Saturday, February 2, 2008

The Irony of Arlen Specter

Friday there was an AP article about Republican Senator Arlen Specter-PA, stating that Senator Specter wanted the NFL to explain why it destroyed evidence of the New England Patriots cheating scandal, stating that he was concerned about the underlying facts on the taping, the reasons for the judgment on the limited penalties and, most of all, on the inexplicable destruction of the tapes.

This is from a Republican senator... Senator Specter, you are concerned about such things when it has to do with a football game? I mean, yes by all means, we have to hold these games above the accountability that your buddies in the Republican party have demonstrated while in power. After all the stakes are so much higher than say whether we as a country have illegally used torture such as water boarding against prisoners and the videos of that were destroyed. Football is maybe much more important to you then missing emails from the administration's deliberations to start a war on false pretenses, or information on the political firings of 8 U.S. Attorneys, or the leaking of a CIA operative's name. I think you are having a case of sour grapes maybe cause you had some money riding on the game or something. Same thing with the congressional investigation into doping in baseball. Is doping in sports disturbing? Yes. Is doping in sports wrong? Yes. Is it something that is so important that we should be spending time and money in the senate investigation? I don't think so. With all the other problems that we need to be sorting out, war, lies, stonewalling, illegal activities, missing emails and other missing evidence by upper administration members, wouldn't it be better to leave the sports problems to be settled out among the sports leagues and associations. Baseball is a multi billion dollar industry I think they could afford their own investigators, set their own regulations and enforce them without tax payers having to front the bill.

Update 3/13/08

I was maybe out of line somewhat on Arlen, it is noted that in the illegal wiretapping subject he wants to change defendant from the telecommunication companies to the government in the court cases now against the telecommunication companies for them going along with illegal requests by the government. I can see the logic to having the government as a defendant, I can understand how it is hard to refuse something the government is pushing you to do. I am not familiar with what effects that may have on any court case. It does seem like it's a rip to the tax payer to have to pay for the government's illegal actions of spying on tax payers. It would amount to the same thing as if someone stole something from a person and they sell it on the black market, spend the money they got from selling the stolen goods, and then we make the person that was ripped off have to pay the thief's fines and court costs. So maybe I'll reserve my praising Arlen for wanting to do that after all. To really be fair, if this was Bush's idea and he convinced the intelligence communities to take this route as a legal option, who in turn convinced the telecoms that this was legal request for information, Bush should be made the defendant and the one liable for any jail time or fines.

No comments: