Here's another Hall of Fame vote for Goose Gossage. Grant does use the weaselly argument to keep McGwire off the ballot, however:

For me, McGwire's case is singular. It all comes down to home runs. Yes, he has 583 homers and currently ranks eighth on the all-time list, but I suspect he'll be out of the top 10 within five years. While I have no proof that McGwire used steroids, I must consider the possibility of inflated stats in the steroids decades (1995-2004). In the previous decade (1985-94), McGwire ranked seventh in homers. In the steroid decade, he ranked eight. Guess the question is: Will his homer total stand the test of time. Good question: It hasn't been 25 seasons since McGwire first broke in, that won't happen until 2010. But since 1986 (McGwire's first season), McGwire currently ranks only fourth behind Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and Ken Griffey Jr.. Four other active players are within 100 homers of McGwire. It's conceivable that among his "contemporaries," McGwire may not end up in the top 10. If your case is built on home run ability, then you better be at the very top of the list.

McGwire combined the ability to get on base with the ability to hit home runs. He wasn't Dave Kingman. I'm perfectly fine with writers not voting for McGwire because they believe he used steroids. Trying to find a statistical reason not to vote for Mark, however, is simply looking for an excuse so you don't have to deal with that issue.