Dan McLaughlin: doing his damnest to single-handedly reinforce negative ethnic stereotypes!
Get better, Danny Boy.

McLaughlin was allegedly so shitfaced he’d wet his pants.

'there's a line, freddie ... and you wet it.'

sorry, maybe that was too soon.

Are we sure that he peed himself? They say it was August 2010; couldn't McLaughlin have gotten a little "overexcited" while watching this game?

It bothers me that only saints should be allowed to do, well, just about anything.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work. From TFA TFA links to:

Fox Sports Midwest has already suspended McLaughlin in light of his most recent arrest, though the season on FSM ended Wednesday. The network doesn't broadcast postseason play. Frankly, I don't see how FSM could possibly bring him back for next year -- not when the Cardinals supposedly have a zero-tolerance stand on drunk driving following Tony La Russa's drunken catnap behind the wheel, Josh Hancock's death, David Freese's DUI and Scott Spiezio's alcohol-fueled meltdown. The Cardinals, btw, have last say on who broadcasts the games.

What's the point? The appearance of "getting tough"? I don't mean the point for big companies making pr-wise moves, and I'm going on the assumption that the guy's job performance has yet to suffer. I mean the actual point. Who in fact is well-served by a rush to fire someone who has been arrested for drunk driving?

Repeat DUI Arrestee David Freese Keeps Job as Cardinals Third Baseman

removed

Are we sure that he peed himself? They say it was August 2010; couldn't McLaughlin have gotten a little "overexcited" while watching this game?

If somebody else peed him, he was probably even shitterfaced.

I'm not offended that he kept his job despite his DUIs. I'm offended that he kept his job because he sucks at it.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work.

Because there's a decent chance it eventually will?

ISSUE ONE! Broadcasting Under the Influence!

For the second time in as many years a broadcaster for the Saint Louis Cardinals baseball team has been arrested for drunk driving. Is this merely overreaction or the indefatigable greatness of a truly great man?

I ask you Freddy "The Beetle" Barnes?

It bothers me that only saints should be allowed to do, well, just about anything.

It bothers me that there are people who think avoiding risking the lives of others is an undue burden.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work. From TFA TFA links to:

Don't you know? It makes the problem go away, disappear, like it never existed. Like sending industrial production (coal) to China, or oil to Asia....no more pollution.

Illness and weakness are not equivalent. A cancer patient has an illness, this loser has a weakness.
I sure as hell would want to get my name off his W2s before he kills somebody, but the Cards obviously don't agree.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work.

This.

And they do it because it's still "okay" to blame people for this type of illness.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work.

First, if the alcohol problems are serious enough they're eventually going to affect work.

Second, part of this guy's job is being one of the public faces of the company.

Third, sportswriters and sports bloggers are selected in large part for their eagerness to fire people.

First, if the alcohol problems are serious enough they're eventually going to affect work.

Miggy sez hi.

I'm an anti dui law guy, but if there is someway to turn a dui into a banning of Mcloughlin from major league broadcasts, then I'm all for it. The Cardinals have one good announcer(Hrabosky) another icon(Shannon) and the rest are all ####### crap, with Mcloghlin being arguably the worse announcer in baseball history.

And they do it because it's still "okay" to blame people for this type of illness.

"Alcoholism is a disease, but it's the only disease you can get yelled at for having. Dammit Otto, you're an alcoholic! Dammit Otto, you have lupus! One of those doesn't sound right."

Alcoholism is a disease, but it's the only disease you can get yelled at for having.

No, I'm pretty sure you get yelled at for pedophilia, too. It's funny how quiet the "it's a disease" choir is when that one comes up.

I don't quite get the eagerness to fire people with alcohol problems if they're not affecting the person's work.

Nobody wants to fire him for having an alcohol problem. He can get pie-faced every night, #### and piss himself to his heart's content and I'm pretty sure nobody will want to fire him. He just shouldn't take it upon himself to risk the lives of everyone he comes in contact with afterward.

No, I'm pretty sure you get yelled at for pedophilia, too. It's funny how quiet the "it's a disease" choir is when that one comes up.

Great point. Fact is, you are not entitled to a job because you have been cursed with a disease. It could very well be your disease sends you living on the street, alone and cold. Life is harsh, but this is reality. I'm okay with the employer being able to decide to fire someone with a DUI.....god, imagine if this was a "protected class"? Personally, a DUI is not automatically going to get you canned. If you are damn good at your job you will probably keep it, if you suck, then you will probably lose it. It's pretty simple.

Cardinals have one good announcer(Hrabosky)

I think Horton's much better than Hrabosky.

Alcoholism is a disease, but driving drunk is a behavior. There are lots of alcoholics who make a point not to drive drunk, and in so doing risk the lives of those around them.

The distinction should be obvious. It's the difference between a person who has typhoid fever and, say, Mary Mallon (a.k.a. Typhoid Mary), who for years knowingly took jobs as a cook where she placed all the people who ate her food at risk of getting sick. If she'd been willing to be a factory worker or a ditch-digger or whatever, nobody would've had a problem with her being infected. It's about the behavior, not just the disease.

Cardinals have one good announcer(Hrabosky)

I think Horton's much better than Hrabosky.

I think this is true now; for the past couple of seasons Hrabosky has seemed bored or something, at least Horton sounds like he cares. Of course if I had to work with a dipstick like McLaughlin (or Joe Buck) on a regular basis I would want to kill myself so Hrabosky is probably depressed.

Alcoholism is a disease, but driving drunk is a behavior. There are lots of alcoholics who make a point not to drive drunk, and in so doing risk the lives of those around them.

Exactly. The problem with getting a DUI isn't just the potential for future alcohol-related work issues, it's also that the person is likely to be an irresponsible moron.

No, I'm pretty sure you get yelled at for pedophilia, too. It's funny how quiet the "it's a disease" choir is when that one comes up.

I expect many mental illnesses or maladaptive behaviors will gradually be medicalized in the eyes of the legal system over the next century and treated via psychiatry rather than the prison system. It's not particularly popular to talk about pederasty as a behavioral disorder, but it makes much more sense to medicate/counsel these people than it does to pay $30k+ a year to feed and house them in prison. They'll have to wait their turn, though, as we'll first have to deal with medicalizing drug addiction, which could take another 40 years if we're unlucky.

In more somber news, Horton will be broadcasting Cardinal games again next year. Though I've decided to watch fewer games from now on--we'll never top 2011 in terms of drama, and the departures of TLR and Pujols mark the definitive beginning of a new era--I dread the possibility of Jerry Mathers being turned loose in the booth for the games I do catch. You'd think by now some enterprising producer would have created a subscription feature whereby crotchety folk like me could turn off the pbp blather and listen to the unadulterated sounds of the ballpark.

And while Dan may be the straightest straight man in baseball, I'm pleased he'll be back next year. Few TV voices call a better game, and I've always enjoyed his give and take with Hrabosky.

The issue I have with the excuse, "It's a disease," is that one has to make a conscious decision for it to manifest itself. The alcohol does not enter the body by itself. And the automobile certainly does force the drunk to drive it. Neither does the drug force its way into the addict's veins.

Beyond the humaneness of doing so, supporting the employee's effort to undergo rehab and maintenance of sobriety is also the employer's safest course of action under the ADA. Providing leave for rehab and supporting the employee's effort to maintain sobriety are recommended courses of action in accomodating an alcoholic's disability. The employer in this case may have work related grounds for termination, but they probably have taken the safest course of action. The same standard is not applicable to illegal drugs though.

Exactly. The problem with getting a DUI isn't just the potential for future alcohol-related work issues, it's also that the person is likely to be an irresponsible moron.

"Likely"? No.
Sometimes, sure.
Sometimes: dentures; acid reflux; high-protein diet; shallow breathing; poorly-maintained breath machines; genetic differences.

It doesn't take much to get a DUI. Let's say you went out to dinner, had a glass of wine or two.
The police stop you for anything at all, and smell (or say they smell) alcohol on your breath. At that point, confirmation bias kicks in, and they also say you're red-eyed and your speech is slurred. Without video, who's a jury gonna believe?
Now you do the field sobriety tests, which are designed for you to fail them. No matter what you do, they will say you failed them. Again: who's a jury gonna believe?
Now they say, "Blow into the little machine - you signed away your right to refuse a test and still keep your driver's license, when you got a driver's license."
QUICK - WHAT'S YOUR BLOOD-ALCOHOL LEVEL RIGHT NOW? ARE YOU SURE? HOW DO YOU KNOW?

If the machine says you were over .08... who's a jury gonna believe? You, or the machine?
Do you have the time and money to fight that .08 at trial, or do you want to enter a plea and get it over with?
Get it over with = congratulations, you are the proud owner of a misdemeanor DUI conviction. See you in 3-5 years to get that #### expunged.

Everybody's an "irresponsible moron" until it happens to you, too.

Double says, "It bothers me that there are people who think avoiding risking the lives of others is an undue burden."

Agreed but I don't see what this would have to do with his announcing games.

Great point. Fact is, you are not entitled to a job because you have been cursed with a disease. It could very well be your disease sends you living on the street, alone and cold. Life is harsh, but this is reality. I'm okay with the employer being able to decide to fire someone with a DUI.....god, imagine if this was a "protected class"? Personally, a DUI is not automatically going to get you canned. If you are damn good at your job you will probably keep it, if you suck, then you will probably lose it. It's pretty simple.

There could be a slippery slope problem with not "protecting" alcoholics. If you can fire someone just for being a drunk, and not for anything that person did, why not fire people with mental illnesses? Sure, the person does his job well, but we wonder if it will affect his job, so let's fire him before it does.

If someone gave me that as a reason for my being terminated, I'd probably have a strong case in court.

Of course, this is why at-will employment exists: so that companies don't have to have an excuse for throwing you out on your ass.

Double says, "It bothers me that there are people who think avoiding risking the lives of others is an undue burden."

Agreed but I don't see what this would have to do with his announcing games.

He's a broadcaster. His job description is "enhance viewing experience for viewers". If a lot of viewers think he is an irresponsible moron or worse, that affects their experience negatively. And it affects how well he can do his job.

The Cardinals have one good announcer(Hrabosky) another icon(Shannon) and the rest are all ####### crap, with Mcloghlin being arguably the worse announcer in baseball history.

Is John Rooney no longer with the Cards? Always enjoyed his work on White Sox games, and I wouldn't mind it one bit were he to replace Bob Carpenter on Nats telecasts.

The issue I have with the excuse, "It's a disease," is that one has to make a conscious decision for it to manifest itself. The alcohol does not enter the body by itself. And the automobile certainly does force the drunk to drive it. Neither does the drug force its way into the addict's veins.

Heart disease, smoking-related lung cancer, and diabetes are all the result of conscious behavior, but they're still considered diseases by the medical community. Disease/disorders generally refer to something that's maladaptive regardless of whether it's caused by conscious behavior or environmental/genetic factors beyond one's control.

All that aside, if FSMW/the Cardinals had opted to fire Dan, I wouldn't've blamed them--the drinking issues that occurred during the TLR years and prominent role of alcohol sponsorship should make the team more sensitive to DUI charges.

For any mental illness, you always have a choice--but you may not be able to make the choice.

Is John Rooney no longer with the Cards?

You got me there, yes Rooney is with the Cardinals, our radio team is actually pretty decent. If you are fine with the homerism(which is a requirement in my opinion for an annoucer) the Radio team is good.

I do not agree about Horton being better or even good, the difference is when Al talks about the good old days, he is always saying the players are better today than in his day instead of the old fogeyism, Horton has no problem being self defacing, but still holds onto the old timers belief that the game was better in his day and has no problem conveying that belief.

I do agree with Al being less than spectacular the past couple of years, the network has been screwing around with him behind the scenes and he's clearly not happy with it. I like Al because he's mostly honest, he has a great eye for what is going on the field, will routinely tell you what the other team is going to do and be right frequently enough that you know he is still interested in the game. His voice is solid for an analyst etc. He has his faults of course, his hatred on several players is distracting to the broadcast(and it was before they became issues with the team, he's hated Phillips and Fielder long before the Cardinals as a team had a public problem with those guys--it was really annoying to listen to him bag on Phillips for years, when as a fan you saw a guy who hustled, yet Al would constantly put out ---he would be a great player if he would try a bit--type of comments)

He's a broadcaster. His job description is "enhance viewing experience for viewers". If a lot of viewers think he is an irresponsible moron or worse, that affects their experience negatively. And it affects how well he can do his job.

Wait. Why would a customer care what an employee does off duty (as it relates to the job, I mean)? If he got a mortgage he couldn't afford, does that make him an irresponsible moron and affect viewers' experience?

Wait. Why would a customer care what an employee does off duty (as it relates to the job, I mean)? If he got a mortgage he couldn't afford, does that make him an irresponsible moron and affect viewers' experience?

Moreover, there are some real clowns doing broadcasts these days. They still have jobs.

Moreover, there are some real clowns doing broadcasts these days. They still have jobs.

including mclofflin. Arguably the worse announcer in Cardinal broadcast history.

delete, double post

I expect many mental illnesses or maladaptive behaviors will gradually be medicalized in the eyes of the legal system over the next century and treated via psychiatry

Psychiatry? You think a hundred years from now psychiatry will be held in higher esteem than other professions with similar scientific veracity, such as Astrology?

"Gradually" medicalized? Have you seen the latest DSM?

If this guy was drunk again, they should revote on Ryan Braun's MVP.

If this guy was drunk again, that means we need a salary cap