And Lance Berkman is one of them.

I profiled Lance for SI years ago, and truly enjoyed him. He’s an off-the-charts right-winger, which isn’t my cup. But the guy also has authenticity, and decency, and—I feel 100% confident in saying—never used steroids. He’s a Texas kid who attended Rice, then went on to star for the hometown ballclub, the Astros.

So, again, some players aren’t meant for New York. Berkman is an excellent addition—still enough pop in his bat to make a difference; a tremendous clubhouse guy who won’t complain if he’s out of the lineup for a few days. But he doesn’t belong in a big nothern city. He’s a country dude; a Texan through and through.

That said, I hope it goes well.

I really do.

… a chance to dip into my youth.

Just try getting me on ’80s Jets trivia. Just try. 

Picked up the New York Times this morning, found my eyes darting for yet another excellent Richard Sandomir column—this one titled JAMES IS THE STORY, EVEN WHEN ESPN DOESN’T WANT IT. The piece concerns an ESPN.com article by Arash Markazi that appeared on the site a few days ago before—Whoooooosh!—mysteriously vanishing. Because Deadspin is Deadspin (and thank God for it, especially in this case), A.J. Daulerio found a copy of the mythical piece and ran it. To surmize: Markazi spent a few crazy hours with LeBron in Las Vegas, and it turns out—gasp!—he’s a self-centered anus who likes naked women and wearing sunglasses indoors.

Anyhow, there was much internet chatter on why the story was pulled. Many guessed that James’ people complained enough for ESPN—his new corporate pimp—to remove it. But that was just an educated stab.

Today, Sandomir tried getting to the bottom of things. He spoke with Rob King, the ESPN.com editor in chief, who—in no uncertain terms—sold his writer out and blamed him for everything. E-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g. Markazi, according to King, didn’t tell James or James’ people that they were being quoted. Markazi, according to King, didn’t even tell people he was a reporter. Markazi, according to King, never broke out a pen or notepad. Instead, he texted himself quotes and moments from the night’s activities.

Let’s be clear: It sounds like Arash Markazi did a ridiculously terrible job here, in that he pretended to be something (a regular party guest) that he wasn’t. Were he just observing, fine. But to quote people—probably not so cool.

That being said, Rob King is so wrong, it’s making my eyes burn and my head spin. You have a problem with Markazi’s reporting? You call the dude into your office (or use the phone, if it’s too far) and read him the riot act. You scream and curse and threaten. Hell, maybe you suspend him. Maybe you even fire him. All fine. What you don’t do—what you never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever do—is sell him out to the New York Times or any other media outlet. If Sandomir calls, you say, “Sorry, but we’re handling this one inside. No disrespect intended.” Case closed.

Whether it’s fun or terrible, deserved or unjustified, the great editors stand up for their writers. I’ve been blessed throughout my career to have some lions in my corner (specifically, Catherine Mayhew and Neal Scarbrough at The Tennessean and Bill Colson at SI) who didn’t cower at the threat of controversy; who didn’t instinctively rush to save their own skin at the hint of controversey.

Rob King is the head of ESPN.com. It is his ship. He is the captain, and when stuff like this happens, real captains take the blame. They accept responsibility and never name names.

Much like a baseball manager with too much loyalty to the team owner, I can assure you that, around ESPN.com’s newsroom, King’s reputation has taken a humongous hit.

He deserves it.

… the man was pretty good on The View today. Which might not be anything to boast about.

But sometimes it’s good to be reminded that these people are human beings.

Appeared today on Litbrit, Deborah Newell Tornello’s site.

I’ve pasted it below—just perfect, and telling. I’m not a fan of beating up on female public figures because of their sex. It happens all the time, and it’s bulls***. But this is fair game—and Palin knows it.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m really not. But I’m 40/60 that the baby isn’t really Palin’s.

Anyhow, here you go …

Sarah Palin chose (B): Ten questions for mothers

Reader Jim (aka Prup), a friend and frequent commenter at Cogitamus–and someone who does have a few differences with me about Sarah Palin’s motivations as well as those of the mainstream media journalists who to this day have not investigated the ex-governor’s strange, inconsistency and lie-filled stories* surrounding what has come to be known as Babygate–has written a terrific set of questions designed to get Palin supporters thinking.**

Thank you, Jim. Take it away…

Ten Questions for Sarah Palin’s supporters who are also mothers:

1. If you were a state governor who was eight months pregnant–and remember, Sarah Palin already knew hers was a high-risk pregnancy because of her age (44) and, according to her book, her baby having been diagnosed via amniocentesis as having Down syndrome–and you were scheduled to fly some 4,000 miles from home to give a speech at a conference, would you (a) give your speech from home via teleconferencing, using modern real-time technology, and explain to your hosts that the high-risk nature and advanced stage of your pregnancy made you reluctant to fly; or, alternatively, send the deputy governor to give your speech or (b) dismiss any staff or security slated to fly with you and insist on flying 4,000 miles to the conference yourself?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

2. If, while attending this conference, you experienced leaking amniotic fluid and felt early contractions on the morning before you were scheduled to speak, would you (a) hand the speech to someone else, ask him or her to give it on your behalf, and go straight to the nearest hospital–one that was equipped for handling high-risk mothers, premature births, and special-needs infants–and get yourself checked out by a doctor or (b) continue with your day and give the speech anyway?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

3. After giving the speech, would you then, immediately afterward, (a) go directly to the nearest suitably-equipped hospital or (b) insist on going to the airport and proceed to get on the first of two several-hours-long commercial flights–airplanes on board which there would be no lifesaving equipment or stored blood should you go into hard labor and experience pre-eclampsia or hemorrhage, no sterile environment, and no high-risk obstetrician attending you–in order to be able to say the baby was born in your home state?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

4. At the conclusion of that first flight, would you then, upon landing and deplaning, (a) go directly to the nearest hospital in the connecting city as fast as possible, even commandeering MediVac transport if necessary or (b) take another flight lasting several hours, in order to continue heading home?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

5. At the conclusion of the second flight, would you (a) go immediately to either of two nearby hospitals with fully equipped NICU’s (neonatal intensive care units), or (b) embark on a one-hour drive through dark, snowy, and winding roads in order to get to your hometown regional hospital–a facility that is not equipped to handle high-risk pregnancies, special needs or premature babies, or even twins?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

6. If you were the governor of a state and the mother of two teenage daughters–and you were well-known and widely regarded for your espousing of conservative Christian family values–would you (a) make a special effort to impress upon your daughters the responsibilities they had as members of the state’s “First Family” or (b) allow one of your underage daughters to have her boyfriend “practically living in the house”, fully aware they were having sexual relations, which fact would eventually be established in no uncertain terms when the two teens conceived a pregnancy?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

7. If, in addition to your to your seventeen-year-old and thirteen-year-old daughters, your household also included a seven-year-old daughter, and both girls would certainly be aware of their older sister’s boyfriend’s routine overnight stays–the elder one undoubtedly knowing the reason for same–would your answer to the last question (a) change or (b) remain the same.

Sarah Palin chose (b).

8. Upon your return to the office, when your premature infant is three days old, would you (a) keep him at home in the care of a baby nurse, where he can receive UV light treatment for his jaundice along with careful monitoring, should he develop any complications due his congenital heart defect; and as your staff will be excited for you, take some family baby pictures to work, thus avoiding the dangers of exposing such a vulnerable baby to the germ-filled environment of your office or (b) bring him with you to the office so you can show him off for photo opportunities?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

9. If, when your infant with special needs was a few months old, you were to be offered a high-ranking position–say, the vice presidential slot on the Republican ticket–which would entail your being away from home for a few months and place you squarely in the limelight of a high-profile campaign; and at approximately the same time as this offer was made, you were to discover that your minor daughter was pregnant, would you (a) politely decline the position, citing ‘family reasons’, and set about protecting your daughter’s privacy as your family worked through the situation and planned the best course of action for your child and future grandchild, doing your best to deflect unwanted press attention all the while or (b) accept the position “without blinking”, and then parade your entire family–including your obviouly pregnant minor daughter and her boyfriend–into the bright lights and onto the international stage of the Republican Convention?

Sarah Palin chose (b).

10. Does Sarah Palin embody your definition of “Family Values?”

(a) yes or (b) no. And you choose..?

At long last, my dreams have come true. For too long, I have been bound by the shackles of AOL. Of Gmail. Of Yahoo. They have lost my messages. They have had techical problems. With Gmail specifically, I struggle to find old messages.

Damn them!

Damn all of them!

Liberal scum!

At long last, we have an answer. Ronald Reagan was the greatest president of all time, and now his son is bringing us the greatest e-mail service of all time. For just $34.95 per year, you (yes, YOU!) can have a reagan.com e-mail address.

I know … I know—dreams can’t come true this easily. I know … I know—miracles don’t happen. Now, however, they do. Here, from his very own website, is what Reagan’s conservative son Michael has to say …

Hello, I am Michael Reagan, eldest son of President Ronald Reagan and like you I am deeply concerned about the future of our country.

Unfortunately we have another problem. People who believe in true Reagan Conservative Values are unwittingly supporting the Obama, Pelosi and Reid liberal agenda! What do I mean? Well, every time you use your email from companies like Google, AOL, Yahoo, Hotmail, Apple and others, you are helping the liberals. These companies are, and will continue, to be huge supporters financially and with technology of those that are hurting our country.

Is that where you want your money to go? I didn’t so I changed things. I came up with the very first conservative email service provider. You now can put your name next to the name of the Greatest Conservative of all, my father Ronald Reagan.

Click through right now for YourName@Reagan.com.

When you purchase your email address @Reagan.com you are supporting truly conservative causes and the proceeds from this conservative initiative will help me promote true Reagan values to win back our country in November and in 2012.

Granted, we don’t actually know what those causes are. And, granted, these days e-mail addresses are, ahem, free. But were Ronald Reagan alive, you can be certain he’d want you to fight liberalism by having an e-mail address in his name.

God bless America.

PS: No, this isn’t an SNL spoof.

This won’t matter much to people who don’t care about the Jets, but yestreday the team signed Mark Brunell as Mark Sanchez’s backup.

Great move.

As one of the many who has cringed whenever Kellen Clemens entered a game, I can say this is an enormous upgrade. Even if Brunell is 108. Even if Brunell has switched to throwing righty. Even if Brunell hasn’t started a game since, egad, 2006. Most great teams with young-ish starting quarterbacks have a guy in the wings who looks like Dennis Qaid in Any Given Sunday. You wouldn’t want him out there all the time, because, well, the bones of older people break easier. But he has enough experience to pull out a last-second miracle, he’s unafraid to dispense wisdom and he doesn’t mind holding a clipboard.

Nice job, Jets.

Many people hated my Big Ben column—fair enough.

• Some seemed to like it—fair enough, too.

One letter writer, however, wins the prize for comment that made me laugh loudest …

P.S. I hope you never ever get an interview from Ben ever again!

Brandon Sneed is a North Carolina-based freelance writer who is in the process of completing his first book, a biography of Anthony (Ant) Atkinson.

He’s a strong writer, strong reporter and, best of all, dogged as all hell (I know this better than anyone—because the dude won’t leave me alone).

Anyhow, he recently asked people for help deciding on a book cover, which I thought was pretty cool. He gave me the nod to post it here, and asked people to consider going to his Facebook page to offer their insights.

Personally, I like the one on the right. But it’s a tough call.

Much thanks.

When it comes to book-jacket blurbs, Dave Zirin is the king.

I thought this well before I knew him, when I looked at the cover of his book, Welcome to the Terrordome, and saw this splashed across the top:

“Dave Zirin is the best young sportswriter in America.” — Robert Lipsyte

That’s pretty hard to top, but Dave’s latest book, a blistering/brilliant examination of professional sports owners titled Bad Sports: How Owners are Ruining the Games We Love, gives us this—also across the top:

“Not since Hunter S. Thompson has a sportswriter shopwn the right snarl for the job.” — Naomi Klein

Admittedly, I’d never actually heard of Naomi Klein until, well, right now. But it matters not—Zirin is the king of blurbs. Mine have been OK and fine and occasionally excellent. But this guy rules.

Which is cool. Because:

A. Zirin truly is an excellent writer, stuffed to the brim with piss and vinegar and the sort of left-wing anger I absolutely love.

B. Zirin is good people.

C. Zirin’s new book is terrific. Seriously, if you’re sick and tired of rich corporate anuses corrupting professional sports; if you’re tired of paying a couple of thousand dollars for the right to then buy a seat; if you’re tired of hearing the Yankees being applauded for building a new stadium … that nobody making less than $100K annually can afford to visit; if you’re tired of $15 beers and $8 Cokes and jerseys that top out at $250, well. Dave’s book is for you.

He gets especially high points for his absolute demolition of Daniel Snyder, the Redskins owner and a man in his own class of dickheadedness.

Great reporting, great read, great book.

Or, in other words:

“Dave Zirin is to writing what God is to everything.” — Jeff Pearlman