Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
You Must Watch the Empire Bowl
It’s Our Last Super Thing
If you are still passionately following football or, worse, allowing your kid to play, you may just be an old-fashioned imperialist running dog. Not that all football fans are bloodthirsty hounds feeding off the crippled hindquarters of the dying animal of empire. Some are in a vain search for a crucible of manhood that no longer exists. Others are in pursuit of a ticket out of a dead-end life.
Whatever your reason, this is the Super Bowl to watch, even if you are among those who have made an effort to disregard the game since high school jocks shouldered you in the halls.
This is the Big One. Maybe the Last Big One. Never before have so many loose strands of an unraveling empire come together in a single event accessible to those who mourn or cheer America.
Let’s start with the conceit that this game is the only super thing we have left. Super power, super economy, super you-name-it… gone. You can beat the Bushes for that, but we’re all out of super -- except for the Super Bowl. That celebration of an all-American $9 billion industry (estimated because the National Football League has never opened its books), not to mention millions more in subsidiary and dependent businesses, offers us a national holiday that has arguably superseded Thanksgiving (thanks for what?) and Christmas (electronic excess and obsolescence).
Even little Everytrader has a shot here. Without insider connections, you undoubtedly have a far better shot at winning a football wager than gambling in the stock market.
The Big Four
Here are the four biggest reasons to watch this Super Bowl.
1. It’s Not Soccer
American exceptionalism is alive and thriving on Super Bowl Sunday. National Football League franchises are overwhelmingly owned, managed, and manned by American citizens. Neither immigration nor foreign capital has made a perceptible dent in the game. And you and I have proudly subsidized all this. American taxpayers have built many NFL stadiums. Most American universities, with their government grants, have sports schools attached; those multi-million-dollar athletic departments (despite claims, they are rarely profitable) train the players and one of academia’s latest revenue-producing innovations -- sports management departments -- train the front-office personnel.
American football is barely played outside the country. Call it a failure of colonialism (as baseball and basketball might), but it’s really a tribute to good old-fashioned protectionism. Those other major sports, even ice hockey, are increasingly being taken over by Latin American, Asian, or Eastern European guest workers. Pro football remains a native game.
The “futbol” that most of the rest of the world plays is a game that American male athletes and sports fans have never found compelling. Why? What’s not to like? The so-called “beautiful game” is exactly that, and the past several generations of American school-age girls and boys were lucky to have recreational soccer programs. But there was no room on the sports “shelf” for a game so poorly suited to commercial TV interruption and American domination.
(It’s not as if soccer is in any way effete. Its fans are famously thuggish. In fact, currently, the nationalistic Russian mobs who roam cities beating up people who do not look Slavic have taken to calling themselves “Soccer fans.”)
2. No Dogs Were Harmed in the Making of It
The controversy over allowing Michael Vick back into the select company of other NFL felons -- reportedly about one-fifth of the playing population -- faded after the Philadelphia Eagles quarterback showed contrition, spoke to schoolchildren, proved to be one of the most electrifying performers in the game, and then lost early in the play-offs, avoiding the embarrassment of PETA demonstrating at the Super Bowl.
At 30, Vick was clearly better than he had been before his 21-month imprisonment. He had added a previously missing work ethic and level of concentration. One wonders if the sharpening of Vick’s focus had to do with losing what might have been his primary outlet for sadism and violence: the brutal world of training fighting dogs and then killing the losers in often unspeakably cruel ways.
There is no question that violence stirs fan blood. Football players know this; they have been remarkably hostile to attempts to soften the mayhem, especially those ringing helmet-to-helmet shots, an offspring of the modern technique learned in PeeWee leagues of “putting a hat on him” (which means tackling headfirst rather than the more traditional style of wrapping one’s arms around the ball carrier’s legs and dragging him down).
Most pro football players seem to be on the side of the hats. A more careful game won’t be football anymore, they say. It won’t be the American game -- even for some of the doctors watching who treat the “epidemic of concussions blazing through schoolboy football.”
3. But No Chicks
The title of Mariah Burton Nelson’s 1994 book, The Stronger Women Get, The More Men Love Football, seems ever more prescient. The so-called feminization of America (really the slow movement toward equality) is reflected in most sports, many boardrooms, and the military. Resistance is stiff, from human resources violations to rape. Conservatives keen over the suffering of the average male. It’s tough when you suddenly have to compete against an expanding talent pool that includes women who are better than you. Mr. Average Mediocre can no longer count on his members-only credential to keep him in the game. Unless, of course, the game is football.
Football is the last estrogen-free zone. No wonder high school and college teams have such bloated rosters. (College teams routinely “dress” 85 men, compared to a pro team’s 53.) This gives more boys the chance to imagine themselves in the testosterone club, even if many of them hardly ever get into a game. Later, as jock alums, they will donate to alma mater and speak reverently of how old coach taught them to be men -- or at least not women.
Yes, there are girls playing in some youth and high school games, even in college, mostly as kickers. But the freakishness of it is still the story. The NFL is so relentlessly misogynistic that off-field incidents like those involving Brett Favre when he was a Jet and Super Bowl-bound Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger tend to be dismissed as boys-will-be-boys antics. Unfortunately, there’s a certain logic to this: since they began playing the game, they’ve been told they can be real men, not girls, not sissies -- if they submit to Coach, play hard, and play in pain. In return, their perks and entitlements will be those of conquering warriors.
4. The Faux Volunteer Army
If football really is the bread and circuses of this dying empire, the injuries suffered by the gladiators (disproportionately African-American) make the game more real, more urgent. And their willingness to take the risks absolves us from blame. After all, they volunteered. They really want to play this game, the media reminds us. These aggressive, competitive men have an intrinsic need to prove themselves to themselves, each other, and us. And where else, the media asks us, would they make so much money and find so much acclaim?
At Goldman Sachs? The Mayo Clinic? Skadden, Arps? No, no, these sturdy lads are often from the underclass and they have leveraged their skill and dedication into some college studies and a job in football. That many of these gladiators, clearly smart enough to absorb complicated game plans, feel that football is their only shot seems to be an indictment of American opportunity. What about all those high school and college football players who put all their chips in their hat and still didn’t make it to the pros?
Maybe some of them joined the National Guard.
It’s here, of course, that the entire metaphor may go offsides for you. Or at least become uncomfortable. Football -- Army? Gladiators -- mercenaries? What about all the strong young men and, increasingly, women who feel that their only shot at getting an education and a meaningful life is joining the military during wartime?
The author and journalist Richard Reeves made the connection neatly when he wrote: “We have a volunteer army, the National Football League with guns, and we are the spectators.”
As spectators we rarely see the young people die in either volunteer legion. Restrictions during the Bush years on journalists filming combat deaths or even showing returning caskets kept the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at a comfortable remove until they became distant and routine. Old news. Maybe even a little boring for people without loved ones on active duty.
On NFL broadcasts, players with broken bones and torn tissues are quickly carted off lest their teammates lose heart. For those of us watching on TV, the collisions seem almost like cartoon hits. How can those players just pop back up? Is it the pride, the adrenaline, that allows them to pretend they are made of steel? Of course, the real damage, the dementia brought on by head trauma, is years, even decades, away.
It’s hard to believe how recently the concussion discussion began in earnest, as if players hadn’t been hit in the head for more than a century. It was launched several years ago by the revelation that former pro football players were being diagnosed with dementia, and even dying from suspected long-term brain trauma, at disproportionate rates for their age. It was helped along by a number of workers’ compensation cases and the superb reporting of Alan Schwarz of the New York Times.
The concussion discussion has replaced steroids as the NFL health topic, although the issues are joined: larger players seem to be at greater risk for early death, and bulking up via steroids probably contributes to harder hits. The discussion has also raised the question of whether parents should allow their children to play the game -- years of small, unreported traumas to the head can’t be good for developing brains. It even occasioned a rare but telling ESPN column on abolition.
Lest you consider this enough piling on the all-American game, labor troubles loom with a lock-out possible in March. Because the main issue is money -- the teams want to share less revenue (currently 60%) with the players -- the media tends to characterize the conflict as “billionaires versus millionaires.” Actually, most owners are rich from other businesses and would not have been allowed into the NFL unless they were financially secure, while few players survive more than about three years in the league. The owners also want to increase production (adding two games to the regular season) without taking more responsibility for health-care costs.
If any of this sounds depressingly like real life, how could you not watch what might be the last Super Bowl, the endgame of empire, the two-minute warning before America finally beats itself?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
68 Comments so far
Show Allforget protest demonstrations - the only thing that will get many American's off their fat lazy asses: TOUCHDOWN!
Super What ?
What does raping children, beating your wife & killing innocent victims in the street have to do with the SuperBowl? Everything. You could say it's the untold story. Every year this testament to amerikkkan ignorance produces according to statistics: record child traffiking for the legions of fans pouring into the host city for their pre & post game debaucheries, a predictable spike in spousal abuse & domestic violence, & of course alchohol fueled carnage on amerikkkan roads. You don't believe me look it up. Reuters has all the gruesome details. So as the empire rots from within, this bread & circus distraction takes on icon status . A symbol for a collapsing "mans world", a last gasp of amerikkkan superiority, a shining example of their arrogance in their ignorance . So, for all you super fans, guess what? Your days are numbered, your priorities & way of life are OVER.... Game over..for the rapists, wife beaters and murderers, Game Over.
That's why I declined all stupid bowl invitations and stayed home to read Commondreams. Watching a bunch of overpaid jocks collecting obscene amounts of money to wear certain colored shirts that viewers personally attach their own egos to...I just don't get it. Why should I care if this bunch of rich guys or that bunch of rich guys wins....none of them give a rats ass about the city they play for, as long as they're making the fattest paycheck they can....I'd like to see a few of them donate half their salary to the most needy charities in their cities. Then I might care a little about them.
Reason NOT to watch this msm distraction.
Too much ostensible intensity for so little or absolutely NO gain.
Makes me wonder how many fools who will drive home exceptionally over the limit. Here's to no deaths or injury from drunk driving and to a record number of people being hauled off to jail for dui. Now that are some stats I would like to see.
I'm going for a motorcycle ride this morning, followed by a long walk through the city with my wife this afternoon. Both will be safer, because the boobs will be home watching their tubes,or getting ready for the Great Moment.
I went hiking today and when I was coming back, the roads seemed almost deserted; it was like driving at midnight.
Its the "propaganda bowl"... brought to you by the fascist network; selling brainwashing for the bubbaworld, amerikan imperialism and consummerism, to keep you fat, dumb and happy !
A great analogy exists between the monopolistic and highly profitable $9 billion NFL empire, which pays no attention to any negative externality costs (like brain damage), and the $13 Trillion corporate/financial/militarist Empire (posing in a USA uniform) --- which also cares not a whit about the negative externality costs of 'brain damage' of Americans or about bringing about human and indeed global extinction.
Both 'games' are at heart 'money games' as Pat Tillman learned --- and 'games' in which anybody, regardless of whether their fame is of an NFL safety or even a president, can be 'taken out of the game' if they express beliefs that may threaten the profit of the 'game'.
So, keep watching, keep being entertained, keep cheering, and don't worry your anesthetised little heads about either Empire 'game' --- the owners would never take you out, eh?
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Miane
"Democracy over Empire"
I'd much prefer football as the main outlet for American male aggression, and get rid of the actual wars.
I have long regarded the Super Bowl, and professional football in general, as an unbearable bore, due in part to its ridiculous level of television overexposure, and for other reasons. I always give it a pass. I do not particularly identify with pro football fans and, yes, we all understand the bread-and-circus-excessive-violence-late-empire aspect of the spectacle. The problem with this essay, however, is not so much its thesis, but rather its tone of self-congratulatory disdain for all those presumably insecure, threatened, and really rather stupid, macho American men out there who channel their insecurity into football. One paintbrush. Maybe many of these guys can still find some beauty and grace in the game. If so, then fine. But I also believe that the air of smirking cultural contempt expressed in parts of this essay is a real problem for the left and has been for quite a while. It feeds tribal politics, and Sarah Palin would probably love it.
Thank you for articulating what I was struggling to say.
"But I also believe that the air of smirking cultural contempt expressed in parts of this essay is a real problem for the left and has been for quite a while. It feeds tribal politics, and Sarah Palin would probably love it."
-- Yes! Yes! This type of condescending attitude is one of the biggest reasons why so many people are turned off and turn away from the 'left' movements.
Yeah, because the condescending attitude that only Christians have family values and male politicians must now put on their "man pants" is so much more appealing. Let's be clear, it's not condescending when it's true. Americans are stoopid, and the sooner that the teatarded among us are minimized, the better we all shall be.
Thank you for articulating why this article feeds directly into the tribal politics mentality.
"Yeah, because the condescending attitude that only Christians have family values and male politicians must now put on their "man pants" is so much more appealing."
-- That you assume I think Christian values (or the Right's values) are more appealing because I think this 'left' article is condescending only reveals your own shortsightedness.
"Let's be clear, it's not condescending when it's true."
-- No. Condescension is based in the tonality of the message, and is delivered by a person who displays a 'patronizingly superior attitude'. You can deliver a message that is based in truth without having this type of attitude. In fact, when you deliver a message that doesn't smugly insult your listeners they are MORE LIKELY to listen to the message.
"Americans are stoopid, and the sooner that the teatarded among us are minimized, the better we all shall be."
-- Well, sure, there definitely seems to be a short supply of critically thinking Americans - both in the left and right spheres. So, what are you doing to minimize the stupid among us? Do you think that insulting them will help to minimize them?
I didn't assume you thought that about Christians. It's when you claim that the "left's" presentation is condescending and therefore marginalized ignores that fact that the "right's" presentation is equally condescending but NOT marginalized. It is also not true that you can deliver a message that is based in truth without having the attitude. Again, the "right" always presents their position with derision and VOID OF FACTS and the stoopid always gobble it up.
I believe in treating others as THEY TREAT YOU. It's how they the stoopid middle. Time for the "left" to win the stoopid middle and implement good policy. The country doesn't need better rhetoric. It needs better policy. The stoopid won't give a damn how there lives are made better, just that they are made better.
"It's when you claim that the "left's" presentation is condescending and therefore marginalized ignores that fact that the "right's" presentation is equally condescending but NOT marginalized."
--I should have been more specific: SOME of the left writers and their messages are full of condescending attitudes. And, I believe that it does harm to the cause.
You know, there is a difference when I read a leftist article by say, Chomsky, Paul Street, Chris Floyd, Bookchin, etc. These guys will talk about and promote their ideas, theories and philosophies. And when I read their articles I see no level of condescension or calling others 'stoopid' while they try to express their message. Paul Street will rail into why Obama or the tea party movement is ridiculous, but he doesn't stoop to the level of calling those who support these entities as 'stoopid' or 'tea-tarded'. Their message is articulate and promotes the leftist viewpoints, and it doesn't need to succumb to the level of berating others as 'stoopid' to get their viewpoints across. The message speaks for itself.
Then I read stuff like this article and the condescension is OOZING out of it, from the very first sentence. This guy is NOT promoting leftist values... he is smugly insulting 'other people values' as wrong and whatnot.
-- And, by pointing this leftist condescension out does NOT mean that I ignore that the right is just as bad, and probably worse in their levels of condescension.
"It is also not true that you can deliver a message that is based in truth without having the attitude."
-- I completely disagree. Just because YOU don't know how to present a message of truthfulness without condescension doesn't mean it is not possible for others to do so.
I don't agree that Americans are "stoopid." They are ignorant. And it is this ignorance that demagogues on the hard right manipulate and exploit. That the right, the Tea Party, etc., is also patronizing and insulting is completely obvious and not the point of my concern about the subject essay's tone of superiority. There are people in the Tea Party who are probably capable of bombing little girls on Sunday mornings or Federal Office buildings on weekday afternoons. My point was that some of the responsibility for this country's extreme rightward swing over the past 30 years has to be placed, whether or not we want to acknowledge it, at the feet of the left. My objections are not so much to progressive politics or progressive economics, especially on issues of corporate oversight and accountability - the problem is in the cultural left, a problem of self-satisfied, sanctimonius conceit. Tune in to NPR from time to time. Or consider the American film industry's simple-minded treatment of poor whites, rural whites, etc., "Winter's Bone", an independent film, notwithstanding.
IHHJ: I am suspicious of three things:
1. Posters who show up and take over the conversation (9 times out of 10, they are retreads using new names to APPEAR as fresh voices).
2. Posters who blame the Left, regardless of how skillfully they run their inverted logic and/or trained psy-ops in the framing of their argument.
3. Posters who fail to mention the inconvenient fact that the Left has not failed due to failed beliefs... it is being purposely marginalized by NUMEROUS forces inclusive of media access itself.
A strong meaningful message WITH a megaphone attracts advocates. The left has virtually no megaphone. Whether you're unaware of that fact, or otherwise masking it, your argument presumes the positions of the left have been invalidated by the public's choices. Why didn't you mention the significant and influential voices (think tanks, media moguls, PR firms) skillfully managing, manipulating, and massaging those alleged choices?
Your logic is slanted. Perhaps it's an oversight... otherwise, you're another poster acting like a champion of the left while knocking it down a peg.
Siouxrose. I used the same ID each time, and these are my first posts to Common Dreams. I am not trained in what you call "psy-ops." Regardless, it seems that my remarks hit a nerve. I am aware of your complaints and agree that the right has had the microphone for a long time. But your points are straw men that I did not raise, e.g., the left's political beliefs. I have protested in the streets against Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. I fear a future for my grandchildren that will be controlled by sovereign, unaccountable corporations. I am not offering any particular "logic" except that if the left in this country thinks it should be exempt from honest questioning, and that its adherents should engage in groupthink or get out, then I see that as a sign of weakness and lack of confidence. My criticism was motivated by concern that the left hurts itself with the tone, not the substance, of the essay and needs to get rid of it.
To that you can also add in the Lefts pessimistic, cynical, glass is half full, sky's falling world view. .
I would argue that the real pessimists, cynics, and fatalists are the conservatives. They're the ones who think it doesnt get any better so why bother trying. Liberals and progressives honestly feel that things can and should be better and they work to that end.
The tax breaks/incentives given to Baseball, basketball and football, franchises exceeds their total combined expenses. It is not a free market, talent based enterprise, but a taxpayer subsidized one. Pass the doritos, please. Burrp.
Although the one can take the author's viewpoint and lay the blame for our country's woes at the feet of the impotent American males/females who have to vicariously "live" through football and - one could argue all professional sports in America - or one could take a step back and realize that we are all victims of the most sophisticated propaganda system the world has ever seen.
I mean, should we have mocked those stupid, impotent Soviets because they believed that their leaders were guiding the country in the right directions even though it should have been plain to see - from OUR perspective of course - that the country was coming apart at the seams?
Were all the Germans who supported the Nazi regime simply bloodthirsty know-nothings or was there maybe something more at play concerning message control and the manipulating of a society's grasp of reality?
The author states:
"American exceptionalism is alive and thriving on Super Bowl Sunday."
Maybe he would do well and reconsider this statement as he seems to think that somehow our love for American football is a phenomenon to be mocked when in reality it is simply one manifestation of overly-propagandized populace, one oppressed by a totalitarianism that may be more subtle than those of the past but one that is much more effective.
Our American exceptionalism extends to the fact that even commentators on the left can't bring themselves to admit that the American citizenry is an oppressed and brainwashed society that is subject to the whims and machinations of a ruthless and voracious elite.
Our love of football's violence and jingoist nationalism is the outgrowth of decades of pervasive, non-stop propaganda and to start blaming individual citizens for falling prey to the propaganda system's effectiveness is akin to blaming all the people who lost their homes during the mortgage crisis.
So right; it wasn't the German people herding prisoners onto death trains. It must have been the Chilean people, or maybe the Finns; most likely liberal democrats.
Stupidity is always someone elses, fault.
You're right the billions and billions of dollars spent on advertising each by corporations are completely pointless as they have no effect.
You're right the trillions and trillions of dollars that governments have spent on propaganda throughout history we're completely wasted monies as everyone knows propaganda doesn't work.
The trillions of dollars that religions use to control the minds of their adherents as evidenced throughout history also similarly had no effect whatsoever upon the populations.
Nah, you're right, us savvy and smarter than the average lefties would better spend our times thinking that all of our fellow citizens and people who have come under the influence of propaganda systems are all just f*cking idiots instead of trying to expose the documented effects of said propaganda systems on populations throughout history and make people cognizant that fact.
Why, propaganda systems in the past were never ever turned against the intellectuals/intelligentsia in those societies, right?
So, while your apt comparisons of the Nazi Empire to Chile and Finland do resonate - ahem - I would think that comparing populations under the Nazi regime to populations under the Soviet regime to populations under American Empire might resonate more so.
Do I think that individuals are blameless for their actions? Not at all.
But the creation of environments in which people are made to act inhumanely have been studied by scientists extensively for the last 100 years and they are being put to use right now as we speak.
Instead of waiting to punish people for doing inhuman - stupid - things maybe we should be trying to combat the systematic creation of those environments in the first place and by looking back at history's examples we can better understand the projected outcomes if we are not successful in our endeavors.
The thought police hasve employed a useful tool to keep people in line. It's called
television. I cant' wait to see part 2 of Freedom and Justice on HBO. You are, however, free to turn it off, not turn it on, or blow it up. I can't put all the blame for our edited versions of ourselves on the editors.
POLY: It goes back a lot further than that. Some nations seem to attract "older" souls. And those lands that have direclty known war, realize it's far wiser to avoid it. America is a land of younger souls, and an adolescent concept of masculinity runs rampant here. In everthing from Hollywood scripts catering (and this is a direct quote from a pro) "to 13 year old boys who want to get laid on a Friday night," to the misogyny that runs through porn consumed by high numbers, to Viagra sales to elderly men (generals and militarists among them), maleness is identified strongly with sexual virility, and it's based on conquering or domination of "other."
Naturally not all men fall into the pattern; and sadly, some women in their need to belong to something bigger than themselves, identify with the military, violent sports, and/or patriarchal religious belief systems. These aspects of culture are pervasive and seem to constitute "reality."
The focus on destruction is everywhere from environmental exploitation to the nonchalant way leaders lie the nation (and its troops) into foreign wars. This is NOT a healthy collective psyche for any nation, and as I have repeatedly sought to make clear in this forum: there is a VERY direct segueway between macho, violent sports and warfare. Both push very specific ideas of what it means to be a man. The result is not only a crippling of those troops who come home broken in body, mind, and spirit, but a crippling of the nation's essence and identity. It is too identified with violence, aggression, competition, and war. All of those items are linked to Mars, god of war, a timeless, potent archetype.
This nation's leaders, educational system, and dominant religions give the feminine qualities of feelings, empathy, nuturing and compassion short shrift. Men are taught that it's creepy to be sissies, or girly men, etc. The hatred of the feminine is real, and it forces many men (and women) to disassociate from this aspect of themselves. The net result is a nation that's lost its capacity to feel. Imbalance is in evidence everywhere, too.
Ah, there are many reasons to boycott all competitive sporting events. The group-think that is encouraged is just one. My team is better than your team can lead to my country is better than your country. Another reason, maybe we should be teaching children and all others that cooperation is better than competition.
And don't tell me that sporting events make a lot of money. So does war, and I don't like that either.
Some of us refer to this day as 'beat-up-your-spouse day'. And I wonder how many drunk driving accidents there will be tonight?
Everything - except essential services - should be boycotted until all 700+ military bases in other countries are shut down. Kids are dying while men and women give their attention to a football.
Humans need to evolve some more.
For what it is worth:
I grew up playing football in the street. We played without pads and hostility. Usually, no one got hurt beyond skinned elbows and bruises.
Then, during my school years I played on the school teams. We wore pads and guys got hurt regular; concussions, blown knees, broken bones. Hostility was promoted.
When our school years were behind us, we played on Sunday mornings during the fall, no pads, no injuries, no hostility.
My points:
The hostility comes from organizational competitiveness. Governments.
The injuries come from the equipment. Weapons.
It's not the game. It's the modus operandi.
I watched, so you didn't have to.
The Packers offense designed every play to get a first down, all year long. They generally get 9 to 15. Down and yards to go doesn't matter, a play is a play. Third and twenty, Bam, first down, huddle up, try it again. They only ran the ball a handful of times and got a couple of first downs with those.
The Packer defense shut Pittsburgh down after it looked like Pittsburgh grabbed the momentum, forcing two punts, followed by a takeaway. The offense rose to the occasion and threw for three first downs, then scored.
Fergie stole the halftime show with a Guns and Roses cover, during which she performed the silky smoothest sensationally sensual slow dance riff as perfect compliment to the female Axle Rose audio mirror. She's a pro, an artist that knows and works at her trade.
The Peas sucked.
A decorated Marine took a bow.
The commercials featured violence, sex, immorality, and stupidity.
Tomarrow is Monday
and it supposed to snow again in southern Wisconsin.
Good point; our neighborhood games were rough sometimes but there was respect and a certain caution to not injure the other guy. If someone got out of line they were called on it by the group, from both sides; no refs, no coaches, no authorities, no sponsors, just having fun.
As in "Ecotopia", the world could resolve differences through competitive sports instead of by bloody wars.
"So long as they continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance. Left to themselves, like cattle turned loose upon the plains of Argentina, they had reverted to a style of life that appeared to be natural to them, a sort of ancestral pattern. They were born, they grew up in the gutters, they went to work at twelve, they passed through a brief blossoming period of beauty and sexual desire, they married at twenty, they were middle-aged at thirty, they died, for the most part, at sixty. Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbors, films, football, beer, and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult. A few agents of the Thought Police moved always among them, spreading false rumors and marking down and eliminating the few individuals who were judged capable of becoming dangerous; but no attempt was made to indoctrinate them with the ideology of the Party. It was not desirable that the proles should have a primitive patriotism which could be appealed to whenever it was necessary to make them accept longer working hours or shorter rations. And even when they became discontented, as they sometimes did, their discontent led nowhere, because, being without general ideas, they could only focus it on petty specific grievances. The larger evils invariable escaped their notice." George Orwell's description of the proles in "1984"
"the Thought Police"...I think the corporate media serves the purpose of a thought police today. Advertising, sit coms and 'the news' frame, or police, what many people allow themselves to think of as 'normal.'
Fergie Promises A Nipple-Free Super Bowl Half Time Show.
Ever since Janet Jackson flashed her decorated nipple during the Super Bowl halftime show in 2004,
organizers have banned women from performing at the game.
Banned women from Super Bowl for Seven years.
I remember at the time, most people didn't care and did not think it was a big deal and thought it was a mistake. However, this is not a public discourse matter. This is a Football matter and it fits neatly into one of the categories described in this article.
Pardon this tangent:
I wonder, with a low and unseemly curiosity comparable to being fascinated with a multi-car accident, whether there are various vulgar regional traditions associated with the Super Bowl.
In the Philly, PA, area, there is a hugely-popular abomination called the "Wing Bowl"-- an annual eating contest founded in 1993 by Philadelphia talk-radio hosts Angelo Cataldi and Al Morganti as a celebration of gluttony.
My Sicilian grandmother would've curled her lip and called these two "gavones".
Despite my Italian-Amerikan heritage and my own propensity for being a "big eater" (until hobbled by consequences to my health), I don't feel at all hypocritical for despising this dopey orgiastic obscenity.
I'm aware that "eating contests" have been a recreational staple of Simple Folk throughout history-- Amerikan history, anyway. I suppose they could be spun as a primitive tribute or celebration of raw animal appetite and "plenty", since they're predicated on having such an abundance of foodstuffs that food becomes an object of sport rather than something to satisfy hunger or an expression of culinary delight.
And I'm also aware that eating competitions have become a professionalized trash-sport. It's right down there with mud-wrestling, pigeon-shooting, and demolition derbies.
As a "principled" glutton and food-lover, I'm rankled by the abuse of food as a substance to ingest for sheer ingestion's sake, more often than not to simply vomit back up again. This fetishistic form of competition-mania is unredeemed debasedness.
It makes me crazy that the "Wing Bowl" is hyped, sponsored, and cheerfully reported upon in local media as Good, Clean Family Fun-- as if it were the equivalent of stadium "tailgating".
Again, I wonder if comparable ancillary Super Bowl diversions exist elsewhere in Amerika. I refuse to pretend to respect or countenance this one, even if troglodytic enthusiasts find such disdain off-putting. It's too offensive on too many levels.
The "Wing Bowl" is "bread and circuses" most fowl.
The tangent is pardoned indeed, and the pun - "most fowl!" :D
A football game is about 100 plus plays lasting 5 or 6 seconds. 10 or 11 minutes of activity lasting for hours.
Insane.
Sort of like chess?
We guys have to find ways to keep our minds occupied.
‘Honey, if you still love me,
Tell me just one thing;
Why do women play their games,
Over a three-minute thing?’
--THREE-MINUTE THING, Billy Vera
Yeah, mostly standing around. Compare to the Tour de France or even an amateur US cycling event or women's figure skating. Ball sports- extended boring third-rate over-paid wimps. Oh yes, fergot mountaineers and open-wheel car racers in the quartet of the best athletes.
Ever tried riding a bike 25mph for a minute?---MD
Misty--
About 35 years ago I knew a topless dancer who claimed Misty Dawn as her stage name. I hope life has been good to you after all these years. :-)
Seems that every year there's always these types of articles denigrating the superbowl, and those that essentially call those that pay attention to it "stupid" and use it to make assumptions about people. Being originally from Minneapolis, MN, these types of articles seem childish. I say that because Minneapolis has a long standing grassroots, green, anarchist, etc, etc tradition. People there are very far to the left compared to most US cities. I know that at least half of my anti-war, green, bicycle and public transit only, anarchist, organizing, hippie, pot smoking friends will be watching the game and in no way fit the stereotype. Yes, the superbowl is a distraction, but even people who don't generally watch TV enjoy a distraction from time to time. Denigrating sports is certainly not going to make anything easier for us on the left who have to deal with everyone who likes them. If you've ever actually gone to a game, it's easier to understand the fascination. The first thing that happens is that the atmosphere of the people is very open. People talk to each other without prejudice. Some people are there for the game, some people are there to chat, and most are there for both. But it is a place where suddenly large amounts of people are friendly to each other and where bias walks out the door. (Unless of course you're wearing the other team's color, but the people that do that know they are going to be joked with and are generally friendly.) I agree that the hype is bad, and that the masses are hypnotized by much of this, but that's a symptom of rampant consumerism, not a cause. But seriously, the left shouldn't be wasting it's energy on sports as a serious issue. Wouldn't it be nice if we used the olympics to solve world conflicts instead of war? And, for what it's worth at face value, the Green Bay Packers are owned by the 110,000 people who live in Green Bay and is actually structured as a non-profit organization. I'm sure those with prejudice will attempt to denigrate me for saying this. Me? I don't care if people are into it or not, I care more about what's happening in Egypt and other parts of the world right now.
I agree with much of what you say.
However, you need to keep in mind that professional sports in the US is to a large part funded by the public, so, it is a relevant political issue for the left; at the very least the public funding of professional sports, the public funding of very rich private individuals is a relevant political isssue.
I completely agree with you on that aspect of professional sports. The public financing of stadiums however, doesn't seem to be divided between left or right. Part of my note in highlighting Green Bay is that it was the non-profit owners that payed for their stadium. There's something they like to keep secret in professional sports. The tax breaks don't make much sense either, but alas, sadly, what's left of our democracy seems to work out that most are willing to let those things go, otherwise said teams will just go elsewhere where they can get tax breaks. Again, I think that's more of a reflection of the sad state of how much democracy they are willing to let us have and how people acquiesce to this and are fooled which happens in every aspect of our lives, and less to do with sports being a problem.
"The tax breaks don't make much sense either, but alas, sadly, what's left of our democracy seems to work out that most are willing to let those things go, otherwise said teams will just go elsewhere where they can get tax breaks. Again, I think that's more of a reflection of the sad state of how much democracy they are willing to let us have and how people acquiesce to this and are fooled which happens in every aspect of our lives, and less to do with sports being a problem."
Right. Most people are never given the chance on voting on whether they want to fund a stadium for rich private individuals. Or, in the rare instances where there is a vote, the people who are eligible to vote are carefully selected such that only those who benefit from the stadium are allowed to vote, as opposed to everyone who has to pay for it / who ends up paying for it. Or, if people vote no, well, there will be another vote, or worse, the no vote is just ignored and the stadium is built anyway with public money. And this is something else the article gets wrong. While the owners enter ownership already rich, that does not mean that they do not make lots of money from owning their teams, and publicly-funded stadiums are a significant source of profits for the owners.
I agree that it isn't necessarily a left vs right thing.
The Green Bay Packers, of course, are the one exception to the rule. Football for its entertainment value is fine. What I resent is the con game that professional-football franchises around the country along with their multinational-corporate pals play on taxpayers.
A few years ago the owner of the Denver Bronchos conned the public into building a magnificent new facility that he claimed was owned by the taxpayers. The taxpayers might have owned the facility, but most of the income generated from the facility and its concessions accrued to this conniving son of a bitch, who owned the team.
The press and all the city politicians got on the bandwagon promoting this charade. They whined in editorials in The Denver Post and The Rocky Mountain News that the beloved Bronchos would move out of the region unless tribute was paid to the egomaniac who struted the sidelines in his ridiculous, full-length fur coat. I'm sure that this "businessman" owner of the Broncos showered the lickspittle who did his bidding with plenty of cash to keep them in tow.
I'm fairly certain that there are other football franchises around the country that have used this questionable business model, including the one in Arlington, Texas where the contemplated spectacle will occur this afternoon.
Gawd bless AmeriKKKa!
Robert Lipstick's mind is full of ignorant cliches about athletes.
And I must even feel guilty about watching football.
I must feel guilty about almost everything I do .
Yet some of you still wonder why the general public gets tired the of the left.
Don't forget, the people of the US managed to elect a critical thinker in President Obama. That was a super accomplishment. I know I am being framed as an apologist here on CD, and that's fine. I believe in thinking the best of people. For the first time in my adult life I have a sense that diplomacy is once again at work and the US is stepping back from the knee-jerk bully tactics that I have always known. Yes, we have a way to go before we see the justice that we all believe in. But we activists for social justice just keep multiplying like fruit flies at this point, springing from the compost of the history of our honoured ancestors.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604823947#!/thesongwriterlounge
scroll down and listen to 'super bowl hero'