Skip to content

When it comes to performance enhancing drugs, Romney beats Obama

Nov 6, 2012, 8:34 AM EDT

Obama Romney

Because the election season hasn’t been long or tortuous enough, Mitt Romney and President Obama were interviewed by Chris Berman on Monday Night Football last night. Which seems like a waste of time, because if you’re still an undecided voter on the evening of November 5 you’re probably unlikely to have the proper cognitive skills to operate your car to get you to the polls this morning anyway. But hey, they talked about sports, so that’s fun.

I don’t really care what Obama thinks about the Chicago Bears or the college football playoff thing, and I don’t really care what Romney thinks of the Red Sox and Patriots. We all have our rah-rahs. But this answer from Romney about what he thinks is the biggest issue in sports was interesting:

“It has to be the specter of drugs — and performance enhancing drugs of all kinds,” he said. “We have to continue to battle that. We have to make sure that our technology keeps up with the people that are trying to skirt around the law. … We’re going to have to change the culture that says to people, using performance enhancing drugs is acceptable. It is simply not.”

Obama didn’t touch that last night, but in October 2008, as a challenger, he sure did during a radio appearance:

“As a father and an avid sports fan, I understand the dangers that performance enhancing drugs pose for athletes, as well as the teenagers who seek to emulate them, not to mention the effect that these drugs have on the integrity of sports. As president, I would use the bully pulpit of my office to warn Americans about the dangers of performance enhancing drugs, and I would put greater resources into enforcement of existing drug laws. I would also convene a summit of the commissioners of the professional sports leagues, as well as university presidents, to explore options for decreasing the use of these drugs.”

Greater resources into enforcement? Thanks, dude. While it isn’t of extreme importance compared to most of what happens in government, the DOJ’s show trials of PED users is one of the dumbest and more pointless things the government has done in the past four years.

I’m gonna vote later today and based on stuff I’ve written before you probably know how I’m gonna vote. But I will freely admit that I would much prefer it if the government’s involvement in sports controversies was more akin to Romney’s “working to change the culture” talk than Obama’s “putting greater resources into enforcement” jazz.  Government has enough to do without increasing the intensity of its increasingly feckless war on drugs,* let alone the singularly feckless PED battles within that war.

*No, I’m not under any delusion that Romney would ratchet back the overall war on drugs anymore than Obama would. When it comes to that stuff the major parties seem to be in similar, idiotic lockstep.

  1. mrwillie - Nov 6, 2012 at 8:44 AM

    I am so very glad it’s almost over.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 6, 2012 at 8:58 AM

      If you think this insanity ends today, I’ve got a couple bridges to sell you in Manhattan. Package deal, really cheap…

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:08 AM

        I don’t understand what there is left to argue over once a new dictator is chosen? Why does it not stop? After someone spends a billion dollars, the loser wants his full moneys worth?

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM

        I don’t understand what there is left to argue over once a new dictator is chosen?

        Sample of news ledes in the next coming days:

        Obama Wins:
        Fox News – Socialist Barack Hussein Bin Laden elected to 4 more years of raising taxes, persecuting Christianity and destroying the economy

        Romney Wins:
        New York Times – big business fat cat wants to cut taxes on billionaire friends, increase military spending and wage war on Iran.

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:28 AM

        Doesn’t that sort of stuff happen for like 2yrs of the term anyway? If not the actual majority? It just seems like a media constant which never goes away. Hmm, I’m half answering my own question I guess.

      • indaburg - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM

        Kiwi, we don’t elect a dictator. If we did, something might actually get accomplished. Not necessarily good things, mind you, but things.

        If today, National Threaten to Move to Canada Day, promises a repeat of the 2000 Banana Republic Fiasco of Florida (aka the chads are hangin’) as the pundits on my tv seem to breathlessly hope for, there will be lots to argue about, namely electoral votes. The talking heads are blathering on about how close this election and how it may not be decided until… who knows when? Then there’s the voter disenfranchisement issues– somewhere someone is going to be denied the right to vote, so there will be arguments over that. If voter turnout turns out to be exceptionally low in the northeast, Obama’s bastion, due to that nasty wench Sandy thereby tipping the race towards Romney (unlikely) expect arguments about that. So, yes, these candidates want their money’s worth. They’ve spent billions so I guess they’re entitled, much to the electorate’s chagrin.

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:42 AM

        Plus, kiwi, when you live where I live there’s the never-ending complaining about how we did the right thing and those bozos on the coasts screwed us. That one never wears out. But, of course, we elect Senators who will screw everyone back, so it’s all good.

      • stex52 - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:11 AM

        Money, Kiwi. That’s why it doesn’t stop. Whoever holds the presidency holds the power over billions of dollars for his/her supporters. That’s why they spend so much on the election. It’s an investment in official corruption. Oil industry, pharmaceuticals, trial lawyers, unions, Chamber of Commerce; they are all trying to get a return on their buck. And if you don’t win, you spend it to try to thwart the other guy.

      • cur68 - Nov 6, 2012 at 11:21 AM

        “National Threaten to Move to Canada Day?” Hey! Only if you have Seal Pup Clubbing Skillz. We got to cull 40 000 of the things over the next 3 years. Better get BSOYL if you plan to come up. And bring a bat. Aluminum, 32 Oz Louisville Slugger for preference.

      • wlschneider09 - Nov 6, 2012 at 11:44 AM

        How bad is it when a seal-clubbing provides welcome relief from the normal thread of conversation?

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:03 PM

        wlschneider09-
        Although highly amusing, your comments make me feel kind of bad now.

      • indaburg - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:24 PM

        National Threaten to Move to Canada Day: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/11/01/canadians-amused-by-american-threats-to-move-north-if-their-candidate-loses/

        An anti-Obamacare co-worker threatened to move to Canada if Romney lost. He was serious and didn’t get the irony. I just laughed and said good luck with that. Knowing him, his seal pup clubbing skillz are probably in tip top shape. (Re: seal pups. Thanks for reminding me to keep up my boycott of all Canadian products, including the Blue Jays, maple syrup, and Canada Dry ginger ale. I can tell it’s really making a difference.)

      • wlschneider09 - Nov 6, 2012 at 6:20 PM

        Sorry Kiwi, definitely wasn’t directed at you. Just a casual observation about political overload.

    • hojo20 - Nov 6, 2012 at 6:35 PM

      Yes, Barack & Moochelle’s reign of terror is almost over.

  2. skeleteeth - Nov 6, 2012 at 8:46 AM

    PED’s, Super PACS…what’s the difference?

    http://projects.wsj.com/super-pacs/

    • indaburg - Nov 6, 2012 at 8:50 AM

      Well, for one thing, Super PACs are PACs on PEDs.

  3. paperlions - Nov 6, 2012 at 8:52 AM

    I was hoping one of them would say the biggest problem in sports is billionaire owners holding cities hostage to get hundreds of millions in public dollars to build stadiums and parking lots, and then the owners keeping all of the profits generated by those assets. Because that problem dwarfs and perceived PED problem.

    • tfbuckfutter - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:12 AM

      Pretty sure only one of them would have a problem with that.

    • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:44 AM

      Wouldn’t you have died laughing if one of them had said “Frank McCourt”?

      • paperlions - Nov 6, 2012 at 11:02 AM

        You know, that could actually have made me stop and re-consider who I was voting for.

      • stlouis1baseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM

        How you been Philiac? Good I hope. Been busy on my side.
        You know…getting the bomb shelter ready so I have a place to take shelter post Election results. Loading it up with rations…mainly spam, ramen noodles and beer.
        I voted on Halloween. No joke…voted last Wednesday. It was kind of nice.
        In my area…we are one ot the “test sites” for the State.
        We can vote anywhere in the County. I was in and out and back to work.
        You voted yet?

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:27 PM

        I’m voting after work — I like to get the count for my precinct. My mother usually goes early but today she didn’t make it until 10:30 and we were already at 369 people. That’s big for my area…especially considering our votes largely don’t count. I actually thought about nullifying my ballot this time around, but there are state questions, so you know.

  4. kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:03 AM

    The sentiment lasted all of 3 seconds as the broadcast switched to the game in which 6-5 270lb guys are running faster than any high school sprint champion.
    PED’s in the NFL concerns me about as much as moss on the driveway pavers during winter.

  5. kkolchak - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:07 AM

    “…the DOJ’s show trials of PED users is one of the dumbest and more pointless things the government has done in the past four years.”

    So what did you want DOJ to do, go after all of the Wall Street crooks who crashed the economy back in 2008 or something? Thanks for highlighting yet another reason why I’m sitting this election out.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:23 AM

      go after all of the Wall Street crooks who crashed the economy back in 2008 or something?

      Would we also go after all the people who took out multiple mortgages they couldn’t afford, this increasing the default rate 10x the normal? They are just as much at fault as the guys on Wall Street, many of whom didn’t have a clue how exactly the CDS/CDO’s worked. Everyone was at fault for that mess.

      • kkolchak - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:43 PM

        I can’t believe I need to say this, but the mortgagees could not have taken out the fraudulent mortgages unless the banksters were willing to lend them the money even knowing the loans were fraudulent. Gads, no wonder this country is rapidly going down the crapper.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:30 PM

        unless the banksters were willing to lend them the money even knowing the loans were fraudulent

        I’m not sure what you are trying to say here? Are you saying the brokers shouldn’t have lent $750K loans to people with $25K total incomes? Well of course they shouldn’t, but people also need to understand how the loans worked (floating rate, ARM, fixed, etc). Or are you saying that the brokers intentionally misled the customer?

      • stlouis1baseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 3:34 PM

        Absolutely Church. Each person (mortgagee) needs to also bear responsibility.
        Look at my post. I could have took out a $125,000.00 loan for my first house 20 years ago.
        I knew then (even as a young dude) that $80,000.00 was far more realistic.
        It absolutely goes both ways. Shared burden if you will.

    • stlouis1baseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM

      “I can’t believe I need to say this, but the mortgagees could not have taken out the fraudulent mortgages unless the banksters were willing to lend them the money even knowing the loans were fraudulent. Gads, no wonder this country is rapidly going down the crapper.”

      Personal responsibility Kkolchak.
      Had more people took personal responsibility and where fully aware of what they could and could not afford we would also not be in this mess.

      Case in point: 20 years ago I was a kid working in a factory for $12.97 per hour.
      I qualified for my first home home loan in excess of +$125,000.00.
      Even as a kid working for $12.97 per hour I knew full well to take out a $125,000.00 mortgage was not only irresponsible…it was naive and just plain stupid.
      As a result, I borrowed $80,000.00!
      As Church stated…it very much goes both ways.

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:00 PM

        Where you bean, Woodpecker? Did you vote yet?

  6. indaburg - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:09 AM

    Craig, what are you waiting for? Go vote!

  7. randygnyc - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:16 AM

    Romney has lead an Olympic Games during steroids’ heyday. It was an important issue at the time. As far as obama is concerned, his only experience is derived from being a fan of sports. It’s similar to ours.

    Speaking of steroids, I’m watching live news on tv, as these huge black panthers (possibly on steroids), patrol and intimidate the voters of Philadelphia at the voting booths.

    • yahmule - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:25 AM

      Randy’s comments are going to be “enhanced” by an extra dose of willful ignorance and overt racism today.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-weiler/the-last-refuge-of-scound_b_2079941.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

      http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/opinion/hogue-voter-suppression/index.html

      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-05/why-voter-suppression-is-mostly-a-republican-tactic.html

      http://www.salon.com/topic/voter_fraud/

      • randygnyc - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:56 AM

        Have no fear. Ex Navy SEALS on site alongside of the black panthers in both Philadelphia and Ohio. They’re making sure no voters will be intimidated.

    • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:36 AM

      Must thank ‘Mitt’ next time I see him. International Bobsled and figure skating competition was rife with PEDs at the time.

      • florida727 - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM

        You forgot to mention the curling team from Indonesia. Darn cheaters…

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:31 AM

        That was just a smear campaign led by Canada.

      • cur68 - Nov 6, 2012 at 11:42 AM

        Hey!

      • rich7041 - Nov 6, 2012 at 4:28 PM

        Curling is a winter sport. You probably meant badminton.

    • garlicfriesandbaseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:26 PM

      Your comment about Obama’s only experience relating to “drugs”, (which is what the article is about), is derived from being a fan of sports, is laughable.

      • randygnyc - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:42 PM

        No, no, no. I related obama’s experience with steroids. It is obviously none, if you consider his effeminate physique.

        His elicit drug abuse is well documented. It’s even included in his own book. He habitually smoked marijuana and occasionally snorted cocaine. He explained that the only reason he didn’t do “smack” (heroin) was that his drug dealer was “too enthusiastic” about it and that made him suspicious. (Maybe the coke and pot made him paranoid).

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:01 PM

        ‘effeminate’ ??? Interesting….

      • aceshigh11 - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:09 PM

        Bush was a limpwristed cheerleader and a known cokehead, so you fail, Dandy.

        Four more years of the black guy…just kill yourself. Now.

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:28 PM

        Seriously, let’s draw the line at encouraging suicide. Totally not down with that.

  8. sdelmonte - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    So how much have you been able to turn on local TV or radio, Craig. I was in your state for two days and felt overwhelmed after five minutes.

    • Craig Calcaterra - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:42 AM

      I tend not to watch a ton of TV anyway, and what I watch I DVR so I can speed through. There are a lot of ads — especially during live sports, which you can’t really FF — but I have done a pretty decent job of avoiding it and tuning it out.

      • umrguy42 - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:35 AM

        I was in Columbus overnight the other weekend, and the electronic billboard up the road from the hotel was flashing a political ad every minute or two, and I knew it had to be bad…

      • natstowngreg - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:33 PM

        A frightening thing, the possibility that your vote in Ohio could decide the Leader of the Free World for the next 4 years. Perhaps, as frightening as the possibility that my vote in Virginia could do the same.

        Be afraid, be very afraid.

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:46 PM

        Can we tone down/eliminate referring to the US president as the “leader of the free world”.
        Your last chap should be had up on war crimes and we certainly didn’t fucking vote for him, so it’s inexplicable to refer to your President as such.

        I know you don’t mean any harm by it, but it’s something many foreigners feel strongly about.
        Leader of the most powerful nation on earth…Leader of the wealthiest country….if you must(but really, is there any need?).

        But seriously, ‘Leader of the Free World’ is just obnoxious.

      • natstowngreg - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM

        Kiwi, that was sarcasm.

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:48 PM

        Failure by me. Very sorry.

      • natstowngreg - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:55 PM

        No problem. Just further proof of how hard it is to do sarcasm in writing.

  9. charlutes - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:31 AM

    The media cracks me up. you open with, “because the election hasn’t been long and torturous enough…” and then you contribute to the space filling pile of election crap that you slam in the first place. Sometimes I think you have to be obtuse to be a sports writer.

  10. prosourcetalk - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:42 AM

    Paperlions nailed it. Thank you.

  11. shynessismyelguapo - Nov 6, 2012 at 9:51 AM

    “m gonna vote later today and based on stuff I’ve written before you probably know how I’m gonna vote.”

    You’re writing in John Anderson, right?

  12. leerosenthall - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:16 AM

    Mitt’s talking about caffeine in that quote.

  13. umrguy42 - Nov 6, 2012 at 10:36 AM

    I was disappointed to find that the “Rent is 2 Damn High” party was not on my ballot this go round.

    • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM

      Are you jealous: I actually get to vote for a guy who shoots a water jug with a picture of Texas on it with a rifle in his commercials. And he IS the more rational choice for the office.

      • kiwicricket - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:18 PM

        It can get worse…Once 1% of my country actually voted for the ‘McGillicuddy Serious Party’
        Whose main policies happen to include:

        -Free dung

        -Sending out intelligence agents around the world to wipe New Zealand off published maps, thus ensuring that no-one could invade the country.

      • natstowngreg - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:30 PM

        Is that the New Zealand affiliate of Britain’s Monster Raving Loony Party? Inquiring minds want to know.

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 12:31 PM

        I’m not saying shooting jugs of Texas is bad. It’s AWESOME!

      • indaburg - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:27 PM

        Shooting jugs of Texas? Ain’t nothing wrong with that.

  14. stlouis1baseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 1:55 PM

    Jugs of ANY kind are not to be shot at. They are to be respected and admired at all times.

    • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:11 PM

      So you’re down with the moobs AND boobz. Sweet.

      • stlouis1baseball - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:14 PM

        Hahaha! Qualifcation: I am down with a lot of things. Moobs are NOT one of them.
        Is that sexist? I don’t intend it to be. But I can’t help how I feel about it.
        I like them on the female side of things. Not so much the Male side. To each his or her own.

      • historiophiliac - Nov 6, 2012 at 2:21 PM

        Booooo!!!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Three legends off to Cooperstown
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Tulowitzki (3316)
  2. R. Howard (3222)
  3. C. Headley (2995)
  4. Y. Puig (2912)
  5. H. Ramirez (2831)
  1. M. Trout (2771)
  2. B. Belt (2592)
  3. C. Lee (2452)
  4. H. Street (2347)
  5. J. Soria (2287)