Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the
Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.
Monday, September 26, 2005 |
The Morality Of The Hyena
The daily BTF sophistry following a particularly noxious San Francisco Chronicle story about Bonds interview I praised earlier in the month:
Wrong, Andy (see post 28). He has every bit as much right to object and say so in public, just as the customers of speakeasies objected to Prohibition. This is what passes for argument on BTF these days. Gad.Bonds and MLB have defrauded their customers -- of course that's Congress's business. That there are more urgent priorities for Congress is a given, but it would behoove Bonds to STFU about that particular subject, and let someone else -- disinterested, preferably -- to make the point.And that's the heart of the whole discussion: Bonds has absolutely no standing to make a point like this.
Comments:
The problem I have with Bonds' argument is that congress does have the constitutional authority to investigate the sale and use of illegal substances across state lines, in an industry that enjoys a federal anti-trust exemption.
Is it a waste of time and a publicity stunt? Hell yes. But this is one of the few instances where Davis isn’t grossly overstepping his constitutional authority.
Is it a waste of time and a publicity stunt? Hell yes. But this is one of the few instances where Davis isn’t grossly overstepping his constitutional authority.
# posted by 
: 9/26/2005 04:39:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 04:39:00 PM
What crossed state lines? And has Barry been accused of engaging in something that does actually affect interstate commerce? I sure haven't heard about it...
"What crossed state lines?"
Ummm... the drugs they were making in California and selling to baseball players all over the country?
Ummm... the drugs they were making in California and selling to baseball players all over the country?
# posted by : 9/26/2005 05:09:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 05:09:00 PM
Since when is Bonds the one being investigated? It's baseball, Rob. Which explains why baseball players not named Barry where called before congress.
# posted by : 9/26/2005 07:11:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 07:11:00 PM
Way to put words in my mouth, Rob.
The House Committee on Government Reform hasn’t accused anybody of a crime. It’s not a criminal investigation at all, and I never suggested such. The Committee is probing the sale and use of these drugs, and baseball's role in regulating them, which is well within their jurisdiction (hence the title "subcommittee on drug policy").
These hearings are a waste of time and taxpayer money, and are nothing more than a way for these assholes to grandstand on national television. Criticize them for that. But look at this rationally, and you’ll realize that your arguments are way overboard.
Of course, considering that you seem to be completely ignorant of the facts surrounding the hearings, yet decided to shot your mouth off anyway, 'rationality' likely isn’t your strong suit.
The House Committee on Government Reform hasn’t accused anybody of a crime. It’s not a criminal investigation at all, and I never suggested such. The Committee is probing the sale and use of these drugs, and baseball's role in regulating them, which is well within their jurisdiction (hence the title "subcommittee on drug policy").
These hearings are a waste of time and taxpayer money, and are nothing more than a way for these assholes to grandstand on national television. Criticize them for that. But look at this rationally, and you’ll realize that your arguments are way overboard.
Of course, considering that you seem to be completely ignorant of the facts surrounding the hearings, yet decided to shot your mouth off anyway, 'rationality' likely isn’t your strong suit.
# posted by : 9/26/2005 09:55:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 09:55:00 PM
Congress has granted "baseball" (specifically, Major League Baseball) an anti-trust exemption. It seems to me that it is in Congress' best interest to make sure an industry that they handed such an exemption to is on the up-and-up (i.e. not involved in massive drug use and possibly even trafficking). Also, by definition of anti-trust laws MLB partakes in interstate commerce thus congress does have the authority to do what they're doing.
With that said, I do think most of the useless, quasi-patricians we have running the show are, in fact, grandstanding. But that doesn't invalidate what they're doing.
Bonds, on the other hand, would do well to keep his mouth shut. He has every right to say what he's saying, I just don't think it's very smart.
With that said, I do think most of the useless, quasi-patricians we have running the show are, in fact, grandstanding. But that doesn't invalidate what they're doing.
Bonds, on the other hand, would do well to keep his mouth shut. He has every right to say what he's saying, I just don't think it's very smart.
# posted by : 9/26/2005 10:12:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 10:12:00 PM
The House Committee on Government Reform hasn’t accused anybody of a crime. It’s not a criminal investigation at all, and I never suggested such. The Committee is probing the sale and use of these drugs, and baseball's role in regulating them, which is well within their jurisdiction (hence the title "subcommittee on drug policy").
I.e., grandstanding. Bonds is interesting because he's a well-known name, and the jackasses in the committee think their job is to make everyone who disagrees with their idiotic view of the world heel. So far as they're concerned, everyone in public life ought not to have more powerful medicines than coffee, and even that's questionable. The "subcommittee on drug policy"? Puh-leeze. That's in the scope of the Judiciary Committee.
Congress has granted "baseball" (specifically, Major League Baseball) an anti-trust exemption.
I'm amazed at the number of people who believe this. It's not true, of course; the fact is that the Supreme Court did so, and Congress has simply failed to override the decision.
I.e., grandstanding. Bonds is interesting because he's a well-known name, and the jackasses in the committee think their job is to make everyone who disagrees with their idiotic view of the world heel. So far as they're concerned, everyone in public life ought not to have more powerful medicines than coffee, and even that's questionable. The "subcommittee on drug policy"? Puh-leeze. That's in the scope of the Judiciary Committee.
Congress has granted "baseball" (specifically, Major League Baseball) an anti-trust exemption.
I'm amazed at the number of people who believe this. It's not true, of course; the fact is that the Supreme Court did so, and Congress has simply failed to override the decision.
I know, it's too much to expect them to take the 10th amendment seriously anymore. It's funny, but I do.
Just because it's interstate commerce, though, doesn't mean that Congress can actually implement a drug policy, with punishments.
The govt. can't require people to submit to searches (drug tests) without probable cause.
So ultimately, it really is nothing more than grandstanding, in the hope of coercing MLB and the Players Assn. into a much stronger, collectively-bargained policy.
The govt. can't require people to submit to searches (drug tests) without probable cause.
So ultimately, it really is nothing more than grandstanding, in the hope of coercing MLB and the Players Assn. into a much stronger, collectively-bargained policy.
# posted by : 9/26/2005 11:21:00 PM
: 9/26/2005 11:21:00 PM
"The "subcommittee on drug policy"? Puh-leeze. That's in the scope of the Judiciary Committee."
You can "puh-leeze" all you want Rob, but the Office of National Drug Control Policy falls under the jurisdiction of the Gov't Reform Committee - always has.
I suggest you write your Congressman - he might be interested to know how you would organize the federal government. But until you set things straight in Washington, the Government Reform Committee is going to go ahead with its business.
You can "puh-leeze" all you want Rob, but the Office of National Drug Control Policy falls under the jurisdiction of the Gov't Reform Committee - always has.
I suggest you write your Congressman - he might be interested to know how you would organize the federal government. But until you set things straight in Washington, the Government Reform Committee is going to go ahead with its business.
I think BTF needs to institute an IQ test before someoen can post, or Congress is going to get into the act and force BTF to clean up its act - the morons that are posting and pontificating on the boards ofour once-honorable National internet surfing Pasttime ....
# posted by : 9/27/2005 02:06:00 AM
: 9/27/2005 02:06:00 AM
"I suspect that there would be many ways to make a federal policy legal. One would be to create a Federal Sporting Agency and require players to be licensed -- the testing would then be tied to regulatory/administrative purpose and be constitutional."
I'm trying to think of another private industry subject to similar regulations, and can't really think of one. We're not talking about something that affects public safety, after all.
Even so, players would still be entitled to some measure of due process if the govt. were involved, which might be much more cumbersome than the current arbitration/appeal process. Players would have to have the right to seek review in court, for example. Can you imagine the legal morass if every positive test wound up pending in federal court for a year or so?
I don't necessarily expect people in Congress to be smart enough to realize this; in fact, it would surprise me. But I think that the lawyers for MLB and the Players' Assn. probably are, and will ultimately be able to convince everyone that a collective-bargained solution is truly better for everyone involved.
I'm trying to think of another private industry subject to similar regulations, and can't really think of one. We're not talking about something that affects public safety, after all.
Even so, players would still be entitled to some measure of due process if the govt. were involved, which might be much more cumbersome than the current arbitration/appeal process. Players would have to have the right to seek review in court, for example. Can you imagine the legal morass if every positive test wound up pending in federal court for a year or so?
I don't necessarily expect people in Congress to be smart enough to realize this; in fact, it would surprise me. But I think that the lawyers for MLB and the Players' Assn. probably are, and will ultimately be able to convince everyone that a collective-bargained solution is truly better for everyone involved.
# posted by : 9/27/2005 09:52:00 PM
: 9/27/2005 09:52:00 PMNewer› ‹Older
 |
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.