Sports, and the Legislators Who Meddle In It
By Charles Bird Posted in Elections — Comments (14) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Yesterday, a group of millionaires--most of whom are or were articially enhanced through the miracles of medical technology--sat before a Republican Congress and wasted a whole day. Secondary matters such as war, budget deficits, the economy, the environment and terrorism took a back seat. While there is a history of governmental involvement in Major League Baseball by virtue of the anti-trust exemption, it doesn't mean that Congress needs to spend one minute of time on it. C'mon, Denny, stop wasting our time.
And showing that idiocy is a bipartisan trait, a Texas legislator wants to regulate "sexually suggestive" cheerleading:
"It's just too sexually oriented, you know, the way they're shaking their behinds and going on, breaking it down," said Edwards, a 26-year veteran of the Texas House. "And then we say to them, 'don't get involved in sex unless it's marriage or love, it's dangerous out there' and yet the teachers and directors are helping them go through those kind of gyrations."
Under Edwards' bill, if a school district knowingly permits such a performance, funds from the state would be reduced in an amount to be determined by the education commissioner.
Didn't he learn anything from the recently struck-down sodomy laws? How exactly would school officials monitor and enforce unlawful cheerleading? I can visualize some prim and proper namby pamby saying, "Ah ha! She swayed her hips two inches beyond the allowed hip shake maximum! No funds for Odessa High!"
The AP article displays legislative stupidity in all of its glory, and it also displays bias. I've seen it too many times. When a Republican proposes a stupid law, we all know right up front the party affiliation of the boneheaded legislator. When a Democrat does it, as in the case of Al Edwards, his party affiliation is somehow left out, which is what reporter April Castro did. A Google search will tell you that Al Edwards is a Democrat.
(alse seen at Obsidian Wings)
« Question and answer time: the Wes Clark thing. — Comments (50) | Rowland Sentenced To One Year — Comments (0) »
Sports, and the Legislators Who Meddle In It 14 Comments (0 topical, 14 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Tom Jones...
"She's A Lady
Tom Jones
Well she's all you'd ever want,
She's the kind they'd like to flaunt and take to dinner.
Well she always knows her place.
She's got style, she's got grace, She's a winner.
She's a Lady. Whoa whoa whoa, She's a Lady.
Talkin' about that little lady, and the lady is mine.
Well she's never in the way
always something nice to say, Oh what a blessing.
I can leave her on her own
Knowing she's okay alone, and there's no messing.
She's a lady. Whoa, whoa, whoa. She's a lady.
Talkin' about that little lady, and the lady is mine.
Well she never asks for very much and I don't refuse her.
Always treat her with respect, I never would abuse her.
What she's got is hard to find, and I don't want to lose her
Help me build a mountain from my little pile of clay. Hey, hey, hey.
Well she knows what I'm about,
She can take what I dish out, and that's not easy,
Well she knows me through and through,
She knows just what to do, and how to please me.
She's a lady. Whoa, whoa, whoa. She's a lady.
Talkin' about that little lady and the lady is mine.
Yeah yeah yeah She's a Lady
Listen to me baby, She's a Lady
Whoa whoa whoa, She's a Lady
And the Lady is mine
Yeah yeah yeah She's a Lady
Talkin about this little lady
Whoa whoa whoa whoa
Whoa and the lady is mine
Yeah yeah She's a Lady
And the Lady is mine."
On kind of the same subject, though, even Garrison Keillor would have (and should be) worried about Capone-N-Noriega. Jersey is hell, but lots of bluestaters like it anyway...
Next they will be mandating school uniforms.
Of course the PC crowd will outlaw certain color for the uniforms - Red could be construed as communist or Native American. White might be taken as purity and therefore unacceptable as signifying some sort of religious meaning. Blue would be looked upon as for freedom and we cannot have that while there are those in the world that are oppressed.
Try Tom Davis. I'm ashamed to say that he's from Virginia. I like the Mullings take on this:
How many young women, do you suppose, suffer from the effects of eating disorders developed while trying to emulate Hollywood stars?I think it would be interesting for Congress to issue subpoenas for some Hollywood bigs to ask them, under oath, whether they've ever taken illegal drugs to enhance their screen performance or their physical appearance.
For that matter, I would have liked to have seen a double-switch - have the ballplayers ask the Committee members, under oath, whether they've ever taken illegal drugs. That would have taken away their home-field advantage.
Or how about we let the players ask the panel members about adultery or other such bad acts.
The upside? At least maybe the baseball distraction prevented Rep. Davis from pushing more such big brother measures such as Real ID. I want a sane party back.
On some level, I'd argue that behavior by athletes is in more important since we've all become so jaded by this point about politicians' behavior that no one idolizes most of them anymore. Also, cheating politicians are rightly viewed as sleazy by pretty much everyone. I'm not sure the same is said of athletes using steroids. Lots of kids started using Andro because McGwire admitted to using it. How many people cheated on their wives because of Bill Clinton? Sure, it's a double-standard, but life is full of those.
But yeah, holding these hearings is stupid and a waste of time, and isn't likely to actually lead to anything, but when they're doing this, they can't be doing a lot of other bad things.
BTW, the Real ID Act came out of Judiciary, so Sensenbrenner is the responsible party. And frankly, I don't know how mad I am about it. I can see a bunch of issues with it, but when you get illegal aliens using state-issued IDs to find jobs at nuclear power plants, then there's a real problem, since terrorists could do the same.
So let's turn it over to the federal government! That'll fix it!!
I always knew we were wrong to say that a stronger, more intrusive Federal government was not the answer.
Make sure you keep your papers on you comrade.
Of course the entire hearing by these blowhards was unconstitutional, but who cares about the constitution anymore. Certainly the president, congress and the supreme court doesn't.
Nevertheless, this hearing was NOT a waste of time. In fact, I believe both houses should have a joint session of all memnbers to spend at least a year on this problem.
Why? Because any time wasted on this is just another day these socialists don't spend passing legislation screwing me out of my hard earned money!!!
Government may be inherently evil, and centralized government even worse, but it is at the same time a necessary evil at times, and no number of knee-jerk reactions or snarky comments can change that.
Fact is, we've got a bad situation, where state-issued IDs get you into all sorts of places that need to be secure, and the states will issue IDs to illegals. It's a security hole that needs to be closed, and it seems like it's either this or national ID cards, which I see as inevitably becoming manditory once we've got 'em.
Dateline: College Dorms All Across The Country.
Despite a private agreement between Milton-Bradley and the purchasers of the #1 board game in the history of America, Congressional leaders have issued subpeonas to top players who have flaunted the printed Monopoly rules.
"We are concerned that by putting 'kitty' money in the center of the board, these players are in direct violation of the sanctity of the game!" intoned the ranking member of the House Committee on Nosey Busybodies. "It all filters down to small kids who look up to their older siblings."
It is not known if the hearings might result in removing marathon Monopoly games from the Guiness Book of World Records.
"I think it stinks how these people might have been fast and loose with the rules," said Johnny Thompson, age 8, "I quit!"
Johnny's mother said she is thinking of filing suit, "These cheaters have crushed my child's dreams. How dare they!"
The Texas politician seeking to regulate "Dirty Cheering" has a point, a point I see coming from the father of 12 year old that is involved with the sport, but is wrong in trying to legislate morality, that's my job.
If you can put up with all the teenage girl screeching, attend a cheer meet sometimes, it's pretty regulated, by parents and the organizers. For the most part, parents do let their voices be heard on the matter of revealing costumes, routines and other moral issues.
Sure there are a few teams, or rather their coaches, that push the moral envelope on routines or dress in order to score a win, but you want see a cat fight, let some parent (mother) who thinks someone is out line go off...not a pretty site.
Government is not the answer, just a engaged parent.
Government is not the answer, just a engaged parent.
You're certainly right about the importance of parental direction in steering their children down the right path.
But I do have to respond to a couple of things.
is wrong in trying to legislate morality, that's my job
Well, we legislate morality all the time, and many times appropriately so. But even if the government shouldn't legislate morality, it doesn't follow that the government should fund immorality.
parents do let their voices be heard on the matter of revealing costumes
Aren't they all revealing? It's not like cheerleaders still wear long skirts.
Yes and they even fund **gasp** dancing.
Small SBC joke.
Please name a "secure" place that a state ID card will get you into that can't be fixed by pretty mundane security measures that don't inflate the powers of big brother? And if you say airplanes I will try not to laugh and I'll calmly respond.
If I may offer a little advice, being snarky may give you a good ego trip for a little while, but at the end of the day, you're not going to persuade anyone, and people are going to realize that debating you isn't really that productive. I don't know if your goal is to persuade people, but if it is, might I advise a change in tone?
That said, your argument doesn't work intuitively. How can someone know that someone is who they say they are without ID? Are you advocating some sort of system where you have "trusted" people who vouch for that person?
What "pretty mundane security measures" are you talking about? And now that you've promised to calmly respond if I say airplanes, I hereby say airplanes and await your response.
Or twisting in his grave.