Arkansas Travelers Unveil New Look...

[NJTank]

Bah!, this is ghastly! Robert E. Lee was an enemy combatant!

Maybe the Bengals will follow the trend and put Osama on thier new helmets.

Comparing Lee to Osama is just plain wrong. Lee was one of the best Generals in this country's history, and he was loyal. However his loyality was to his state Virginia, had Virginia sided with the North he would have been a Union General.

[winters in buffalo]

Comparing Lee to Osama is just plain wrong. Lee was one of the best Generals in this country's history, and he was loyal. However his loyality was to his state Virginia, had Virginia sided with the North he would have been a Union General.

How is it wrong?

Recognizing that Osama fights like a coward and Lee fought like a hero, Lee was still responsible for the deaths of more Americans, and he fought to protect a system that was every bit as disgraceful as that which al Qaeda is promotiong.

[CC97]

Yeah, I second the "thanks" to B-Rich for the info.

Something I heard a while back, but hadn't shared: apparently the Florida Marlins were considering calling themselves the "South Florida Marlins" originally. The person who told me this even has an official graphic file of it.

Nice collector's item.

(no, I don't have it!)

South Florida Marlins was registered on the USPTO in 1991.

[Joshawaggie]

the horse is gnawing on a baseball, and the dude looks like he is gonna beat him, with the bat. WHAT A GREAT LOGO.

[CDunn]

I really don't want to fan any flames, but drawing any sort of comparison between Osama and Lee is misinformed. Lee was offered the position of Commander of the entire Union Army, but could not accept because he couldn't see his home of Virginia and his Commonwealth brethren destroyed. Lee was not fighting for the institution of slavery. Just as very few Northerners were fighting against slavery, very few Southerners were fighting for it. Rather they were fighting for their homes, states rights, and the Jeffersonian ideal this country had started with. Lee is one of the greatest leaders and public figures this country has had.

I think it's kind of stupid to use Lee as a baseball logo, but I'm not offended by it.

[NJTank]

Excatly Lee was torn by his decision but chose to defend his state. If Lee was from Maryland he would have been regarded as a hero and possibly became President, and teh war would have been over allot sooner too, because of hwo great of General he was.

[MC Buffalo]

I agree that Lee shoud not be compared to Bin Laden in any way, but this does bring up an interesting thing......

The Confederate Flag was flown as a symbol of a "Country" which was created out of a Civil War and the wish to break from the United States. Once the war was over and the upheaval squashed don't you think that use of the Confederate Flag would have been made illegal (as part of an official state logo) or at least frowned upon.

I don't buy the argument that the "Stars and Bars" itself should be considered offensive to those of African descent, it wasn't the Confederate States of America who started the importing of Slaves. I think it's more an issue of this was a symbol of a group who wanted no part of the United States, why would the United States allow them to fly this symbol after the thousands of lives lost on both sides in the bloodiest war in the nations history?

I can't imagine a city in Germany using the Nazi Flag as part of their official identity. And if that is too strong of an example for some people how about the original Stars and Stripes being used by any local governments in England after the Revolutionary War.

Now, before I get a ton of hate e-mail from you proud Southerners.... Most of mhy kin on my Fathers side reside in North and South Carolina, I have no biased against the South at all, I just have alway found it interesting that US State Governments would use Confederate Identities as their official symbols.

I see no problem with Colleges (Ole Miss), Sports teams, the Dukes of Hazzard's Car or the like using any Confederate Images as their main identities....

[yh]

the horse is gnawing on a baseball,

If baseballs are referred to as "the ol' horsehide," wouldn't this be an act of cannibalism?

[TravsPR]

Listen guys...if you think that the "Horse jumping through A" logo is ugly...that's fine. You have a point. But the General Robert E. Lee thing should not be a problem. Listen, comparing General Lee to bin Laden, Hitler or Stalin is downright wrong and shows a lack of knowledge about the man.

He was an American hero during the Mexican War. General Lee was so respected that he was not tried as a traitor even after the Civil War. After the war, he served as president of Washington College(named for George Washington, and since renamed Washington and Lee University, a top liberal arts school in Virginia) where he uttered these words, "I think it the duty of every citizen in the present condition of the Country, to do all in his power to aid in the restoration of peace and harmony."

President Ford even restored General Lee's citizenship because of his respectful standing in American history. If you would like to read President Ford's remarks, which hail General Lee's character, please use the link provided. http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/750473.htm

Now these caps are meant only as a novelty cap (not for game action) because the Travs have a small connection to Lee through his horse, "Traveler". And I don't know if his horse was white or not...but again this is a novelty cap and not a political statement. We don't have a Confederate flag on the hat...in fact we sometimes wear uniforms with the American Flag on it.

The "Little Rock" on the jersey works because for over fifty years, the franchise was known as the Little Rock Travelers. For the past five years, we've been giving away replica caps with old "LR" logos on them. All we're doing is returning to our roots for a new look.

The "Oakland" thing wouldn't work for the Golden State Warriors because they were never called the Oakland Warriors. The Twins wouldn't take St. Paul or Minnepolis because they've always been called the Minnesota Twins. The Arkansas Travelers were called the Little Rock Travelers for many, many years...and that's why these new uniforms work. And they've received great feedback in Little Rock and amongst our fan base.

Just to add some perspective...I am fom Pittsburgh...I am a Democrat and I consider myself to be liberal when it comes to the topic of race and equal rights. I do not see these novelty caps as a reason to be offended. Be offended by the logo being poorly drawn...not the American hero riding the horse.

Phil Elson

Play-by-Play Announcer

Arkansas Travelers

phil@travs.com

[habsfannova]

Robert Lee is not Osama bin Laden.

He's also not an American hero. He's a CONFEDERATE hero, and what was the main reason the Confederates rebelled?

SLAVERY!

That pretty much puts it all in prespective for me....

Anyway, ugly hats.....

[Lucky1]

Habs You are 100% WRONG. The civil war started over the question of States Rights being more powerful than the Nation. Since the inception of the new Nation after the Revolution, it was formed as a union of individual governments, united. Slavery, a major ISSUE of the times, was NOT the cause. It became more important as the North found it was not winning the war.

[winters in buffalo]

I need to apologize and clarify my statements -

In my original post, I drew no direct lines of comparison between Lee and bin Laden. It was merely a sarcastic expression of my disapproval of the use of the Lee imagery. I could have picked any historical 'enemy' - Osama was just the most exaggerated and current-events related figure to use.

My second post, however, was intended to be inflammatory - responding to Tank's post that I was comparing the two, I wanted to show that it WAS possible to do so (although I only was able to come up with two, and they were admittedly very general).

I made my point and got a great reaction. It's good to see that everyone responded with facts rather than accusations and name-calling. Bonus points for a response from the team!

But, remember.... history is all a matter of perspective - and for every arguement that people have posted here defending Lee, there is someone out there with a parallel statement praising bin Laden. Scary, but true.

[paynomind]

The Confederate Flag was flown as a symbol of a "Country" which was created out of a Civil War and the wish to break from the United States. Once the war was over and the upheaval squashed don't you think that use of the Confederate Flag would have been made illegal (as part of an official state logo) or at least frowned upon.

Actually, this is a way too common misconception...

The "stars and bars" WAS the flag representing the confederacy, but "stars and bars" actually means this flag:

The "Southern Cross" was the original version of the "blue X with stars in it, on a field of red" but it was actually a square flag. It was carried by Confederate troops in the field which were the vast majority of forces under the confederacy.

The Stars represented the 11 states actually in the Confederacy plus Kentucky and Missouri. But only for BATTLE, not in the govenment. Seen here:

The rectangle version of the Southern Cross, that has become the idetifying label for those who want to display that they have hatred in their hearts, and want to piss off all those who don't, is the Confederate Navy Jack, only used DURING battle, AT SEA. You know it, but here it is anyway:

SO, don't let some ignorant racist tell you they display the Navy Jack for "heritage." If you want heritage, bastard, then display the actual flag of the confederacy.

Also, as you mention, the flags of the confederacy are the only flags in WORLD HISTORY of a squashed rebellion that were not outlawed outright. That was a display of freedom by the United States government, to make a point. They should have outlawed them while they had a chance.

Also, Robert E. Lee was an honorable human being, who believed strongly in State's Rights. His stae succeeded, so he fought for his state. He would have fought northern if Virginia has gone northern. Lee DID fight for the rebels, and maybe SHOULD have been treated as such, but at surrender, he was dedicated to making the country work. This is honorable. Unlike those who "hold on to" their desires to be rebeles again.

[habsfannova]

Habs You are 100% WRONG. The civil war started over the question of States Rights being more powerful than the Nation. Since the inception of the new Nation after the Revolution, it was formed as a union of individual governments, united. Slavery, a major ISSUE of the times, was NOT the cause. It became more important as the North found it was not winning the war.

Yeah, but what was the ONLY REASON they seperated and used the "States Rights" banner? SLAVERY! There was a tarriff spat with SC in the 1830's, which was the only other time a state threatened to secede. If you don't realize what slavery means, it was when Whites OWNED Blacks, some Indians, and the products of masters affairs and used them for labour! OWNED them!

Lee may have been an honourable man, but he fought for that sick, demented system.

The "States Rights" banner was also used to promote segregation. See Strom Thurmond and many other Southern Democrats/Dixiecrats....

[paynomind]

Oh, and thanks, "TravsPR" for your post. We are tough on logos around here, and downright VISCOUS to bad ones.

This is a bad one. Horrible.

We are offended as designers, humans, and living organisms with eyes.

[paynomind]

The "States Rights" banner was also used to promote segregation.  See Strom Thurmond and many other Southern Democrats/Dixiecrats....

You have it absolutely, completely backwards.

Thurmond, et al. drug up old State Rights battles that had legitimacy to latch their ignorant opinions to.

States Rights was the legitimate reason for war. Slavery was a smaller and smaller percentage of southerners leading up to the war. Truely, SOME folks fought the war to keep their slaves, but the vast majority was fighting to be their own state with their own laws and their own taxes, like the country was originally set up.

Slavery was a tag along issue.

[Grish]

Nice piece of history from the PR guy. Some things he forgot is Lee was a well respected individual in D.C during and after his time. There is much debate, with supporting documents, to suggest he was opposed to the action taken (the Civil War) but felt it was is duty to support those who elected him.

Lets not forget the reason why he was not tried as a traitor, it is because President Lincoln felt the south and its people had been punished enough and over rode congress, to help easy situation. Lee was a person that made extending an olive branch to easy, as well as helping heal wounds. Lincoln had Lee granted miltary parole at surrendor not allowing Lee to be tried by congress for treason. Lee's "Oath of Allegiance" paperwork was not found until the Ford admistration which then granted him his citzenship back.

Remember the south was not immediately reestablished as a part of the U.S.. Congress required sworn statments to allegiance of the U.S. before states, people etc where allowed back in. Many individuals where not immediately reinstated, laws where past with out representation from the south, hence the 13th , 14th and 15th admendments passing with little effort.

As for Little Rock on the jersey it is a nice tip to the past and I have always like teams that do such things.

[habsfannova]

The "States Rights" banner was also used to promote segregation. See Strom Thurmond and many other Southern Democrats/Dixiecrats....

You have it absolutely, completely backwards.

Thurmond, et al. drug up old State Rights battles that had legitimacy to latch their ignorant opinions to.

States Rights was the legitimate reason for war. Slavery was a smaller and smaller percentage of southerners leading up to the war. Truely, SOME folks fought the war to keep their slaves, but the vast majority was fighting to be their own state with their own laws and their own taxes, like the country was originally set up.

Slavery was a tag along issue.

You are right, I did reverse that statement accidentaly. Sorry for the mistake.

But, Slavery was a MAJOR reason the Southern states seceded.

[TruColor]

Since we're COMPLETELY off-topic...

There's this really interesting book I read a few years ago called "Guns of the South". The utterly implausable plot goes something like this: South African White Supremacists from the future get a time machine, and go back to Old South and arm the Confederate Army with semi-automatic machine guns. The South wins the Civil War, Lee becomes President, blah, blah, blah. However, the author (name escapes me now) really knew his Civil War history, and understood Lee's character to a T. It's actually a very good story, and actually paints Lee in a very good light.

If I remember correctly, Lee ends up ending slavery anyway.

[Brian in Boston]

The author you're referring to is Harry Turtledove. He's a master of the sub-genre of science fiction/fantasy known as "alternate historical fiction" or "alternate history".

Among his best "alternate histories" are:

* The aforementioned Guns of the South;

*How Few Remain, a novel dealing with a second "War Between the States". It is not a sequel to Guns of the South, as some readers erroneously report. Rather, it is a prelude - of sorts - to Turtledove's Great War series, as it takes place in the same imagined universe as the latter.

* The Great War series has been described as "World War I meets Civil War III", and features three volumes: American Front, Walk In Hell and Breakthroughs.

* The American Empire is another trilogy which focuses on the world in the aftermath of The Great War series. It is comprised of: Blood and Iron, The Center Cannot Hold and The Victorious Opposition.

* The Worldwar series deals with a scenario in which the Allied and Axis powers of World War II combine forces in an attempt to stave off an alien invasion. The seven volumes in the series are Worldwar: In the Balance, Worldwar: Tilting the Balance, Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance, Worldwar: Striking the Balance, Colonization: Second Contact, Colonization: Down to Earth and Colonization: Aftershocks.

* Ruled Brittania deals with a 16th-century Europe in which a successful Spanish Armada deposed Queen Elizabeth I from the British throne, replacing her with Queen Isabella. Spanish forces try to maintain the new status quo, while British operatives - including William Shakespeare - plot to overthrow their Spanish overlords.

* In the Presence of Mine Enemies is the story of an enclave of Jews living a "closeted" lifestyle in the Germanic Empire of Europe which follows the Nazis' triumph in World War II.

* The Two Georges (written along with actor Richard Dreyfus) looks at the modern world which developed out of an agreement forged in the 1760s between King George III and George Washington. The result: a quasi-independent North American Union within the British Empire.

Brian in Boston