Obamacare upheld by radical right wing justice, nation's media misses the connection
I’m not sure how today’s Supreme Court decision can be interpreted as a good day for liberal democracy. It’s a great verdict for President Obama politically, this is true, but if the last three and a half years have taught us anything, it’s that these two outcomes are not always the same.
A lot of liberals are treating this verdict as if it was affirmation for Single Payer because it affirms a "mandate" for coverage. It’s not. The court wasn’t being asked to uphold that ideal with this challenge. There should be made a key distinction here, constitutionally, between a mandate towards public health care coverage and a mandate towards private insurance. The Supremes were essentially weighing the validity of Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care initiative of a decade ago, the plan Romney championed back in the days before he started courting Republican voters outside his home state and pandered himself steadily to a full 180 degrees.
The Romney/Obama health care plan is one that effectively enforces a tax on me if I refuse to buy a product from corporate America. It's forcing me into commerce, to put it more in the court's terms. How in the world could such a mandate be seriously ruled constitutional? What does buying an insurance product from a private company have at all to do with Congress' power "to lay and collect taxes"? In effect, today's judgment links the mandatory purchase to that of car insurance, backing the basic premise that health care is, like driving a car on a public road, a privilege, not a human right. This idea is so radically right-wing that even an ultraconservative like Chief Justice John Roberts just voted for it. Of course fellow right-wing loonies Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas opposed him, but then that pair's primary agenda on the bench is always to serve the political angle foremost, and so they naturally chose the judgment that would most adversely effect Obama in November.
The proposal and defense of this health care legislation is typical of how the Democratic Party approaches issues today as a quasi-conservative party in the United States. Throughout this entire debate, over almost four years, nobody in leadership in Washington-- in either party-- ever advocated for health care as a human right. Even after Obamacare's legislative passing, and now after legal affirmation by the highest court, Americans not eligible for Medicare will still count on their employer, and their employment, for health coverage. Obamacare leaves 27 million Americans uninsured. Instead of universal protection provided by our government for and by the people, we are mandated to purchase the private health insurance products that Americans find so repugnant that reforming health care grew to become the predominant political issue of the age. Obama's solution to our crisis, from the very beginning of his time in office, was not to get every American insured, but to put forth a plan that lined the pockets of some of the nation's largest corporations. We despise it. Now we're forced to buy it.
On immigration, the Democratic president has staked out a similarly center-right position. He adopted Romney's position on health care, and he went straight to the Republican Messiah on immigration. Despite gaining headlines designed to appeal to progressives, he remains to the right of Ronald Reagan on matters of immigration. Reagan provided general amnesty to undocumented immigrants in 1986. Obama, in a well-publicized move earlier this month, only went so far as to provide amnesty to undocumented children. His significant pandering to the left during election season isn't enough for some of us to forget that Obama has had more undocumented workers deported than his Republican predecessor. On both immigration and health care, the Democrats' strategy is to stake out a center-right position, endure scathing personal attacks from the right, while the nation's left wing mostly sits quietly in the boat, going along, staying seated, claiming a victory on behalf of their counterfeit standard-bearer in the White House, probably due to matters of morale, while surrendering ever more ground on the landscape of the larger political war.
My hope always lies with the long-term future of the republic. I was rooting for an overturn of Obamacare today so that this dismally insufficient solution to our national health care clusterfuck could be removed from its position blocking the road to reform. A group of progressive legislators in Washington had been preparing in recent weeks a formal re-introduction of Single Payer as the true viable solution to our health care woes. The Single Payer plan would get every American covered-- Medicaid for all, without exception or caveat-- from birth/citizenship until death, and would, additionally, cover every American less expensively and less wastefully than any other known and experimented alternative on Earth. As Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out today, the United States remains the only major nation that does not provide health care for every man, woman, and child as a right of citizenship. After today’s ruling, we will likely not see that particular piece of Single Payer legislation introduced, or any similar piece, for years and maybe decades to come. Sleep well tonight, Americans, and as always, try not to get sick.
David Eckstein disease
Here's a fun game to play when you're watching a baseball game on TV: Take notice of how often the broadcaster describes a white player as "hustling" to make the play, or makes allusion to how hard a white guy is playing. Then listen for the same comment about a black player or an Hispanic player. You won't hear it. Invariably, the same field action will cause the broadcaster(s) to remark instead about what a "tremendous athlete" the player is, or how "natural" his talent is.
I know I'm not the first person to bring this to your attention, but I hear it on a nightly basis, and it's driving me a little batty. Daniel Descalso and Shane Robinson, white players, are always "hustling," but Adron Chambers, black, is always "a raw talent." When Chambers hustles down the first base line, he's "showing off his speed," or the like. It never goes away.
The retired Cardinals shortstop, white man David Eckstein, was routinely-- to the point even of some infamy-- tagged by commentators as the type of player that got the most out of his "limited" athletic talent because of his universally-respected work ethic. Do you know who I notice every day playing just as hard and relentlessly as Eckstein ever did? The Cardinals' current shortstop, a Dominican, Rafael Furcal. Yet no broadcaster ever alludes to this attribute of Furcal's game. It's amazing. This is an insult to Furcal's work ethic of course, but in a backwards way, it's also an insult to Eckstein's substantial athletic gifts. My grandmother could play as hard as Eckstein-- well, my grandma's dead, so let's say my brother could play as hard as Eckstein plays, and that wouldn't be near enough for him to ever warrant a spot on a big league roster. Being a big leaguer requires both substantial talent and substantial effort.
I'm not going to mention the names of any specific broadcasters that I feel are routinely guilty of this, but I will say that it's clear that at least one of Ozzie Smith's old teammates never read his book because Ozzie wrote about this cultural double-standard in 1988, and one of Bob Gibson's former teammates didn't read either of Gibby's two books. He wrote twice, three decades apart, about the stereotypical attributes assigned to black baseball players.
The "Runnin' Redbirds" teams that Ozzie played on in the '80s, clubs that always had a core group of African-American players, won routinely with what are usually the prescribed attributes of speed and athleticism. (The general perception is right there in the nickname.) But daring to steal second base, and third base, taking the extra bag, going first to third and second to home on base hits, beating out ground balls, chasing fly balls in the outfield-- these actions require playing your ass off. And don't even get me started about how seldom you hear baseball pundits recalling the collective intelligence of these '80s Cardinals, men who played a very strategic brand of baseball. Their white manager, admittedly brilliant, gets most of the credit for doing the thinking for that team. Imagine the same '80s Cardinals teams, but comprised instead of all white players. What would be their reputation? You don't have to imagine very hard because the Gas House Gang of the 1930s was that team-- and those guys are recognized today, as they were in their time, as the almost quintessential "down and dirty," hustling ballclub. Willie McGee and Vince Coleman got pretty dirty on the field though too during the Reagan Administration. Vince, in fact, routinely had to change out his jersey mid-game, going head first into bags as often as he did.
Most of today's broadcasters came up in the world during the '60s and '70s. Shouldn't they have the social consciousness, or at least the ability to be cognizant of what their words sound like to many of us? Haven't we learned anything in baseball over three generations? What year is this?
First post from the new Blogger Administrator site
The new Blogger Administrator site sucks. Things should never change ever.
Moonlighting strangers
Quote of the day: Actress Emily Mortimer ("Lovely and Amazing," "30 Rock"),
talking about her new role on HBO's "Newsroom,"
"As a child I watched Spencer Tracy-Katherine Hepburn movies without really knowing what they were, but loving them, and I also loved this show called 'Moonlighting,' which you may not have heard of... I was so in love with (Bruce Willis)! I was obsessed with him. And (Cybill Shepherd). I used to not know how I would get through the week once it was over. I think I was about 12 or 13 when it was on in England and I was just like 'I don't know if I can survive the week without it.'
"There are very few romantic comedies these days that work. And I feel (Aaron) Sorkin understands what George Cukor and Billy Wilder and all those people who did it so brilliantly in those days did, which is that the best way of depicting sexual tension is the way people talk to each other, the words they use to talk to each other... And so that was what I really responded to, that made me really feel like, oh my God, I can be in something like Moonlighting."
The anonymous 20
Twenty employees of the Quaker Oats plant in Cedar Rapids
claimed their equal shares of a $241 million prize this afternoon, but only the first names of the prize winners were released publicly as their attorneys have filed an injunction to keep the full names private permanently.
Absolutely not. No more government secrecy. The state of Iowa runs the lottery and is a founding partner in the national Powerball, whose winning numbers are drawn twice a week in Iowa. More than a billion dollars in proceeds have gone back to the state since lottery sales began in 1985, but more than two billion dollars have not. They've been paid out as winnings, and all of that money should continue to be accounted for through the point of the payout. The lottery exists in this state at the formal consent of the people, those persons that participate do so knowing they're taking part in a state-affiliated activity, and each and every winner is responsible for anteing up the taxes on these winnings, which amounts to a lot of additional money.
The law says the information is public-- and that's as it should be. There is no justifiable reason for these names to remain private. The poor are at risk from predators in this country, not the rich. The rich have the entire power of the police state at their disposal. The bottom line is that you can't take the winnings and then decline the accompanying limelight. If you don't like the game, don't play the game, but this is a key element of the game. There's more to it than just the scratch-off. In the absence of transparency, the state lotteries would lose their credibility-- and that's as it should be too.
---
It's clear that Americans are concerned about the effects of steroids in Major League Baseball. Well, except for the 73 million Americans that attended games last year. And the ones that serve on juries.
---
Sad that Andrew Sarris had to live one week too long and endure the release of "That's My Boy." Or maybe there's a connection here.
"The blowdried banker" and "love-struck schoolgirls"
Professor Taibbi
schools us again on the factors that led to Wall Street's collapse. This time it's on the occasion of Jamie Dimon testifying before a cleanly-castrated Senate Banking Committee.
Taibbi, at his Rolling Stone blog:
"You can either be a commercial bank, with all the federal support that entails, or you can be a high-risk gambler. But you shouldn't be allowed to be both. We could have Chase Commercial Bank, and Chase Investments Inc., and they can each be as big as they want, but those companies should be separate. Why do we need companies like Chase that are both things, under one tent? The real answer, from Jamie Dimon’s point of view, is simple – there’s no way he could have a $350 billion hedge fund if he didn’t have mountains of federally-insured money to play with, and a steady stream of low-interest loans from the Fed."
In last week's testimony, only Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley addressed the CEO in a manner that could be described as "confrontational." Congress sucks up so badly to Dimon, you would think he was David Patraeus' asshole.
---
The Los Angeles Kings are champions of the National Hockey League, and as such, their players and personnel have possession of the Stanley Cup for a total of 100 days this year. (My cousin, Jeff Moeller, the Kings' Senior Director of Communications, will have the Cup for four hours at his home on some assigned date this year.) Jimmy Kimmel had this to say...
"There's a great tradition in hockey. Each player on the winning team gets the Stanley Cup for a night. It's similar to what happens in the NBA, but instead of a trophy, they get a Kardashian sister."
Your 2012 Recession Guide
In these uncertain times, a dollar doesn't stretch the way it once did. Prudence of a responsible consumer requires that we evaluate the fair market worth of every product we buy. This isn't all about going cheap. I offer two different lists-- one of product areas where money can be saved, and one where the extra money is well worth it. Enjoy, and consider yourself a penny wiser...
NOT WORTH THE DOUGH
-----
Name Brand Breakfast cereal-- There's a product at my supermarket called "Magic Marshmallows." It's a dollar and a half cheaper than the equal size box of "Lucky Charms." Same exact thing.
Expensive Pens-- I've only received upscale pens as gifts, but I've never in my life had one that works for more than a month or two. Buy yourself a 12-pack of Bic Ultra Round Stic Grips for $2.50, don't allow people to walk off with them, and you're good to go for the next decade.
Premium Gasoline-- I'm sure some gearheads will quibble, but I've been buying the cheapest unleaded gasoline at the pump now for 20 years, and I've run every car I've owned to over 140,000 miles.
Fast Food "Combo Meals"-- They're just giving you the soda for free, and that costs them virtually nothing. Don't get suckered. Skip the soda and order a cup of ice water. Soda doesn't quench your thirst anyway. It's syrup. It was originally designed to be a sugary treat like ice cream. A some-of-the-time delicacy. Not a lifestyle. A bonus will be that you might save on the risk of diabetes.
Hardcover Books-- I don't understand the appeal. The paperbacks are cheaper and preferable in every way. I find they have a more durable spine and they're not as heavy to hold. For those times when you're in a hurry to read a new book before it's been released in paperback form, go to the library and check out a copy. If you can't get a copy reserved at your local library because the only books you read are currently being read by half of the rest of the country, start being your own person.
Generic Medications-- These are identical to name brand drugs, except that the name brands have lost their exclusive patent. Same active ingredients, still subject to government regulation. The mark-up we pay on name brands goes strictly towards the cost of "marketing," and frankly, I've never been sure why a drug like Viagra, for example, requires an expensive ad campaign. Better sex sells itself, no? That's the beauty of the best drugs out there. Notice that heroin dealers don't buy 30 second spots on television, and they still do just fine.
A Night at the Movie Theater-- Movies suck. Programming on TV is better. And tickets, concessions, gas, and babysitting are all terribly expensive. All the good writers work principally in television, and have for the last decade-- David Milch, David Simon, Lena Dunham, Graham Yost, David Chase, Tina Fey, Dan Harmon, Seth MacFarland, Matt Weiner, Mike White. At this point, movies have more in common with amusement parks than they do television, and you are too old to still be going to movies about superheroes.
Tithing-- Why are all of America's churches getting larger when the economy is getting smaller?
Electronics "Extended Warranty"-- Don't you love that offer to add 30-some dollars to your purchase at the retail store? I offer this deal instead, Best Buy. I keep the three extra Hamiltons, and if this product breaks down within the next 24 months, I'll stop shopping here.
Newspapers and Pay Walls-- We live in the golden age of citizen-powered news media (if you know where to look), and the irony is that there's almost an exactly inverse relationship between the amount of money you spend on media and the quality of actual, independent, uncompromised information you get in return. Pay for an internet connection at your home and pay nothing more in your life for news and information.
Fancy Hotels-- Unless the hotel is the destination itself, go cheap so that you can go more often. During most of your stay, you'll be out of the room, and most of the time you're in the room, your eyes will be closed. That being said, make sure you have temperature control and sanitary conditions.
Field Box Seats at Busch Stadium-- You pay $75 for a game. I'll sit in the Loge Level above first base and see three games for that same price.
Political Campaign Contributions-- Let's say you give $50 to a candidate. Then 700,000 of you and your fellow citizens are worth one Sheldon Adelson. Face facts, patriot: You are completely meaningless to the political process except for your willingness to cause havoc in the streets. They're laughing at you.
WORTH THE PREMIUM
-----
Travel, in General-- Nobody remarks upon their death bed, "I traveled too much." Invest in this as much as your schedule allows, and then go even a little beyond that.
Name Brand Batteries-- Longer lasting. You get what you pay for with this product.
High-Grade Narcotics-- You're not just paying for added happiness, you're also paying for a certain measure of safety in an unregulated industry.
Organic Food-- Nobody factors in the future price of health care when they're throwing the cheapest crap into their grocery cart. Invest in your body for savings later. It's all in my book.
Buying Local-- Support local businesses with all your might. Not only because it's the right thing to do, but because more of this money will eventually pass back through your hands.
The Undercoating-- I can't stress this enough.
Home Box Office-- Art enriches us the way travel does, and the best art in story form exists this generation on premium cable. (It's not even TV.) I know it's tempting to watch each of these shows later as part of the Netflix subscription you've already shelled out for, but we live in an era in which there's an instant national dialogue online about every television program, and it makes the shows so much more fun to watch when you're watching the episodes in time with the rest of the world.
The More Expensive Sushi Rolls-- I know it's tempting to go with only the $6 Salmon and Tuna Rolls, but the Dragon and Volcano Rolls of this world, at double the price, will be the best plates of food you've ever had. Tonight, we live dammit!
Bellefontaine quiz answers
1-g
2-e
3-a
4-f
5-b
6-c
7-d
The day of the dead
I spent Saturday afternoon in a cemetery. How did you spend your weekend?
Looking for new and interesting things to do in St. Louis after about 70 other visits, I journeyed to Bellefontaine Cemetery, which over time has apparently come to be pronounced 'Bell-Fountain' by the locals. The visit allowed me to pay my respects to some of the more notable figures in U.S. history, at least those that resided in the vicinity of what was once the largest city in the West.
Bellefontaine is the oldest "garden" or "rural" cemetery on this side of the Mississippi. The first internment took place on April 27, 1850. By "garden" or "rural," we mean that the original cemeteries, in the European tradition, could be found in the shadow of churches. But as American cities rapidly grew in the mid-19th century, those burial grounds started to take up valuable real estate. Also, as churches would often relocate to better their financial imperative, the cemeteries would naturally be left behind and often fall into neglect. Rural spaces for the dead-- peaceful, dignified, and amicable to contemplation for the grieving -- became the new ideal.
Their are some larger-than-life bigwigs lying in eternal slumber at Bellefontaine among the 86,000-some bodies buried over 314 acres. The most often-visited marker belongs to Captain William Clark, who you probably know better as the Daryl Hall of the 19th century pop-singing duo "Lewis and Clark." Some of the captain's neighbors on the other side of the impressively-manicured Bellefontaine lawn include William S. Burroughs, the Beat Generation author; Captain Isaiah Sellers, the steamboat captain Mark Twain made famous in "Life on the Mississippi"; and famous beer baron Adolphus Busch, who despite not spending a penny of his massive fortune for 99 years, still sleeps in a room larger than my apartment. Anybody can get into Bellefontaine-- the cemetery doesn't discriminate based on class, race, or creed-- but the wealthiest customers are the ones that make their presence known.
Cemeteries are fun-- especially this one-- for three reasons.
1) You can look for celebrities-- and unlike when that person was alive, there usually aren't other gawkers with which to contend. Bellefontaine has so many formerly-leading citizens entombed within its borders that it offers a visitor center and a formal, self-guided walking tour.
2) It's like a scavenger hunt when you're looking for specific markers.
And 3) They're very interesting, sociologically-speaking. A person's marker tells a lot about his or her life-- one's cultural tradition, religion, relationship to family, personal aesthetic or lack thereof, and of course, in many cases, level of vanity.
There's a lot of green space remaining in Bellefontaine-- room to grow, as it were. It was a perfect afternoon for my visit-- a warm day, a soft breeze blowing, and the grounds offering ample shade. To paraphrase an unrelated Mark Twain line, few of the living complained, and none of the others.
---
Match the Bellefontaine resident with his nickname in life. Open book, open notes. Answers tomorrow...
1) Thomas Hart Benton a)The Crazy Dutchman
2) James Yeatman b)Cut Face
3)Adolphus Busch c)Mr. Mac
4)William Clark d)Der boss president of der Prowns
5)William Sublette e)Old Sanitary
6)James S. McDonnell, Jr. f)Red-Headed Chief
7)Christian von der Ahe g)Old Bullion
Buying history
How desperate for money are the New York Mets, a team that slashed $90 million off their payroll in one winter in preparation for the worst case scenario of a lawsuit filed against them by the victims of Bernie Madoff? They're this desperate: the team is selling tickets to Johan Santana's no-hitter* that took place last week. Yes, the game has already been played, but now you, dear reader, can own one of these $50, limited edition tickets (limit 4) and tell everybody you know that you were there, June 1st, 2012, when history was made, even though you were probably at Cousin Mario's unfortunately-scheduled graduation party and thought that was better worth the time since you've only heard of two of the players left on the Mets this year, Santana and David Wright.
There were actually about 14,000 unsold tickets to the game that night-- the Mets and Cardinals played to a stadium that was about two-thirds full-- but the box office is still open for as long as supplies last! Here's what this ticket offer means to 'jetsfan468' at the ESPN website: "this is the dumbest thing i ever heard. i guess this means the tickets of mine, and the other 20 something thousand people who went are now meaningless, anyone with 50 bucks was 'at the game'".
According to
Adam Rubin, at ESPN New York, the then-Florida Marlins offered the same kind of re-sale after the Phillies' Roy Halladay pitched a no-hitter at their ballpark in 2010, so there is precedent from other intradivision grifters. At ESPN St. Louis, the presses were silent today in regards to the controversial promotion because, again, ESPN St. Louis doesn't exist.
---
The Cardinals, though financially-solvent, have sunk deeper into their chiseling ways as well. I bought tickets to this weekend's series at Busch against Cleveland, and on top of the price of the ticket, and the usual accompanying, mysterious fees, I also turned over $1.50 for the honor of picking up the tickets at Will Call. Shouldn't picking up the tickets save the team the cost of mailing them? Yes, it does, but see, they now want you to print off your own electronic ticket at home. Of course if I do that, and Jake Westbrook pitches a no-hitter while I'm there, I'm stuck with an 8 1/2 by 11 inch photocopy of a ticket from a laser printer in Des Moines as the principal historical artifact of this once-in-a-lifetime evening. The Cardinals aren't showing a lot of confidence in Jake Westbrook.
I do have confidence in him, and that hard sinking fastball of his, so I'll pay it, but that dollar and a half better get put towards shoring up the bullpen.
Norway's Boddicker back on the hill
Norway, Iowa native Mike Boddicker, a former big league pitcher, testified at Roger Clemens' perjury trial on Tuesday in Washington. Clemens' defense team has argued that when the pitcher was observed getting injected with needles in the clubhouse, they were vitamin B12 shots, not steroids.
Boddicker made the claim on the witness stand yesterday that he once observed a trainer injecting Clemens in the buttocks when the two pitchers were teammates in 1990, and that the vial he saw being used was labeled B12.
Part of
Boddicker's testimony was Perry Mason-like in its theatrics. During cross-examination by the government attorney, Boddicker was asked if there were secrets in the clubhouse. The defense followed by asking if Clemens ever did anything that was kept from the public. Yes, said Boddicker, Clemens would often leave the ballpark in uniform to see kids in the hospital.
Oh no he di'nt!
---
Obama did nothing this year to help the unions and the campaign of working people in Wisconsin because he was afraid their defeat would weaken him politically. Scott Walker had eight times the money, the unions had... no representation whatsoever from anybody inside the American political power structure.
Republicans win in election after election because the "working people's party," the Democrats, gave its soul away to corporate interests, and that action left neither party with one. Republicans know that the Democrats cannot plausibly make the case that they're a cogent alternative to the corporate strangulation that 99% of America despises. Corporate candidates run unopposed. Beginning with Wisconsin, Republicans have succeeded in turning our teachers, librarians, laborers, and public employees effectively into the new domestic terrorists. The Democrats' tack is to just shadow behind in an effort to capture the "political middle" of that idea.
---
In the latest Vanity Fair, Kristen Stewart, star of the critically-unpopular "Snow White & the Huntsman" and the "Twilight" films, called critics of her recent work "voracious... shit eaters." I like Stewart just fine. She was tremendous, in fact, in "The Runaways" and "Welcome to the Rileys." Did you see those? But she shouldn't set up her critics so easily. If I was a film critic, I would reply like this: "Yes, and your movies are the shit I'm forced to eat."
Cleaning up this week's biggest problems
This afternoon I went to the doctor-slash-nurse practitioner to get my ears inspected. The last week or so I could hear almost nothing out of my leftmost auditory canal. My self-diagnosis was 'impacted wax,' which is probably more information about my inner ear than you were looking for, but then that's why Al Gore invented blogs.
I had my ears rinsed out three years ago at the same office. (I call it "rinsing," I don't know what they call it.) I had a pretty good idea that this was what was needed again, but of course a small part of you always assumes the worst. Maybe it's something else. Maybe I'll never hear out of that ear again. Maybe the sympathy I would get out of something like that might help me get girls. My imagination was running wind sprints.
Skip to the climax: turns out the culprit was wax. My lack of a formal medical education once again did not prove to be a deterrent to me in the slightest. An utterly charming and very attractive woman, not grossed out at all, used some sort of water suction device to pull out of my left ear a disgusting gob of goo that resembled a Sun-Maid yogurt raisin, and then pulled out one about half the size from my right ear.
And now I can hear. Everything. My voice is louder. Her voice was louder. The rattle in the office's central air conditioning unit was louder. The traffic was louder. The front door of my building and the door of the mailbox were louder. My television has been turned down to about half of the volume of where it was at this time yesterday. This sound of typing right now is driving me absolutely batty. I feel like my sense of hearing has become... superhuman.
---
The Mets' Johan Santana no-hit the Cardinals Friday night, but of course, he actually didn't. Thanks to modern video technology the entire world that cares to can see Carlos Beltran's 6th inning line drive hitting the chalk behind third base on its way into the left field corner, as well as the mark it left behind on the chalk for continued inspection during the final four innings. Before that stroke, the Mets had a shot at their first no-hitter in 51 years, one of only two Major League franchises that has never had one, and the third base umpire, it would seem, gave them a break. Only that's not his job. The official scorer has the imperative, by custom, to make sure any team's first hit is legitimate, but he/she is deciding how a play is scored-- hit or error, not safe or out, ball or strike. The umpire isn't supposed to do the same.
Mets fans, and the New York Daily News as their instrument, are upset that the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran a Saturday morning headline reading "No-Hitter" with an asterisk behind it, but that's exactly the way this game should live in our memories. This is like the Armando Galarraga perfect game from last year in reverse, except also that last year's umpire, Jim Joyce, admitted afterwards that he botched it. On Friday night, the offending umpire, Adrian Johnson, stayed silent.
And of course the reason he did is because in a no-hitter/perfect game that was, opposed to a no-hitter/perfect game that wasn't, there's a perception that nobody is being victimized. Johnson is hoping that his epic flub will not take anything away from Santana's glory. What I'm not sure about though is why Johnson gets a free pass on the action itself. I find his potential motivation to be entirely in question. Everybody on the field is already thinking about the possibility of a no-hitter by the time a pitcher has worked unblemished by a hit into the 6th inning. I put forth the hypothesis that Johnson momentarily forgot that he was an umpire-- and not an official scorer-- and wanted to make sure the first hit the Cardinals achieved was a no-doubter. After last year, every umpire in the league is afraid of potentially "Jim Joyce-ing" somebody so Johnson, operating under that mindset, was overly susceptible to botching a call in the pitcher's favor if he thought the ruling could go either way.
Should there be instant replay in Major League Baseball? Of course there should. Prohibiting the use of the technology when it exists in advanced form-- and when baseball competes simultaneously with the National Football League, which has used instant replay without almost any shred of controversy for almost two decades-- is a fool's mission. The head fool, though, Bud Selig, says he still believes in the "human element," an argument that could also be used to defend murder and genocide. (Just sayin'.)
We have instant replay in baseball now only up to the point that the New York tail of the dog has demanded it. The technology of instant replay had already long-existed when the Yankees were granted a home run against Baltimore in the 1996 American League Championship Series-- despite fan interference by that punk kid Jeffrey Maier. No league action was forthcoming after the Maier incident-- even to avoid future such occurrences. But then all it took was the Yankees' Alex Rodriguez and the Mets' Carlos Delgado to both lose a home run to a blown fair/foul call weeks apart in the spring of 2008 for the commissioner to change his mind about the use of replay-- but only in respect to home run calls. Uh huh.
For their part, ESPN New York reported the no-hitter Saturday with almost no mention of the blown call. ESPN St. Louis was silent also because it doesn't exist.
Major League Baseball has signed on for expanded replay in 2013 so maybe Santana's no-hitter will wind up being the last no-no that really wasn't. It's the Mets fans I feel bad for though. Despite being pond scum generally, they waited 8,019 games, some of them, for a no-hitter. They deserved to have their first one be legitimate. Not this travesty of desperation. It's like getting married at an advanced age and settling for Larry King. When they chat on message boards about the Post-Dispatch asterisk, they curse reality the way Royals fans did in 1985, the way I can only imagine fans of the most starving teams must when they've been given so little in return for their energy for years on end. They know their achievements are perceived by the rest of the world to be approximately as legitimate as the Vichy Government of France in 1940.
Several Mets fans have remarked wildly and absurdly that the Cardinals have their own "asterisk" in the dugout in the person of hitting coach and home run conquerer of Roger Maris, Mark McGwire, but that argument only washes if you accept that Mighty Mac's legal use of steroids in 1998 was somehow invalidated by future policy. The equivalent of discrediting those would be if they decide to add back all the balk calls for the last 100 years when they do away next April with the fake-to-third-fake-to-first pick-off play. It's just a silly proposition on its very surface.
God, I hate the Mets. They're arrogant and loud. And ugly. And that's just the fans. They're so classless they even booed Mookie Wilson's kid when he played for the Cardinals in the 2006 NL Championship Series. Their team gets media attention so far above what it's actually earned on the field over a half century of play that they make the Boston Red Sox look like the Red Sox. And I'd like to conclude by saying that I think the team should give Bernie Madoff's money back to his victims.
---
Another Mad Men Spoiler alert (Don't read further if you haven't watched last night's episode): I would never off myself, especially so soon after I got my hearing back, but if I did choose to hang myself like Lane Pryce did, I would also choose to do it from a door, next to a Mets pennant.
