BronXBombers51 wrote:Even if you wanted to believe in this...
...Bonds isn't the only person who was a habitual PED user. This isn't a matter of a person who tried pot once and a habitual user. This is treating a habitual user much more harshly and unfairly than another habitual users.
The game is FULL of habitual users. Do we all honestly believe into these "I tried HGH once when I was rehabbing" statements? Come on. Maybe it's true, but I'd say there's better than a 50-50 chance that most of them are BS-ing. As someone stated earlier...there was a culture of drug use in baseball. Heavy usage doesn't start and end with Bonds. Is he a part of it? Certainly. But that's all he is. He's a part. This has been going on since the mid-80s, if not earlier. Bonds isn't even accused of using until roughly 1999-2000.
People just need to stop acting like this is a Bonds issue. It's a baseball issue. Bonds plays a small role in the overall scheme of things.
I know that there are a lot of other habitual users, but there is nothing in comparison to what stacks up against Bonds in terms of evidence. If there was as much information about everyone else as there was about Bonds, there would be a lot more focus towards other people. We have just seen a substantial amount of information about Clemens when the Mitchell report came out, and I have hardly heard Bonds mentioned. I think most of your problem is with the media, where their job is to sell papers. If they wrote articles about how they thought Alex Sanchez and Matt Herges and other people should were bad steroid users, would you even read the article? Most people don't even know who they are. They right articles about Bonds and Clemens because they are the most interesting and sell the most papers. It is the nature of how media works. This isn't just how the media treats Bonds unfairly, it is how the media always treats everything. For instance, Britney Spears probably isn't the only celebrity that doesn't wear underwear or is a bad mother, but there are always pictures of her everywhere with her child in her lap while she's driving or stories about how she tried to get her toddler porcelain teeth or how she doesn't hardly ever wear underwear. All of these things are written about her and all the pictures are taken because she is popular and a polarizing figure that causes people to have opinions and sells papers. I don't think Bonds records should be erased or asterisked, for the record and I do think it is stupid and unfair that Selig is probably going to go after him more so than other people.
I guess my overall point is that the media is always unfair. This isn't the media specifically out to get Bonds, he is just the most relevant. Plenty of celebrities get this same bias against them, and it is not isolated to Bonds. The overall tone of people's arguments for Bonds makes it sound like everyone in the world is treated fairly by the media except for Bonds, and that is simply not the case.