I believe poor ole Roger...

[Pastor G]

It doesn't hurt us to give the benefit of the doubt.. We don't want to so we can say "I told you so" or "I knew it."

For some reason even Christians tend to jump on the negative instead of reserving judgement until all the facts are in..

There was a man in the news last week that got released after 27 years in prison in my city.. He maintained he was not guilty all along as do most in prison, but DNA proved him right... So actually some are falsly accused... Can you believe it?

Roger has done much for the game of baseball... I choose to believe he is not guilty, if it comes out that he is, then so be it.. It hasn't hurt me at all to believe him..

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by Pastor G

It doesn't hurt us to give the benefit of the doubt.. We don't want to so we can say "I told you so" or "I knew it."

For some reason even Christians tend to jump on the negative instead of reserving judgement until all the facts are in..

There was a man in the news last week that got released after 27 years in prison in my city.. He maintained he was not guilty all along as do most in prison, but DNA proved him right... So actually some are falsly accused... Can you believe it?

Roger has done much for the game of baseball... I choose to believe he is not guilty, if it comes out that he is, then so be it.. It hasn't hurt me at all to believe him..

See, now this is nice

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Pastor G

I choose to believe he is not guilty, if it comes out that he is, then so be it.. It hasn't hurt me at all to believe him..

Originally Posted by Mrs. LPW

See, now this is nice

Awww...see there.
Are you implying I'm not nice??
(*pouting*)

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Awww...see there.
Are you implying I'm not nice??
(*pouting*)

Oh I'm sure you'll get over it. Broad shoulders and all that.

I've changed my mind (I'm a woman and we do that) I think Roger is GUILTY.

So here's a story. I know someone, he's messed up. Has a bad health problem but he's also a drug addict to add insult to injury.

So a bit ago he was approached by the police in our fair city to be a rat. And they pay him. (this is what he told my husband.. but he's also a pathelogical liar... so take it with a grain of salt)
Anyway, he was found out by someone he was going to rat on, (cause he's stupid to boot) and he went to the police and told them he was done ratting. They then said... well, we've got so much on you we'll put you away unless you continue.

SOOOOOOOOOO... is it possible McNamee has been paid to tell what he's told? Whether it's true or not? Can the government do such a thing to get info? If they CAN... that's another whole can of "how can we ever know the truth and trust our governments" worms.

McNamee's son is apparently very sick...
And of course, this proves nothing because he might want money from Clemens to retract his story about steroids.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Pardon me folks. Somebody help me here.

It seems that so many people who always believed Barry Bonds was guilty
...and always believed Michael Vick was guilty
... and always believed Marion Jones was guilty

... now think "we should give Roger Clemens the benefit of the doubt" (?!)

Why is that?
...

well, the mounting evidence against Barry Bonds is staggering. leaked Grand Jury testamony that was written in a book was massivly dammaging. his name all over BALCO documents was increminating way beyond one convicts testamony. Personally I didnt believe any of the hearsay, but when hard evidence was brought....well that kind of changes things... kind of like Barrys cap size has changed.

Vicks problem was he was dead guilty and the evidence wasnt one person ratting him out, it was hard evidence...then he pled guilty.... that kind of seals the deal... but it was the hard evidence that got him.. and led me to believe in his guilt.

As for as Jones is concerned. I BELIEVED HER right up to the day when she came out and pled guilty and stated she did it.....'

so, i guess you dont really have a point TRF.....

Personally where Roger is concerned, I think the jury is still out and everyone should be holding judgement. No free pass, No calls for his head. there is one single guy who was told he would go to jail if he didnt provide names, who provided Rogers name. period. nothing more.

Now we have law suits and such. I suspect the truth will come out on this. then we will know.

I just wont hang him until there is some hard evidence. (just like i did with bonds)

[ChicagoPastor]

Originally Posted by Mrs. LPW

I believe Roger Clemens...
After hearing the press conference on mlb.com, the tape of he and McNamee... and his answers afterward...

Any other baseball fans following this?

(I must admit, my husband is following it for me)

I'm a big baseball fan.

I also believe Roger. This McNamee fellow sounds crazy....I think he was trying to set Roger up....he kept asking "what do you want me to do, just tell me what you want me to do? He was trying to bait "The Rocket"

If Clemens was guilty he'd act a little more like McGwire and just lay low.

I loved it when he told everyone to just keep their Hall of Fame vote that he didn't need it

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by ChicagoPastor

I'm a big baseball fan.

I also believe Roger. This McNamee fellow sounds crazy....I think he was trying to set Roger up....he kept asking "what do you want me to do, just tell me what you want me to do? He was trying to bait "The Rocket"

If Clemens was guilty he'd act a little more like McGwire and just lay low.

I loved it when he told everyone to just keep their Hall of Fame vote that he didn't need it

Yes, I liked that as well, although the press sure didn't!

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Ferd

well, the mounting evidence against Barry Bonds is staggering. leaked Grand Jury testamony that was written in a book was massivly dammaging. his name all over BALCO documents was increminating way beyond one convicts testamony. Personally I didnt believe any of the hearsay, but when hard evidence was brought....well that kind of changes things... kind of like Barrys cap size has changed.

Vicks problem was he was dead guilty and the evidence wasnt one person ratting him out, it was hard evidence...then he pled guilty.... that kind of seals the deal... but it was the hard evidence that got him.. and led me to believe in his guilt.

As for as Jones is concerned. I BELIEVED HER right up to the day when she came out and pled guilty and stated she did it.....'

so, i guess you dont really have a point TRF.....

Personally where Roger is concerned, I think the jury is still out and everyone should be holding judgment. No free pass, No calls for his head. there is one single guy who was told he would go to jail if he didn't provide names, who provided Rogers name. period. nothing more.

Now we have law suits and such. I suspect the truth will come out on this. then we will know.

I just wont hang him until there is some hard evidence. (just like i did with bonds)

(I don't think you even understand the point I was making)
Just because you don't agree with my point doesn't mean I don't have a point. My point is that at this point in time after the initial allegations went public in those other cases (i.e. a few short weeks after the initial allegations and/or evidence) the general mood, as far as public sentiment, was one of disbelief and skepticism toward Bonds, Vick, Jones...and Pete Rose, for good measure. I'm a sports fan and remember these episodes very well. There was no groundswell of "I believe 'em. They might actually be innocent.", like we see for Clemens now.

Second, no one is asking at what point YOU believed Marion Jones, etc. You keep referring to when YOU believed Vic, Jones, Bonds were guilty. This post is not about what Ferd believes in particular. I'm referring to what seems to be public sentiment in general. So its silly to say I don't have a point just because YOU believed Marion Jones when she pleaded guilty. The fact is, the sportswriter community and the fan base were very skeptical of her from the very beginning, as they were with Vick long before he pleaded to anything, and of Rose once the initial allegations surfaced, even when the evidence was still just circumstantial at first.

Nobody's asking you to hang him. If you choose to believe Roger, that's fine. This is a he said/he said case, so in the end, it will probably end up being a stalemate. People will come to their conclusions based on whatever testimony and evidence is out there. But your assertion that I don't have a point just because of of your personal perspective on these incidents is not valid at all.

have a good day, Mr Ferd

[Mrs. LPW]

Let's not take this topic too seriously.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

(I don't think you even understand the point I was making)
Just because you don't agree with my point doesn't mean I don't have a point. My point is that at this point in time after the initial allegations went public in those other cases (i.e. a few short weeks after the initial allegations and/or evidence) the general mood, as far as public sentiment, was one of disbelief and skepticism toward Bonds, Vick, Jones...and Pete Rose, for good measure. I'm a sports fan and remember these episodes very well. There was no groundswell of "I believe 'em. They might actually be innocent.", like we see for Clemens now.

Second, no one is asking at what point YOU believed Marion Jones, etc. You keep referring to when YOU believed Vic, Jones, Bonds were guilty. This post is not about what Ferd believes in particular. I'm referring to what seems to be public sentiment in general. So its silly to say I don't have a point just because YOU believed Marion Jones when she pleaded guilty. The fact is, the sportswriter community and the fan base were very skeptical of her from the very beginning, as they were with Vick long before he pleaded to anything, and of Rose once the initial allegations surfaced, even when the evidence was still just circumstantial at first.

Nobody's asking you to hang him. If you choose to believe Roger, that's fine. This is a he said/he said case, so in the end, it will probably end up being a stalemate. People will come to their conclusions based on whatever testimony and evidence is out there. But your assertion that I don't have a point just because of of your personal perspective on these incidents is not valid at all.

have a good day, Mr Ferd

you got me. peace.

(im not ready to believe Roger btw. I hate the guy. he never would come to the Rangers.)