The Americanisation of Australian team names needs to be reversed

There is another mania overtaking the US, this in relation to the supposed racist or wrong-think names that have been applied to some of the sporting teams, some of whose names go back for generations. You may know, for example, that the Washington Redskins are in the process of changing its name because the name “Redskins” is for some reason not nice. Since the names represent some kind of totem portraying positive qualities – mostly manly qualities which is perhaps part of the problem – you would hardly think these are intended as insults. But before I get into that, I wish to raise something about that has happened here in Australia which is an Americanisation I wish we could reverse.

My football team in Canada is the Toronto Argonauts. Every North American team is comprised of the name of a city (or a location as with the Texas Rangers) along with a team name. It is perfectly normal to say both together when referring to a team, or separately, as in Toronto which everyone will understand who you mean if you are discussing a particular sport, or the Argonauts on its own. Or you can say The Toronto Argonauts which is a bit longwinded but formally OK and euphonic. But when I came to Australia, a team was referred to either by its civic location – Collingwood, Carlton – OR by its name – The Magpies, The Blues. One never said both at the same time. One never said Carlton Blues. To me it still sounds foreign. They were Hawthorn or The Hawks, Geelong or The Cats, but never both together.

Now for some reason, we have Americanised the names of our sports teams, specially in sports reporting. I wish we would stop and go back to the Australian way.

As for the latest stupidity in the US, almost entirely from amongst people who are the least likely to be interested in professional sport, the desire to rob teams of their ancient names has arisen as some sort of sop to political correctness. This was a letter to the Sports Editor at the Chicago Tribune in which this mania is discussed.

Dear Mr. Page:

I agree with our Native American  population. I am highly jilted by the racially charged name of the Washington Redskins. One might argue that to name a professional football team after Native Americans would exalt them as fine warriors, but nay, nay. We must be careful not to offend, and in the spirit of political correctness and courtesy, we must move forward.

Let’s ditch the Kansas City Chiefs, the Atlanta Braves and the Cleveland Indians. If your shorts are in a wad because of the reference the name Redskins makes to skin color, then we need to get rid of the Cleveland Browns.

The Carolina Panthers obviously were named to keep the memory of militant Blacks from the 60’s alive. Gone. It’s offensive to us white folk.

The New York Yankees offend the Southern population. Do you see a team named for the Confederacy? No! There is no room for any reference to that tragic war that cost this country so many young men’s lives. I am also offended by the blatant references to the Catholic religion among our sports team names. Totally inappropriate to have the New Orleans Saints, the Los Angeles Angels or the San Diego Padres.

Then there are the team names that glorify criminals who raped and pillaged. We are talking about the horrible Oakland Raiders, the Minnesota Vikings, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Pittsburgh Pirates!

Now, let us address those teams that clearly send the wrong message to our children. The San Diego Chargers promote irresponsible fighting or even spending habits. Wrong message to our children.

The New York Giants and the San Francisco Giants promote obesity, a growing childhood epidemic. Wrong message to our children. The Cincinnati Reds promote downers/barbiturates. Wrong message to our children.

The Milwaukee Brewers. Well that goes without saying. Wrong message to our children.

So, there you go. We need to support any legislation that comes out to rectify this travesty, because the government will likely become involved with this issue, as they should. Just the kind of thing the do-nothing Congress loves.

As a die-hard Oregon State fan, my wife and I, with all of this in mind, suggest it might also make some sense to change the name of the Oregon State women’s athletic teams to something other than “the Beavers” (especially when they play Southern California. Do we really want the Trojans sticking it to the Beavers???

I always love your articles and I generally agree with them. As for the Redskins name I would suggest they change the name to the “Foreskins” to better represent their community, paying tribute to the dick heads in Washington DC.

As in, foreskins and seven years ago.

The Australian is now the print version of the ABC

The comments section still carries just enough of the right side balance but the rest of the paper is ideologically just The New York Times. Two days back I took a look at Jonathan Swan’s useless interview with Donald Trump which you can find here. I wrote then:

Hardly wild at all. If you see these posts in the context of the full interview, there is nothing whatsoever noteworthy about these moments to single out. I don’t know how the President puts up with it. Must also say that this Swan is a serious jerk. And so shallow that it is an embarrassment. Rude as well.

And you know why you haven’t heard a thing about this interview? It’s because Donald Trump takes the interviewer apart. It also seems to be truncated from what would have been the full interview so Trump must have done even better with the rest of it.

It has now shown up in Cut&Paste: Trump gets grilled by Aussie Jonathan Swan, son of the ABC’s Norman. Here’s how it ends:

Fran Kelly, RN Breakfast, Thursday:

And, full disclosure, he’s the son of Norman Swan, our Norman Swan, host of the Health Report here on RN and the Coronacast podcast.

Days until the US presidential election:

88.

From the C&P you’d think Trump was completely done over. But if you watch the interview, even the bits they were willing to show, Trump took him to the cleaners. And what will happen in 88 days that the Oz is looking forward to? That Joe Biden will be elected? It’s not just the bias at the Oz that bothers me, but the stupidity.

Obama’s literary fraud

Obama is no better at writing than he was at governing. A fantastic fraud in every way, which the left insisted on electing and then re-electing. And that he cannot write is no minor issue since he was elected more or less on his autobiography supposedly personally detailed in his Dreams from My Father. The man who exposed all of this was Jack Cashill in his Deconstructing Obama.

How did Barack Obama, a man who had previously written little else, suddenly pen what Time magazine calls “the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician”? Here, in Deconstructing Obama, political scholar and author Jack Cashill analyzes and pieces together Obama’s statements about his life to get at the truth behind the man.

Cashill’s “eureka” moment came when he realized that the structure of Dreams of My Father loosely mirrors that of Homer’s Odyssey. From the moment of that revelation, Cashill researched, read, and examined interviews, writings, and statements about the President’s life story, focusing especially on a poem written when Obama was nineteen. According to the facts, in conjunction with Obama’s statements and writings, Cashill’s conclusion is that the stories don’t add up—and for the nearly 2 million people who read and accepted the story about Obama’s life—the truth is that it may be more myth than history.

That is putting it mildly. With Obama, there is no there there. And he has returned to the scene of Obama’s literary crime of the century discussing the memoir Obama is owed to his publisher, now at least three years late. This one even involves Donald Trump who apparently had seen through Obama’s literary pretensions right from the start: Why the Media Chose Not to Hear When Trump Called Obama a Literary Fraud. Here are the last paras, but read it all since it’s short.

the media wanted nothing to do with the idea that Ayers was Obama’s muse, no matter who made the claim.  At least fifty publications reviewed his book, and not a one mentioned the six pages he spent on the book’s most newsworthy revelation.

Relentless Obama-defender Chris Matthews interviewed Andersen on MSNBC’s Hardball and did not address the authorship issue.  Said Matthews at the end of the interview, “You’re amazing, successful guy.  You have a winning streak here.”  If Matthews did not read the book, which is likely, someone on his staff surely must have but chose not to notice the damning Ayers revelation.

To accuse Obama of being a literary fraud opens one up to the charge of racism.  This I can verify from experience.  There is only one reason, then, that the mainstream media passed on the opportunity to call out Trump: the deep-seated fear that he was right.

Trump was right. If you count on the media to understand what is going on, you will hardly know a thing about the times in which you live.

Ideas cannot win on their own. They need a voice

From Bari Weiss Knows What ID Scientists Already Knew.

New York Times opinion journalist Bari Weiss submitted her very public resignation today. It’s a must read, and it will remind you at once of the world scientists in the intelligent design community have long occupied.

“Forays into Wrongthink”

Some excerpts:

[A] new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else….

I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.

My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist….

New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action….

There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong….

Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity — let alone risk-taking — is now a liability at The Times…. [S]elf-censorship has become the norm.

… If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.

Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired….

All this bodes ill, especially for independent-minded young writers and editors paying close attention to what they’ll have to do to advance in their careers. Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril….

I’ve always comforted myself with the notion that the best ideas win out. But ideas cannot win on their own. They need a voice. They need a hearing.

Is this the worst journalism you have ever read?

It’s a good thing that The Age is still around so I don’t have to depend on the hysterics at The Oz for my news. Take this today by someone classified as the Associate Editor: Code red for Premier Daniel Andrews as coronavirus crisis reignites. He starts:

Daniel Andrews’s premiership has been smashed and his legacy imperilled. He has had a horrible month; in normal circumstances the Victorian Premier might already have walked.

But for complex social and psychological reasons the Andrews experiment is on life support rather than in the political mortuary. His community is still more interested in beating the virus than in revenge politics.

In his own obtuse way, he has put his finger on the problem: there is no opposition party or leader in Victoria. My favourite party trick at the moment is to ask people to name the Victorian Opposition Leader. Virtually no one can do it. But back to the article as The Oz does everything it can to beat up this dead horse for reasons unknown to me:

Just as the behaviour of the COVID-19 virus can be unpredictable, so is the state of mind of Victorians as they confront their gravest challenge since World War II. The latest record numbers have stunned an already stunned city, with deaths certain to rise [they certainly cannot fall].

“We are in the fight for our lives,” Victorian Health Minister Jenny Mikakos says.

Today the community’s narrowed eyes are focused almost completely on suppressing the killer virus that is marching through the metropolitan area.

He finishes with this:

This once-in-a-lifetime event has entered a highly emotional phase. The economy was retrievable until the fresh outbreak but is now under even greater threat. We are staring at potentially large-scale loss of life. If this crisis deepens and the government is nailed by the judicial inquiry, how long could the Labor caucus justify retaining Andrews at the helm?

Of course Andrews is going to resign, in just the same cowardly way that John Cain left the mess he was responsible for to Joan Kirner. Some legacy! Andrews is the worst premier Victoria has ever had, and that is really really saying something.

Defund the ABC

Modern Monetary Theory: How MMT is challenging the economic establishment

Illustration of a tree with money for leaves and lush flowers on the ground below where the money falls.

From the dumbest economic analysts in Australia, our very own ABC: Modern Monetary Theory: How MMT is challenging the economic establishment.

What if everything we thought we knew about public finance over the past 40 years has been wrong? A new economic theory has emerged that could rewrite our understanding of how governments create and spend money and what type of society we can afford to build.

And if it is correct, people may be furious. Because it could show that Australia’s political elite can afford to spend far more than they are on public health and education, social housing, scientific research and green energy schemes, while eliminating unemployment.

And yet they’re not — either from a misunderstanding of government finances or because they don’t want to. However, to embrace this radical economic theory you will have to forget what you’ve learned about budget deficits (that they’re bad) and government debt (that it burdens future generations).

Why? Because proponents of the theory say that far from being a problem, budget deficits are often a good thing — they can be the source of healthy economic growth.

More at the link and some previous discussion of MMT here.

Daniel Andrews is showing the way. He spends enormous amounts of money, but never finishes a project so that nothing is ever completed. Tunnels, train lines, you name it, he has left all kinds of useless projects halfway done, which even if completed would never earn as much in revenue as they cost to build. Just build it and they will come, they in this case being massive debt and deficits.

The ABC is filled with such deadheads. I never watch the thing myself but only found out about this from someone else who monitors the place. I don’t know how anyone can listen to such ignorance day after day, but I guess someone has to do it.

ABC delenda est which is Latin for Defund the ABC.