WasWatching.com

But, is it any more illegal or stupid than some parent willing to spend $1,000 on the latest version of some computer-gaming hardware (that would retail for $200) – buying it from some guy out of the trunk of his car – because his kid has to have it the first day it’s available to the public? You think that doesn’t happen?
-------

Steve, you're a father. How in the WORLD do you make this analogy? Buying a videogame out of the trunk of a car is the same as buying ILLEGAL DRUGS for your son's use? That's not even in the same universe. Supporting and supply DRUGS (and these are illegal drugs with negative side effects) is absolutely horrible. I can understand why Pettitte's father did it -- he loves his son -- but there's no way to excuse it away. I can also understand why Pettitte wanted and used the HGH, but again -- it's wrong.

Also, you might want to amend your post about how Pettitte is believable because no one would know about using HGH in 2004 and he admitted to it. Turns out, he only revealed this because the "Daily News" found out about it. So Pettitte isn't as honest as we believe. He continually lied about his use, and then only revealed this because a paper got the info.

By the way, I love the little note that Roger's son goes to this gym. If you're going to throw out that suggestion, then at least have the cojones to say he might be a user too.

“Supporting and supply DRUGS (and these are illegal drugs with negative side effects) is absolutely horrible.”

Agreed that supporting and supplying illegal drugs that have negative side effects is horrible. But, we’re talking about HGH here – and not something like crystal methamphetamine or crack.

One can make a case that buying HGH, illegally, is somewhat like buying Viagra, illegally. Yes, it’s illegal. And, yes, if used incorrectly, it could be harmful to the person using it – but, it’s not harmful in the way that crystal methamphetamine or crack is to the user.

If Pettitte’s father went over the border and bought Andy some Viagra without an Rx – and then let Andy take it – would you be as upset about it? How is that different than HGH? They’re both performance enhancers, no?

Sure, it was illegal. And, sure, it’s stupid. But, is it any more illegal or stupid than some parent willing to spend $1,000 on the latest version of some computer-gaming hardware (that would retail for $200) – buying it from some guy out of the trunk of his car – because his kid has to have it the first day it’s available to the public? You think that doesn’t happen?

-------------------------
i used to work at gamestop and have personally sold xbox 360's for $1000+ when they first came out

You didn't mention buying Viagra illegally in your original post -- you compared buying and supplying HGH to his son as being similar to buying a videogame on the street. And I repeat: those two things aren't anywhere near each other.

Listen, I am not an expert on HGH or Viagra -- I've taken neither. But I know that HGH is given to people for specific reasons and that you should only take it if you truly need it. I feel the same way about Viagra, too, but I don't exactly think the drugs are similar.

A more honest comp might be to say "Well, Andy was feeling a little pain, so his father got him some illegal Vicodin." Would you be okay with that? Or if he picked him up some Xanax because he was feeling down?

I don't believe in self-medicating. That's just me. And while I think everyone in this situation had good intentions, it was inexcusable.

That comparison is absolutely terrible. Comparing drugs to a video game is just about inexcusable. And secondly, Andy is in his late 30s. How does that compare to some 12 year old kid who wants to play a video game but couldnt get to the mall before they sold out?

I understand that sometime analogies are a little off but this one is out of the ballpark. I also understand your point about doing anything for your kids but there are different levels to which you would do anything for their kids and those two situations are about 10 degrees apart.

I think the implication is that the video game system you are buying out of the trunk of some guys car is stolen or "fell off a truck", which, too, is illegal. Not saying it is a perfect analogy but I think it is a little better than some have stated.

"Turns out, he only revealed this because the "Daily News" found out about it. So Pettitte isn't as honest as we believe. He continually lied about his use, and then only revealed this because a paper got the info."

The idea that Andy Pettitte is, somehow, a beacon of honesty, let alone a credible witness, is laughable at this point. He projects a niceness and simplicity, which people like to interpret as wholesomeness and decency. And by most accounts, he is liked by his teammates and the reporters who have covered him. But he is a very flawed person--someone who has been caught publicly lying on a couple occasions now (and the true reasons he originally left the Yanks might be related to other indiscretions if I'm to believe a person I know who knew inside Yankee stuff at the time). Frankly, if he came out tomorrow and said that he only did HGH the two times with McNamee and the one time with his dad and that was it, I'd see very little reason to believe him. He's given us no reason to believe him. And the funny thing is I don't much care about this issue. But please, let us stop referring to Andy as honest. He's many things that can be viewed as positive--he's nice to the people around him, for instance--but he's sketchy when it comes to the truth.

In his interview with Sports Media Guide, Terry Pluto said MLB banned HGH on Jan. 13, 2005. And that since Paul Byrd's last order for HGH was a week before that date, he'd therefore done nothing illegal.

I don't know what "more illegal" means, but I believe that the sentence and/or fine would be much more severe for drugs than computer games.

I actually think there is a drug hysteria in this country's legal system (cheating in sports is a separate issue).

Anyway, I don't think Pettitte wants to go out this way.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Feds go after the Pettitte's in this situation. They go after people on their deathbeds who use marijuana all the time. After all, someone has to think of the children....

As far as Andy, people can say what they want and I still like the guy, but his credibility in this matter is shot. But I don't really think HGH is a big deal so let's move on. He's made some mistakes, but the only person he's potentially harmed is himself.

"That comparison is absolutely terrible."

Here's the point attempted to be made: That, as a parent, sometimes, you find yourself doing something that defies logic, common sense, etc. - and something that is not above board - and something that you never would have ever pictured yourself doing before you had kids...but, you do it because your kid came to you and asked for it or needed it.

That's all I was trying to paint with that picture. Sorry if it didn't connect for some.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Feds go after the Pettitte's in this situation.
___

I think there would be Fifth Amendment issues, at least after his initial admission confirming the Mitchell Report. The rest were made in conjunction with a cooperating with a Congressional committee, so I don't see that happening. His attorney likely received assurances.