News and Notes: April 24, 2012

Well, let’s see what we have here …

  • Guess who has a new Facebook Group?  You knew she wouldn’t be away for long.
  • Someone still hears the sounds of battle as she transforms total casualties into a count of battle dead:  “When the Battle of Resaca takes place, I can hear the cannons and guns at my house.”  I thought the battle took place back in 1864.  Apparently it’s a recurring feature, much like “The Big Bang Theory.”
  • And congratulations to the Phoenix Coyotes, who finally won a playoff series.  Next round we’ll have some great hockey between Nashville and Phoenix, both known as hockey hotbeds.  Meanwhile, should the Ottawa Senators fail again to close out the New York Rangers in the first hockey game seven played at Madison Square Garden since the night of June 14, 1994 … and I’m sure you know what happened that night … once more there will be no Canadian team eligible to win the Stanley Cup.  Since them several teams located in the former Confederacy have won the Stanley Cup (Dallas, Tampa Bay, Carolina), for those looking for a Civil War hook.

20 thoughts on “News and Notes: April 24, 2012

  1. Robert Baker April 24, 2012 / 3:53 pm

    I was starting miss dear ol’ Connie. She doesn’t post my comments anymore. I feared the worst.

  2. Brad April 24, 2012 / 7:59 pm

    A strange lot. Must have forgotten to take their anti paranoia meds.

    Go Rangers!

    • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 11:09 am

      The Rangers face quite a challenge. Losing in the first round to an 8th seed would not be acceptable on Broadway.

      • John Foskett April 25, 2012 / 12:43 pm

        There also comes a point when consistently making your forwards “eat rubber” has an impact. Some times I think it’s Tortorella’s version of Hood’s “discplining assault” at Frankllin.

        • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 1:04 pm

          Torts used to be an assistant for the Coyotes back in the old days.

      • Brad April 25, 2012 / 12:44 pm

        Yes, that would be bad but they have Hagelin back so we’ll see.

        • John Foskett April 26, 2012 / 10:19 am

          Which is another reason why I can’t root for NYR – they tolerate Wolverines. (And Ottawa has a real nice PK guy in no. 22)..

  3. John Foskett April 25, 2012 / 6:53 am

    Actually, Nashville’s got a pretty decent following. As for Bettman’s Desert Debacle, well….. Connie’s like somebody who tries to avoid the law by constantly changing addresses. If this keeps her from perpetuating Confederate Fiction in more visible forums, it’s a good thing.

    • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 11:06 am

      Much of the sad saga of the Coyotes can be traced to the location of the Glendale facility. When the team was in downtown Phoenix, it drew. It would have drawn had it moved where it was supposed to move … Scottsdale.

      Connie’s just Connie. That she thinks she’s mounting a successful defense of Confederate heritage simply highlights the failure of some Confederate heritage advocates to set forth a compelling case that defines Confederate heritage so that a broader public would honor it. She admits that Confederate heritage advocates are on the defensive. At times they may hold a position for a while, but they don’t retake ground and often find themselves giving it up.

      She has fifteen members in her group. None of them have noticed her inability to execute a proper sentence in the group’s charter: “Incensed about the attacks on the South, it’s people, heritage and culture?” I found even more amusing a member’s claim that “sometimes it JUST feels good to smack them around! There are more people lurking in on an exchange than just those directly involved in it. I like to play to that audience and realise that the Ass I’m debating is a bigot and will never admit their bigotry. It’s the audience that I am hopefully entertaining or getting to think for themselves when i challenge the ‘Perfessers’.” Never heard of the guy. Never saw him post here. Wonder if he likes smacking other people around. Maybe he’s listening to the cannons fire away at the battle of Resaca.

      • John Foskett April 25, 2012 / 12:40 pm

        I agree that there’s some merit to the arena location angle but the other problem is the lack of a larger committed hockey base. Some of the “southern” franchises can put fannies in the seats (see: Carolina, Tampa in an up year) but because they’re not “hockey country” it’s tough to get all of the “ancillaries”.There’s a heavy dependance on northern transplants. An Ontario university (may have been York, but I could be wrong) did a complex market study a few years ago which exposed the fragility of franchises located where a too-large portion of the base can be found inside the arena on game nights. Not surprisingly there’s a strong case that both Vancouver and Toronto/Southern Ontario can each support at least another money-making franchise. Bettmann, however, dug his knuckles in against Balsillie buying the Phoenix franchise and moving it to southern Ontario. Of course, there are also some residual issues because the franchise originally was purloined from Winnipeg. .

        • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 1:00 pm

          There’s a significant transplant base here from the Midwest, although that does not always lead to the shifting of fan allegiances (I remain attached to the Islanders, but the remainder of the family wears Coyotes gear when the teams play here). The fan base issue is especially visible when Detroit or Chicago play here. But that’s a Phoenix problem: of the four pro teams here, only the Suns have a true fan base. There are a good number of Dallas (and even Giants) fans at Cardinals games; since the early 2000s the Diamondbacks have found their biggest crowds for a midseason game involve the Yankees (indeed, they based their entire ticket marketing campaign two years ago around the three games with the Yankees).

          I think Quebec and the greater Toronto area can support another team. Vancouver is a shakier proposition, because another team doubles the chance for destructive behavior. 🙂 The Maple Leafs appear to be the obstacle to expansion into Hamilton, as was Balsillie’s behavior with Bettman.

          Phoenix was on the NHL radar before the Jets moved here. Both Edmonton and Quebec talked about relocating here. The Jets were earmarked for Minnesota at first; only when that fell through did Bettman tug on his NBA ties with Jerry Colangelo, who saw another 41 games worth of parking fees. The Coyotes as tenants in Phoenix could draw, but they lacked the revenue streams to make money. Had they gone to Scottsdale, where much of the fan base is located (East Valley), and been the centerpiece of a yuppie dining and entertainment hub, they would have made it easily. There have been serious ownership issues and the Gretzky era was simply a disaster. Now the disaster is the Glendale City Council, which has bobbled ownership inquiries. The bankruptcy saga really took a chunk out of things, as did the lockout.

          The point is that hockey could work here, but not the way it’s been handled.

          • John Foskett April 26, 2012 / 10:18 am

            Those are all good points. One of the problems highlighted by the study was the “tentacles” issue – how far out does the hockey base reach for support of local programs, media, etc. Like it or not, that’s a tougher sell in places where hockey has some of the elements of being a “freak show” – weather in the 70’s, littered with year-round golf courses, lots of retirees, etc. Not saying it;s impossible but just that it’s a tough climb. Dallas has had to retrench some and not due only to ownership issues. And Dallas has a deeper pro hockey history than Phoenix. The Nords were talking about relocating anywhere that the La Belle Province income tax wouldn’t apply and Pockington was talking about relocating anywhere that wouldn’t have hit squads looking for him after he cut no. 99 loose.

      • Robert Baker April 25, 2012 / 12:46 pm

        Brooks, I’m going to the Resaca Reenactment….lol

      • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 1:29 pm

        Note: it didn’t take very long for Connie to correct her mistake. She visits a lot.

  4. Forester April 25, 2012 / 12:55 pm

    I’m irritated that her groups are so closed. I tried to join once, she briefly friended me than deleted me without allowing me to join the discussions. I think my pro-feminist and gay-rights postings on Facebook scared her away or something.

    A place to discuss Confederate heritage-related topics is not a bad thing, but it should be more open to the public. It’s not even like I came in and talked smack, I just never got into their frat in the first place. Petty, petty.

    • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 1:09 pm

      The point to me is that Connie’s not really interested in discussing Confederate heritage. Nor is she interested (or, so far as I can see, able) to promote it. She’s a more rabid version of the nonsense I see in about half of the postings at the SHPG. She embraces a perspective of victimization, much as her other interests focus on false accusations. That’s the common theme.

      I think there’s much room for a sound and informed discussion about Confederate history as well as a place where one could discuss the meanings and implications of Confederate heritage. Neither of these locations fit the bill.

      • Forester April 25, 2012 / 2:07 pm

        Now that she has the new Backsass site on Facebook, she needs to put more substance into her blogs and less debate. No offense, but I don’t think Crossroads and Civil War Memory really get enough readers to warrent a whole rebuttal website. Blogs are fun, but ultimately a drop in the scholarly bucket. If she were rebutting published BOOKS, that would be a whole different animal. As it is, “blog wars” remind me of my teen years on MySpace.com (anyone remember that site?).

        Though I’m contributing to blog wars right now, aren’t I? Funny how things like Connie generate more attention than actual Civil War scholarship. My favorite blog entry this week was actually Kevin’s crater letter, but this is what I stopped to talk about. I feel, so, like …. totally, like, teenage. :_(

        • Brooks D. Simpson April 25, 2012 / 3:02 pm

          Well, my hit count suggests that perhaps I get more readers than one might expect. And, as I’ve suggested before, controversy pushes that up a bit more. But while Kevin and I address a number of issues, Connie’s blog is simply an attack-the-other-bloggers-and-critics blog. Backsass will follow the same model (so you must now count two rebuttal websites … a blog and a FB group). I can also assure you that she spends a great deal of time preparing rebuttals that for some reason or other go direct to spam on my blog. Those folks who want to read what she has to say can venture to her rapidly-multiplying online outlets. If it was all about the hits, I would let her in, and let the entire blog be swamped by those exchanges. Never let an amusement become a distraction.

          Your point about relative attention reminds me that the very professional historians who decried any attention to thinks they deemed irrelevant or distracting tend to post in response to those very things. I usually get more meaningful responses from those professional historians who are not in academic positions. In turn I enjoy pointing people to their work, as in the fine discussion of the Barlow-Gordon incident by Scott Hartwig at the NPS Gettysburg blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s