Reckon there's one for the Carolina's and Mississippi too? Surely there are similar souvenirs from their Great Plains Tour.
Gotta be more memorabilia...copies of Love Letters taken out of Southern homes and printed in northern newspapers for amusement, wood from Southern homes in mini charcoal bags, blood stained undergarments?
Contact America Apparel if you're interested.
Lighters in the air.
USA! USA! USA!
Of course, as per from, off topic: now, I'm as glad as the next man, woman, or trans-gender/species/extraterrestrial entity, to see one of the last unreconstructed patriarchal bastions of misogyny scaled and conquered by a woman, but somehow this does not appear to be one of those occasions:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2042298/Mansfield-CEO-Carolyn-Still--29-agrees-marry-clubs-chairman-John-Radford.html
*per form* - bad typo form as per usual
ReplyDeleteShe has to work somewhere...collagen injections aren't cheap.
ReplyDeleteI love to see genuine talent given the scope to work its magic; colour, creed, gender or race should not inhibit its progress, but this does look good on any level. It's just sad and, although it may be a dose of unrealistic naivete on my part, sport - as a driving prerogative - one would think, has the strongest commitment to merit, not just on the field, but behind the scenes also.
ReplyDeleteWhat is her role with the club exactly? Is something that will have an obvious impact on the field.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine the supporters putting up with lousy results over this.
If a ruthless meritocracy is what you seek...you've found it here and you're gonna see it live on these pages when the Vanderbilt Commodores drive the final nail in the coffin of what everybody agrees is a fine God fearin man and a once fine football coach at Georgia.
Well, you know the old saying, civil wars are the best of wars. Particularly on fitted t's designed and marketed by a bunch of whiny, self-important little twerps: http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/09/15/american-apparel-angered-by-spoofer-who-won-its-modeling-contest/
ReplyDeleteShe'll be mainly dealing with the business side, so, to a certain degree, insulated from what happens on the pitch.
ReplyDeleteSince I brought up the issue of merit, I feel a need to add some provisos, or at least a certain cautious cynicism with respect to the practical application of that concept. In the abstract, "merit" seems a perfectly clear notion that implies the fair balancing of justifications based on some kind of track record and assessment of its continuing or future application in a given circumstance or situation. In real life though, the application of merit, or its appropriation, is often tied to a prevailing ideology or presumed pedigree, rarely is it held up to rigorous scrutiny from those without an immediate interest or stake in its outcome. For example, there appears to be a consensus among various establishments that success in business conveys upon those individual or institutions who are successful - especially fiscally speaking - a more universal ability; indeed the very embodiment of that ability, to achieve success in all other fields of endeavour, be that as a direct participant or in an advisory capacity. This is particularity noticeable with respect to "failing" public institutions or running of public infrastructure, namely enterprises where the profit motivation is at best secondary to the service provided: those services that can viewed as necessary to the general well being and/or function of society. It would be unacceptable to shut down the roads, energy infrastructure, etc., if there were no profit to be made from them. That is not to say it is wrong to make a profit out of running these services, rather it would seem absurd to close down them if you couldn't. As a business man or woman, if your business becomes structurally unprofitable, that is no amount of restructuring will lead to profit, you'd be an idiot not to close it down and, if you were such an idiot, you can be sure it will shut despite your commitment to a lost cause. So, there appears to be an inherent tension between the fundamental models involved in public services and for-profit businesses. Both have merits, both have downsides and weaknesses ... I've gone so far off topic, so let me reign this in a bit and finish up before it turns into an essay ... I see sport as falling somewhere between these two categories; before I expand upon that point, let me just say for the record - pre-empt any notion of where I may be going with this: I don't see sports like football as being best served by government ownership and public tax funding - not where this going. I merely wish to highlight the inherent tension, say between share holders in a club or team and their fans, supporters. There's an uneasy alignment here, not one that is bound to fail, but one that require a bit of give and take on behalf of both parties. Supporting a team is not about making as much profit as you can, nor is it about winning every game. You can walk away from a game, even if you lose, with pride, if you - notice how "you" implies a certain closeness (identification) with the enterprise one merely doesn't get from buying a product - did your best. Because that's sometimes just the way the cookie crumbles. There is no such room for sentiment in business for profit only. Loyal support will see their team through thick and thin, shareholders will move to where the profit is - and why wouldn't they? Of course, it's not that black and white, but there's a definite tension between the level of tolerance on both parties. You just don't buy shares to support your locality - "put something back", because you're parents used to take you to such & such company when you were younger ... my main point is merit is not a straightforward matter and that's the point I was trying to make against myself. It's been nice arguing with myself! Enough!
Dread Pirate Jessica has identified an interesting case ... if you can't beat them, beat them by co-opting them.
ReplyDeleteBill Hick does a great routine about this *warning strong language*:
http://youtu.be/gDW_Hj2K0wo
There's another great example of this practice; I won't mention any names, but set out the general scenario. A school kid finds out by reading the papers that a certain sports wear brand has a sweat shop in some "developing" county were the workers are poorly treated and paid. He starts a campaign. The sports wear company in question realises that the media attention this fresh-faced, dew-eyed, kid is getting is hurting their brand. So what to do? They contact the kid; tell him: "We had no idea this was going on, we were lied to by the people that run that factory, we have listened to you and here's a wheelbarrow of cash to sponsor your campaign and an company branded award for your efforts, please feel free to give the same damaging publicity to our competitors."
ReplyDeletePS. If Vanders go on to suck, I will drop them faster than a hot potato and demand reassignment of my allegiances.
ReplyDeleteJust one more reason to hate this ridiculous company.
ReplyDeleteAnd what a lost opportunity...get over yerselves.
It's funny they also put out shirts mocking Custer at Little Big Horn.
Same people giving the orders, same strategy...that was practiced in The South and viciously perfected on The Plains...totally different response.
That's the beauty of not being able to fudge a 40 times...or do anything about their line being stronger than yours.
ReplyDeleteYou probably ought to delve a little deeper into this business of college football (especially the SEC)...coaches are paid millions and very little of that money actually comes from the state. In fact, often none of it does.
They make money at the gate, t-shirts nicknacks, bowl games, etc but most of that money goes to the school to fund olympic sports, women's sports, a new wing for the library, whatever.
Fans are directly involved through booster organizations...it causes all sorts of shenanigans and accusations of shenanigans...and heads roll when things don't go well. These are deep pockets. There are two coaches in the SEC right now that were taken from Professional teams. You'd love it...and maybe you could be the one to figure out how a shady fella in Memphis died falling UP his stairs.
Just so any interested parties have the necessary information...we will pimp the pages out to rundown and degrade any company if the price is right.
ReplyDelete"The thing with stairs is that, if you're standing at the top of them, they're going down; however, if you're standing at the bottom of them, they're going up. So it's all relative to your point of view."
ReplyDelete... we thank you for your expert testimony, now if the jury would just like to check on which side of their bread butter is spread, I would encourage them to render their verdict "an act of God".
"Your honour, can I add another pertinent fact?"
ReplyDeleteSure son. but I can't see how you can improve upon your testimony.
"I should also have mentioned, if you're standing exactly on the halfway step on some stairs, depending on your orientation, you could be either going up or down."
I see.
" ... but wait, there's more."
Go on.
"If there is no middle step, and by that I mean no step that sits exactly halfway, then it impossible to say which direction - even taking a relative point of view - you are travelling in while taking them, since there is no transition point where you could say you were halfway up or down, depending on your orientation."
The relevance?
"The stairs in question in this case had an even number and since such stairs are not built with a half step step, there can be no definitive answer as to whether the victim fell up or down them."
Then it is settled.
I don't need to tell you about it...you obviously worked the case.
ReplyDeleteSee the dark side of all this is recruiting. Athletes are offered athletic scholarships...which for the most part are, considering that football is the actual field of study, all the same. Yet, that's all that can legally be offered...you see where this can head already I'm sure.
That makes me all kinds of angry, tub thumping group mentality shit always does. So its ironic you bring sports into this conversation really, though at least in sports usually no one dies, unless there are stairs to fall up obviously!
ReplyDeleteActually Nat did it but, interestingly it was on a yankee football blog were I first saw it. What we all have known for decades has become obvious in the last few years...when it comes to football it's the SEC and everybody else...and it is not sitting well with our friends in the mid-west.
ReplyDeletes*** like this is especially infuriating when you consider how hard and constant we have to work to protect our on past...it's symbols and figures. Meanwhile these thugs have monuments built for them that sit in this very state...they're on our freaking currency.
I may be pessimistic by inclination forged of experience; however, I can't help holding on to the optimistic hope that, when something gets so bad - out of control - it is either eradicated by self-implosion or that there is an uprising against it.
ReplyDeleteRe-reading my spoof rendering of the "stairs fall" I can't help being reminded of the Kennedy assassination, especially the "magic bullet" theory. Now I don't pretend to have done the reading; the research to offer a definitive opinion on the matter (admittedly, by definition, "opinion" is not definitive, rather qualified or merely uniformed speculation).
ReplyDeleteThere are so many books, articles and archive documents, one could spend years sifting through them, but what does strike me about the case, is those who are overtly keen to scorn anybody that suggests Oswald didn't act alone - they was are "conspiracy theorists" and, as such, often subject ridicule as if it were a matter of obvious faulty perception. Now may be there wasn't another shooter; as I have admitted, I don't feel qualified to make a judgement either way. Where I am qualified to speak, rests upon my years in studying philosophy and my experience of examining and taking apart arguments. Doesn't make my opinions right, but it does suggest I have the ability to engage in something more than just idle speculation. Now putting aside questions about Oswald's past associations and his connection with Ruby, his assassin; now imagine yourself as a cop, you see the Zapruder film for the first time with no background baggage; you see Kennedy's head jerk back and his brains splatter over the back of the limo. What is your prima facie - at face blush - guess as to where the bullet came from? What does it look like? Well, it looks like someone in front of the limo shot him, I'm not saying that is the fact of the matter, just what one's natural inclination would be looking at the film. What I'm getting at it is that is exactly what appears to happen, yet even mention the obvious somehow makes you, in certain people's eyes, a nut job! As I have been at pains to point out, what appears to be obvious is not necessarly the case, but what amazes me about the Kennedy assasination is that the obvious is ubiquitously treated with contempt, yet in all other fields of inquiry it is taken as a valid starting point from which to delve deeper, indeed that is the cornerstone of any empirical investigation.
Again Bill Hicks makes a humorous routine out of this *language warning*:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Fl9ZVJ7B8
I thought for sure the rag up there would bring the good doctor out of hiding but, if talk of the John Kennedy assassination doesn't do it...we're left to assume he just hates us.
ReplyDeleteI with you on the principal here...having certain ideas shoved aside as ludicrous...sometimes very plausible ideas, common sense ideas...by a kind of bullying consensus.
I can't emphasise enough here I'm not suggesting the official Oswald-lone-gun-man story isn't in fact correct. I really don't have the investigative credentials to posit a firm conclusion. My point is that there's a strong vein of resistance within American public that challenges this and, to dismiss them on the basis of "it's nuts", is frankly nuts. Is it really inconceivable that certain vested interests wouldn't have liked to see Kennedy dead? No! I'm not saying that just because something is conceivable then it has to be actualised. Just that it is possible. It REALLY is possible. Sometimes wishes become accidentally realised. It is not outside the bounds of conceivability; it is not ruled out by impossibility; illogicality. Again, possible does not mean it has to happen. I am not equivocating here, only trying to take the dispassioante view.
ReplyDeleteI totally understand what you're saying.
ReplyDeleteThis particular issue though...it's almost impossible to discuss. In part the reaction to alternate theories is the fault of some of the theorist and their obsessiveness. It's almost like people are afraid to encourage them.
We'll have to ask Allen if he feels any responsibility in this matter.
Still, you're overall point is very valid...I think.
Here's an interview with Peter Dale Scott, who I believe is one of the most brilliant living historians among those that analyses modern events in America. So why isn't he more famous? Well, I leave you to make your own mind up. He doesn't really get into the juicy stuff here, more a general overview. But it's worth your time looking up some of his other videos.
ReplyDeletehttp://vimeo.com/17186683
http://vimeo.com/17443314
http://vimeo.com/17466392
I don't want to appear as supporting American bashing here. That is far from the truth. It is a telling fact that I can find more about what is going on in America than I can the UK.
ReplyDelete"American bashing"? America bashing - bad grammar fail. I do a lot of of proof reading as part of my job and it shocks me how sloppy my own writing - written presentation - is.
ReplyDeleteQualifier *sometimes* is.
ReplyDeleteWe'll see what we can see tomorrow....today is booked for more profound matters.
ReplyDelete:)