Ma'am, I'd like to do for you what a couple libertarians (who strongly opposed my positions then and now) did for me, and offer you some constructive criticism - repeat, *constructive criticism* - concerning your article.
Your entire article is effectively a rant against Obama. That in and of itself is NOT the problem. The problem, ma'am, is that your current case of heartburn revolves around Obama having met with leaders among the players and convinced them to form a committee.
Your article strongly implies that's *all* that happened, that because a committee was formed, all progress would immediately stop, that nothing lasting or positive could possibly result from a committee. Indeed, some of the other responses indicate that's precisely what the readers got from your article.
You do not seem to have researched what that committee had or had not done after its formation.
Note that the discussion with Obama was on Wednesday night.
From the Philadelphia Enquirer:
"On Friday, the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association announced an agreement to establish a social justice coalition and convert team arenas into voting locations for the general election.
As of Saturday, TV networks aired advertising spots during playoff games, encouraging people to vote in national and local elections. There was also a “Vote” logo on the video board at each end of the arena. Those were parts of the NBA’s new effort to raise awareness of voter access and opportunity."
What's more, that boycott you lauded? LeBron James saw the problem with it. From USA Today:
"[Lebron James'] frustration with Hill and the Bucks was because the players didn’t have a plan of action that would warrant players returning to play, sources said. James’ mindset, sources said, was if they’re refusing to play, then what’s the end game and what demands must be met to continue?"
James knew that while boycotts made headlines, in the long run for sports teams, they're not a winning strategy. So Obama told them what would be most likely to result in lasting and positive change. They listened to him, and so the players' association is concentrating on getting out the vote...which is the ONLY real way to change local, state, and federal politics. All the high-profile boycotts and protests in the world won't change a thing unless we win those local, state, and federal elections.
Ma'am, while I think you're very, very wrong in your apparent two-steps-above-Hitler opinion of Obama, your personal goals of social justice are laudable. You and I mostly want the same things. But I would admonish you that just because you really, really don't like a person, it does not mean that person is never right. In this case, you were too quick to judge. You did not perform the due diligence such an article demands, but leapt to the attack with righteous anger driven by assumption.
Next time, please do not be so quick to assume. Dig a bit deeper, and try to remember that most people - even most politicians (not counting Trumpists) - really do want to do what is good and right...and that most conflicts arise when what one person feels is good and right simply doesn't mesh well with what the other person feels is good and right.