They’re like any other mob—they lose any sense of right and wrong (even if they had it in the first place).

Craig,

Learned a great new word playing Scrabble with my father several years ago that my wife and I have incorporated in our lexicon:  Nidget (see definition below).  My wife thinks of it as a less harsh word to use (coded as well) and I realized that my retired father has way to much time on his hand and feeds he competitive nature by reading the Scrabble dictionary so he can beat as often as possible. 

Nidg´et
n. 1. A fool; an idiot, a coward.

What’s even crazier is that last week I wrote about this same subject in way harsher terms, and got relatively little reaction from it.

All of the passion on the part of the nidgets (thanks Moose!) is a result of me disagreeing with Hank Aaron.

What I find interesting is that folks want to release the names of ‘cheaters and criminal’, though I am sure not all of the PEDs were illegal, on the grounds that they did something illegal and therefore gave away all their rights.  However, folks do not seem bothered that people (lawyers, other court officers, media) are violating the law by leaking and/or publishing leaked names.  It seems to me to be awfully selective in how and when laws need to adhered to.

NIDGETS!!!!!!  All of ‘em!

(love it, Moose)

“Gray day, everything is gray. I watch but nothing moves today”
Hey! finally a reference I didn’t have to Google.
I guess having small kids does have it’s advantages after all.
I swear I’m batting about .150 on the references, and that doesn’t include the ones that I never even recognized as references.

“Some names are leaked, so bring on the rest. Why alienate some and not all?”  This comment over at NBC is typical of what far too many people call “logic” and “fairness.” If some people in a group get screwed, the fair thing is to make sure everyone in the group gets screwed. Or the converse: some people get an unfair advantage, so the only fair thing is to give everyone the same unfair advantage. I spend my whole day trying to explain this. People who think like this make a lot of laws and policy in this country—-they may even constitute a majority. Be afraid.

Craig - You know my feelings on the subject of PED’s. They haven’t changed since I last chimed in on one of these discussions. For the record, Henry Aaron is GRRATNESS both because of his accomplishments and his humility. I agree with his sentiment here, but understand the reasons not to do what he would like. The only reason that the release of these names (or the inability to do so) is that Donald Fehr is an a**hole and Bud Selig is a pu**y. The confidentiality of the list should never have been a negotiated restriction! I do, however, have a question for the shyster in you: If laws were, indeed, broken, would not the union be liable for not disclosing known criminal activity to the proper authorities? Isn’t there an obligation to the criminal justice system to disclose such known activity, regardless of any civil contract? That being the case, should the list not be turned over to police, who then could publish it if they wish?

Craig - You know my feelings on the subject of PED’s. They haven’t changed since I last chimed in on one of these discussions. For the record, Henry Aaron is GREATNESS both because of his accomplishments and his humility. I agree with his sentiment here, but understand the reasons not to do what he would like. The only reason that the release of these names (or the inability to do so) is that Donald Fehr is an a**hole and Bud Selig is a pu**y. The confidentiality of the list should never have been a negotiated restriction! I do, however, have a question for the shyster in you: If laws were, indeed, broken, would not the union be liable for not disclosing known criminal activity to the proper authorities? Isn’t there an obligation to the criminal justice system to disclose such known activity, regardless of any civil contract? That being the case, should the list not be turned over to police, who then could publish it if they wish?

THAT’s a good way for unions to behave: convince your members to take a drug test under assurances of confidentiality, then report the violators to the police! No employer is under an obligation to blow the whistle on an employee for drug abuse as the result of a voluntary (or mandatory) drug test, and a union that did so might as well just pack it in. The fact that you could even ask this question goes a long way toward explaining why you agree with Aaron. Wow.