U.S. fundraising mittens made in China
The outside of the mittens says “Go USA.” The insides says “Made in China.”
Less than two years after being criticized for having the U.S. Olympic team's uniforms made in China, the U.S. Olympic Committee has another wardrobe malfunction on its hands.
The red-white-and-blue mittens it's selling to raise funds for winter athletes were produced in China.
It says so right on the tag on the inside.
The USOC is charging $14 a pair for the blue gloves that have the word “Go” embroidered in red on the left mitten and “USA” on the right. Also part of that left mitten is the tag, which says the gloves are “100% acrylic,” “One Size Fits Most” and “Made in China.”
USOC spokesman Patrick Sandusky said the “official” mittens being worn by the athletes at the opening ceremony are made in America. They're also available to the public for $98 a pair on the Ralph Lauren website.
But the federation was going for a lower price point for its fundraiser. With the games more than a month away, it has raised $500,000 from the mitten sales.
“We wanted to create a fundraising opportunity where almost anyone could support Team USA,” Sandusky said.
The USOC has tried to be extra careful about where its goods are manufactured since running into trouble when news broke that its 2012 team uniforms were produced in China. Congressmen from both parties piled onto the PR gaffe, with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., saying, “I think they should take all the uniforms, put them in a big pile and burn them, and start all over again.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Planned Parenthood changes fetal-tissue reimbursement policy
- Playboy opts for a touch of modesty, will stop running nude photos
- Dry prairie states contend with wildfires
- Winter storm names afoot for 4th season
- Judge: Takeover of Youngstown City Schools legal
- 19-year-old fatally beaten in church, brother severely injured
- Psychologists who devised CIA interrogation techniques sued
- Ex-coal CEO Blankenship talks safety in secretly recorded calls
- Propane, oil prices expected to be lower over winter
- Clinton email server was connected to Internet in ways that made it more vulnerable to hackers, documents show
- Benghazi panel dismissal dispute simmers as Clinton testimony nears