Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 91 of 91

Thread: Neal: Rosario has nothing to do but wait

  1. #81
    Senior Member All-Star 70charger's Avatar
    Posts
    1,114
    Like
    137
    Liked 198 Times in 97 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan View Post
    We can certainly argue the intent of the commerce clause, but let's just use a different scenario, if I grow pot in CO and sell (or just use it) it in CO, constitutionally, there's absolutely nothing that the Federal government can do about it... not that they see it that way.

    And again, the supremacy clause is limited by the 10th amendment. The Federal government has no rights to overrule the states on issues that have not been granted them by the constitution.... not that they care, but that issue is completely different.

    Speaking as another lawyer, you are absolutely right. Gonzales v. Raich says that if you grow pot in CO (CA, actually), from seeds that came from in-state, and use it in-state, you're engaging in interstate commerce.

    And in that, the Supreme Court is laughably, ridiculously, less-common-sense-than-a-two-year-old WRONG.

    And that about sums up Constitutional jurisprudence as it regards the commerce clause (and the fourteenth amendment) over the last century plus.

    It's only the law of the land if you simultaneously accept the premise that the Supreme Court could interpret the first amendment in such a way as to deprive us of our freedom of speech if they one day decide to warp the Constitution that way.
    Last edited by 70charger; 04-30-2014 at 11:03 PM.

  2. #82
    I can't believe what I'm reading here. Has Twinsdaily been infested with so many liberals that marijuana is now considered benign? Well, let me tell you something, Cheech, that stuff will rot your brain just like any cheap street narcotic. Science has proven it. I'd recommend that all of you lay of the devil's lettuce for a few days, sober up, and then watch this documentary some psychologists made a few years back that shows the true dangers of "mary jane."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54xWo7ITFbg
    BYTO R.I.P.

  3. This user likes freshinthehouse's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    zchrz (05-01-2014)

  4. #83
    Senior Member Triple-A zchrz's Avatar
    Posts
    217
    Like
    41
    Liked 104 Times in 62 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by freshinthehouse View Post
    I can't believe what I'm reading here. Has Twinsdaily been infested with so many liberals that marijuana is now considered benign? Well, let me tell you something, Cheech, that stuff will rot your brain just like any cheap street narcotic. Science has proven it. I'd recommend that all of you lay of the devil's lettuce for a few days, sober up, and then watch this documentary some psychologists made a few years back that shows the true dangers of "mary jane."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54xWo7ITFbg
    And there ya go, ethnics use marijuana, we should probably deport Rosario asap there are white women he could be corrupting.
    "Professionalism - When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - Hunter S Thompson

  5. This user likes zchrz's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    freshinthehouse (05-31-2014)

  6. #84
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,112
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    49
    Liked 1,588 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sconnie View Post
    I think it's good policy to punish him, he broke the rules and the law. Many employers test for all kinds of substances, as they should have the right to do so. Especially union approved/negotiated contracts.
    I'm still not sure why anyone thinks it's a good thing that they're testing for substances that aren't any more dangerous than alcohol, are becoming increasingly popular (and legal) with mainstream America, and do not enhance performance in the slightest bit.

    And it's pretty hard to call the system MiLB players unionize under "negotiated", considering that MiLB players don't have a seat at the table during negotiations.

    You'll also note that MLB players are NOT tested for marijuana use. Funny how that works. The guys who get a seat in negotiations don't get tested for smoking weed.

  7. #85
    Senior Member All-Star Sconnie's Avatar
    Posts
    1,097
    Like
    614
    Liked 397 Times in 262 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    I'm still not sure why anyone thinks it's a good thing that they're testing for substances that aren't any more dangerous than alcohol, are becoming increasingly popular (and legal) with mainstream America, and do not enhance performance in the slightest bit.

    And it's pretty hard to call the system MiLB players unionize under "negotiated", considering that MiLB players don't have a seat at the table during negotiations.

    You'll also note that MLB players are NOT tested for marijuana use. Funny how that works. The guys who get a seat in negotiations don't get tested for smoking weed.
    Funny, according to the MLB Players Association, they are tested for THC
    http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/jda.pdf
    Maybe MiLB baseball players don't have a vote, but they are protected and legislated under the same collective bargaining agreement as the MLB players and choose to enter into the agreement contractually under their own free will.
    I don't care if pot is legal or not, if a person enters a contractual obligation, it's up to them to hold up their responsibility. You'll notice several legal and prescriptive substances in the list of drugs of abuse such as synthetic THC and Codeine.
    Whether pot should be tested for, it was the players association that voted to approve the contract under drug of abuse, not PED. It's a safety and addiction issue contractually.
    Employers should have the right to protect themselves, their properties, and their customers, as well as the players should have the right to collectively bargain player contracts that are in the best interest of the players association. For all we know, it was the players association that bargained this issue into the contract. I think if the players wanted alcohol to be a tested substance of abuse, it should be included as well.

    On the freedoms and liberties issue, I think pot should be legal. It's so prevalent and socially accepted that it's unreasonable to treat it differently than alcohol.

  8. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrylos View Post
    Never understood why people do not give a chance to Polanco at SS. He is a SS for the time being and much more valuable there than 2B.
    It's possible he could be a SS, but every remark I've read by evaluators is that his arm and range aren't there. His errors are a result of his relative inability to get in proper position to field the ball, often followed by a hurried throw from an arm that can't make up for his range deficiency.

    That's a paraphrasing of all I've read and heard. I think the Twins are trying to determine if he can make the proper improvements fielding the ball. If so, the throwing errors should decline. I haven't yet heard anybody say that it looks like he could stick.

  9. #87
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,112
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    49
    Liked 1,588 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sconnie View Post
    Funny, according to the MLB Players Association, they are tested for THC
    http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/jda.pdf
    I phrased that poorly. An MLB player can be tested for a drug of abuse but they're not randomly tested. There has to be a cause for testing.

    From Wiki:

    Testing for drugs of abuse is not administered randomly, but on a basis of reasonable cause. If one of the HPAC panel members has evidence that a player has used, possessed, or sold banned substances in the last 12 months, they call a conference and discuss the evidence with the other members. If a majority vote to test the suspected player is reached then testing will take place no more than 48 hours later.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_L...ll_drug_policy

    Anyway, I don't think our opinions are terribly different on this. Rosario was stupid for smoking pot, knowing he would be tested. I simply do not believe MLB should be testing for drugs of abuse, particularly not testing MLB players for it (who have representation in the unions) but testing MiLB players for it (who have no representation).

    Really, this all boils down to the fact that I believe MiLB players should have union representation. It's not right to have a group of workers playing under a contract they had no hand in negotiating.

  10. #88
    Senior Member All-Star Sconnie's Avatar
    Posts
    1,097
    Like
    614
    Liked 397 Times in 262 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    I phrased that poorly. An MLB player can be tested for a drug of abuse but they're not randomly tested. There has to be a cause for testing.

    From Wiki:



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_L...ll_drug_policy

    Anyway, I don't think our opinions are terribly different on this. Rosario was stupid for smoking pot, knowing he would be tested. I simply do not believe MLB should be testing for drugs of abuse, particularly not testing MLB players for it (who have representation in the unions) but testing MiLB players for it (who have no representation).

    Really, this all boils down to the fact that I believe MiLB players should have union representation. It's not right to have a group of workers playing under a contract they had no hand in negotiating.
    I could not agree more that minor leaguers should be represented directly at the bargaining table. It would be better for the entire baseball economy for drafted players to be treated more like international free agents though it would probably increase ticket prices.

    The difference between MiLB and MLB testing policy, is MLB has the Unionized mechanism for determining probable cause, where the minor leaguers do not, so it is random, however both have the same mandated follow up random tests that Rosario fell under this time.

    Where I disagree is, the players negotiated the contract, and we don't know how the drug of abuse clause entered into the agreement. It may be that the players wanted (or still do want) drugs of abuse to be tested for the safety and integrity of the players and the association. They may be protecting themselves in ways that other sports are not. I support the collective bargaining process even as an anti-union, pro management person because I do feel that unions exist for very important reasons, and the process does work in those instances.

  11. #89
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,112
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    49
    Liked 1,588 Times in 825 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sconnie View Post
    Where I disagree is, the players negotiated the contract, and we don't know how the drug of abuse clause entered into the agreement. It may be that the players wanted (or still do want) drugs of abuse to be tested for the safety and integrity of the players and the association. They may be protecting themselves in ways that other sports are not. I support the collective bargaining process even as an anti-union, pro management person because I do feel that unions exist for very important reasons, and the process does work in those instances.
    It's possible the players negotiated it into the CBA but I find it incredibly unlikely that they were proponents of this testing.

    If they were, they would have included drug of abuse testing with the random PED testing of MLB players. The owners wouldn't have negotiated that out of the testing process if the players wanted it in. The owners have incentive to keep their players clean for obvious reasons. The players, not so much.

  12. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by 70charger View Post
    Speaking as another lawyer, you are absolutely right. Gonzales v. Raich says that if you grow pot in CO (CA, actually), from seeds that came from in-state, and use it in-state, you're engaging in interstate commerce.

    And in that, the Supreme Court is laughably, ridiculously, less-common-sense-than-a-two-year-old WRONG.

    And that about sums up Constitutional jurisprudence as it regards the commerce clause (and the fourteenth amendment) over the last century plus.
    I'm no constitutional scholar, but if I remember right, there have only been a handful of cases where the Supreme Court found a particular activity NOT to affect interstate commerce (guns free school zones act and the plurality decision on the affordable care act off the top of my head). It's not common sense at all, but it is how the constitution has been interpreted for quite a long time.

    Anyway, baseball!

  13. #91
    Senior Member All-Star 70charger's Avatar
    Posts
    1,114
    Like
    137
    Liked 198 Times in 97 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Frasier Law View Post
    I'm no constitutional scholar, but if I remember right, there have only been a handful of cases where the Supreme Court found a particular activity NOT to affect interstate commerce (guns free school zones act and the plurality decision on the affordable care act off the top of my head). It's not common sense at all, but it is how the constitution has been interpreted for quite a long time.

    Anyway, baseball!

    I'm not constitutional scholar either. I think partially because I had Jim Chen as a teacher.

    (I looked you up; you were a U guy too...)

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.