I think just about all of the mascots need explanations. That’s why I provided my own :)

And no you;re not too sensitive– that seems to be the complaint for every city’s residents, every two years

Thanks for visiting the Metroblog.

My major objection to the 2010 mascots is that they require explaining to everyone who sees them for the first time.

The marshmallow twins actually are worse, but this only proves that Olympic Comittees are incapable of learning from the lessons of history.

The 2010 critters seem cynical and exploitive, which of course makes them fair representatives for VANOC.

Animals would be a good solution: It’s not like our woods aren’t crawling with cute fauna. Heck, the fourth “sidekick” mascot is a Vancouver Island Marmot (wait–Vancouver isn’t on Vancouver Island–Shuttup!).

So would it be such a pain to have “Oly” the Otter and his buddies “Van” the Bighorn sheep and “Tena” the whodaheckcares?

Instead, they took semi-sacred spirit beasts and turned them into Hello Kitty. Instead of somehow being inclusive of native culture they seem insulting to me.

Of course, the whole idea of Vancouver residents having to put up with and pay for this fiasco so that Microsoft execs can pay $1200 a seat for the gold medal hockey round seems insulting to me. Maybe I’m just too sensitive.