Was Steve Carlton a racist and anti semite?

[CW]

Chuck, the OP, did not give his opinion of Steve Carlton, did he? He's just asking a question.

sincerely,
Chuck

[ALR-bishop]

All I know about Mr Carlton is that the Cardinals had him and somehow thought trading him for Rick "Wise" was a good idea.

[Snapolit1]

Guy has been the subject of a number of articles in the LA Times and someone thinks it's unfair that a simple question was asked on this colleting board? Weird response in people getting all defensive for Steve Carlton. Same question is asked about prominent public figures every day in the press.

[ALR-bishop]

Appreciate you injecting a political inference into the thread. Well done.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Appreciate you injecting a political inference into the thread. Well done.

+1

[Leon]

sigh, no politics please

[frankbmd]

I have reason to suspect Mario Andretti.

[Snapolit1]

Modified accordingly.

[Leon]

+1

Originally Posted by CW

Chuck, the OP, did not give his opinion of Steve Carlton, did he? He's just asking a question.

sincerely,
Chuck

[clydepepper]

I read somewhere that Jim Palmer used to wet his bed.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Well, he was an oenophile.

[seanofjapan]

So after reading the articles linked to, am I to understand that the only evidence to back any of this up is a single comment allegedly made 25 years ago, which Carlton denies having made, basically just referencing some nut job conspiracy theory, to a reporter who himself says Carlton is definitely not racist or anti Semitic?

It’s pretty thin.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Leon

+1

So it's sort of like jeopardy?
We can dodge that rule by making any opinion be in the form of a question?

Good to know.

[ALR-bishop]

Is Steve being sarcastic here ?

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Is Steve being sarcastic here ?

Steve the Poster or Steve the Carlton?

[ALR-bishop]

Yes

[Leon]

Originally Posted by steve B

So it's sort of like jeopardy?
We can dodge that rule by making any opinion be in the form of a question?

Good to know.

Sure thing....dodge until I see it. The way I read it the OP asked a legitimate question and didn't give an opinion of a person or company.

[D. Bergin]

LOL, I guess this begs the question, can one be an Anti-Semite, without being a racist and visa versa?

I think I know the answer and nearly all the possible responses, but let the chicken and the egg scenarios begin.

I apologize ahead of time for stirring up sh*t in this thread.

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

LOL, I guess this begs the question, can one be an Anti-Semite, without being a racist and visa versa?

I think I know the answer and nearly all the possible responses, but let the chicken and the egg scenarios begin.

I apologize ahead of time for stirring up sh*t in this thread.

I would say absolutely. Judaism is not a race. Additionally, what would prevent someone who is Jewish from being intolerant of someone who is Asian, Black, Latino etc.?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Leon

Sure thing....dodge until I see it. The way I read it the OP asked a legitimate question and didn't give an opinion of a person or company.

Well, I usually don't do that, so no worries here.

To me the question came across as odd, since I wasn't aware of any controversy. I suppose someone running across that old article might have questions. It just seemed odd at first.

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by mq711

In his playing days, Carlton was anti-press and not very fond of autograph collectors but has mellowed with age.

Well, if you read the "old" article he's doing it for income.

Originally Posted by steve B

Well, I usually don't do that, so no worries here.

To me the question came across as odd, since I wasn't aware of any controversy. I suppose someone running across that old article might have questions. It just seemed odd at first.

Struck me as odd too, if you take the article at face value. How much can anybody know about Carlton w/o reading about and trusting what the authors' write is not 'embellished'?

Also, although the OP's question was innocent he's relying on the opinion of others' who actually have the nerve to post a full name in their replies

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Paul S

Well, if you read the "old" article he's doing it for income.


Struck me as odd too, if you take the article at face value. How much can anybody know about Carlton w/o reading about and trusting what the authors' write is not 'embellished'?

Also, although the OP's question was innocent he's relying on the opinion of others' who actually have the nerve to post a full name in their replies

Yeah, like you?
.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Leon

Sure thing....dodge until I see it. The way I read it the OP asked a legitimate question and didn't give an opinion of a person or company.

Asking a question like that is close enough to stating an opinion or making an accusation. I wouldn't want anyone starting a thread like that, that questions my integrity, especially if they were allowed to remain anonymous. And I'm pretty sure Mr. Carlton would feel the same way if he ever stumbled upon this site and thread.

[Leon]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I am pretty sure you can't say how someone else will feel because you aren't them.
And, as always is done and evidenced by precedent, if this thread had your name in the title I would send you the name of the OP privately. That has been done in numerous other instances. IF Steve asks me for the OPs full name I will tell him. Same if it was about you, I would tell you. Everyone, imo, has a right to know who is saying stuff in their direction but mandating a full name is a bit more invasive and not required unless an opinion is given. A question probably won't require a full name.

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Asking a question like that is close enough to stating an opinion or making an accusation. I wouldn't want anyone starting a thread like that, that questions my integrity, especially if they were allowed to remain anonymous. And I'm pretty sure Mr. Carlton would feel the same way if he ever stumbled upon this site and thread.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by CW

Chuck, the OP, did not give his opinion of Steve Carlton, did he? He's just asking a question.

sincerely,
Chuck

When did you stop beating your wife hitting is also a question.

Just asking a questions isnt' just asking when one of the answers would mean you are a socially unacceptable person...

or like when my wife asks me, what are you doing this weekend? i always afraid to answer because one of the answers may be wrong..

[Peter_Spaeth]

I still don't get the notion of hiding behind a screen name. On a forum discussing health issues, sure, there's a privacy concern. But baseball cards?

[CW]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I still don't get the notion of hiding behind a screen name. On a forum discussing health issues, sure, there's a privacy concern. But baseball cards?

Well, since you asked I can give one good reason for not disclosing your name on a forum like this: continuously posting expensive baseball cards from one's collection could potentially open oneself up for future theft or attempted burglary, even if you do not keep your cards in the home.

I believe it was Lionel Carter who once said once your collection gets large and has some value, it becomes difficult to share it with others because you are not sure who to trust.

[packs]

There are also unhinged people in the world who can do a lot of damage with a name and some locally identifying details. Everyone's employer is only an e-mail away and people are free to make up anything they want.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by CW

I believe it was Lionel Carter who once said once your collection gets large and has some value, it becomes difficult to share it with others because you are not sure who to trust.

Coincidentally, Chuck, I watched the video Mastro produced about Lionel Carter's collection just a couple of nights ago (I probably watch it two or three times a year). Mr. Carter referenced that very thing. Here he had this fantastic collection, a veritable history of the sport and the hobby, yet he couldn't show anybody outside of his most trusted inner circle because of theft concerns. A good portion of his collection was stolen, despite his caution, but most of it was eventually found by the police.

The video makes for a stark contrast. Mr. Carter was such a class act, yet when I see Bill Mastro speaking, it makes my skin crawl.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Now more than ever, I believe there was more to that theft than met the eye. And as I recall the collection was returned intact, not recovered by the police.

[ronniehatesjazz]

I know it’s the water cooler section but I really wish the whole subject of racism/sexsim/politics would be off limits here. I get bombarded by it 24/7... television, work, school, family dinners, I’m even subjected to it at the grocery store checkout where I have nothing to stare at but tabloids as I’m stuck in line due to some poor chap having to be both a cashier and bag boy. Also the whole topic has became like some cheesy 80’s drama. Let’s all just talk about our feelings when it’s truly all about posturing to inflate one’s own ego. Just disgraceful IMO and the whole message is lost. Sorry for ranting but it’s just so frustrating to constantly have it thrown into your face and even more tiring and depressing that you can forecast the responses verbatim.

[gopherfan]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

I know it’s the water cooler section but I really wish the whole subject of racism/sexsim/politics would be off limits here. I get bombarded by it 24/7... television, work, school, family dinners, I’m even subjected to it at the grocery store checkout where I have nothing to stare at but tabloids as I’m stuck in line due to some poor chap having to be both a cashier and bag boy. Also the whole topic has became like some cheesy 80’s drama. Let’s all just talk about our feelings when it’s truly all about posturing to inflate one’s own ego. Just disgraceful IMO and the whole message is lost. Sorry for ranting but it’s just so frustrating to constantly have it thrown into your face and even more tiring and depressing that you can forecast the responses verbatim.

I really like your avatar.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I still don't get the notion of hiding behind a screen name. On a forum discussing health issues, sure, there's a privacy concern. But baseball cards?

I agree, if you don't have any conviction in what you are saying don't say it. Even if you are anonymous or if your name is out there.

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I still don't get the notion of hiding behind a screen name. On a forum discussing health issues, sure, there's a privacy concern. But baseball cards?

Here's one "notion" that may not have occurred to many. First off, I have been a board member since the days of the old software platform. The only reason my join date is 2011 is that I took about 18 months off during the changeover, and so some of my data, post count, etc., did not carry over.

During almost all of this period, my son was being victimized through most of his school years. If it wasn't verbal abuse, it was, for example, tossing his new gym sneakers into a toilet bowl full of feces. These were not rare occurrences - it was incessant. AND, these sort of things carried over to social media. (it was all heartbreaking, to say the least, and still is today). So, I kept my full name off my posts, as it would have been easy pickins for the cretins to look me up and phuck with my son even more.

I am happy to report that this all ended when he entered college. Hence I am a bit overdue in finally using my full name. (Anyway, at least 100 members have known my name through the BST, private deals or just plain community friendship). Hence, I gotta lotta opinions stored up after all this time so all youse (sic) better watch out!

And so, I have to believe there are many anons here that have legit reasons, if not exactly my own, to be so on a baseball card forum

[Leon]

How many people can (could) search and find your full name the way you have it masked now? I think you would have been safe even back then. The reason the name rule is the way it is, is because there are legit reasons for being anonymous. Otherwise, it wouldn't be allowed and all real names would be mandatory. It would be easier to manage that way, that is for sure.

Originally Posted by Paul S

Here's one "notion" that may not have occurred to many. First off, I have been a board member since the days of the old software platform. The only reason my join date is 2011 is that I took about 18 months off during the changeover, and so some of my data, post count, etc., did not carry over.

During almost all of this period, my son was being victimized through most of his school years. If it wasn't verbal abuse, it was, for example, tossing his new gym sneakers into a toilet bowl full of feces. These were not rare occurrences - it was incessant. AND, these sort of things carried over to social media. (it was all heartbreaking, to say the least, and still is today). So, I kept my full name off my posts, as it would have been easy pickins for the cretins to look me up and phuck with my son even more.

I am happy to report that this all ended when he entered college. Hence I am a bit overdue in finally using my full name. (Anyway, at least 100 members have known my name through the BST, private deals or just plain community friendship). Hence, I gotta lotta opinions stored up after all this time so all youse (sic) better watch out!

And so, I have to believe there are many anons here that have legit reasons, if not exactly my own, to be so on a baseball card forum

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by Leon

How many people can (could) search and find your full name the way you have it masked now? I think you would have been safe even back then. The reason the name rule is the way it is, is because there are legit reasons for being anonymous. Otherwise, it wouldn't be allowed and all real names would be mandatory. It would be easier to manage that way, that is for sure.

I understand what you are saying, but back then the situation was so intense I couldn't risk it - you would have had to of lived it. As far as the way my name is masked now, I realize the silliness, it's just that I'm still a little gun shy from that whole situation. I know it's hardly Googleproof.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Paul S

During almost all of this period, my son was being victimized through most of his school years. If it wasn't verbal abuse, it was, for example, tossing his new gym sneakers into a toilet bowl full of feces. These were not rare occurrences - it was incessant. AND, these sort of things carried over to social media.

It was cleaner when we were kids, w/o cyberbullying and w/o the overprotective overreactions. I feel sorry for the kids today who are bullied; they get lots of well-meaning clucking from the powers that be but they aren't given the leeway to learn to take care of their own situations. I was bullied terribly in Jr. High and the school did nothing, as was the norm, except make me sit down with the worst of the abusers and share my feelings. Which made things so much worse since teenage boys don't really have feelings except angry, hungry and horny. My father lost all patience with the p***y wimps at the school. He told me I had to handle my own troubles and took me to a karate studio. He and the instructor told me to lay low for a while, learn to fight, and then beat the hell out of the first bully who tried me. I applied myself fanatically to the training and the next kid at school who started to get physically abusive with me never knew what hit him. Knocked his ass down and nearly out in the school yard. The bullying stopped dead in its tracks. I then went after another of the bullies from my old school who showed up at a party; when he started up I publicly forced him to choose to leave the party rather than fight me. Again, no repercussions from adults in either situation: we handled our own s**t. Today, I would get suspended for defending myself, which is a shame. IMO that is why some kids just snap when they are bullied and go to extremes like armed mayhem or suicide; they must feel like they have no other means of taking control over their lives, and that must be so enraging. I mean, to tell an abused kid (and bullying is abuse, no doubts there) that if he defends himself against an abuser he will be dealt with as a co-equal offender, that would have made things so much harder for me. I still would have hit that kid, but I'd have paid a price for it that would have been entirely unfair; I had a future that would have been damaged by a suspension but that dimwit is probably offering to put cheese on the burger for the next customer. Don't need college for that...