Jesse Ventura and Chris Kluwe: Credibility Gaps

Governor Jesse Ventura (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Jesse Ventura and Chris Kluwe are two men who have a few things in common.  Both used to be professional athletes, one in wrestling and the other in football.  Both have dabbled in politics, one as Governor of Minnesota and the other as a gay rights activist.  Both are now (or soon might be) embroiled in legal controversies that could endanger their credibility, not to mention their careers.  Some might say that's already happened.

Ventura filed a defamation suit against the now-deceased author of a bestselling book (whose name and tome will not be divulged here), who was once a Navy SEAL just like the former Governor, who wrote about getting into a bar fight in 2006 with a man he called "Scruff Face", and who he said was making disparaging comments about the war in Iraq and about dead soldiers.  In later interviews, the author said that "Scruff Face" was in reference to Ventura.

Ventura denied all that, saying the incident never happened, and the author's claims have cost him the respect of other military personnel, as well as having financial setbacks and lost job opportunities.  You might say people stopped taking Ventura seriously a long time ago when, after his term as Governor ended, he hosted a TV show highlighting conspiracy theories.  Suing a dead fellow SEAL and his widow was bad enough.  Losing to them in court may be even worse.

As for Kluwe, the former Minnesota Vikings punter is contemplating a lawsuit against the team for not suspending assistant coach Mike Priefer when he made an offensive comment about gays, and for not releasing a full report of a six-month investigation into alleged homophobia in the locker room.

Kluwe got only part of what he wanted.  The Vikings suspended Priefer for three games, not the four he asked for.  They also released only a few pages of the report, not all of it flattering to Kluwe.

Not only did the Vikings cut Kluwe before the 2013 NFL season for strictly football reasons and not for his activism (he was also let go by the Oakland Raiders soon after), but the report goes on to say that Kluwe made joking references to the Penn State child sex scandal in the locker room.

If that's true, then Kluwe just shot himself in the foot.  He had all this support from those who believed in his efforts to get same-sex marriage legalized, and he punted it away (so to speak) because of a heinous joke.  You suppose those LGBT organizations would want the money Kluwe promised to give in case he won the lawsuit?

At this writing, the Ventura case has gone to the jury.  They have yet to reach a verdict.

Also at this writing, Kluwe's case has yet to be filed because he, his attorney and the Vikings are reportedly negotiating a settlement.

Whatever happens, both men will either be vindicated, or will need to take a good look at themselves.  And so do we.

UPDATE (7/29/14):  It took the Ventura jury six days and a vote of 8-2 to come up with this verdict:  $1.3 million in "unjust enrichment" and $500,000 for defamation for the former Minnesota Governor.

In wrestling terms, it was a split decision.

Death Flight Over Ukraine

Vladimir Putin - World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Davos 2009 (Photo credit: World Economic Forum)

In the post-9/11 era, this is what governments fear most:  A band of terrorists using surface-to-air missiles (how they got them doesn't matter) fires one of them at a commercial airliner, obliterating the plane and all those aboard.  This could occur practically anywhere in the world.

Something like that did happen in the skies over Ukraine.  A Malaysian Airlines flight that was coming from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down by one of those missiles, killing almost 300 passengers and the flight crew.  The wreckage is scattered over eastern Ukraine, which just happens to be a world hot spot right now.

Right now, the recovery efforts are being poorly handled.  Forces loyal to Russia have commandeered the crash site, and the bodies were held inside refrigerated rail cars.  The rebels claim they will forward the bodies and the evidence over to investigators once they arrive on the scene.  But will they let the investigators do their jobs in what amounts to a war zone?

Before that happens, the finger-pointing has already begun.  The United States and its allies have pointed theirs at Russian President Vladimir Putin, who they claim is backing the insurgents that threaten to seize the eastern half of Ukraine.  Putin, who has made no secret of his wanting to get the Soviet Union back together, has accused the Ukrainian army for shooting down the plane.

But what can you really do to hurt Putin and Russia outside of meaningless economic sanctions?  Western Europe is in a no-win situation because they need Russia's energy and commerce.  And Putin is the man they must deal with, so that's why they're letting him have his way.

For Malaysia Airlines, getting people to fly with them has become an even tougher sell.  Remember Flight 370, the plane that apparently sank somewhere into the Indian Ocean?  They still haven't found it, and may never find it.

So now we have another mystery plane, this one fraught with so many international and security implications that one doesn't know where to begin.  For the victims' families, they don't care about any of that right now.  They just want their loved ones home, one way or another.

The Supreme Court Needs a New Hobby

A Hobby Lobby that looks different! (Photo credit: Nicholas Eckhart)

It has become an annual ritual around this time of year.  People wave the flag, have picnics, shoot off fireworks and go on vacation.  The United States Supreme Court does something similar.  The fireworks come from the controversial decisions they make, sometimes providing a feast of rulings favorable to Big Business, all in the name of interpreting the U.S. Constitution as they see fit.  And then they go away until October.

Having concluded a few years ago that corporations are people, it shouldn't have come as a surprise that the justices also consider them to be a religion unto itself.  In a 5-4 decision, the Court allowed the Hobby Lobby chain of arts and craft stores (and other companies like them) to ignore parts of the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare), and deny their female employees coverage on contraception for religious reasons.

This leads us to the question of whether employers should impose their religious beliefs on their employees.  Never mind health insurance.  What about pharmacies who won't sell birth control products?  Would Muslim-owned businesses or other fundamentalist organizations require women employees (regardless of religion) to be covered up?  Would some employers use the Court's decision as an excuse to not hire those of certain races or sexual preferences?  Or would employees have to follow company guidelines even when they're off the job?

Would you work for such a company?  In this job market, where things are improving (but not by much), some people may find it's a choice between employment or nothing at all.  Others may find that compromising their principles is worth a steady paycheck.

The Supreme Court justices may have just opened a new can of worms here.  They're inviting  discrimination lawsuits of all types, based on who's doing the hiring and who claims to be discriminated against.  In the Hobby Lobby case, its female employees can either find another job, or stay and think twice about ever having sex again.

Boycotting Hobby Lobby isn't going to solve things, if you're not into arts and crafts.  Neither is getting a law passed in Congress to address the ruling.  (In this Congress?  Are you kidding?)

It's been 50 years since President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing discrimination on the basis of race in public establishments, employment and at the voting booth.

Fifty years later, we have a Supreme Court that's more interested in upholding the rights of corporations than in the rights of the people who work for them.  Affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have already been gutted by the Court under Chief Justice John Roberts.  What other attempt to rewrite the constitution could the Court come up with in the next session?

Maybe the justices need a new hobby.