Steroids: how to tell who's using and who's not

By Bruce Watson

Published on February 22, 2008

The snow is still on the ground but some players are suiting up and heading for Florida while others are dressing in suits and testifying before Congress, so it must be baseball season again.

This season, steroids hang like a dark cloud over the national pastime. Ever since the Mitchell report accused hundreds of MLB players, including anyone who ever played for the Yankees of steroid use, the question has been "Did they or didn't they?" But last week's Congressional hearing with Roger Clemens raised a bigger question.

When a guy who can spin a wicked curveball squares off against a Congressman who can spin the truth, who do you believe? Is there any way for a politician to tell when a baseball player has taken steroids?

Fortunately for fans, players, and the truth, I've developed a little checklist. Any politician can simply take a good look at any tainted player and add up the points for each positive answer. Has the player ever:

* played for the Yankees? (2 points)

* gone from three homeruns a year to 52? (4 points)

* punched a hole in a clubhouse wall? (5 points)

* been seen hanging around the clubhouse with men who hold degrees in pharmaceutical science? (6 points)

* switched in six months from a size 15 collar to a size 34? (8 points)

* punched a hole in a manager? (9 points)

* made noises resembling those of King Kong in his latest movie? (10 points)

* shaved his shoulders? (11 points)

* slid into second with a double and head butted the umpire? (14 points)

* actually liked playing for the Yankees? (18 points)

If a player totals more than 40 points, you don't need a Congressional hearing to answer the "did he or didn't he" question. But athletes aren't the only people who want to enhance their performance.

With politics becoming a spectator sport, steroids may well be stepping up to the plate. Like aging ballplayers, aging politicians find they just can't keep up with the insane demands of their profession. Wouldn't steroids enhance a politician's performance? Beef up fund-raising? Heighten profiles? Put extra spin on every statement?

So how can a ballplayer tell if a politician has taken steroids? I've developed a little checklist. Has the politician in question ever:

* campaigned for six months straight without sleep? (2 points)

* gone from $3 million a year in fund-raising to $52 million a year? (3 points)

* shaken more than 30,000 hands in one hour (5 points)

* spoken on more than seven talk shows in a single Sunday morning? (8 points)

* punched a hole in the Constitution? (9 points)

* been seen hanging around the halls of Congress with lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry? (10 points)

* added earmarks for hundreds of pet projects and then crossed the aisle to head butt anyone who voted against them? (11 points)

* participated in all 125 campaign debates? (12 points)

* filibustered for 60 hours straight? (13 points)

* taken a political junket to the Balco Laboratory in California (15 points)

* brought a baseball bat into a committee meeting? (18 points)

* considered voting for Mitt Romney? (19 points)

* experienced sudden memory loss, such as forgetting he/she voted for the Iraq war? (20 points)

* turned into a super-delegate able to leap public opinion in a single bound? (22 points)

* rooted for the Yankees? (25 points)

Until we get steroids out of baseball, out of politics, and back into weight lifting where they belong, no spectator sport will be safe.