The Battalion
OPINION
Wednesday, June 28,1989
THE SUPREME COURT'S GUIDE
] to yufw MEANxmes
CURRENT TERMS:
Smokino
n
yorf-smoKWt
is Rose’
the hole
It’s two out in the bottom of the ninth
and Pete Rose is at bat. The score is tied,
Baseball 2 and Gamblers 2. Here’s Bart
Giamatti with the wind-up, and the
pitch . . . strike one! — Rose is accused
by bookmaker Ronald Peters of placing
over $1 million in bets over a two-year
period. The second pitch . . . strike two!
— The FBI acquires betting sheets from
Rose’s house ready equipped with fin
gerprints. Rose is in the hole 0 and 2.
Giamatti’s pitch . . . ball one — Rose
takes Giamatti to court. Wait! What’s
happening? The umpire, Norbert Na-
del, has postponed the game for 14
days?
Supreme Court justified in
decision to protect ideals
I’d be willing to bet that most of you
are aware of Pete Rose’s problem. For
those who are not, the former baseball
great and current Cincinatti Reds man
ager has been accused of gambling by
some quite reliable sources. At stake,
and the stakes are high I must say, is
Rose’s association with baseball, since
gambling is strictly forbidden.
In the good old days, if a
grader brought home a lousy
grade,
have apparantly changed. The kid
now hire an attorney, if he thinks
his parents have prejudged him,
he could be grounded. Tin :rs w * 10 remov
■ -— the spot
tear
peared, Warlike
the court system determine his st ' lU ' e ^S ure a ^.'
• . . . itrCCt caiH 1 i
Obviously this is ridiculous, butsoii'™
for
court system tor even accepting a
such as the one involving Pete andl pitch dark and <
Under this system, the courts could
cide the fate of any employee of!
company who was to be fired, or
who received a low grade. (O.K.
ample.)
Rose, baseball’s all-time hit leader, is
now batting against a formidable foe in
Major League Baseball Commissioner
A. Bartlett Giamatti.
I recently received a letter from the
TRUMPET mailing list on our com
puter network condemning the Su
preme Court decision overturning the
conviction of the man convicted of flag-
burning (a.k.a. desecration of a vener
ated object) under the Texas Penal
Code. This subject is getting an awful lot
of airplay, and I’m nearly convinced
that in many people’s minds, the emo
tional issue and the constitutional issue
are being impractically and unneces
sarily yoked together.
Brent Walter
Auvermann
Guest Columnist
city streets to protect us (or to give us
parking tickets), yet they do not under
stand that state laws are not sovereign,
and that the Supreme Court has the
power to nullify any federal or state law
that conflicts with Constitutional prin
ciples.
The Supreme Court justices have not
hypocritically washed their hands of
bloodstains in the way that Pilate did at
Jesus’ trial (or, insert your own analogy,
if you don’t care for that one). They
have confirmed, however, that to vener
ate objects over ideals amounts to empty
idolatry; to honor the flag over the ide
als it represents is exactly that kind of
vanity. The American heroes of past
wars gave their lives, not for the flag,
but for freedom; to suggest otherwise is
to belittle their sacrifices.
In the past, the Commissioner’s
power was unquestionable. The first
Commissioner of Baseball, Kenesaw
Mountain Landis, handed down life sus
pensions to eight Chicago White Sox
players after a wagering scandal in
1919. A more, poignant example of the
Commissioner’s power may be that two
of the greatest baseball players in his
tory, Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle,
were banned for life for dealings with a
casino. (They were later reinstated by a
different Commissioner.)
Second, if Rose’s case wasn’t ridr
lous enough, Judge Nadel’s
may make the books so to speak, asl
ing a landmark case of misjustice.Jud
Nadel thrust the courts into
like a quarter into a slot-machine. I
Commissioner is not allowed to take
action in the next two weeks. OnJulj
Nadel will consider a motion forapi
liminary injunction, which would!,
ther delay baseball’s case while N»
decides who should determine R®
guilt.
Some of you may construe that to
mean that every person who disagrees
with me on this is letting his emotions
overrun him. That is not what I mean to
suggest at all; I realize that just as nine
Supreme Court justices could not come
to a concensus on the issue, neither
should I expect that all reasonable citi
zens should see eye-to-eye on it. But the
evidence is overwhelming that many are
confusing the emotional and legal facets
of the flag-burning brouhaha.
One of my good friends, a policeman
in Dallas, has a brother on the force who
was watching from only a few feet away
when the flag was burned in 1984. His
brother remembers seeing an 80-year
old veteran walking up to the pile of
ashes, with tears streaming down his
cheeks, scooping them up, and taking
them to be buried. I don’t know if he
was stopped so that the ashes could be
used as material evidence or not ... I
doubt it, as eyewitness accounts proba
bly sufficed to put the guy away under
Texas law.
Secondly, (and this is more in line
with my initial premise) the illustration
of the broken-spirited veteran with the
tear-stained clothes seems more to ag
gravate the emotional reaction to the act
than to address the legality or the mor
ality of the Supreme Court decision.
The statements I’ve heard are, “that flag
was paid for with men’s blood, but now
the Supreme Court has given the god
less commies and immigrant ingrates
free rein to spit upon it, burn it or tram
ple it in front of thousands and millions
who serve or served in our Armed
Forces.” Yes, that is true, and it is a gut-
wrenching sight to most of us who are
citizens of this “great nation.” But the
use of this illustration to deride the Su
preme Court decision really suggests,
then, that the justices are somehow un-
American, disloyal slobs who have no
respect for the flag or for the ideals it
represents. This is patently unfair, both
to justices, and to ourselves.
Take a rose and dry it sometime.
Then take it in your hands and crush it.
Is not its aroma more fragrant and
beautiful when it is “dishonored?” Just
as the flag represents freedom when it
waves proudly over our military bases,
our stadiums, and our neighborhoods,
it represents freedom even more boldly
when it is burned in portest.
Essentially, Baseball law gives the
Commissoner absolute power to regu
late disputes “in the best interests of the
game.” Every player, manager and team
owner knows and respects this. It has
worked for years.
So what the heck is Judge Norbert A.
Nadel doing?
My main gripe is not whether or
Rose gambled. It is his money. I ®
care. It would be slightly upsetting
bet on his own team, especially if
picked them to lose, but that is noi
major problem either. My compl®
that baseball and the courts mixaboi
well as happiness and season ticket
see the Atlanta Braves. This isalnw
bad as our government’s boycottnf
the Olympics.
HOUSTON (.
rirl swept into a
lowing water Ir
Allison spent IE
ide an undergr
iel before she w
mthorities said.
“She spent tin
ity’s major sev
hat flood water
hardly had
Departmer
Warnkesaid.
“It’s just a mi
itill be alive,” he
Latricia Reese
r south Hous
m. Monday
:ousin saw her
fast-moving
into a nearby gu
She was retri
Tuesday by two
“We used a
said Ti
instruction wo
he drain Tuesc
Univ
dies ]
STAFF AND WII
The man v
Texas A&M L
Monday in Ac
Frank H. V
tablished sol
houses at the
and the Unive
lina.
He served
1978. During
lishing caree
publication c
books, about
University wo
Wardlaw c
serving as fc
the Universit
24 years. Be
Let us not be drawn into the trap of
emotionally exalting objects over the
ideals they represent, and let us not im
pugn the motives and patriotism of the
five justices who, in the face of intense
criticism, boldly sought to preserve
those ideals in our Constitution.
If Pete is found guilty of bettint
games other than ones involving
Reds, he could be suspended fa
year without wagers oops 1
wages. Of course if he did bet on
Reds, he gets the boot for life.
Pete Rose filed suit in Nadel’s court
against Commissioner Giamatti. In his
suit, Rose charged that Giamatti had
predjudged him about his gambling.
Rose’s motive was to block a scheduled
hearing on his conduct which Giamatti .
was to have held on Monday. Nadel said Since the courts are involved,
no dice to Giamatti and issued a 14 day ^ now s when this thing will be resov
restraining order on the Commission- doubt that Rose can convince ^
er’s hearing.
As with all columns, opinions ex
pressed by Guest Columnists are not
necessarily those ofThe Battalion. Per
sons interested in submitting guest col
umns should contact the Opinion Page
Editor at 845-3314.
First of all, this court case is absolutely
ridiculous. Suits such as Rose’s have be
come major thorns in the side of our ju
dicial system. Isn’t this the same court
system with a backlog so large that many
cnminals aren’t even brought to trial?
As for lawsuits it is a free-for-all.
that he is not guilty. If he has to,
Pete Rose prove his innocence in
of a jury? I doubt it. In fa ct > \ ‘
someone Mr. Rose and three J>'
Any takers? Oh sit down, FeW-
l:
Matt McBurnett is a junior
engineering major and a colu^'
The Battalion.
That policeman friend of mine could
not believe that the Supreme Court
could issue such a decision. After all, he
said, it is Texas state law, and the fellow
was obviously in violation of that law!
I sometimes shake my head in disbe
lief when I hear statements like that, be
cause it demonstrates a certain lack of
understanding about just exactly what a
Supreme Court decision is for. We have
among us patriotic citizens who would
fight for freedom if called upon. Many
put their lives in jeopardy daily on our
The other side, the one that agrees
with the Supreme Court decision, has
often claimed that the flag “is nothing
but colored cloth, anyway . . .” The
left-wing justice who served in the US
Navy, the one that defected from the
fold of his left-wing counterparts by dis
senting, would probably not agree with
that statement, and I feel fairly confi
dent in suggesting that if a poll were
taken of people who were born and
raised in the United States, the majority
would disagree, as well. It is not nec
essary for us to deprive the flag of its
honor in order to justify the Court’s de
cision. The issue goes much deeper than
that.
I like this one
She brought
her own
blindfold...
this s
the
$50
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Ellen Hobbs,
Editor
Juliette Rizzo,
Opinion Page Editor
Fiona Soltes,
City Editor
Drew Leder, Chuck Squatriglia,
News Editors
Steven Merritt,
Sports Editor
Kathy Haveman,
Art Director
Hal Hammons,
Makeup Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspa
per operated as a community service to Texas A&M and
Bryan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the
editorial board or the author, and do not necessarily rep
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, fac
ulty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper
for students in reporting, editing and photography
classes within the Department of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday
and examination periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62
per school year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising
rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald,
Texas A&M University. College Stadon, TX 77843-1 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX
77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battal
ion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col
lege Station TX 77843-4111.
MAtf&JUieS
HCUeftN w
IBM anc
delivery
bundle
memory, ,
(1.44Mb),
DOS 4.0, N
Software