Skip to main content

Douche of the Day: Missouri state Representative Rick Brattin

I haven't handed out any douche-of-the-day or douche-of-the-week awards in a while, but Missouri state Representative Rick Brattin's recent actions helped snap that severe drought.

Last week in the Missouri House, Republican state Representative Rick Brattin decided to propose a bill which would strip scholarships from any athlete who "calls, incites, supports or participates in any strike." The proposal also mandated colleges and universities to fine any coach who encouraged or enabled student-athletes' protests.

While Representative Numnutz, I mean Representative Brattin, wasn't available for comment, co-sponsor Representative Kurt Bahr (tweedledum) was, and went on to say the following:

"[The aim is to show that] the response that they've had (the University of Missouri) has not been as strong as the Legislature would like, and that we, the General Assembly, expect the leadership of this state institution to actually lead and now allow the students to call the shots."

Look, if these Missouri legislators want student-athletes to be treated like employees, then guess what? They're going to have to sign another bill which would require that student-athletes get paid for their services in risking life-altering injuries to bring money to the school. Even if we wanted to pretend that these legislators saw student-athletes as employees, employees have the right to strike, to fight for and demand higher wages and/or better benefits. I know most Republicans would like to squash unions like they want to squash equality for anyone other than straight white Christian males, but unions, unlike moderate Republican politicians, haven't gone the way of the dodo bird just yet.

It's also extremely ironic that Rick Brattin and Kurt Bahr, both Republicans, are proposing legislation which would, in essence, strip college-athletes of their First Amendment rights to free speech, considering the fact many Republicans have been claiming the increased political correctness demanded by college students is the largest factor in our free speech rights eroding before us.

Speaking of irony, while our tax dollars may be going to learning institutions such as the University of Missouri, where this nation's young adults continually learn, find themselves, and take that next big step into adulthood, even if they go on strike for whatever reason, it's all but inevitable they'd still be working harder and providing more for our tax dollars than representatives like Rick Brattin and Kurt Bahr, whom have taken it upon themselves to use our tax dollars to silence the protests, the First Amendment rights, of college students.

Not only is this proposed bill unconstitutional, and with that, unAmerican, it's also incredibly stupid. If the bill passes, do Representatives dumb and dumber seriously believe this will result in a positive change for Missouri's college athletics? Guess again... These are SEC athletes, who were likely recruited by a number of other quality universities, so if Missouri legislators tell their student-athletes, "I'm sorry, but we're going to take away your First Amendment rights, therefore you can't protest," they can (and will) protest another way - transfer to another school. That isn't even mentioning the fact the bill would severely hamper recruiting. "Uh, yeah, you can either go to this great school outside of the state which isn't passing bills to trample on your Constitutional rights or you can come here where we'll just tell you to shut up and play, and if you don't, you'll lose your hard-earned scholarship. What do you say?" Yeah, good luck with that. Even if the bill doesn't pass, it could very well have a negative impact on Missouri's college athletics. What 18-year-old kid wouldn't be at least somewhat tentative about attending a university where the state's legislators are fighting to strip him or her of their free speech?

No, I hadn't done this in a while, but thanks to Missouri state Representative Rick Brattin's recent bill proposal, I'll proudly hand him the Douche of the Day award! Congratulations, Rick!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-missouri-bill-college-scholarships-20151215-story.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"