Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Stick to (American) football

Once again, the all-wise powers that be in the U.S. Senate know more about what's in the best interest of our country than we do. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) said he might refer the Terrell Owens case to the Senate antitrust subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He called the Eagles' decision to suspend Owens for four games and deactivate him for the rest of the season "vindictive and inappropriate," adding, "It's a restraint of trade for them to do that, and the thought crosses my mind, it might be a violation of antitrust laws."

I beg your pardon? Terrell Owens committed insubordination by mouthing off about his team and his teammates on a radio show, which he's done multiple times in the past in San Francisco when he played for the 49ers. He also got into a physical altercation with former Eagle and current team ambassador Hugh Douglas and challenged several teammates to a fight.

What Terrell Owens did is nothing short of a personnel action that would get him fired from just about any job in the so-called real world. If suspending an employee and then effectively firing him is an anti-trust violation, I can think of thousands of anti-trust violations that don't even get coverage beyond the town gossip. None of which, I might add seemed to interest Mr. Specter in the least. The worst part of this story? Specter himself condemned Owens's actions that led him into this mess to begin with.

"I am madder than hell at what he has done in ruining the Eagles' season," he said. "I think he's in flagrant breach of his contract and I believe the Eagles would be within their rights in not paying him another dime or perhaps even suing him for damages." Sounds like someone's talking out of the other side of his mouth. Considering the party he hails from, that should come as no surprise.