You Decide….Which Is A “Great”
Victory? Two
significant events happened this week.
First, president Obama gained the promise of a sufficient number of
Senate votes to uphold an Executive veto in the case of a Congressional vote
disapproving of the Iran Executive Agreement.
Secondly, we witnessed a federal judge overturning an NFL Commissioner
decision, which had been taken (according
to the Commissioner) on the basis of his authority in the negotiated
players/owners Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). The media is hailing
each development as great victories; you be the judge.
Put
the merits of the Iran Agreement aside for a moment. Our president declined to call this a treaty
because he said, to the effect, that in today’s WDC political environment, no
treaty can be approved. Therefore, this
Iran deal fell under the lesser category of an executive agreement. Whatever it may be called, the likely failure
of a Congressional disapproval will result in the effective implementation of
the agreement. Whether you personally support
this agreement or not, there is absolutely no denying that the agreement is
controversial; and that there are sincere and intelligent people on either side
of the support/oppose argument. There
can also be no denying that the Middle East situation, in which Iran is
inextricably a central player, is one of the most (if not THE most) critical areas of foreign policy and national
security today. Ask yourself the simple
question: Shouldn’t the standard for approval of such a momentous deal be
higher than simply one-third of the votes in the U.S. Senate? When you have a situation where over
two-thirds of the House, both Republican
and Democrat members, vote against this deal and a number approaching
two-thirds of the Senate, both Republican
and Democrat, oppose the same deal… shouldn’t someone, somehow, somewhere in
this idiotic administration understand that this agreement lacks the necessary
support to legitimately gain implementation?
A reasonably intelligent person might consider reconsidering the terms
of this agreement. A rational,
open-minded person might wonder if it is such a great deal for our country
after all. A responsible and competent
leader would actually meet face-to-face with opponents of the deal to try and
understand their opposition. Alas, that
is not what we have. We have a
hollowed-out, unprincipled politician in the White House who, supported blindly
my the mainstream media, sees any victory at all in this matter (even one as pathetic as a narrow
veto-supporting Senate vote) as a “legacy” for his administration in the
realm of foreign policy. My goodness;
have the terms “victory” and “legacy” been dumbed-down so low as to be
applicable in this situation?
And
now, let’s move on to the spectacle of men playing games and being declared royalty
for doing so successfully; otherwise known as professional sports. The NFL has had a niche carved out for it in
our society. The salaries that athletes,
coaches, management, and league personnel are paid are obscene. When television screens that present a
picture that is actually superior to being there are easily affordable and readily
available, it is remarkable that NFL teams can fill their stadiums for 16
regular season games, plus the playoffs.
And yet, on occasions, the main players on the opposing sides of the league
and the players association forget how damn fortunate they are to have this
privilege and commence to behave like infants in the sandbox. The NFL Commissioner, backed by the NFL
owners and lawyers, fleeced the Players Association when they negotiated the
current CBA. Not being a lawyer, two
things seem obvious to me. First, the
Commissioner can cite any act he desires for punishment if, in his opinion, it
is detrimental to the integrity of the game.
Secondly, if his initial decision on punishment is appealed, then HE
will be the arbiter in the appeal hearing.
That’s right; he will consider the wisdom of his own initial
decision. Now any of us might agree that
this is a stupid agreement and we might also wonder…why the hell the Players
Association agreed to such a deal. I
suppose some things simply cannot be explained.
But binding agreement or not, when a party to said agreement abuses
their powers beyond all reason and reaches a level where judgments and actions
are clearly arbitrary and unfair, then the question is begged…Can a legal
agreement be broken if a party to said agreement abuses their rights within the
agreement to an extreme level? Even if
the Players Association was crazy enough to agree to this thing and legally
sign off it, must they be subjected to the flagrant and abusive exercise of
powers by the Commissioner as granted by the agreement? To this NFL fan, the clear answer is “NO!” Just like what I have seen in NASCAR, the
popularity of the NFL and its accompanying financial treasures has outrun its
ability to competently and fairly administer itself. They are both run like “good ole boy” networks
in a rural southern county. As stupid as
individual players may sometimes behave or speak, they are nonetheless the
primary essence of what makes the NFL successful. They have a fundamental right to be meaningful
partners when it comes to deciding what rules will define standards of behavior
in the league. The dictatorial attitude and
approach of the NFL owners and their Commissioner has risen to unacceptable heights,
has been repeatedly shot down by the court system of this nation, and has once again
been loudly repudiated in the Brady affair. I say “Hell Yes” and bring ‘em down. Professional basketball and baseball have already
fought this war and settled on bargaining agreements that accept the players as
full partners in the administration of the leagues. It is now time for the NFL owners and Commissioner
to understand the realities of what makes people care about professional football
and sit down at the table to negotiate IN
GOOD FAITH with the Players Association.
No comments:
Post a Comment