Hi, all...
Please forgive me for not posting this week.
I've been hospitalized with pneumonia and congestive heart failure since Sunday last, and probably won't be discharged until tomorrow (Friday, May 8th).
I haven't had Internet access until this morning, and that proved a total fluke.
Sharpen your knives, if warranted, and I'll update tomorrow.
Until then, cheers -- and jeers!
19 comments:
"pneumonia and congestive heart failure"
What kind of excuse is that?
Dude, get better. Fast. Thoughts with you.
Your pal,
Timmy
At least you don't have what Manny has.
Here comes the CHB to tell us everything that is wrong with him....wait for it...wait for it...
Hey Jerry
THinking of you. Get better soon
There is going to be a doozy Shank slamfest of Manny no doubt
Dave M
Wow. Hope you get better soon.
mike b1 is right - Shank will come out with his Manny piece real quick.
Hopefully the Shank takes responsibility for his lack of courage in reporting the truths he knew about the "steroid" era in baseball.
Manny admitted his mistake and is moving on. Will the Shank move on gracefully?
Can the Shank admit his lack of "testosterones" doing his job as a reporter or will he still be in denial and claim that he is a saint of a "typist".
g
Jerry - hope you're doing better soon, unlike the Boston Globe.
Agree w/ Mike & Dave M - the Manny article will be a world class barnburner.
Best wishes for a quick and full recovery.
Anonymous, His Manniness admitted nothing - he lied his needle-studded ass off about the doctor and a prescription drug.
Monkeesfan …….
You need to dig a little deeper into your bloody sock.
Here is where we are at in the current episode of baseballs’ Steroidgate which is titled “Sacrifice the Non-conformists in Order Clean Up Our (Owners) Tainted Image”:
In the past ….
“Ramirez was not mentioned in the Mitchell Report in December 2007, MLB's official report on drug use, and there had not been whispers that he was among the sport's juiced players.”
Now Ramirez admits, ….
"Recently I saw a physician for a personal health issue. He gave me a medication, not a steroid, which he thought was OK to give me. Unfortunately, the medication was banned under our drug policy. Under the policy that mistake is now my responsibility.”
Media Responsibility
We shall see where the media darlings take this. Those same media darlings are the ones that have financially capitalized on the recent explosion in the popularity of MLB during the last decade or so.
Interestingly, persons like Curt Schilling are quick to attack and point the finger. But if Schill was so righteous why didn’t he lead a “Player’s Prayer” crusade against the “Steroid Era” while he was competing and in the midst of it all? Money!
Same goes for the Shank, why didn’t he lead a campaign at mobilizing all the “intelligent” media whores into cleaning up the game? Money!
Future
…….. and now the saints (Schill & Shank) come marching in.
Bottom Line
Ramirez did admit to his mistake.
Do we all now need to burn him to the stake because the powers that didn’t have the gonads to deal with steroids early on? What greed!
g
Bottomline.....This is the steroid era, some guys used roids,some did not....some guys got caught,some did not get caught...other than the guys who did get caught, WE WILL NEVER KNOW FOR SURE who was using and who wasn't....MOVE ON....anything else is just like a dog chasing it's own tail....to sum up, Roids, WHO GIVES A RAT'S ASS?....(except the media,of course)......and best wishes to you Jerry. Get well soon.
Anonymous, Manny's excuse is a lie.
onkeesfan ....
Explain to me where the lie is in Manny's legally prepared statement:
"Recently I saw a physician for a personal health issue. He gave me a medication, not a steroid, which he thought was OK to give me. Unfortunately, the medication was banned under our drug policy. Under the policy that mistake is now my responsibility.”
Then explain to me how you want to crucify him .... and the rest of the bozos that have profited from playing a game ... the CHB included.
What about the owners of MLB?
g
Hope you're doing better, Jerry. Looking forward to your return.
Look, up in the skies, Globies!
"It's a bird!"
"It's a plane!"
"No, it's David Geffen!"
It’s the hottest topic on two coasts. Why in the world would David Geffen, perhaps the shrewdest investor Hollywood has seen in years, want to plunk down $200 million or so for the 19.9% stake in the New York Times Co. held by hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners? Like most newspapers, The New York Times, which owns its fabled Gray Lady flagship, the Boston Globe and other assorted assets, is losing tons of money. Worse yet, with ad sales that make up 59% of its overall revenues tanking and not likely to fully recover, the Times is fast becoming a non-profit institution.Fast?
This is exactly what David Geffen understands. For $200 million, the Hollywood financier, who generously contributes hefty amounts to the arts and hospitals in the LA area, would be making a financial contribution to a national institution that likely will never be a large money maker.Does he get a charitable contribution deduction on his Federal tax return for this buy?
Geffen, who in the last year has stepped down from his job as chairman of Steven Spielberg’s Dreamworks studio and from the board of Dreamworks Animation, doesn’t so much see this as a business venture, but rather as a civic investment. Hard to believe, but after years of watching Geffen operate behind the scenes, it is clear that at 66, he has little left prove in the business world. He is worth . . . well, who knows. But likely north of $6 billion since he presciently took all his money out of the stock market a year before the crash. Paul Allen... Portland Trailblazers...
I suspect that Geffen would love to make another billion somewhere, but he clearly knows that The New York Times isn’t that place. Last year, the company lost $57 million. This year it has already lost nearly $75 million. And we're only halfway through Q2!
But a Times investment would be deeply personal for the billionaire. Geffen came from New York, having been born to immigrant parents who lived in Brooklyn, and he has become for the last three decades a fixture in the power structure of the city. He grew up reading The New York Times, and knows its power as a national oracle. (He, after all, helped hobble Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts with a well-aimed barb to Times columnist and friend Maureen Dowd in which he said the Clintons lie with “with such ease, it’s troubling.”)
With its annual haul of Pulitzer Prizes, The New York Times is a journalistic giant and a national treasure. And, as I am sure that Geffen knows well, it is also an impassioned voice for the liberal causes that Geffen likely holds dear. Would he like to make sure it continues as the Oracle of the Big Apple? Does a Hollywood mogul live behind a large gate (and Geffen’s walls are the largest in town)? You betcha.
Harbinger would not comment, but a source close to the matter says that the firm “hasn’t made a decision concerning The New York Times.” This source also confirms that Geffen approached Harbinger and that Harbinger declined the offer. Geffen’s overture was first reported on Fortune's Web site.
So does Geffen make another bid for the Times, or was his offer to Harbinger just a passing fancy? That’s harder to say. He tried in 2006 to buy The Los Angeles Times, and I suspect that, too, would have likely gone from its alleged status as a profit-seeking venture to non-profit status had he won it. He backed out because the asking price was too high and he didn’t see eye to eye with partner Eli Broad, who also saw The LA Times as a civic institution necessary to be saved.
So, this is not a new idea to him. And while Geffen famously refuses to over-pay, my bet is that he and the Harbinger folks are likely still talking, or that they will before too long. Geffen these days is spending a lot of time on the 453-foot-long (yes, you heard that right) super-yacht he shares with Oracle founder Larry Ellison, and recently returned from Thailand.
Eventually he would likely run out of places to visit. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t voyages he still wants to take.
It's too bad you're under the weather. Shank's gleeful Bruins exit from the playoffs column is one of his absolute worst.
I mean, he even starts off by gloating over the 18-1 Pats.
thanks for the update, Paul.......that's why I don't even bother reading Shank's column anymore....so predictable...sometimes I say to myself, "maybe I should read his column today, give him a chance"....then I think better of it. It's quite empowering to just ignore Shank's column....all that effort he put into trying to piss off the fans and I didn't read a word of it....it's great!...it's like he's dead!....(or unemployed, which should be coming soon)....I reccomend ignoring Shank to everyone I meet!
To call the post-Bruins loss column "gleeful" is idiotic. It actually was dead-on, there were high expectations for the playoffs after a year in which the very word Bruins came back into sports conversation for tee first time in years and it came to a game 7 at the Garden which all of Bruins, fans thought they would win and ended with the flick of a wrist in overtime.
Not gleeful, but absolutely accurate.
Indeed, it was an excellent and much-needed column...
Hello, all...
I am still with the living, although markedly black and blue.
I suffered an attack while in the hospital that prompted the implantation of a defibrillator. I look like a plum...
Post a Comment