Posted By:
davidcyclebackI wonder if a California Barry Bonds fan, blissfully willing to ignore artificial
alterations to the baseball hero (as long as he's producing for the home team, that is),
is similarly willing to look past alterations to a card (as long as the card is producing
for the portfolio, that is).
I've never understood how a collector can not be bothered by Bonds 'alleged' steroid use,
yet be bothered by a baseball card being altered. I would think the distaste for artificially
altered baseball objects would be uniform. Now, if one likes Bonds steroid alterations AND likes
altered baseball cards, I may disagree with the philosophy but will credit it for consistency.
(Duly note, I'm not being being entirely serious-- though that means I'm being partially serious).