In the ongoing saga of 'we are in trouble' (refer earlier pedantic ramblings elsewhere on this site) I think the decline of civilization is coming in spades. First it was the desire to excel - win - be ahead of the pack etc.
Now its retarding to falling bridges, crumbling airports, people shooting other people (more than before) and stripped titles.
Most recently some federation of something or another decided to strip a cycling hero (more on use of this hackneyed term later) of his by contesting that he used performance enhancing drugs to aid in achieving them in the first place (no pun). In fact I should say he took them to come in the first place (now that should be clear as mud).
But wait - what is with the redundant descriptor 'performance enhancing'? What other types of drugs do you think an athlete would take before hitting the road in the Alps? Viagra?
I suppose if he was multitasking then yes but there is no evidence of that impropriety according to this body of knowledge is there?
May be some take Aspirin? But not Lunesta?
I mean of course if he took anything it was to be healthy for the gruelling ride.
While all the money makers made their money in promoting baggage to TV shows to watches to world press having a field (make that mountain) day at their employers' expense, and other paraphernalia getting peddled (no pun) I am not sure what the stripping really does.
This is Tiger all over again. So the retarding reference earlier is not in the actual 'stripping of' but rather in the farce that the entire sports marketing has come to be.
What would be funny is if after stripping someone of their medal the show promoter channels played the entire trip in rewind mode on prime time (back to the starting block).
Here is another essay on the subject of first names. As in birth names. Or names provided to an offspring at birth. While the developed world tends to shy away from the exotic like Refrigerator or Coca Cola for their new production there is a plethora of Jims and Johns and Bobs or Robs. Speaking of which I do not think there is a categoric decision point at the time of birth if a child will be hereafter called as Bob. I mean have not yet met a toddler called Bob or Rob for that matter. At some point though the parental instinct to mouth out multiple syllables runs out and they switch from calling the crawler Robert to simply Robbie to Rob. Now speaking of - it is strange that the name sounds like something you would not want Rob to do - i.e. Rob anyone. Then why call someone that? After all Rob Peter to Pay Paul is not exactly a maxim to live a young life? Is it? Perhaps Peter or Paul might want to have a say in it? Then there is this matter of going to the John. Why degrad...
That last suggestion would give new meaning to the word Flashback!
ReplyDelete