<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Future Shock Schlock Smock</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/</link>
	<description>The Obsessive Study Of Athletics Aesthetics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:25:38 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: RS Rogers</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-149141</link>
		<dc:creator>RS Rogers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-149141</guid>
		<description>&lt;/em&gt;Mike is right in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148655&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this comment&lt;/a&gt;. It is &lt;strong&gt;not&lt;/strong&gt; correct to wear the flag reversed on your right sleeve, unless you are a member of the United States Army. The Army issued a specific regulation some years back reversing the orientation of right-shoulder flags so that it appears to &quot;fly&quot; as if from a flagpole advancing toward the enemy. For the rest of us, the Flag Code is the guide to civilian flag etiquette, and the Flag Code is quite clear that the flag should always be shown with the union (the stars) on the viewer&#039;s left.

Also, it&#039;s worth noting that every flag etiquette authority agrees that, under the Flag Code, it is always improper to wear flag patches on athletic uniforms. The Flag Code&#039;s definition of &quot;flag&quot; is quite broad; if a reasonable observer would recognize the image in question as a flag, or as part of a flag, then it&#039;s a flag. We would all recognize a flag patch as a flag, so it is a flag subject to the specific ban on use on athletic uniforms as well as the more general ban on using the flag &quot;in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike is right in <a href="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148655" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">this comment</a>. It is <strong>not</strong> correct to wear the flag reversed on your right sleeve, unless you are a member of the United States Army. The Army issued a specific regulation some years back reversing the orientation of right-shoulder flags so that it appears to &#8220;fly&#8221; as if from a flagpole advancing toward the enemy. For the rest of us, the Flag Code is the guide to civilian flag etiquette, and the Flag Code is quite clear that the flag should always be shown with the union (the stars) on the viewer&#8217;s left.</p>
<p>Also, it&#8217;s worth noting that every flag etiquette authority agrees that, under the Flag Code, it is always improper to wear flag patches on athletic uniforms. The Flag Code&#8217;s definition of &#8220;flag&#8221; is quite broad; if a reasonable observer would recognize the image in question as a flag, or as part of a flag, then it&#8217;s a flag. We would all recognize a flag patch as a flag, so it is a flag subject to the specific ban on use on athletic uniforms as well as the more general ban on using the flag &#8220;in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zach</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-149053</link>
		<dc:creator>zach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 03:38:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-149053</guid>
		<description>So...it&#039;s okay for Marc Ecko to deface of piece of American history like that?  If Baseball is the national past time, why isn&#039;t it treated as a piece of national historical monument, and protected as such.

Say what you will, but you have no evidence, just damning speculation, that Bonds used steroids, steroids that weren&#039;t banned btw.

I&#039;ll just stop, as anyone outside of California will never listen to reason on the matter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So&#8230;it&#8217;s okay for Marc Ecko to deface of piece of American history like that?  If Baseball is the national past time, why isn&#8217;t it treated as a piece of national historical monument, and protected as such.</p>
<p>Say what you will, but you have no evidence, just damning speculation, that Bonds used steroids, steroids that weren&#8217;t banned btw.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll just stop, as anyone outside of California will never listen to reason on the matter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148655</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148655</guid>
		<description>I think you may be wrong about the positioning of the flag patches.  

The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.usflag.org/uscode36.html#175&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;US Flag Code&lt;/a&gt; in §175(i) states &quot;When displayed either horizontally or vertically against a wall, the union &lt;em&gt;(the blue field)&lt;/em&gt; should be uppermost and to the flag&#039;s own right, that is, to the observer&#039;s left. When displayed in a window, the flag should be displayed in the same way, with the union or blue field to the left of the observer in the street.&quot;

So, based on this, the AFA soccer team IS right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you may be wrong about the positioning of the flag patches.  </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.usflag.org/uscode36.html#175" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">US Flag Code</a> in §175(i) states &#8220;When displayed either horizontally or vertically against a wall, the union <em>(the blue field)</em> should be uppermost and to the flag&#8217;s own right, that is, to the observer&#8217;s left. When displayed in a window, the flag should be displayed in the same way, with the union or blue field to the left of the observer in the street.&#8221;</p>
<p>So, based on this, the AFA soccer team IS right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148650</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:04:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148650</guid>
		<description>[quote comment=&quot;148426&quot;]&lt;em&gt;Paydirt, NOT COOL &lt;/em&gt;
I wasn&#039;t trying &quot;to be cool&quot;. If people are looking for pics of men dressed in drag, they&#039;d like that pic.[/quote]

I&#039;m not one for personal insults, but...

You know, some of us read this blog at work.  Nice job, jerkass.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="quoter_comment_header">paydirt said:</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148426"><p>
<em>Paydirt, NOT COOL </em><br />
I wasn&#8217;t trying &#8220;to be cool&#8221;. If people are looking for pics of men dressed in drag, they&#8217;d like that pic.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;m not one for personal insults, but&#8230;</p>
<p>You know, some of us read this blog at work.  Nice job, jerkass.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jamie k.</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148647</link>
		<dc:creator>jamie k.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148647</guid>
		<description>THANK YOU PAUL!!!

as a minor, i dont need or want to see that kind of filthy crap.


thank you for banning him!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THANK YOU PAUL!!!</p>
<p>as a minor, i dont need or want to see that kind of filthy crap.</p>
<p>thank you for banning him!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lemonverbena</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148596</link>
		<dc:creator>lemonverbena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:55:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148596</guid>
		<description>[quote comment=&quot;148262&quot;]I&#039;m surprised by the lack of chatter about the Royals jersey and the raffle. Was I wrong in thinking it was a pretty big deal?[/quote]

if it was one of those M&#039;s rollerball helmets I&#039;d be freaking out, but the Royals suck and that yellow blouse is a nightmare.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="quoter_comment_header">Paul Lukas said:</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148262"><p>
I&#8217;m surprised by the lack of chatter about the Royals jersey and the raffle. Was I wrong in thinking it was a pretty big deal?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>if it was one of those M&#8217;s rollerball helmets I&#8217;d be freaking out, but the Royals suck and that yellow blouse is a nightmare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terri</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148582</link>
		<dc:creator>Terri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148582</guid>
		<description>[quote comment=&quot;148580&quot;]I don&#039;t have a picture, but didn&#039;&#039;t one of those rookie hazing dress-ups end up saving that one Indians pitcher who was shot on the team bus? He was wearing cheerleader boots and it helped to slow down/stop the bullet.

do I remember this right?[/quote]



Yeah, you&#039;re right, check out post 190</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="quoter_comment_header">odessasteps said:</p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148580"><p>
I don&#8217;t have a picture, but didn&#8221;t one of those rookie hazing dress-ups end up saving that one Indians pitcher who was shot on the team bus? He was wearing cheerleader boots and it helped to slow down/stop the bullet.</p>
<p>do I remember this right?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yeah, you&#8217;re right, check out post 190</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SoCalPVguy</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148581</link>
		<dc:creator>SoCalPVguy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148581</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know if you have seen this yet, but Iowa State has &quot;stolen&quot; the USC uniform for 2008, thus joining other mid-western copycats Minnesota who has stolen the So Cal look for years...

Follow the links to home and away shots...

http://www.cyclones.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10700&amp;ATCLID=1249144</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know if you have seen this yet, but Iowa State has &#8220;stolen&#8221; the USC uniform for 2008, thus joining other mid-western copycats Minnesota who has stolen the So Cal look for years&#8230;</p>
<p>Follow the links to home and away shots&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cyclones.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10700&amp;ATCLID=1249144" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a><a href='http://www.cyclones.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10700&amp;ATCLID=1249144' target="_blank">http://www.cyclones....</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: odessasteps</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148580</link>
		<dc:creator>odessasteps</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148580</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t have a picture, but didn&#039;&#039;t one of those rookie hazing dress-ups end up saving that one Indians pitcher who was shot on the team bus? He was wearing cheerleader boots and it helped to slow down/stop the bullet. 

do I remember this right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t have a picture, but didn&#8221;t one of those rookie hazing dress-ups end up saving that one Indians pitcher who was shot on the team bus? He was wearing cheerleader boots and it helped to slow down/stop the bullet. </p>
<p>do I remember this right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Lukas</title>
		<link>http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2007/09/26/future-shock-schlock-smock/#comment-148575</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Lukas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 03:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.uniwatchblog.com/?p=652#comment-148575</guid>
		<description>I step out for a few hours and look what happens. Jeez, people....

Was it wrong for someone to post a link to a gay porn photo? Yes.

Have I now blocked him from the site? Yes.

But should everyone have reacted a lot more calmly, or not at all? YES. For the umpteenth time, people: Just because a flasher opens his raincoat in front of you doesn&#039;t mean you have to respond -- just keep walkin&#039;.

And at the end of the day, it&#039;s just two naked bodies. No, it didn&#039;t belong here, but whatever -- we&#039;ve all seen much worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I step out for a few hours and look what happens. Jeez, people&#8230;.</p>
<p>Was it wrong for someone to post a link to a gay porn photo? Yes.</p>
<p>Have I now blocked him from the site? Yes.</p>
<p>But should everyone have reacted a lot more calmly, or not at all? YES. For the umpteenth time, people: Just because a flasher opens his raincoat in front of you doesn&#8217;t mean you have to respond &#8212; just keep walkin&#8217;.</p>
<p>And at the end of the day, it&#8217;s just two naked bodies. No, it didn&#8217;t belong here, but whatever &#8212; we&#8217;ve all seen much worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
