It was the revered US sociologist, ambassador and 18 year Senator, Daniel Moynihan who said "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts."jaxons wrote:Nobody has to like what I say, it is the facts.
If I am so far off the mark why wasn't he given a contract extension after he was told he was getting one?
The board and executive are well aware of what is going on I assure you.
Modern media and communications have reduced the word "fact" to a malleable misappropriation, making it adaptable to perspectives and opinions offered by those without disinterested objectivity. Witness the recent performances of the nation's latest Environment Minister, who 2 decades ago won his PhD from a prestigious US institution for his thesis on the inviolability of the worth of pricing carbon. Now he consults Wikipedia for his evidence to deny his researched stance of 2 decades back, and quotes this source as fact. It is only the corroboration of the independent voice, sustained by the application of accepted rational process, that can withstand the skepticism of the truly inquisitive.
There are some who choose to peddle the opinions of some as fact, selectively carving off simplistic strands of tales from the disaffected and dressing them up as irrefutable. Rhetoric is a design, a construct, that has become the method of choice of the latter day commentariat.
Narrow perspectives become fuel to propel agendas. Egoists become enfranchised by the bestowing of privilege, believing themselves to have been awarded by virtue of some nebulous superiority.
Belief of whatsoever transmogrifies into evangelical zeal, a belief in something beyond actual verification, yet something that morphs into reality for some.
Meanwhile, it is the presence of those who hold alternative views that highlights, so graphically, the utter misuse of the word "fact".
That's a roundabout way of suggesting Tony74's opinion differs from yours, which highlights both the nature of your proclamations, and that there exists, within roughly the same theatre, a different set of "facts" to those you put forward as unarguable.
You wax and wane on the crimes against the greater club good of Watters. Yet, there exists many who suggest this is not correct. You hint at a superior vantage point, yet I now know some of those with an entirely adversarial view are very well placed. Competing claims of complete fact, based on the privilege of some proximity to the inside, abound.
So, the not so privileged are left with a choice. Tag along with limited or expressed views or take in a broader view by listening to those with their mitts on the tiller, and conclude what makes sense.
You see, your rhetorical question about 'if I'm wrong why didn't he get a contract extension after he'd been told he'd get one?' is more than countered by the statements of the new president. What he said is entirely plausible, very reasonable and damn difficult to refute as untrue. Further, I would hope and trust the board are as aware as you suggest. Yet, the position remains unaltered.
An unvested associate relayed the remarks of the newly admitted Billy Longer in an interview this afternoon. By that relating the Longer kiddie seems to have been heaping high praise on the role the current coach played in convincing the young man to join the merry band of men at Seaford. I do not claim such information as anything beyond interesting. I do claim it is a suggestion of the current coach's ongoing primary involvement in our immediate future performance. What's more, I interpret such news as suggestive of a welcome coherence across the various areas of responsibility within the footy club.
I'm told Longer said he had Watters on "speed dial" and that had been the case in the lead up to his arrival on the list. From that I take considerable heart. My associate also commented on Longer seeming to be a bright lad. That, too, I like.
We will see what will be.
