If the source is Doug Mirabelli then I wouldn't put too much stock in the story: Mirabelli's one of the least liked players in Major League Baseball, let alone the Red Sox locker-room, and has a well-earned reputation for back-stabbing players left and right.
 

Interesting. I didn't know that about Mirabelli. Of course, the fact that he's a jerk doesn't mean it's not true.
 

Mirabelli told Thorne this two years ago? And Thorne doesn't report it at all, until between pitches of an at-bat in a routine game in late April of 2007? I don't think so.
 

It is weird, I know. But where's the conspiracy here? Sometimes that is how truth comes out...

I'm not saying that it is true, just that the circumstances don't prove or disprove anything....
 

It would be all too perfect -- here's yet another big Bush backer whose machismo is faked. Public appearance, for Bushies, IS reality.

I say the burden of proof should be on anyone who campaigns for this President. Test the sock! (and ask the surgeon: is there any way this particular surgery could lead to bleeding at that interval?).

SE
 

Squatting Egret, aka The Boy Who Cried Bush (he sucks, but does every conversation need to involve him?), offers a possible explanation for why this is coming up. Thorne probably just dislikes Schilling personally.

And SE, Schill could wear a pink tutu on the mound AND have painted his sock red (even if done, 'twould be a smart play as a head game) and his machismo would still be legit because he's the single biggest reason that two teams have world championships (the first--and possibly the last--for both).
 

That was real blood. I tasted it.

Dracula
 

I concede that he's a manly man insofar as he pitches in the major leagues, and wins, and all that. And no one needs to play through extraordinary injuries in order to be macho.

But the point isn't that he wasn't 'really injured.' It's the mindset behind the thing: how *insecure* is it to put fake blood on your sock?

If it can be read as a head game being played with batters, that's different. But it seems more likely to me to be designed for the cameras and the fans, and that would just be pathetic.

Will be glad to be wrong about Schilling. But will also be plenty eager to mock him as a symbol of Republican insecurity (cf. so-called "chickenhawks") if he's proved to have faked the sock for PR reasons. (He isn't just incidentally a Republican, he really stumped for Bush.)

Jumping the gun, admittedly. And it's a silly symbolic point (but it's Schilling himself who hitched his wagon to Bush, and vice versa; it's not me who linked Bush's political fortune with Schilling's macho star power, Schilling did that himself). So I'll retract the whole thing for now and wait for a more appropriate time to Cry J'Accuse at Bush. Like five minutes from now, and every five minutes thereafter, on a new issue every time, cause he's REALLY REALLY bad at being president.

Standing Eagle


PS. Bush sucks.
 

Allow me to clarify that I have no basis for thinking it wasn't real blood. It certainly could have been.

What makes you think I'm a 'Boy,' by the way?

SE
 

1:49, aka Your Nemesis, here, Egret. Nicely explained and I respect that you had the balls (yes, balls, you're a boy--a woman would've been reluctant to note my choice...I think) to at least partially amend your original stance. So long as you keep the vitriol at about 3/4 tank, I'm sufficiently enticed to argue with you. I can only be so pissed at someone who entertains me for at least five minutes everyday.
 

Occurs to me to note that if these allegations prove to be true, Schilling will become yet another Republican hero who has turned out to have feet of Klee.

Standing Eagle