Skip to content

Interesting email

September 10, 2008

Thought I’d pass along an interesting email I received the other day.

“For everybody reading this, I can’t believe nobody pounds home the most obvious facts. First, last and forever, The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency. The President couldn’t even get a simple up or down vote on Federal judges for how long?

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi ground the entire United States government to a virtual halt, obstructing most of what President Bush tried to do. If any of the idiots running their mouths knew anything about how government works, they’d be blaming congress for the petty, vicious obstructionism. Along with big media, that refused to report daily that practically every proposal sent to Congress by President Bush was defeated before it made committee hearings. Everything that was passed and blamed on Bush was only passed for political expediency of politicians in office.

What’s sickening is how many people actually believe that Bush is totally to blame. I’m not saying he didn’t make mistakes, Lord knows he made his share, but what Lincoln said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand” is now a punchline for all the self serving hypocrites in Washington. Of every party. “

EDIT:It has been since pointed out that the Republicans, not the Democrats, were in control for a majority of the time mentioned above. My how fast misinformation spreads. Be nice to see people calling out their own parties for doing this same thing. BTW please don’t use Wikipedia as a reference (though it is in this case much more factual on the topic at the beginning of the email than the idiot that posted this email, which would be me….)

69 Comments leave one →
  1. edwelker permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:11 pm

    I won’t disagree with this, but our president made a large number of mistakes that were not affected by a Democratic Congress as well.

  2. jsjoyce permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:16 pm

    Hey Curt,

    On the field, I love you. You’re the epitome of a professional athlete (well, except for your weight…).

    But I wish you & those 2 right-wing nutjobs on the radio that you talk to would stick to sports. You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, and this is “your” blog. But what a turn-off to read one of my favorite sports stars this decade blather on & on about politics.

    Oh yeah, speaking of “hypocrites”, here’s some hypocritical thinking for ya:

    (Lincoln said that? I thought it was George Costanza??)

  3. heringermr permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:21 pm

    I am a Republican who wants to support the party, but this email is not true.

    Republicans controlled the house the first six years and the senate the first four years of the Bush presidency.

  4. September 10, 2008 12:23 pm

    C’mon Curt, check your facts. The Senate went 50-50 in 2000, was a Republican Majority from 2002-2006, and then went 49-49 in 2006. The House was a Republican Majority until 2006.

    Also, the House was Democratic under Reagan, and Republican for the majority of the Clinton years. Both of these Presidents accomplished plenty with conflicting parties controlling the executive and legislative branches. So not only are your facts wrong, the premise of your argument is as well.

  5. yaphi permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:24 pm

    The Democrats didn’t control congress until 2007 when they took over. So that means 6 out of the 8 Bush years Congress was controlled by none-other than the Republicans.

    The Republicans had held control for 12 years prior.

    Don’t believe everything you read in your email box!

  6. botw81 permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:31 pm

    Interesting email but factually incorrect.

    Only 2 of the last 8 years of Bush 43 have had a Democratically controlled Congress.

    A simple up or down vote on a candidate was tough to get because of the candidates the President brought in. It is ironic that the same people, such as former Majority Leader Bill Frist, who decried the perils of the filibuster, now flex it with authority. Senator McConnell and the Republican minority in the senate are projected to utilize nearly more filibusters than the previous three congresses combined (,jpg).

    Reid and Pelosi have done nothing but capitulate to the President on nearly every issue these last two years since they took over Congress save off-shore drilling and they are already showing signs of caving in there as well. They have very few fans on either side of the aisle.

    Harry Truman had the card on his desk, “The Buck Stops Here.” The President takes the ultimate responsibility for the successes and failures of the country. He had 6 years of a completely Republican administration and spent tax payer dollars like a college freshman with a new credit card.

  7. rposner permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:33 pm

    Check the emailers facts. The House was controlled by Republicans from 2000-2006. And Republicans had control from 2000-2004.

    Curt, does this represent your sentiment? How anyone can defend this Administration is beyond me.

  8. pwg56 permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:38 pm

    And you find this email interesting because . . .???? You agree with it???

  9. drillococco permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:40 pm

    Sir, with all due respect, the information is very incorrect: Congress has been solidly Republican for most of George W Bush’s Presidency, from January 2000 to January 2007.

    Congress has been in the Democrats hands for only 20 months now, in almost eight years of GWB’s Presidency.

    It is also true that most of the legislation contrary to the administration’s policies has been successfully vetoed down by the President himself.

    President Bush’s most important policies — the “surge” in Iraq is a clear example — have been in fact approved by the Democratic Congress these past 20 months.

    These are the facts. The e-mail reported them incorrectly. Then, one can have one’s own ideas, but facts are facts.

    “practically every proposal sent to Congress by President Bush was defeated before it made committee hearings” is also flat-out incorrect.

  10. drillococco permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:41 pm

    That would be “January 2001”, obviously, when GWB was sworn in as President.

  11. aj117 permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:42 pm


    It is an interesting idea, but not supported by fact. The House and Senate were both under Republican control from 2000 until 2006 (or had a 50-50 tie as in the senate, but with a Republican in the executive branch, a tie goes to the Republicans), when the Democrats gained control of both . Thus, 6/8 years of Bush 43’s term had Republican control of the House and Senate.

  12. rposner permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:47 pm

    p.s. the founders of our Constitution built a system whereby Congress would serve as a check and balance to the President, a not an institution that should roll over to the whims of the President. Curt, you must agree with that.

    I encourage you to check out the book The Dark Site. It’s a good account of how the Administration overstepped the rule of law after 9/11. It also demonstrates that much of the Administration’s policies have been dictated out of the VP’s office and not the Oval Office.

  13. September 10, 2008 12:47 pm

    “The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency.”

    Besides not being true, that statement is completely false.

    Democrats haven’t had significant control of congress since the Reagan years. Democrats still can’t break a filibuster in the Senate and generally can’t legislate w/o the cooperation of both Republicans in Congress and the President.

    Bush took office with the Republicans in control of the House and Senate. Quick research says that he had Republican control of the Senate for 6 years and the House for 4.

    So yeah – nice email – but not exactly accurate.

  14. adammarquis permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:50 pm

    A good point but “The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency.” is simply untrue. Info for just the senate:

  15. aj117 permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:54 pm

    While the part about obstructionist Democrats preventing the president from getting his legislative agenda across for the majority of his term is patently untrue since Democrats were not in the majority until January 2007, the media does deserve it’s share of the blame.

    They do not report the news, they report the sound byte politics that do not inform Americans of news, but rather entertain them with politically flavored gossip. The terrible part of this is, the media has no incentive to change this type of coverage.

  16. pdxpesky permalink
    September 10, 2008 12:58 pm

    That might be interesting if it were true. The Republicans had a majority in the House for the first six years of the Bush presidency, and a majority in the Senate for 4+ years (the first half of 2001 and four straight years in 2003-6). As for all the Bush proposals that were defeated without committee hearings, can you name any? He did work with committees chaired entirely by Republicans in both houses for four straight years and his proposals would at least have generated hearings if they had been important in any way. The last two years have seen the Democrats in majority — I’m curious about what Bush has proposed during that time that has been stonewalled. Also, anything that has been passed either was signed into law by him or vetoed…any veto overrides of significance or did he sign everything that has been passed? Curt or anybody?

  17. September 10, 2008 1:02 pm

    “First, last and forever, The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency. ”

    That’s blatantly false. W has had an opposition House for one year, and opposition Senate for three.

  18. dayhave permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:12 pm

  19. sgtipb permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:28 pm

    If by “interesting” you mean, “completely false,” then yes, that’s interesting.

    The republicans had control of the both the senate and house for the entire first term and well into the second term of the Bush presidency.

    For God’s sake, man. Google is your friend. Facts are not hard to check.

    Even in the last year-plus, the Democratic majority in the Senate has been incredibly slight (technically, a tie, in fact, though functionally a slight majority, with 2 independents voting mostly w/Dems and Joe Lieberman(D) often voting with Repubs). This is neither a filibuster-proof nor a veto-proof majority (not even close, in fact).

    As for the House “obstructing most of what President Bush tried to do,” thank God. He – and the Republican House and Senate that were running the country unfettered for 6 years – have done quite enough damage, thank you. Acting as if it’s somehow unfair for the elected representatives of this country to oppose the PotUS is nothing if not un-American. There are three branches of government for a reason, as much as it may irk George W. Bush and his flock.

  20. wikipedian permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:28 pm

    “Almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency.” Interesting, maybe, but not true.

    Bush had a Republican House from the beginning of his administration until January 2007. He had a Republican Senate for four years—from 2003 to 2007.

    Should we blame the Republicans in Congress for obstructing Bush for four years?

  21. kevinbcmu permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:32 pm

    Curt, I respect your political stance (even though I disagree with it) but I cannot let the falsehood in this e-mail go unchallenged:

    “The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency”

    FALSE. Only since January 2007 have the Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress. For the vast majority of Bush 43’s presidency, the Republicans have controlled both houses.

  22. pmatts76 permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:37 pm

    Well, it seems that Curt is on the same email chain-list as my Uncle Frank.

    “First, last and forever, The US Congress has been controlled by Democrats for almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency.”

    That’s just not true, though. Bush has served almost 8 years in office. During that time, the House was in Republican hands for 6 years, while the Senate was in the GOP’s hands for 4 of those. Now if my math is correct, then the assertion that the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats for “almost the entire Bush” presidency is not such an “obvious fact”. Maybe that’s why no one has been pounded it home, much to the chagrin of the originator of the email.

    Come on, Curt!! This stuff could easily be figured out by a) being minimally aware of things in the past 8 years and b) just looking it up.
    But keep the b.s. emails coming!

  23. doogald permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:37 pm

    Well, that’s a pretty silly e-mail message, and here is why:

    – First of all, the House of Representatives was controlled by the Republicans for the first six years of the Bush administration. There is no way you can blame the House for being obstructionist on judges – they do not have anything to do with that. So, Bush had to deal with a hostile House for only two years.

    – The Senate was in Republican control for about 4 years, 6 months, Democrat control will be about 3 years, 6 months. Now, the Senate does approve judges, and the Democrats had enough members to prevent cloture on votes, effectively giving them the ability to tie up some votes so long as all members of the caucus joined them.

    Let’s contrast these with the Clinton years:

    – The Democrats controlled the House for only two years while Clinton was President (as opposed to Republican control for six years during the Bush administration.) Clinton had a very vigorous opposition in the House for most of his Presidency.

    – The Senate was controlled by Democrats for a bit less than four years (so, about the same amount of time as Republicans controlled the Senate while Bush was President). Clinton also had a problem with Republicans blocking judges, as over 60 were blocked in the Senate. I am having a hard time finding the number of Bush judges blocked, but I believe that it is less than 60, and I do know that there are fewer vacancies among federal judges now compared with when Bush took office.

    – Of course, Congress impeached Clinton, knowing that conviction would fail, and still spent many days in trial. Talk about a waste of time, energy and resources!

    If Bush really wanted to get judges through cloture he could have done what politicians are supposed to do – met with the opposition, proposed compromises, etc. The fact that he did not do so leads me to believe that either he was incompetent, wanted them to be blocked so that he could use it as a campaign issue (however unsuccessfully), or really did not care. I suspect a combination of the first two reasons.

    And, all that said, somehow Clinton managed to reduce the deficit (in fact, leave a surplus), win a war (Kosovo), grow the economy, reduce unemployment. Etc., etc., etc. I think that Bush’s record pales in comparison (and I would be the last to argue that Clinton was a great President.)

  24. desmonthesis permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:41 pm

    Actually, when Bush took office in 2001, the 107th Congress had just been inaugurated as well, and until June, both the Senate and the House of Representatives had a Republican majority. On June 6th of 2001, the Senate took a Democratic majority. That lasted until January of 2003

    When the 108th Congress was inaugurated in 2003, both chambers had a Republican majority. That lasted until 2005.

    When the 109th Congress was inaugurated in 2005, both chambers STILL had a Republican majority. That lasted until 2007.

    It wasn’t until the 110th Congress after the midterm elections of 2006, which took office in 2007, that both chambers of the Congress had a Democratic majority. So for 6 out of the past 8 years, the Republican party has been the party of the majority.

    That e-mail needs to get its facts checked.

    Source: C-SPAN

  25. mjd04 permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:42 pm

    If by “almost the entire time” you mean “significantly less than half the time,” then you’re correct. If by “almost the entire” you intend to give these words their standard English meaning, well, then, you’re incorrect.

    2001-2003 — Senate, 50-50 (Cheney casts tie-breaking vote, so it’s a Republican majority with Republican leadership), until Senator Jeffords switched from Rep to Dem on 6/6/01. House — Republican majority with between 218 and 222 seats, to the Dems’ 208-211.

    2003-2005 — Senate – 51-49 Republicans. House — Republican Majority with b/w 225-229 seats, Dems with between 205-207.

    2005-2007 — Senate — 55-45 Republicans. House — Republican Majority with b/w 229-232 seats, Dems with between 201-202.

    2007-present — 51-49 Dems. House — Dem majority with b/w 231-236. Republicans with b/w 198-202.

    So, until last year, the entire Bush presidency saw a Republican majority in the House. For the first 6 months of his presidency there was a Republican majority in the Senate, for the next year and a half, a Dem majority. After that, for the next 4 years, there was a Republican majority. For the last year and a half, a Democratic majority.

    In sum, for the House we’ve had 6 years of Republican rule to about 1.5 years of Dem rule. For the Senate, we had 4.5 years of Republican rule, to about 3 years of Dem rule.

  26. syphax permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:48 pm


    For starters, the premise behind this entire argument is simply FALSE. You might want to consult the Google before posting something like this; it reflects poorly on you. Do you think that Obama is a Muslim?

    Republicans controlled both houses of Congress for the 107th, 108th, and 109th Congress. The 107th is complicated (Jeffords switched to independent & Paul Wellstone died), but Democrats never had more than 50 seats in the Senate then, and the Republicans controlled the House.

    Bush got whatever he wanted for six years.

    Democrats took over both houses in 2006 for the 110th Congress in response to six years of Republican misrule.

    Curt, you can have your own opinions, but you can’t have your own facts.

    The Republican party has mastered the concept of blaming others for their own mistakes. Don’t be their unwitting accomplice!

  27. jonnyjbones permalink
    September 10, 2008 1:59 pm

    And you read it and believed it without even checking it? Great job spreading misinformation Curt.

    I’ll edit it for truth:

    “For everybody reading this, I can’t believe nobody pounds home the most obvious facts. First, last and forever, The US Congress has been controlled by Republicansfor almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency. The President couldn’t manage to improve anyone’s lives except the rich?

    Cheney tried to ground the entire United States government to a virtual halt, obstructing most congress and the justice department the white house didn’t controll. If any of the idiots running their mouths knew anything about how government works, they’d be blaming congress and the white house for the sorry state of affairs of this great nation. Along with big media, that refused to report daily that our government was lying to us and spying on us in the name of security. All our politicians always tried to just blame the other party.

    What’s sickening is how many people actually believe that the Iraq war was a smart move.”

  28. September 10, 2008 2:02 pm

    Really? Well the Rebuplicans ran Congress from 1995 into 2007 (source) and Democrats haven’t really been in control of the Senate during Bush 43 either (Source).

    Research people, research. Stop listening to what others say and find out for yourself.

  29. klemmy77 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:09 pm

    You know that is interesting Curt isn’t it? How these ” grown up ” adults who are helping to run the most powerful and caring nation in the world act. What I mean is simple really we are taught how to act when we are young. How that it is better to talk over a problem then to be hard headed and dig heels into the ground. The hardest thing is that it happens over and over again and no one who will ever be elected can change that. I feel that is because most people live in a fairy tale world of false promises that elected people tell them, and only sometimes we get our heads out of dark areas on our bodies to see that take a step forwards then take about ten back with some other elected lier who is worse.
    Anyways on a side note Curt I heard what you said yesterday about New York fans being happy about Tom Brady going down with his knee injury. Also about how bitter the yankees and their fans are. You hit it right on the head Curt. Lets be honest the Yankees have lost their swagger and their fans are holding on to only memories of past championship years while Boston has become the model team. I can’t tell you how much joy I get by seeing New York Yankee fans p*ss and moan about how their team sucks.
    Best of luck in your recovery and hope to see you pitch again. Or if not then hopefully the best of health to you and hope to see you in Cooperstown someday.


  30. odentono permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:09 pm

    President Bush was elected in November of 2000. The Democrats only took control of Congress in November of 2006.

  31. josuechavez23 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:15 pm

    I understand that you’re conservative and support John McCain and Sarah Palin and that is your right as an American. All I ask is that when talking about politics you be truthful, and in posting this email that you recieved you should acknowledge that it starts with a falsehood.

    The Democrats have not controlled Congress for a majority of Bush’s presidency. The Democrats didn’t gain control of Congress until November of 2006, so they have held control for less then two years. That is the fact of the matter and should be pointed out.

    I do agree that bipartisan politics should have more of a place in Washington, but it is lies like this that continue to divide Democrats and Republicans.

    Good luck as you continue to rehab from your injury, I greatly respect your baseball talents.

  32. ahl0003 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:16 pm

    Hey Curt,

    “Interesting” is perhaps not the word you’re fumbling for. How about “specious” or just “erroneous”? The Democrats have controlled the senate for the past two years — the prior 12 were presided over by a Republican controlled senate.

    It’s posts like these that make me and many many others wish you’d stick to baseball talk in this blog: you’re just out of your depth. It’s great that you’re a McCain supporter, but it’s unfortunate that your reasons are so vague (at best) or misguided (more often than not). It’s not that your a dumb guy, it’s just that you’re not as well-informed or as intelligent as you think.

    That said, I truly hope you pitch again and that you continue to be involved with our beloved Red Sox.

  33. chrisholmes permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:28 pm

    This is not an interesting e-mail. It’s the age-old, time-honored tactic of spreading the blame. It’s an e-mail designed to prey on ignorance. Try doing some actual research and looking at the bills that get passed some time – you might be shocked by the sheer volume.

    “obstructing most of what President Bush tried to do”

    And thank goodness. Imagine what would have happened if there wouldn’t have been anyone around to reign him in…

    It’s a shame our congressional system isn’t understood better by our citizens. Then e-mails like this get floated around to prey on the ignorant. This e-mail is no different than the hoards of political television ads that attack opponents by saying, “So-and-so voted to raise taxes 37 times.” Of course, no one actually does any research to find out what bills the candidate actually voted for and why, since our congressional system allows riders. A candidate could vote to fund some aspect of the military, and because of a rider that raises a tax somewhere, now they’re suddenly in favor of raising taxes.

    I suggest actually browsing the bills sometime. Try a resource like Thomas:

    For instance, did anyone know there is a bill being proposed (H.R. 25) to repeal the I.R.S and the income tax? Can you imagine the damage that that bill would have if passed? Check it out: “H.R.25 : To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.” Hmm… let’s see… how do we fund the government without taxes…?

    How’s that for a political ploy though? Now anyone who votes against this bill can be attacked in a television ad for not voting to lower taxes…

    Bottom line: don’t buy into the blame-game. Don’t be ignorant.

  34. heyitstodd permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:28 pm


    107th Congress (2001-2003)
    Majority Leader: Thomas A. Daschle (D-SD)
    Minority Leader: Trent Lott (R-MS)
    Note: From January 3 to January 20, 2001, with the Senate divided evenly between the two parties, the Democrats held the majority due to the deciding vote of outgoing Democratic Vice President Al Gore. Senator Thomas A. Daschle served as majority leader at that time. Beginning on January 20, 2001, Republican Vice President Richard Cheney held the deciding vote, giving the majority to the Republicans. Senator Trent Lott resumed his position as majority leader on that date. On May 24, 2001, Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. He announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving that party a one-seat advantage and changing control of the Senate back to the Democrats. Thomas A. Daschle again became majority leader on June 6, 2001. Trent Lott announced on December 20, 2002, that he would not continue as Republican leader in the 108th Congress. William Frist was elected Republican leader on Dec. 23, 2002, and began service on January 7, 2003.

    108th Congress (2003-2005)
    Majority Leader: William H. Frist (R-TN)
    Minority Leader: Thomas A. Daschle (D-SD)

    109th Congress (2005-2007)
    Majority Leader: William H. Frist (R-TN)
    Minority Leader: Harry M. Reid (D-NV)

    110th Congress (2007-2009)
    Majority Leader: Harry M. Reid (D-NV)
    Minority Leader: Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

    House Majority Whips
    1995-2003 (R)Tom Delay (currently under indictement for campaign finance corruption)
    2003-2007 (R)Roy Blunt
    2007-present (D)James E. Clyburn

    So, given that the Republicans controlled the Senate for the majority of the Bush Administration, and controlled the House for six out of eight years, the premise of this e-mail is invalid.

    As for the judge confirmations, isn’t it interesting that the percentage of judges confirmed under Bush is HIGHER than under Clinton? This is especially damning for the Republican “the Democrats are obstructionist” argumnents due to the fact that for the first two years of Clinton’s Administration, the Democrats were in control of Congress. Take out the judge hearings from that era, and compare only times when Congress was controlled by parties in opposition to the President, and the Republicans'”legislating with the bench” sins are far greater than Democrats’.

    Yes, both parties make mistakes. Yes, both parties politicize issues which needn’t be, to the detriment of its citizens at times. But, for those who want to continue the party of Bush’s policies and elect John McCain, it’s a tough road to hoe – either the country has been screwed up by Bush & McCain’s party, in which case they are to blame, or it is not screwed up, and continuing the Bush policies would be good for the country. Tough choice, indeed.

  35. redbeard76 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:31 pm

    Selective memory.

    Per Wikipedia, the Democrats have a House and Senate majority currently in the 110th Congress since 1/4/07, yes. Also in the 107th Congress in the Senate only from 1/3/01 to 1/20/01 and after Jim Jeffords went indy from 6/6/01 to 1/3/03.

    The remainder of Bush’s presidency was in House and Senate control.

    Those are facts, people.

  36. playball1 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:31 pm

    I certainly agree that politics have stopped us from dealing with some of the most pressing issues that face the country today, but this email is pushing a major falsehood. It wasn’t until 2006 that the dems gained control the House, and with Joe Lieberman switching to an independent, the dems didn’t have control of the senate. That leaves 6 years of republican controlled congress, which is the majority of Bush’s time in office.

    I hope your recovery is going well Curt, and hope to see you back in the saddle next year, just not for the yanks!

  37. redbeard76 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:32 pm

    *That is, Republican House and Senate control.

  38. jdarnold permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:49 pm

    Assuming you believe this total fabrication, I can understand how both you and the writer also believe that John “I voted with Pres. Bush 90% of the time” McCain is a maverick and Sarah “I was for the bridge to nowhere before I was against it” Palin is a pork buster. In 2006, the Dems grabbed control by a razor thin 51-49 vote margin for the first time since 2002. And that’s only if you count “independent” Joe Lieberman. And in 2006, the Dems grabbed control of the House for the first time in 12 years.

    Next time, maybe a little research is in order. The Republicans were in charge and blew it. Sorry, but revisionist history isn’t going to be good enough this time.

  39. ccovey123 permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:50 pm

    You are an idiot…will you ever shut up?

  40. furiousdee permalink
    September 10, 2008 2:54 pm

    Democrats were in control of the House from January 2007 until the present. Democrats were in control of the Senate from January 2001-January 2003 (with a 1 vote majority); 2007 until the present. That means the Republican party set the House agenda for 6 of the 8 years of Bush’s term; 4 of the 8 years in the Senate. That is hardly Democratic control for “almost the entire Bush 43 Presidency”.

    If you want to throw facts around, please make them accurate.

    George W Bush, DICK Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, Colin Powell, Condi Rice and Co. lied about WMD to put America into Iraq.

    No bid contracts were given out like candy to companies with close ties to Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. Co-incidence?

    Oil prices are sky-high with oil-men in the White House.

    Mortgages are crumbling and the banking industry is receiving multi-billion dollar government buyouts with ex-finance executives in charge of our financial institutions.

    We are spending billions of dollars a day on an unnecessary war, but all the Republicans can complain about is out of control government spending?

    You people are nuts to think that GWB and Co. doesn’t take much of the blame for the mess we are in. In January 2001 we were at peace, jobs were on the rise, the economy was revving along, gas was about $1.20/gallon, and the US Treasury was in a surplus.

    After nearly 8 years, every one of those achievements has been reversed.

    Now you want to elect a guy who supported this destruction as the next President just because he layed in a Vietnamese prison for 5 years?Unbelievable.

    Oh, and hey Curt…too bad about Brady; and you are wrong, NY is definitely broken up about it. How’d your season go?

  41. September 10, 2008 3:02 pm

    Finally and Thank You!

    This is the very point I have been trying to make with my left-leaning friends and family for years. But how to make them listen to reason when all they want to do is point fingers at Bush saying “The Buck Stops Here.”


  42. kypselos permalink
    September 10, 2008 3:08 pm

    Wow, Curt, your anonymous author should have done at least some minimal fact checking. The Democrats won majorities in both the House and Senate in the 2006 midterm election. Previously, they had been the minority party in both houses since the 1994 midterm elections. By my count, 6 years of Republican majority is “most of the Bush 43 presidency.”

    The “up or down votes” on federal judges were delayed by filibuster in the Senate, which requires 60 votes to break. Now that the Republicans are in the minority, they have not been shy about using the filibuster, either. This is how our government works. It seems like your emailer is the one running his mouth.

  43. jdarnold permalink
    September 10, 2008 3:11 pm

    BTW, just some reference links, in case you want to investigate scurrilous claims:

    US Senate party divisions:

    And really, it’s been since 1996 that the Dems were the majority party. In 2002, it was an even 50-50 split (again, counting the “Democrat” Lieberman)..

    US House party makeup:

    Mind you, I’m not saying the Dem Congress is doing right. They’re a bunch of spineless wimps who ought to put into practice what they got elected to do.

  44. tdmtown permalink
    September 10, 2008 3:31 pm

    There you go again…..
    Are you trying to emphasize that the mistakes are bipartisan? or is this your sad attempt at saying “Look, it’s not all georgie’s fault”?

    Since you obviously went to college as a Fizz-Ed major, not poli-sci,
    maybe you should at least print stuff that has the facts right.

    Not sure what your emailer exactly means by “proposals” when referring to congress. Congress writes bill, laws, etc. and they are there as a legislature.
    The president himself can’t actually introduce laws or legislation. It’s pretty much part of the BASICS of government and why we have the THREE branches. Now, he can have one of his lackey congressman introduce something he is interested in but it is written and introduced/sponsored by an elected member of congress.

    “Controlling” the congress is really another quasi truth. It wasn’t most, but closer to half the time(Congress isn’t in session 52 weeks a year). And controlling the congress, but having republican control of the Senate is another story.
    In case you forgot your high school social studies, things go from the Congress, THEN to the Senate. So really, what Democratic agenda from a Democratic controlled congress is going to pass a republican Senate, THEN to a republican President who has VETO power?

    Should they work together? Well clearly they SHOULD, there is a lot of
    things that make sense to a lot of folks that shouldn’t be the fight that they are.
    But conversely, war is something few people want, so why are republicans so
    “for it”? The money spent on it could surely be better spent to protect the vulnerabilities we have, here on our shore, to terrorism.
    Reduce or eliminate our dependance on oil(of any sort) and we wouldn’t need to at all worry about the middle east and the sectarian battles/civil wars.
    (because, yes, we obviously have to pay attention because of oil)

    By the time the Democrats had control of the House AND the Senate, the republicans had full control and mastery of the “P” card.
    Yes thats right, the “Patriotism” card. They cleverly created a way to bash and debase anyone who was “anti war” because of course, you can’t love your country if you are against a war that has proven itself useless and wasteful, right?
    War is a trap on every level, and it can be used to manipulate just about every faction of politics and the republicans used it, and rode it until people started turning on them. Now, any of the cowardly democrats who gave into the fear of getting re-elected because of the “P” word, should be canned as well, but it’s a really crappy card to play. Crapping on people/volunteers in a nationally televised convention, just give Obama a zinger, and using a war and the deaths of soldiers and innocents as fuel to call people “anti” Patriotic is as disgusting as it gets.

    So controlling the Senate and Congress in a time of war, with a president and republican propaganda machine that calls everyone who is anti war UNpatriotic,
    is really lose-lose. It’s lose lose because you can’t fix or do ANYTHING in this country with a war going on that not only is sucking 10 billion a month out of our country, but also it’s very soul. No one “wins” during a time like this, No one “wins” in war.

    Stop the war, fix the country. Frankly, i’d have preferred to look back and judge georgie as a president who, republican or democrat, brought the country and the world to a better place in a new millennium. Obviously thats not the case.
    9/11 was horrible, but we would have survived and healed without entering into a ridiculous war.(but yes, looking specifically for the parties responsible was necessary) Perpetuating and miring a country in a ridiculous war thats lasted longer than WWII and has cost more lives -in total- than 9/11 did, is worse.

  45. wikipedian permalink
    September 10, 2008 3:55 pm

    Was your correspondent outraged when Chief Justice Rehnquist, no liberal activist, voiced the same criticism of the Republican Senate in 1998 when it would not give up or down votes to Clinton’s judicial nominees.

    (Not wikipedia)

    Chief Justice Rehnquist said delays by President Clinton in sending nominations to the Senate had contributed to the problem, but his main criticism fell on the Senate itself, which is responsible for approving or rejecting nominees to the Federal judiciary.
    ”The Senate is surely under no obligation to confirm any particular nominee, but after the necessary time for inquiry, it should vote him up or vote him down,” the Chief Justice said.

  46. creativewriter79 permalink
    September 10, 2008 4:07 pm


    Your voice has about as much weight as Elizabeth Hasselbeck on the View. You are an athlete, when you start talking about politics it just makes you sound dumb, really, really dumb. Please refrain from making comments that takes brain power to discuss and stick to throwing small balls at catchers….oh wait, you can’t do that anymore either.

  47. irishsoxfan permalink
    September 10, 2008 4:18 pm

    When reading this; keep in mind that I am an independent moderate. I don’t like politicians in Washington telling me how to vote. However, both conservatives and liberals like to say that means I am indecisive and wishy washy. That’s because neither side can fathom that I have beliefs and opinions that fall on either side of the fence, depending on the issue. However, my opinions and beliefs on the specific issues are fairly concrete, unless I can be convinced otherwise. To do that; you would really have to have your facts straight. It’s simple, on Education I’m liberal, on dealing with terrorism; I’m conservative. See that wasn’t so hard, now was it? Now you know where I am coming from, let me share this observation.

    Why is it that we, as a society can not have a political discussion with out acting like third graders? What ever happened to liberals and conservatives coming together to hammer out a deal and moving forward. Now if you are conservative you are a “Right Wing Nut Job” and if you’re liberal it’s a “Left Wing Screw Ball.”

    I was reading the message boards over at CNN not too long ago and the discussions there boiled down to; “Obama sucks!” Of course then the obvious retort of “No, McSame sucks, and so do you!” It went on and on like this for hours. Seriously, could these people see how ridiculous they looked?

    Also, what really amazes me about people in this country is; those who claim to be the most open-minded, are always so quick to tell others how wrong they are. Why? Is it really just because other people don’t agree with their opinions? I’m open-minded, just as long as you agree with me! That sounds rather closed minded to me, no?

    One great irony out there is how misguided people can become. For example, we have anti-abortion protesters who want to save unborn children and give them a chance at life. Ok, nothing wrong with that, so they protest. But then some misguided, half-baked schmuck goes and throws a Molotov cocktail, or plants a bomb in the abortion clinic. Of course, the same behavior is found on the other side of the extreme with anti-war protestors. Again, there is nothing wrong with the idea. You don’t want American soldiers dying in a far off place. I get that, but then you have similar half-baked, mis-guided schmucks who get violent with the police or denigrate the very soldiers and sailors they are trying to bring home. I just don’t understand how you protest violence with violence? It kind of defeats the purpose, doesn’t it? I also find it amazing and somewhat humorous, how the two ends of the spectrum, who claim to as far apart as possible, act with such similarity.

    I look at all of this behavior and I can’t help thinking what awful things lie ahead for this country. Normally, I have no use for politicians. I think most of them are lying crooks. Also, being a veteran of wartime, in the U.S. Navy (96-03) I’ve seen dumb decisions made by politicians, get soldiers and sailors killed, instead of listening to the Generals and Admirals, who actually know a little something about the subject.

    Having aired my general opinion of politicians, I would like to say, and I can’t believe I’m going to say this but…Having seen the behavior of the average American during this campaign; if this country goes to hell in a hand basket, don’t blame the politicians (ouch, did I really just admit that) but instead look in the mirror. For if we, as a country; can not have respectful, informed, and insightful debate and discussion than our whole system will come crashing down.

    That’s just my slightly obstructed view from the cheep seats.

    Kindest Regards,
    Brendan Smith
    Dallas, TX
    by way of Providence, RI

  48. furiousdee permalink
    September 10, 2008 4:19 pm

    Oh yeah, one more thing. For you to have posted this falsehood without checking the facts means either you are stupid, or a partisan hack like the rest of the Bushie neo-cons. I’ll bet you that sock wasn’t even bloody…

  49. huron1 permalink
    September 10, 2008 5:10 pm

    first thing curt, its curt right. you are no longer a relevant playing baseball player. you should never label an entire group of fans and just assume we are all alike. im really tired of you making news by bashing ny. stop. its old news just like yourself. crawl into your multi million dollar home and keep quiet. tired of your mouth. thanks. see you next year. oh yeah, no i wont. lol

  50. sloe1 permalink
    September 10, 2008 5:25 pm


    Funny thing I was just telling some friends the other night how everyone wants to lay blame on the President and no one is blaming Congress.

    This may be truer for Iraq but for other domestic issues I have trouble not seeing blame laid on Congress and their total lack of action.

    Ask 1 question what has the Democratic run Senate and House done in the last 12 months ?

    Keep up the good words and hopefully I will run into you on Warhammer soon.

  51. heyitstodd permalink
    September 10, 2008 5:34 pm

    Mr. Schilling,

    First off, I am impressed that you admit your mistake of assuming the unverified e-mail was valid. A lot of people will simply dig-in when they are shown to be incorrect. The fact that you post your opinions and have an open discussion forum merits respect as well.

    Now, the question becomes this: Given that you forwarded the mail as a way of confirming and promoting your general view on political issues, does the fact that the basis of this viewpoint was an entirely false premise, are you evaluating your views as well?

  52. heyitstodd permalink
    September 10, 2008 5:36 pm

    Oops, I edited on the fly, with the usual results. Change the last paragraph to the following:

    Now, the question becomes this: Given that you forwarded the mail as a way of confirming and promoting your general view on political issues, does the fact that the basis of this viewpoint was an entirely false premise cause you to evaluate your views as well?

  53. yankeechick78 permalink
    September 10, 2008 6:45 pm

    Could you be more of a pompous ass? Red Sox fans always want good health for Yankee players. What a load of crap.

  54. laurieny permalink
    September 10, 2008 6:46 pm

    Actually I think Curt’s original assessment of this email was correct. After all, isn’t a story always more “interesting” when you just make #@!# up?

    This sort of propaganda would be amusing if it wasn’t so dangerous, because people on that end of the political spectrum tend to believe whatever they’re told, and then repeat it without even checking. They never research whether or not it’s true before spreading it around, and then somehow it “becomes” the truth through repetition… and of course if they heard it on Fox News or Rush or Savage or Coulter or similar nutbags, it’s automatically “true” and is forwarded and repeated ad nauseum. There’s no independent thought or curiosity about the veracity of such stories, and even when proof to the contrary is presented, the erroneous position is stubbornly held to (because it suits their agenda), continues to be repeated as fact, and votes are cast based on the falsehoods. It’s kind of like high school, but hundreds of thousands of people don’t needlessly lose their lives because the student council president was elected based on lies.

  55. yankeesjets permalink
    September 10, 2008 6:47 pm

    Mr. Schilling,

    I recently read your comments regarding your thoughts on New York sports fans cheering Tom Brady’s leg injury. Let me preface this by saying that I am a big Yankee fan and an even bigger Jet fan, and I must say your comments are quite unfounded, not to mention childish.

    Yes, many people were indeed cheering Tom Brady’s injury. However, I think it should be made clear that those who were cheering are not just New York fans, but fans of all the other 31 NFL teams not called the New England Patriots. Yet you fail to mention that, while only concentrating on fans in New York. Care to explain why that is, Curt?

    I also find it funny how you claim that Boston fans are not “bitter and mad and miserable” like New York fans are. Let me take the time to remind you of an incident that occurred in the Boston area over the Fourth of July holiday weekend that made the news, when a man from New York was vacationing with his wife, children, and 70-year-old father. They were traveling along a highway when a GROUP of Red Sox fans noticed the New York plates on the man’s car and began to harass him and his family. The situation escalated when the GROUP of Red Sox fans dragged the man out of his car and beat him senseless with baseball bats while his terrified family were forced to watch. The kicker is that it turned out the guy was not a Yankee fan, or even a baseball fan for that matter. I suppose just being from New York is enough to make someone guilty, right? I’ve seen the Yankees play the Red Sox at Yankee Stadium and the worst I’ve seen were Red Sox fans getting heckled, while there’s plenty of documented incidents of Yankee fans getting physically beaten at Fenway Park. However Curt, since you want to talk about football, let’s talk about Bill Belichick and Tom Brady walking off the field at Super Bowl XLII before the game was even officially over. Maybe we can even discuss how the Patriots were exposed for cheating during several of their Super Bowl runs. I understand that New York certainly has their share of classless and immature fans, but before you begin making derogatory comments about another team/city’s fanbase, it might be a good idea to take a good look at the immaturity and un-professionalism that your own team/city’s fanbase has exhibited over the years.

    When I heard the comments that you made over the radio, I was not too surprised, since the radio is much like the internet in the sense that you can say negative things about groups of people without having to deal with them face-to-face. It also didn’t surprise me that it was coming from the same man who attended a hockey game in Boston with a hat that said “Yankee hater.” I realize that you can do that in Boston since you’re relatively safe there, but would you go on a train or bus in New York City wearing that hat? Long story short, anyone can hide behind a radio or a computer and say whatever they want. However Curt, if you really want to make a statement, then how about you show up at the Jets-Patriots game at the Meadowlands this Sunday? With your status in Major League Baseball, I am sure you would not have much difficulty obtaining a ticket to the game. It’s nice that you’ll speak your mind on a Boston radio station, but how about coming down to Giants Stadium on Sunday and make your presence known in front of 80,000+ of the people who you think so negatively of. After your negative comments towards New York sports fans, I’m sure there will be quite a few Jets fans in attendance on Sunday who would love a chance to debate your argument.


    Someone who’s proud to support New York sports teams

  56. September 10, 2008 7:23 pm

    See? That’s why you’re supposed to run against Kennedy.

  57. matt624 permalink
    September 10, 2008 7:51 pm

    Mr. Schilling,

    First off, I want to tell you that I am from New York and I am a Yankee fan. I watch every single game and every single inning they play whether that be during the great 98 season or even a season like this when they havent played that well. As a Yankee fan on the field I always respected you. I thought you were a gamer and a great big game pitcher and I think a place like NY brought out the best in you during your career whether it had been pitching for Arizona in the World Series in 2001 against us or during your years with the Red Sox. You played the game the right way and I wish you well in your future endeveours in whatever that may be. But your comments about NY fans this past week really pissed me off. How can you stereotype an entire group of people like that? How many Yankee fans do you actually know?? And the fact that you think that Boston fans arent as bitter as New York fans is simply laughable. But seriously man what is the deal, why cant you keep your mouth shut? Whether its throwing your teammate Manny under the bus, or if it is tossing Lou Piniella when he managed the Rays under the bus (When you told all of America that his players were telling you that they hated playing for him) IF that was even said which I highly doubt than why would you even say that?? Thats none of your business and to be honest your not apart of the Red Sox anymore so Manny is really non of your business either. You dont know me and your famous and I am just a 23 year old kid that just graduated from college but I would love to challenge to a debate, on this subject whether it be online or in person or over the phone or whatever….If your as good of a debater as you are with your workout programs than it shouldnt take long. Thanks,


  58. joeycee permalink
    September 10, 2008 8:16 pm

    Curt…stick to NOT pitching and collecting 8 million rather than talking politics…and don’t chime in on EVERY Boston/NY sports story. We can fight our battles just fine and dandy. Go Pats!

  59. blaffin permalink
    September 10, 2008 8:21 pm


    I find it interesting that you would support a ticket with McCain/Palin. Considering your tremendous fight for a cure for ALS and the work with stem cell research. Are you against stem cell research? McCain seems for research but Palin is againts it. Either way this is a terrible disease that my grandfather died from.

    I am also a huge Yankees/Jets fan but I would never wish injury on a Pats or Sox player.

    Brian Laffin
    Poughkeepsie, NY

  60. raydam permalink
    September 10, 2008 8:29 pm

    It actually kills me that I agree with you on McCain being the choice for the next President.

    What kills me is that you could actually cost him votes with your support. Mentioning that Bush is not completely to blame because the Democrats had control of Congress was not only incorrect but means nothing.

    You should talk about what McCain brings to the table. How HE will lead the country instead of making excuses for Bush. Any educated individual knows that the President isn’t responsible for everything that happens. This isn’t rocket science.

    You should stick to your normal rhetoric about how great you are and how much your foot hurt during the 2004 series. You have a better chance being remembered for pompous sports remarks than a political genius.

    Do us and McCain a favor….vote and support McCain, but do it silently so we don’t lose any votes…

  61. pkreder permalink
    September 10, 2008 9:53 pm

    you’re an idiot…cash your checks and write your blog…leave politics to politicians and people with a brain.

  62. chuck345 permalink
    September 10, 2008 9:56 pm

    So let me get this straight. You know of a few Yankee fans and so that automatically discounts any of the decent ones. Yeah, so the entire fan base is full of people thrilled to see a pro athlete down for the year. Maybe not everyone is a monster. This is a comment I would expect from an adolescent…seriously. An adult with veteran status in professional sports has the ability to say such an ignorant comment? I’m surprised, really.

    And FYI, I’ve heard of many actual stories where Yankee fans would bring their family and they would STILL get heckled for wearing Yankee gear. By the 7th inning, they would have peanuts, beer, vulgarities thrown at them in Fenway. Real classy too. And not to mention, a friend of mine brought his girlfriend to a game at Fenways and she was called a slut numerous times for weaing Yankee gear. Real excellent.

    I’m not saying Yankee fans are prized-packages, they certainly aren’t. But seriously, I’ve never heard anymore criticism towards fans, than I do about Boston, and I live near the area. Even the sports talk people on the radio say the same thing when comparing Red Sox and Yankee fans. Maybe you just don’t want to believe that maybe…just maybe…your fanbase is a bit worse in that regard. Trust me, some Yankee fans “suck”, but there are a huge number of Sox fans that do also.

  63. hawknyc permalink
    September 10, 2008 11:35 pm


    Once again you have managed to prove that intelligence in not a requirement for sucess in professional sports….
    As a Giant fan, why would I want to see Brady get injured when I got so much enjoyment out of watching the Giants kick the crud out of him?

    If anyone is bitter, it’s the Boston fan. Reguardless of the sport, I’ve been listening to anti-NY vitrol for 40 years. It’s rather quite amusing.

    BTW, please get healthy and come back for one more year.


  64. kathyinct permalink
    September 11, 2008 12:09 am

    Hey, Schill, the party is scared crapless about Palin and all they can do is attack and attack like the bullies did in school to the good kids. The bullies had issues and acted out in school on those good kids and therefore THAT party is doing the same. I cant believe the negative responses about her in day to day life, I swear these people drank some potion that made them such in denial that Palin isnt a great choice for VP. I love how I hear “she was a mayor” and how the “governor”isnt mentioned! She is now even ridiculed on her hunting………..uh, dont we wish we had her knowledge like other hunters for in any case we are stranded in the woods sometime those skills would help! And for those who think she is TOO religious, well, then stop singing God Bless America you hypocrites! And that goes to all the public servants too who feel that way about her. Shame on yous. The people in this country are starting to scare the crap out of me!

  65. irishsoxfan permalink
    September 11, 2008 1:11 am

    Wow, I’d like to thank everyone who participated in the 3rd grade name calling from post 43 on. You only further proved my point about not be able to discuss politics like informed adults.

  66. truthguru permalink
    September 12, 2008 10:00 am


    I respect what you have done in baseball, but I’ve seen your politics and you’re an idiot. You are like most outspoken republicans in thinking everything you say is right. I recently saw something in the news where you spoke of being a military brat and it’s part of your reason for believing the things you do. Well I am a military brat as well and my veteran father and both veteran grandfathers are voting for Barack Obama.

    This has nothing to do with McCain’s POW status, which is respectable, but how many times is he going to use that? AND THEN, there is someone like Sarah Palin, and GIVE ME A BREAK if you buy into this whole, she’s more experienced that Obama crap, because we know that is garbage. Her foreign policy experience includes the follwing : She lives in the state closest to Russia. ARE YOU KIDDING ME????? Her husband works in big oil, she doesnt support women’s rights (abortion), and she has an infant child with down’s syndrome that shes just going to throw to the babysitter. I wasn’t a big Hillary fan, but I would easily choose her over Palin. She’s completely self serving as most republicans are. I basically can’t stand the republicans for the most part and how ignorant they are.

    I truly used to think you were an intelligent, respectable man, until I found out your political status and YOUR voting record. Good job chump. 4 more years of this and I may as well be working at McDonalds for minimum wage. I know you make millions of dollars and don’t have children in the unjustified war, but one day hopefully something in your life effects you so deeply that you apologize for being such a schmuck and voting for the wrong candidates. I’d hate to have your record.

    Thanks for posting yet another response that only reinforces the fact that Senator McCain is going to be our next President. You state she is more inexperienced than Senator Obama only by calling her names, not by telling us about the vast experience of your candidate. Isn’t “Anti-Abortion” as you state it, also referred to as “Right to live”? I have never delved deep into that topic because I believe abortion is a law that should be decided on the state level and is far too big and too much for any one person to govern. FWIW I am also Pro-Life (except in extreme cases such as rape, incest or potential mother’s death).

    Glad to hear you’ll vote, that’s really all that matters at the end of your rhetoric.

  67. papibig88 permalink
    September 15, 2008 2:14 am

    Mr. Schilling,

    Does this in anyway lead you to realize the many ways that propaganda spreads across the Internet and subsequently the Nation, leading us to a country of misinformed voters?

    The fact that you didn’t ALREADY know that the Republicans were in charge for the majority of Mr. Bush’s two terms is incredibly telling. To support a candidate in such a public way and yet be so naive of the simplest crucial facts of our country’s political truth is EXTREMELY dangerous and irresponsible.

    I believe you are better than that.

    Did you NOT find it discouraging that the tone of the RNC was to denigrate those who work to help others. A chant of “Drill, drill, drill!” – as if oil was an addiction that we just can’t get enough of. I believe that Senator Obama has inspired millions to join together for a common cause to make the WORLD more peaceful, where as Senator McCain’s speech ended encouraging everyone to “Fight, fight, fight, fight, fight…”

    Words matter Mr. Schilling.

    Peace In, War Out

    Just to be clear and I really don’t care if anyone catches this or not. It was not that I didn’t know who controlled the house or senate, it was that I haphazardly read over the email, missing the entire premise of that first point. That’s my fault and the reason I really could not respond to the complaining and bitching afterwards.

  68. March 26, 2009 5:00 pm

    I am a Patriots fan from Argentina. Very nice Patriots information.
    I am a big fan of Tom Brady and Wes Welker.
    I hope to be in Boston for a game this fall.

  69. May 26, 2009 9:33 am

    This post is awesome, nice work!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

38 Pitches

Curt Schilling's Official Blog

%d bloggers like this: