they could always claim they didn't know what they were taking. OK...and? Tell me, do you always know what your doctor injects you with? For myself, I take two injections a week for my allergies. I haven't the foggiest notion what is in those shots. All I know is my doctor proscribed them to combat allergies.

If you're buying, I'm drinking. We don't brew any haterade for the Giants down here. We just send cholos to hospitalize them. Kidding, in bad taste. No problem, Jon. They shot a Giants fan a couple years ago. At least this one is still alive. As to tonight's game-Three words: Barry Fucking Zito. The only saving grace for Mr. Goferball is the season's still young. Grrrr Barry Fucking Zito??? I was expecting to see 7 runs in 4 innings or something... 6 innings 3 runs. Not too bad for your 5th starter...an expensive 5th starter, but still! It was 3 runs before the National Anthem even stopped echoing in the stadium.

I don't either. Because if Selig does that but allows Gagne to keep his Cy Young or any other steroid user to keep their records he would be nothing less than a hypocrite. It would also open the proverbial Pandora's Box. How many ballpayers would have to be relieved of their records or put on trial for keeping the truth of their steroid use away from the Commissioner's Office? There would be no end to it.

Yes, I'm familiar with the "steroids/hgh is equivalent to aspirin/boo boo juice" argument. It is pointless, because it's medically and legally nonsense to compare aspirin with roids. That's pretty ... er ... clear. I haven't heard anyone demand that Bonds be stripped of his MVP awards. Just a little * is all. That should goe for Gagne's Cy Young, too. Here's a concept: Lets hold people accountable for lying under oath (which is different from taking steroids). See Roger Clemens. I'd think that as someone who deals with kids, you might see this as a teachable moment. As in, hey kids, don't do something wrong and then lie about it to try to cover it up. Come clean, acknowledge you screwed up, and you'll be better off in the end. See Andy Pettitte. You know, if I live to be a thousand, I will never understand why any discussion on this or any other BBS has to include some veiled insult relative to my job. I don't tell you or anyone else how to conduct themselves in the workplace so I fail to understand why you need to, Papsrus. This is a thread about Bonds' trial, not a career....nor does it have anything at all to do with it. No one is saying aspirin is the same as steroids. The term was "performance enhancing drugs". Any pain reliever does exactly that. The point of comparison is neither will make a player hit HRs. Why that is such a bone of contention it is beyond my comprehension. No one is saying that a person who lies shouldn't be held to task, either. But I sure would like the people who insist upon using photoshopped pictures to be taken to task as well. What I am saying is in our court of law the prosecution has the burden of proof. And no such proof exists relative to the charge that Bonds knowingly took steroids. Whether or not lying is a bad thing to do is a separate issue. Whether or not Bonds actually did use steroids is a separate issue. The charge is he knowingly took steroids. Period. The Feds have no case.

If you're buying, I'm drinking. We don't brew any haterade for the Giants down here. We just send cholos to hospitalize them. Kidding, in bad taste. No problem, Jon. They shot a Giants fan a couple years ago. At least this one is still alive. As to tonight's game-Three words: Barry Fucking Zito. The only saving grace for Mr. Goferball is the season's still young. Grrrr

Convict him of lying about a material fact in testimony before a Grand Jury. That is perjury, its a felony, and he lied in so many ways in his testimony that they have two charges that don't relate in any way to whether he knowingly took HGH or steroids. So congratulations on finally learning and accepting that there are perjury charges that don't specify that he had knowingly taken steroids or HGH. When your hero is convicted, you can celebrate that he wasn't found guilty of knowingly using steroids or HGH. The rest of the rational world has already figured out what he took and that he knowingly took them, regardless of what a jury may find when they are being denied the testimony of Greg Anderson, and as a result, an enormous amount of other evidence that was excluded as a result of Anderson's actions to obstruct justice. Point of clarification: My hero is Miles Davis. He didn't play baseball. As to the rest: Papsrus, I'm not going to re-hash all the pointless palaver about "performance enhancing drugs" which could range from aspirin to that so-called "boo-boo juice" batters get after being hit with a baseball. None of which makes a player hit HRs. Additionally, as I have already stated, numerous times, on this BBS that he has admitted to using the "clear" and I really don't much care if he did use steroids. Eric Gagne did and nobody is talking about taking his Cy Young away. So what is the BFD? We going to put all the guys who did steroids on trial now? A ridiculous concept. Catching Bonds in a lie about who gave him injections [which clearly does not prove he knew what was in those injections] is not what this case is about and you know it, Dan. It is about whether he knowingly took steroids. Period. All the rest is just prosecutorial add-on bullshit. Look, you have already made up your mind about this whole business because the truth of the whole matter no longer means anything to you. That's fine, Dan. Believe what you want, OK? But it is also painfully clear that any discussion with you along these lines is virtually impossible without you having to hurl insults. It's only a game, Dan...quit taking it so personally.

Convict him on what, Dan...getting injections? Last I heard it is still legal in this country to that. The principle reason for this charade is the use of steroids. If they convict him on being injected then it only proves what a joke trial this really is.

That's it? That's all you got?? He's in jail because he wants to say FU to the Grand Jury?? No. That's all there is. He's in jail because he refused to cooperate with the prosecution after they jerked him around. The judge subsequently held him in contempt and made him nothing less than a political prisoner. I'm real sorry if you don't like the answer, but do the research and find out for yourself, then.

Good point. Though they showed in force on Thursday's opener. TBH, Mark Cuban would be a mistake. You guys already had one yutz in Rupert Murdoch. When the Giants played at Candlestick the parking was a complete zoo; still is. One way in, one way out. Geez. I took my son to a Niners game a couple years back, and I kid you not, it took us a full hour and a half just to get to the on ramp of the 101 Freeway. At ATT, surface transportation is the way to go. I'll have to take you to a game one time, Jon. The Duke's Dodger Hater Weizenbock Beer is on me, OK?

Logical "proof" that he took something illegal and knew it: Greg Anderson is sitting in jail refusing to testify. If Bonds was innocent (despite the overwhelming circumstantial evidence) of the charges of lying to the Grand Jury about taking steroids, then Anderson would have no reason to avoid the trial. He'd be able to waltz right in, say he never injected Bonds with anything, or at the very least never told Bonds what he was injecting into him. That despite all the other ballplayers flocking to Anderson to get similar injections, knowing what it had done for Bonds, and all of them knowing they were asking for illegal substances. Since Anderson is refusing to testify, he obviously has information that would hurt Bonds, and doesn't want to share it. Otherwise he'd be there at the trial. He probably has a golden handshake from Bonds and is waiting and for a big payday once everything is finally over. That's his incentive. That's about enough reasonable proof to me. Also, a credible witness (Kathy Hoskings) who didn't want to testify at all, stated today that she personally saw Anderson injecting Bonds: "'This is Kathy. That's my girl. She ain't going to say nothing to nobody,"' she quoted Bonds as saying. "So Greg shot him in the belly button." Why would Bonds be worried she would say something to anybody, if he was doing something legal? Still waiting for a reasonable, logical response from Goodspeak on why Anderson's in jail, from Goodspeak's perspective. Well, if you read the newspapers you would know Anderson got screwed over by the prosecution relative to a deal they made regarding immunity for his testimony. So, basically, he told them to go fuck themselves. Besides, I am certain he knows this is a three ring circus just like the rest of us who care about keeping trivial cases like this one out of the court system.

Cool. Look me up and we'll go together. I'll even buy you a beer: Duke's Dodger Hater [sic]

An old fashion beat-down in LaLa Land: Giants win, 10 to zip I couldn't help but notice that, like last night, they invited a lot of empty seats to the game. A Saturday afternoon and the Dodger fans can't make it to the ballpark and support the oldest running rivalry in baseball? Really?

The term "my girl" has always meant a romantic involvement...since time began, for pete's sake. There have been song lyrics, a song, poetry and fiction with that term meaning just exactly that. You never heard of the Temptations? Sheesh. My Girl That's a nice group. Do they have any other records? And what I said was that "my girl" does not only signify a romantic involvement. It's actually pretty common these days for it to not. Do you know anybody under 40? And if so, do they go around jamming The Temptations all day? I know hundreds of people under 40. You? They dig the hell out of [late 60s] 70s music, too. And I didn't say "only" either. Oh, so you're pseudo-arguing against a point with which you do not disagree. In order to, what...deflect energy away from the obvious primary point (that Bonds was on steroids, irregardless of whether or not it can be "legally" proved)? Mr. Weizen, have you been taking on students for supplemental income? I use the term "my girl" in reference to my daughter all the time. I also refer to my wife, romantically, using the very same term. I've known my wife a while longer, so on that level, the romantic involvement would be the way I have used it most. I think most people do, too. As to the "pseudo-arguing", TBH, I have no idea what you mean. But I can tell you this: It's regardless, not irregardless. Ask somebody who is over 40.

The term "my girl" has always meant a romantic involvement...since time began, for pete's sake. There have been song lyrics, a song, poetry and fiction with that term meaning just exactly that. You never heard of the Temptations? Sheesh. My Girl That's a nice group. Do they have any other records? And what I said was that "my girl" does not only signify a romantic involvement. It's actually pretty common these days for it to not. Do you know anybody under 40? And if so, do they go around jamming The Temptations all day? I know hundreds of people under 40. You? They dig the hell out of [late 60s] 70s music, too. And I didn't say "only" either.

The term "my girl" has always meant a romantic involvement...since time began, for pete's sake. There have been song lyrics, a song, poetry and fiction with that term meaning just exactly that. You never heard of the Temptations? Sheesh. My Girl I was voicing an assumption with no proof to make a point about what the prosecution is doing with their "evidence". Dan took the bait. My point is made. And that would be an assumption, Dan. Er, a "factual observation" of your assuming this to be true, that is.

I quote: "This is Katie, she's my girl, she won't say anything." I further quote: The ballplayer called it a "little somethin', somethin'" he took before heading out on road trips. Source: San Jose Mercury News What, one might posit, would the term "she's my girl" denote? I am making an assumption based on very little proof. Just like the prosecution is. What, one might further posit, would this "somethin'" be? Yet another assumption, no proof. Her brother was caught in a lie earlier on the stand, and under oath. Why, then, shouldn't we expect his sister isn't a liar, too? And I am asking you nicely, Dan: Please stop the insults or I will ask the moderator to shut this thread down. Thank you.

Alternative....? The Braves are always picked to win. The Giants are rarely picked to win. BTW...have I mentioned that I hate the Dodgers? Grrrr

Well, it's pretty clear to me you're asking us to believe that Bonds didn't knowingly take steroids. Seems to me, more and more evidence is accumulating every day that undermines your position, so I'm curious; if Bonds is eventually convicted, will you then claim it's a miscarriage of justice or is there a point in the process where you will concede that he was, indeed, aware of what he was doing? Will you acknowledge his innocence if he is found not guilty? I haven't been claiming Bonds wasn't on steroids and TBH, I couldn't care less if he was. I have, however, been saying that there is no proof that he knowingly took steroids. Big difference, Dave. Wrong about what? There is no actual evidence, only hearsay testimony. That isn't enough to convict Bonds of jaywalking. Hear, hear.

Better check with the prosecution's star witness, Dr. Arthur Ting. He testified he had one generic conversation about steriods with Steve Hoskins, the brother of Bonds' ex-girlfriend [you know, The Queen of Credibility], who claims to have spoken over 50 times with him about Bonds steriod use. They're both liars. So much for that slam dunk case against Bonds, huh. Bullshit in, bullshit out: The Feds got no case. An injection of what, pray tell. Like I said, she has no motive but to screw Bonds. Zero credibility. A she said he said nothing of a case. What part of "only my doctor has ever given me an injection" don't you understand? No one has to prove that steroids were in the syringe - she has testified to witnessing the injection given by Greg Anderson to Barry Bonds. Greg Anderson is NOT a doctor. The prosecution has proven that count of perjury. And you obviously pay no attention to this trial in the first place. This testimony was by his "personal shopper" not his mistress or business partner. She cried on the stand from beginning to end because she did not want to testify at all. Her brother, the former business partner, told the feds that she had witnessed Anderson inject Bonds and because unlike the scumbag trainer, she takes her obligation as a citizen seriously, she testified to what she witnessed. The defense did nothing to impeach her credibility and I suspect that her being so upset on the stand will go a long way toward confirming her account for the jury. The charge is Bonds lied about whether he knowingly took steroids. An injection without any evidence that it is, in fact, steroids is no proof of anything beyond pure speculation. The Feds got no case.

An injection of what, pray tell. Like I said, she has no motive but to screw Bonds. Zero credibility. A she said he said nothing of a case. So you're asking us to believe that Bonds was getting regularly injected like he was some kind of pin cushion, he undergoes all these physical and emotional changes and at no point does he stop to ask, "oh, by the way, what is that stuff?" Please. I'm not asking you to believe anything.

Guilt by association is not proof Bonds knowingly took steroids. That is the the charge, Guys. The Feds have no case.

Rough day for the Gigantes....three errors won't get the job done, Boyz.

Big season opener for my guys: Giants vs. Dodgers; four game series. Beat LA!!!

I recall someone, somewhere around here saying that steroids have no effect on a hitter's physical abilities. And I recall someone slamming prosecutors at just about every turn leading up to the trial. And, correct me if I'm mistaken, but an essential part of Bonds' defense is to discredit the witnesses testifying against him (naturally). I'm just glad they disallowed testimony from his former mistress about the size of his shrinking balls. No. What I said was steroids only make you bigger. They don't make you hit HRs. No. I slammed the whole waste of taxpayer money and the fact the Feds have no case. No. I said a jilted ex-girlfriend who was summarily kicked to the curb has about as much credibility as a community bedpan. Shrinking balls? M'kay. Now you're just making it up as you go along.