By NEMS Daily Journal
Former Cristil colleague praises his strong principles
The retirement of Jack Cristil is a major event in Mississippi broadcasting.
Jack and I have been friends since 1956, when he, the late Ed Cleary, and I made up the announcing staff of WELO-Tupelo.
Jack is a true, hard working professional who literally spends hours preparing for upcoming game broadcasts. At kick-off and tip-off, he is ready! He is a man with high principles who always presents himself as a gentleman, as I observed in the press box at Mississippi State University for many years. Finally, he is a devoted family and churchman. The membership of Temple B’nai Israel has benefited from his lay leadership for many years. Jack, Martha and I wish you well!
MSU alum rings his cowbell in honor of Cristil’s career
As a Mississippi State alumnus I was saddened to hear of Jack Cristil’s retirement from broadcasting.
As everyone knows, he is, and will forever be known as the “voice of the Bulldogs.” His tenure with MSU has spanned some of the most sweeping changes in our country’s history as well as athletics.
His knowledge and skill for giving the listener the feel of what’s happening in the game is legendary among his peers and fans. He called every game as he saw it; not taking sides, recognizing the efforts of both competitors, and giving both schools a well described picture of the contest and giving that trade mark “you can wrap this one in Maroon amp& White” line at the end if MSU was winning.In my lifetime I’ve never heard anyone other that Mr. Cristil call a MSU football or basketball game and I know that I’m not the only one.
I don’t know who will come in and try to replace him in the booth this fall but it’s hard to replace a legend.
They have some “big shoes” to fill. Here’s to you Jack.
God Bless you and thanks for the memories, and there are thousands upon thousands, of us ringing our cowbells in your honor!
Citation of dangerous dog list is an incorrect claim
I am responding to the letter written by Mr. Wayne Whipple and published on Feb. 23. This letter lists the HSUS, AVMA and the CDC as three organizations that “officially designate” pit bulls (as well as rottweilers and several other breeds) as dangerous breeds.
This is not true.
The list of the “Top 10 most dangerous dogs” that he claims these three organizations have assembled in fact does not exist. The list is most likely a reference to a research study published in the Journal of the AVMA in 2000, however many websites have published their own top ten lists, sometimes with different dog breeds, sometimes citing this study and other times not explaining why a dog made their list. About this study, the CDC writes: “This article lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years. It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic.” The AVMA adds, “Statistics on fatalities and injuries caused by dogs cannot be responsibly used to document the ‘dangerousness’ of a particular breed, relative to other breeds, for several reasons.”
The HSUS, the CDC and the AVMA do ot support the designation of any breed as dangerous. On the topic of breed specific legislation (i.e. breed bans), the HSUS states: “The HSUS opposes legislation aimed at eradicating or strictly regulating dogs based solely on their breed
for a number of reasons.” The AVMA Task Force on Canine Aggression in Human-Canine Interactions wrote, “Singling out 1 or 2 breeds for control can result in a false sense of accomplishment. Doing so ignores the true scope of the problem and will not result in a responsible approach to protecting a community’s citizens.”
Dog bite fatalities are tragic and are shocking in part because they are so rare. I hope that communities that are considering changes to local laws will consider alternatives to breed bans and as Mr. Whipple said be “proactive and not reactive.”
Knee-jerk reactions won’t help Mid-East situations
There are many things to consider before criticizing our apparent national policy of wait-and-see-before-criticizing-Middle Eastern-dictators.
Each time there is an uprising there is a seminal tilting point where American speech is appropriate.
Maybe the conservative American pundits are hoping that the president will speak too soon as he did in the William Gates affair that led to the beer summit.
No one, including America, President Obama or the world needs a teachable moment at this time. Things are rapidly changing from one to many communications from the older technology style of newspaper, radio, and television.
Now communication is many to many, through twitter, Facebook and many other newfangled means.
Going backwards to knee jerk reactions is not going to be accepted by Americans when it comes to President Obama.
Making stately proclamations in grandiose fashion like our last president’s proclamation of mission accomplished while perched atop an aircraft carrier would be inappropriate. Bold assertions while being crouched behind a big desk with the presidential seal out front with giant flags on both sides making him look small would not be accepted by our president.
The president and his advisers, through carefully thought out logic, will carefully craft an appropriate set of remarks at the right time. Critiques from pundits, right and left, are devoid of the knowledge, privileges or rights to fully grasp the flexing point.
I took my vote seriously while choosing Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
I would gratefully appreciate being able to look back one day and hear president Obama say, “I did it my way.”