This image was lost some time after publication.

We've been keeping an eye on the fallout, two days later, of the big Barry Bonds expose in Sports Illustrated, and we've noticed the debate being framed thusly: Do you believe in Barry or do you believe the book?

We find this an unusual way to look at it; the book is not an argument or an essay: It's hard evidence. (Though it's worth noting that it's evidence leaked by prosecutors because they're likely not going to end up pursuing a case against Bonds after all.) It's like that old story about the husband who is caught cheating by his wife but still denies it: Who are you going to believe: Your lying eyes ... or Me?

But that's the way it's going: Believe in Barry, or side with the haters. (The third option is, "Who gives a crap about steroids?" a position we understand far more than "Bonds didn't do steroids and is just being attacked.") The notion of even having a debate about this seems borderline insane — an argument for Barry against the charges is similar to claiming that, actually, Team USA did beat Canada yesterday — but human beings do not choose to be sports fans because it's rational and logical. Hell, we sure didn't.

Bonds Exposed []
Baseball Etch-A-Sketches