<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Today in The Journal News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/</link>
	<description>A New York Yankees blog by Chad Jennings and the staff of The Journal News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:32:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: James B</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-665002</link>
		<dc:creator>James B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-665002</guid>
		<description>Swisher, CC, Burnett and now Arod&#039;s issues... wow, going to be an interesting season!  Love to see Gardner outwork Melky for the CF job - but did I read somewhere (seem to remember) that Melky is out of options... meaning if he doesn&#039;t make the team - he hits waivers?  If this is true - there is no way that happens.. 

Anyone heard who the guest instructors are going to be in Spring this year?  Only one i heard for sure was Guidry.  Heading down and would love to know who to look for.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Swisher, CC, Burnett and now Arod&#8217;s issues&#8230; wow, going to be an interesting season!  Love to see Gardner outwork Melky for the CF job &#8211; but did I read somewhere (seem to remember) that Melky is out of options&#8230; meaning if he doesn&#8217;t make the team &#8211; he hits waivers?  If this is true &#8211; there is no way that happens.. </p>
<p>Anyone heard who the guest instructors are going to be in Spring this year?  Only one i heard for sure was Guidry.  Heading down and would love to know who to look for.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664891</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664891</guid>
		<description>Randy,

I&#039;m no expert in this area, so I&#039;m just speculating here.  If there are state or local stalking laws that apply where ARod lives, they probably apply only to people who intend to menace or harass the victim.  Roberts doesn&#039;t have a license to break those laws, but she does have a legitimate reason for following ARod around: she is reporting on a celebrity.  So she doesn&#039;t run afoul of the law.

Of course, if she really breaks into ARod&#039;s house, she goes to jail just as if you or I did it.

Since she is a celebrity of sorts now (TV appearances and a book), can other reporters try to dig up dirt on her?  I see no reason why not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Randy,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m no expert in this area, so I&#8217;m just speculating here.  If there are state or local stalking laws that apply where ARod lives, they probably apply only to people who intend to menace or harass the victim.  Roberts doesn&#8217;t have a license to break those laws, but she does have a legitimate reason for following ARod around: she is reporting on a celebrity.  So she doesn&#8217;t run afoul of the law.</p>
<p>Of course, if she really breaks into ARod&#8217;s house, she goes to jail just as if you or I did it.</p>
<p>Since she is a celebrity of sorts now (TV appearances and a book), can other reporters try to dig up dirt on her?  I see no reason why not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randy l</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664879</link>
		<dc:creator>randy l</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664879</guid>
		<description>&quot;Players with spotless reputations, like Jeter, should get extra credit for being above suspicion.&quot;
 jeremy-

 thanks for clearing that up. makes sense to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Players with spotless reputations, like Jeter, should get extra credit for being above suspicion.&#8221;<br />
 jeremy-</p>
<p> thanks for clearing that up. makes sense to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve B</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664873</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:30:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664873</guid>
		<description>&quot;i don’t think so. if 50% used steroids. it means 50% didn’t. why should we assume everyone uses?&quot;

You can&#039;t. But those who didn&#039;t use and knew about the issue but did nothing to bring the issue to light are as much part of the problem as the users themselves. Somebody or several somebodies neeeded to have the grapes to stand up to the union. Schilling may have come closest with his revelations to SI, but when the chips were really down before Congress he turtled. It was pretty obvious the Union got to him in advance of those hearings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;i don’t think so. if 50% used steroids. it means 50% didn’t. why should we assume everyone uses?&#8221;</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t. But those who didn&#8217;t use and knew about the issue but did nothing to bring the issue to light are as much part of the problem as the users themselves. Somebody or several somebodies neeeded to have the grapes to stand up to the union. Schilling may have come closest with his revelations to SI, but when the chips were really down before Congress he turtled. It was pretty obvious the Union got to him in advance of those hearings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randy l</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664870</link>
		<dc:creator>randy l</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:29:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664870</guid>
		<description>&quot;As far as I know, you and I have the same right to investigate ARod as Roberts does. We can all snoop into ARod’s life as much as we want as long as we don’t break the law.&quot;

jeremy-

that can&#039;t be true because there are stalking laws. i just wonder where the line is that separates stalking laws from freedom of the press laws. 

 while i don&#039;t know what the laws are, i have a hunch  that if one is a stalker by nature, becoming a reporter is a good cover :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;As far as I know, you and I have the same right to investigate ARod as Roberts does. We can all snoop into ARod’s life as much as we want as long as we don’t break the law.&#8221;</p>
<p>jeremy-</p>
<p>that can&#8217;t be true because there are stalking laws. i just wonder where the line is that separates stalking laws from freedom of the press laws. </p>
<p> while i don&#8217;t know what the laws are, i have a hunch  that if one is a stalker by nature, becoming a reporter is a good cover <img src='http://yankees.lhblogs.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664867</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664867</guid>
		<description>Randy,

You are right.  There is no reason to assume Jeter juiced.

What I meant to write is that we should assume all players juiced for the purposes of HOF voting.  We should not keep clearly deserving players out of the HOF because they juiced or because we suspect they juiced.

Players with spotless reputations, like Jeter, should get extra credit for being above suspicion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Randy,</p>
<p>You are right.  There is no reason to assume Jeter juiced.</p>
<p>What I meant to write is that we should assume all players juiced for the purposes of HOF voting.  We should not keep clearly deserving players out of the HOF because they juiced or because we suspect they juiced.</p>
<p>Players with spotless reputations, like Jeter, should get extra credit for being above suspicion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664862</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664862</guid>
		<description>Dave,

Those are reasonable assumptions but they are just that, assumptions.  We are not doctors and we don&#039;t know what ARod took.  We just aren&#039;t qualified to say what benefits he received from PEDs.  

My point is that HOF voters aren&#039;t qualified to do that either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave,</p>
<p>Those are reasonable assumptions but they are just that, assumptions.  We are not doctors and we don&#8217;t know what ARod took.  We just aren&#8217;t qualified to say what benefits he received from PEDs.  </p>
<p>My point is that HOF voters aren&#8217;t qualified to do that either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randy l</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664860</link>
		<dc:creator>randy l</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664860</guid>
		<description>&quot;My view is we should assume all players juiced through 2003&quot;

jeremy-

i don&#039;t agree with that at all. we should assume jeter has juiced ? 

i don&#039;t think so. if 50% used steroids. it means 50% didn&#039;t.  why should we assume everyone uses?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;My view is we should assume all players juiced through 2003&#8243;</p>
<p>jeremy-</p>
<p>i don&#8217;t agree with that at all. we should assume jeter has juiced ? </p>
<p>i don&#8217;t think so. if 50% used steroids. it means 50% didn&#8217;t.  why should we assume everyone uses?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664855</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664855</guid>
		<description>Randy,

As far as I know, you and I have the same right to investigate ARod as Roberts does.  We can all snoop into ARod&#039;s life as much as we want as long as we don&#039;t break the law.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Randy,</p>
<p>As far as I know, you and I have the same right to investigate ARod as Roberts does.  We can all snoop into ARod&#8217;s life as much as we want as long as we don&#8217;t break the law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joba-the next great Yankee closer</title>
		<link>http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2009/02/11/today-in-the-journal-news-427/comment-page-2/#comment-664854</link>
		<dc:creator>Joba-the next great Yankee closer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:20:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://yankees.lhblogs.com/?p=6844#comment-664854</guid>
		<description>Jeremy

Correction
Great point you made to Doreen.


As far as Clemons, Bonds and McGwire, I don&#039;t think they will be voted into the HOF.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeremy</p>
<p>Correction<br />
Great point you made to Doreen.</p>
<p>As far as Clemons, Bonds and McGwire, I don&#8217;t think they will be voted into the HOF.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

