The biggest non-surprise of the week: your Anaheim Angels' owner, Arte Moreno, offering no comment to the Los Angeles Times when they asked about his stance on Arizona's SB1070, that piece of Copper State legislation that makes OC's own Proposition 187 seem as anti-Mexican as El Plan de Santa Barbara. Moreno is an intensely private man (when I tried to get a five-minute interview with him for an ESPN piece a couple of years ago, I was granted two questions after begging for two weeks), and the last thing he wants is the spotlight that would shine bright on the Tucson native as baseball's sole Latino owner opining on something geared toward harassing brown-skinned folks like himself.
Some might call it cowardice; I say, I understand.
]
Moreno is in the biggest no-win situation in sports right now–that is, besides the Los Angeles Dodgers' won-loss record. If Moreno stands by his players (whose union came out against SB1070), he risks alienating the many Know Nothings who support the Halos and already don't like the idea of Moreno's pro-Latino efforts. But if Moreno openly supported SB1070, he'd cede the Latino market in Southern California to the Dodgers forever. So, he remains quiet.
Moreno's politics are known to be Republican, but on the other hand, his upbringing (one of 12 children) would've made his clan a likely target for a Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpayaso raid. What does he think? And what do YOU think about Moreno's non-stance stance? Let's try to focus on the question of whether sports owners have an obligation to opine on political matters that affect their players instead of anti-Mexican bashing, although my request will undoubtedly be about as listened-to as my radiola…
