Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Souder the Hypocrite - Part 2,794 (at least)

Last week the JG ran a story about Congressman Mark Souder's desire to regulate baseball and make sure those darn professional athletes don't put anything into their own bodies that he might find objectionable.
Souder said if baseball doesn’t adopt Olympic standards about drug use, employ outside investigators, use surprise tests and do it year-round, Congress will enact legislation to require it.

I had originally planned to post about this but it eventually just slipped my mind. However, local blogger Bartleby, had an excellent post that reminded me of the situation and rekindled my anti-Souder flame so to speak (although I assure you that flame was not in jeopardy of dying out).
In my ideal world, the torturers of Gitmo and Abu Ghraib and the various secret CIA shops-of-horror would be ordered to release their current victims and concentrate on waterboarding this pudgy little freak who "represents" me in the U.S. House of Representatives. The objective: make him reveal what text of the imaginary U.S. constitution empowers the FedGov to "enact legislation" -- or do any single other accursed thing -- about professional gladiators and what substances they choose to fuel themselves on. This clown obviously knows or cares nothing about the document that he has taken far too many false oaths to defend. But it might be entertaining, admittedly in a perverse way, to see what he'd shriek out in an attempt to halt his "simulated drowning."

It's not quite how I would've put it but I do enjoy his writing style. Having said that, Souder has yet another piece of drivel column in today's News Sentinel where he explains just how "conservative" he is (twice in the first 5 sentences). Furthermore, he explains that "conservatives" like him believe in personal responsibility:
The challenge of our robust republic, grounded in economic freedom, is getting some boats launched. By consensus, we have rescue operations (homeless shelters, public housing and health) that deliver minimal level services. Legislators grapple between a liberal vision that expands that security toward middle and upper classes and a conservative vision that generally supports more personal responsibility.

But wait a minute. Why doesn't that personal responsibility apply to professional athletes who are adults and under the care of a physician when they choose to use performance enhancing substances? I guess personal responsibility only applies when whatever is being done is not objectionable to Congressman Souder. Welcome to the modern Republican party - again...

9 comments:

Craig said...

Even I am old enough to remember when the term "conservative" meant someone who was prone to minding their own business, as opposed to Mr. Souder. The man is an authoritarian thug who needs to give our republic a break and go back to managing his daddy's store.

Phil Marx said...

Jeff,

Originally I viewed this as a "personal responsibility" issue, with a touch of privacy rights also included. However, I have now come to see it as a "law and order" issue to a large degree.

Suppose your neighbor was selling drugs from his house. Now I'm not talking about you catching him smoking a joint in his backyard one night. I'm talking about a full blown drug operation. I think you'd expect the police to act on it. If they didn't, they are effectively condoning it.

Now at first, the police will probably just start sending patrol cars through that area. If your neighbor has any sense, he'll either stop dealing drugs or do it in a manner that is not so obvious. If this doesn't work, the police will step up their approach with undercover narcs and eventually raid the house.

Now with major league sports, I believe there has been enough evidence put forth to make a reasonable claim that illegal drug use is a rampant part of their culture. It's more than just a random occurrence. Essentially, they are a drug house. I think if the government did not act on this, they would be condoning it.

You're probably right that Congress has no Constitutional authority to implement specific procedures for them. But they do have the right and the responsibility to say "Drugs are illegal, either you fix this problem or we will." Then they could send send in undercover agents to infiltrate the sports organizations.

I think this is similar to the Paris Hilton situation. The government is trying to send the message that just because you're a rich celebrity doesn't mean you're above the law.

Jeff Pruitt said...

Phil,

I suppose my real point is that steroids, HGH, etc, shouldn't be illegal in the first place.

Moreover there are already laws on the books and it's a police matter. But for Congress to impose specific testing criteria on MLB? That's not their job by any stretch of the imagination...

Andrew Kaduk said...

Actually, Phil, congress does NOT have the right to say that "Drugs are illegal." That's why the whole "War on Drugs" is such a farce and also why this conversation is so ridiculous. The fact that Congress has taken the liberty of making drugs illegal does not mean they had the right to do so.

Your other point is simply one of social Darwinism. If your neighbor was a SMART drug dealer, you would have no idea that he was dealing drugs, and he would therefore be in no fear for his freedom whatsoever and the police would have no rationale by which to investigate him. You're talking about STUPID drug dealers, and most of them tend to have frequent run-ins with authorities anyway.

ROACH said...

if all drugs, gambling, prostitution, and most other realities and aspects of human existence were legal then the police would have more time and resources to puruse truly dangerous violent felons. (such as government thugs usurping their powers granted under the constitution?)read the declaration of independence, and substitute King George III for King George W, and then draw your own conclusions. then read the bill of rights. do we really have many of those rights safe anymore either?

Imagine: if the govt did away with most of its authoritarian fascist laws, designed to either extort money, or control our lives, thoughts, wealth, and most other aspects of human existence, imagine how much freedoms we would have again, and how little money the govt would need to take care of our collective christian /humanitarian needs, and human duties.
we could empty the prisons, feed the hungry, help the poor, house the homeless, and still have money left over to try to help the other poor humans who were unlucky enough to be bonr in some sh-t hole of a 4th world nation- such as Darfur, or any of a couple dozen other nations. but no- we are ruled by a power hungry empire, who makes slaves of us all. Spartacus! SPARTACUS!
MERRY X-MAS! I suppose roach will be the next to be crucified, and martyred for trying to "stick it to the MAN", but what a way to go?

Phil Marx said...

I will agree that the fundamental proposition of the war on drugs need to be reviewed. There are so many obvous flaws in the rhetoric of anti-drug crusaders that it would be comical - if it weren't really happening.

That being said, as long as it is the law, it should be enforced uniformly. The main point I was trying to make was that if they igore the steroids in sports issue the message being sent will be that rich celebrities are above the law.

Andy said...

Roach - Entertaining post and alot of truth to it.

I would also add to the waste of tax dollars, the ridiculous amount of money spent on abstinence only programs in America.

Do we actually think teenagers aren't going to have sex ??? The two hundred million dollars spent sure would have bought a helluva lot of condoms.

oskarmilde said...

it is sad that congress doesn't have anything else to do. if they want to tackle a drug issue, they should maybe focus on defeating the disease through treatment rather than jailing the junkies which only increases the efficacy of their habits.

The ruling body over baseball should remain the MLB, not congress. I don’t know if congress could do a better job, but with the MLB running things at least my tax dollars don’t go toward “cleaning up baseball”.

If they are going to draft new legislation, will it include a clause to rewrite the record book? Since the feds have the power, why no rewrite history? Let’s finally give Schilling one of Clemens’s Cy Young Awayrds!

oskarmilde said...

it is sad that congress doesn't have anything else to do. if they want to tackle a drug issue, they should maybe focus on defeating the disease through treatment rather than jailing the junkies which only increases the efficacy of their habits.

The ruling body over baseball should remain the MLB, not congress. I don’t know if congress could do a better job, but with the MLB running things at least my tax dollars don’t go toward “cleaning up baseball”.

If they are going to draft new legislation, will it include a clause to rewrite the record book? Since the feds have the power, why no rewrite history? Let’s finally give Schilling one of Clemens’s Cy Young Awayrds!