Because we had some server issues this weekend, I didn’t get to post an Obamicon every day. To make up the Obamicon deficit, today and tomorrow we’re going to double up.

This afternoon’s Obamicon features Roger Clemens, whose name was mentioned 82 times in the Mitchell Report. His trainer, Brian McNamee, claims that during the 1998, 2000, and 2001 baseball seasons, he injected Clemens with Winstrol (the same drug they caught Ben Johnson using at the 1988 Summer Olympics).

In April 2008, the New York Daily News reported on a long-term relationship between Clemens and country music star Mindy McCready that began when she was 15 years old. For what it’s worth, McCready says the relationship actually began when she was 16, but they didn’t start doing it until years later.

Look, we all knew Clemens was a dick who didn’t like to carry his own bags, insisted on special treatment and couldn’t retire often enough. But for all his faults, he was always a tireless advocate of two things: hard work and family. What a fraud.

What lurks beneath the lid?

I’ve always loved coffee, but it’s Suz who bears responsibility for turning me into a bonafide java-snob. Your dark roasts, your light roasts, your medium roasts–I love them all. Whether it’s an exotic peaberry from Tanzania, a pure Kona from Hawaii, or a humble-but-hearty house blend, I’ll never say no to Joe. And while I frequent several lovely independent cafes, more often than not I end up swinging by my local Starbucks to feed my addiction.

So imagine my joy when I ran across Starbucks Gossip, the unofficial blog of the chain’s baristas. And imagine my voyeuristic sense of satisfaction when I read this post on what the celebs drink and found it to contain several ballplayers. Coffee and baseball! Two of my favorite things! Commingling in caffeinated bliss!

Assuming you don’t share my obsession with celebrity gossip, I’ve thoughtfully pared down the list to just baseball players:

Posted by: SoCalBarista | August 17, 2008 at 02:49 PM

Derek Jeter came in to our store a week ago and ordered a double tall non-fat latte.

Should've gotten decaf.

Posted by: Will | August 18, 2008 at 08:31 AM

Roger Clemens orders a Venti Earl Grey and Venti no-whip Caramel Frap

Jeff Bagwell gets a tall nonfat latte and tall awake.

Posted by: :) | August 18, 2008 at 04:43 PM

For the baseball fans, Joe Nathan, one of the top pitchers in the country, of the Minnesota Twins came to my store. He ordered a grande vanilla bean creme frappiccino and a banana loaf. He was really rude. Drove up and on his cell phone, wouldn’t even acknowledge me, and no tip of course. I also found it weird that an athlete was having such a fattening non-caffeinated bev.

Posted by: Borrowed Partner | August 18, 2008 at 08:46 PM

Roger Clemens got a caramel frap and a slice of lemon pound cake at my old store. Tipped well and was very nice.

Posted by: Boston Starbucks Rebel | August 18, 2008 at 08:51 PM

JoeTori [sic] came into my store and got a caramel macchiato.

But really, you should read the entire thread. There’s something oddly compelling about seeing Barack Obama, Cameron Diaz, and Chuck Norris all jumbled together through the barista lens. Plus, you find out things like that Tiger Woods doesn’t tip, that Michael Jordan only tips the change (but pays with a $20, so it’s okay), that Kevin Garnett gets his coffee venti-sized (TOP OF THE WOOOORLD! TOP OF THE WOOOORLD!!!!), and that Chad Johnson double parks in the handicapped space (why am I not surprised?). Sometimes, they are who we thought they were. But other times (I’m looking at YOU, Joe Torre) the beverages offer up a surprise.

Personally, I’m a grande bold with room, tips the change. Or I did until I read this post.

At least I’m still ahead of Taylor throws-the-drink-back-through-the-drivethru-window Swift. C’mon Taylor…that’s not our song!

Back in January, when Roger Clemens filed his lawsuit, I wondered if the legal process would open up a whole new can of worms. Short answer: yes. And what nubile worms they turned out to be.

But the Rocket’s latest statement, which hit the newsstands today, shows just how far he still is from understanding what’s already happened to him.

I was only just getting used to Mitchell report ballplayers apologizing without saying what they were apologizing for. There was Eric Gagne, who apologized for a “distraction” and said he felt “bad.” Bad for what? Distraction, why? He didn’t say. Paul Lo Duca was similarly cryptic. “You do something wrong in your life and you get away with it, you still have something inside you that burns,” he said. I don’t think he was talking about kung pao chicken. But when a reporter asked him for an antecedent, Lo Duca’s replied: “Come on, bro. Next question.” Jason Giambi set the standard in 2005, when his use of steroids became public. He took “full responsibility”—but for what he did not say. And he declined to elaborate. “I’m sorry,” said Giambi, “But I’m trying to go forward now.” Move forward from what?

But Roger Clemens has now taken this art of nonapologizing to a new level. He admitting making “mistakes” in his “personal life,” adding, “I have apologized to my family and apologize to my fans. Like everyone, I have flaws. I have sometimes made choices which have not been right.” Then he categorically denies any improper relationship with “a fifteen-year old girl.” Mindy McCready is not mentioned by name.

(McCready, of course, said she”could not refute” anything in the story first reported by the New York Post. The Post danced around the issue of statutory rape by saying that Clemens and McCready met when she was 15, that it was “love at first sight,”and that McCready accompanied Clemens back to his hotel room, but that the two did not become “intimate” until she moved to Nashville and became a star—conveniently, when she had turned 18. But as Coley pointed out, it’s hard to say what’s creepier—a 28-year old man sleeping with a high school sophomore, or a 28-year old man mentoring her for three years and then sleeping with her when he’s 31 and she’s 18?)

In the statement, Clemens said the relationship, “has been twisted and distorted far beyond reality,” adding, “It is just one of many, many accusations that are utterly false.” He does not, of course, go into specifics. He merely concluded:

“I realize that many people want me to simply confess and apologize for the conduct that I have been accused of, but I cannot confess to, nor apologize for, things I did not do. I have apologized to my family for my mistakes. And having offered this apology to the public, I would ask that you let me and my family deal with these matters in private.”

If the accusations are as false as he claims, it’s hard to see what sort of matters he and his family could be dealing with in private. If they’ve got stuff to deal with, it would seem to point to some level of truth in the philandering-Roger stories. Of course, I suppose it could be his other, unspecified “flaws” or “choices which have not been right.” But then, why issue this statement now? Can’t we just go back to accepting “full responsibility” (for something unnamed), “moving on” (from something unnamed), because someone feels “bad” (about something unnamed)? That seemed so simple and clear in comparison.

But the biggest insight into Clemens’ view of this case comes in this short nugget: “I believe my personal life has nothing to do with the accusations of steroid and HGH use. I have already made clear that I did not use them.” When he was gladhanding on Capitol Hill, he asserted that he did not use PEDs and that he was a faithful family man. Now he asserts the two assertions have nothing to do with each other. Not only does he seem to think whatever he asserts becomes God’s own truth, he also apparently believes that this truth can be changed any time he issues a new assertion.

Unfortunately, Roger’s lawyers don’t seem to have informed him that in the eyes of the law, just asserting something doesn’t make it so. Once you’re making statements under oath, anything untrue assertion becomes perjury. That’s how you get from an Arkansas land deal to Monica Lewinsky. That’s how you get from the Hall of Fame to a can of worms.

Yesterday, Paul sent an email to the Umpbump staff, announcing the day’s big news: Newsday was reporting that Roger Clemens was banging a country singer. The following is the contents of the resulting email thread.

Sarah: WHOAH! This is huge! Peter Gammons has, I think, touted Clemens as the ultimate faithful husband when all his teammates were sleeping with groupies!

Coley: Sarah, can you track down that Peter Gammons article? I think that would be something people would find interesting.

Sarah: You know, i may have been mistaken about that. I read later that it was Canseco who said that in his book…so while I do have this memory of hearing it from the lips of P-Gam, he may only have been repeating the words of Canseco. Or I just screwed up who said it in my mind, making this the first time anyone has ever confused Peter Gammons with Jose Canseco. Either way, I don’t think Gammons put it in an article. I think he was just talking. But they did write a book together back in the 80s.

Sarah: Also, this guy is a total douchebag. It’s a huge non story?!?! What planet is he on?

Paul: All Wallace Matthews ever does is complain. He’s one of the top examples of why mainstream NYC sports media sucks. Well, him and Mike & the Maddog.

Sarah: This may be my favorite line:

“The fact that she was 15 and he 28? Well, that one is a little tougher to get around, but these days, 15 is the new 30.”

Gross, gross, gross!

“With all due respect to my good friends at the New York Daily News, aside from the age of his alleged mistress at the time of their meeting, this is one big non-story, important to all of four people on planet Earth – Mindy McCready, the woman in question; Brian McNamee, who is being sued by Clemens for defamation; and Mr. and Mrs. Roger Clemens of Katy, Texas.”

Right, and Congress! And anyone who read the Mitchell Report! And anyone who watched Clemens’ testimony on television!!!!

And why does he keep talking about Miley Cyrus?! Has she really invaded every last corner of the earth?!?

Coley: Sarah, now that Miley Cirus has been photographed wearing a sheet, it’s now permissable to have sex with 15-year-old girls. Didn’t you hear?

[Scandalous Miley Cyrus photos after the jump. Go on, click it. You know you want to. Perv.]

Read the rest of this entry »

As if this whole Roger Clemens-Mitchell Report fiasco couldn’t get any weirder, it’s being reported in the NY Daily News this morning that not only was Clemens cheating on his wife for ten years starting in the early 1990s, he was actually carrying on the affair with singer Mindy McCready… beginning when she was 15 years old.

This is going to get downright awkward.

Of course, for his part, Clemens is denying that the relationship between he and McCready was ever sexual. His lawyer, Rusty Hardin, has said:

“(Clemens) flatly denies having had any kind of an inappropriate relationship with her… He’s considered her a close family friend… He has never had a sexual relationship with her.”

Right. It’s totally normal for a (then) 28-year old man to start hanging out with a fifteen year-old girl. Like it was totally normal when Lester Burnham did it. And that turned out well.

Here are some details as best I can gather:

1. He first picked her up in a Fort Myers karaoke bar after hearing her sing. What the hell is a fifteen year old doing in a bar anyway?
2. Clemens used to take her on road trips during his time with the Red Sox, Blue Jays, Yankees and Astros. I’m sure it was completely innocent. She’s just a family friend.
3. McCready used to received FedEx boxes filled with cash, courtesy of Mr. Clemens.
4. They “partied” with Michael Jordan and Monica Lewinsky. I’m not sure why this part is news.

But of course, this accusation is going to spill over into the courtroom on a totally unrelated issue. The legal fisticuffs going on between Clemens and Brian McNamee will surely bring about more on this. For one, the Clemens defense team had been trying to portray the Rocket as the ultimate family man – one who would never put his family in harm’s way by tarnishing his own reputation by using performance-enhancing drugs. Now that argument becomes very difficult to back up.

Moreover, believe it or not, Jose Canseco’s credibility (who’d a thunk it?) comes into question as well. The soon-to-be action star has been in Clemens’ corner throughout this whole issue. Although Canseco had outed several players as steroid-users in Juiced, Clemens wasn’t one of them (although he does say that the two had discussed the topic). More recently, Canseco has come out and denied that Clemens attended “the party” at his home back in 1998, one that has become a major crux in the legal proceedings. But in Juiced, Canseco wrote of Clemens:

Here’s something you probably don’t know about Roger Clemens: He’s one of the very few baseball players I know who never cheated on his wife. I was amazed by him, to be honest. His wife should be very proud of him…

I went out with him a bunch of times when there were beautiful women around, and he had a lot of opportunities and never took them. I was with him enough times to realize: This man never cheated on his wife. He was one of the rarities, the anomalies, in baseball. I can hardly think of anyone else who never cheated on his wife.

For those of you who dislike Clemens and Canseco, Happy Birthday.

For your Sunday morning pleasure, via Slate.com, the poetry of Roger Clemens, excerpted from his deposition and his Congressional testimony:

“Offensive Haiku”

I am offended.

I will be honest with you.

I am offended.

—Feb. 5, 2008, deposition

“Ghost Andy”

He looked at me,

Wringing his hands,

White as a ghost

And asked me

What are you going

To tell them?

And I told him

I’m going out there

To tell the truth.

—Feb. 13, 2008, hearing

“Glute”

I have strained my glute

On a couple occasions.

I wish I could tell you

How many occasions.

—Feb. 5, 2008, deposition

David Cone was considered one of the classiest players in the game in his day, and I see the same is true in retirement. I had the pleasure of watching Cone pitch for the Red Sox in 2001, his second-to-last year in the majors. I was at his famous duel with Mike Mussina, in which Moose was perfect for eight and two-thirds innings, before giving up a garbage hit to Crazy Carl Everett. I remember feeling very disoriented to have actually been rooting for a Yankee pitcher in a game against my beloved Red Sox, but how many perfect games does a girl get to see in her lifetime? Anyway, often forgotten is that David Cone turned in a vintage, virtuoso performance in that game as well. He scattered 6 hits over 8 and a third innings, allowing only one unearned run (the Red Sox made three errors behind him).

Anywho, it was a great—and eerie—game to watch, and it left me with a perennial soft spot for Cone. So I was pleased today to see him take some responsibility for the steroid era:

The former pitcher was on the union’s negotiating team during the 1994-95 strike, when management proposed drug testing and the players’ association successfully fought it off.

“Certainly in retrospect, I think there’s plenty of blame to go around. Certainly I share some of that blame as being involved with the players’ association at that time,” Cone said Wednesday. “It’s something I’m not proud of. It’s humbling. It’s embarrassing.”

Cone walked a careful line, talking about former teammates and Mitchell Report goats Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens but not criticizing them. Did Roger or Clemens ever tempt him to train with them?

“I was afraid of the weight room,” Cone said. “I think they knew better. I made my position very well known. I was an old-school guy, I was a couple-beers-after-the-game kind of guy.”

In this week’s Metro column, I note the ignominious end of Roger Clemens’ storied career. A virtuosic performance has worthy of the big screen has rapidly degenerated into a tawdry television drama. Two thumbs way down.

And though much ink and many pixels have been devoted to whether or not Clemens used steroids, whether he “seems guilty,” the PR of filing a lawsuit, what that tape was all about, and how Andy Pettitte must feel about all of this, it’s basically all been speculation. Leave it to Baseball Prospectus to actually look at the particulars of his lawsuit.

This is the article I’ve been waiting to read. After all, the Mitchell Report only had teeth because of the BALCO trial. By filing a lawsuit, could Roger Clemens be opening up a whole new can of worms? I suppose that depends on the particulars of the case. From BP writer Derek Jacques:

A claim of defamation (usually broken down into slander for spoken statements and libel for statements made in writing) accuses someone of saying or writing something untruthful that is then “published” to a third party, for the purpose of injuring the reputation of the person making the claim. Because a statement can’t be defamatory if it’s true, the truth of the allegations McNamee made against Clemens is the main issue of the suit. The question is simply whether or not McNamee injected Clemens with steroids and HGH in 1998, 2000, and 2001.

[...]

Defamation is a notoriously hard case to prove. In this situation, the allegations are all about the actions of two men alone in a room together with no other witnesses, and likely no physical or documentary evidence to connect or divorce them from what McNamee says they were doing. Clemens will face an uphill climb making his case, both because he bears the burden of proof and because he has to prove a negative—that an event that McNamee doesn’t tie to a specific date and time didn’t happen.

Clemens lamented during his 60 Minutes interview that people were treating him as “guilty before innocent,” instead of innocent until proven guilty. Ironically, filing this lawsuit puts the burden of proof right where he didn’t want it: on him.

And for those who were hoping that the Mitchell Report would close the door on the steroids era and let our beloved sport heal, the Clemens lawsuit effectively crushes those dreams:

Before this matter reaches trial, there would likely be months, perhaps years, of preparation, discovery, and depositions. If you give skilled litigators enough time to dig through someone’s life and financial records, all sorts of interesting and unexpected things can happen.

In other words, yes, the seal has been broken on a new can of worms. The only remaining question: is it a can of harmless earthworms, a can of annoying ringworms, or a can of fearsome Mongolian Death Worms?