PDA

View Full Version : The Tiger Woods comment



TerribleT
01-10-2008, 11:43 AM
I was just reading a story about a comment made by a Golf Channel anchor, and I'm wondering what other feel about this sort of thing. We saw it with Don Imus, and we've seen these kinds of things where a comment gets made, with no real racism intended, IMHO, and then that jerkoff Sharpton does his race-bating thing. I personally really dislike Sharpton, Jackson, and all of their kind. What are your thoughts?

If you're not up on the story here's a link...

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/news?slug=ap-golfchannel-anchor&prov=ap&type=lgns

Mike Beck
01-10-2008, 12:04 PM
this country is fucking crazy, man. you can't say a goddamn thing anymore. it's all taken out of context. If she said that about a white golfer, nobody would say shit. Sharpton is an asshole. He's entertaining, but he throws up the racism flag over everything and anything. freedom of speech my ass. why is everyone so effing sensitive nowadays? you can't say someone should be lynched in a humorous way? nappy headed hoes is one thing (and i don't even think that's that bad), but this is just crazy. was tiger offended? because i bet he wasn't. and i bet the rutgers girls weren't losing sleep over imus's comment. i don't like the dude anyway, but what they did to him was too much. Yet bill o'reilly is still on the air for being a creepy scumbag. i don't get it.

Matt
01-10-2008, 12:40 PM
I totally agree, except about Bill...he's my father! :cry:

Ruthful
01-10-2008, 02:39 PM
It's the very rare golf pundit who can deploy lynching humor efficaciously.

You'd want to leave that up to someone like Dick Gregory or Lenny Bruce, n'est-ce pas?

TerribleT
01-11-2008, 06:13 AM
A bit more info...

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/news?slug=txwoodsresponse&prov=st&type=lgns


Woods' agent, Mark Steinberg, issued a statement Tuesday indicating that the matter has been blown out of proportion. "This story is a non-issue," he noted. "Tiger and Kelly are friends and Tiger has a great deal of respect for Kelly. Regardless of the choice of words used we know unequivocally that there was no ill-intent in her comments. This story is a non-issue in our eyes. Case closed."

I think/wish/hope that the golf channel will now go tell that fucking race bater Sharpton to piss up a rope, and fuck off, so that we may at some point end his reign of terror. I'm so fucking tired of this braying jackass taking someone's comment out of context, blowing it way out of proportion, and using it to forward his agenda.

And thank you Tiger, my already high esteem for you just jumped a bunch.

ZoNeSeeK
01-13-2008, 05:10 PM
I think its the product of an over-litigous society, you know, people wanting to blame anyone and everyone for their problems, refusing to take responsibility (suing macdonalds over hot fucking coffee, for instance) - it sets a trend from the courts basically saying (via their decisions) that "no, you dont have any personal responsibility, you are all idiots, eveyrthing needs to be swathed in cotton wool otherwise you'll die, so sue away!".

Then what happens is media and workplaces are so fucking terrified of their stupid employees stabbing their left fucking eye out with a pencil and then deciding that there wasn't a warning label about the possibility of this happening and their workplace didnt do enough to prevent it, so they sue them and the judicial factor sits their, dick in hand and having a good old fucking wank while they pour over minutae of law and decree that Yes, Lack Of Warning Label About Pencil Sharpness Contributed To Fuckwit Poking Self In Eye Therefore Someone Else Is Culpable. The absurd amount of political corectedness and censorship going on in the media is a version of this same mentality.

Blame the damn courts for allowing this sort of shit to happen. Negligence on the part of a service provider or company is a serious issue and the protection of negligence laws for regular people is being undermined by the amount of tossers trying to cash in because of their own stupidity.

But until the courts actually start throwing absurd cases out, companies will continue to overreact to the slightest thing to protect themselves financially. If any black person viewing the Golf show decided to take it to a lawyer, the company would have to spend thousands just responding to the law suit and defending itself, and I highly doubt any court would turn around and decree that the plaintif has to pay the companies court and legal fees.

Maybe if they did that more fucking often people wouldnt run to lawyers everytime they had a damn cry.

TerribleT
01-13-2008, 05:48 PM
I think its the product of an over-litigous society, you know, people wanting to blame anyone and everyone for their problems, refusing to take responsibility (suing macdonalds over hot fucking coffee, for instance) - it sets a trend from the courts basically saying (via their decisions) that "no, you dont have any personal responsibility, you are all idiots, eveyrthing needs to be swathed in cotton wool otherwise you'll die, so sue away!".

Then what happens is media and workplaces are so fucking terrified of their stupid employees stabbing their left fucking eye out with a pencil and then deciding that there wasn't a warning label about the possibility of this happening and their workplace didnt do enough to prevent it, so they sue them and the judicial factor sits their, dick in hand and having a good old fucking wank while they pour over minutae of law and decree that Yes, Lack Of Warning Label About Pencil Sharpness Contributed To Fuckwit Poking Self In Eye Therefore Someone Else Is Culpable. The absurd amount of political corectedness and censorship going on in the media is a version of this same mentality.

Blame the damn courts for allowing this sort of shit to happen. Negligence on the part of a service provider or company is a serious issue and the protection of negligence laws for regular people is being undermined by the amount of tossers trying to cash in because of their own stupidity.

But until the courts actually start throwing absurd cases out, companies will continue to overreact to the slightest thing to protect themselves financially. If any black person viewing the Golf show decided to take it to a lawyer, the company would have to spend thousands just responding to the law suit and defending itself, and I highly doubt any court would turn around and decree that the plaintif has to pay the companies court and legal fees.

Maybe if they did that more fucking often people wouldnt run to lawyers everytime they had a damn cry.

Thanks Zone!! WELL PUT!!!! I think the best way to get there would be to incorporate a "loser pays" system into our civil courts.

Dud-a-chum?
01-13-2008, 05:57 PM
All you have to do to see my opinion on this whole thing is look at my signature. My God, would the founding fathers of our country die all over again of grief if they saw what their country has become.

TerribleT
01-13-2008, 05:58 PM
All you have to do to see my opinion on this whole thing is look at my signature.

And that's well put too :)

ZoNeSeeK
01-13-2008, 06:31 PM
Thanks Zone!! WELL PUT!!!! I think the best way to get there would be to incorporate a "loser pays" system into our civil courts.

I think this is the case when its individuals -vs- individuals, but i think when its an individual -vs- a company, the company always has to cover its defence costs. Not 100% sure though, would anyone happen to know anything detailed about these sort of cases?

TerribleT
01-13-2008, 06:36 PM
In the US, to the best of my knowledge, everyone has to pay their own legal fees. The problem comes when someone sues a major corporation, the corporations just settle out of court, because there's no risk to the person suing if the corporation wins. What happens is many lawyers will take these suits on on a contingency basis, knowing that the rewards are potentially high. If they would be required to pay the fees of the corp. in the event that lost, it would stop a lot of the more frivolous. Not all obviously, but some of the worst ones.

ZoNeSeeK
01-13-2008, 06:44 PM
the fee paying should be determined by whoever is presiding over the case - i dont think any blanket rule would be fair to everyone.

If someone genuinely has a case, and there's a human error with evidence for instance, the plaintif would be destroyed financially by the amount theyd have to pay .. but i guess it gets difficult looking at it like that, as any decision that forces the defendant to wear the costs and technically they are not guilty wouldnt make sense.

TerribleT
01-13-2008, 07:42 PM
I just think the "most"fair way is for the loser to pay all of the legal fees associated with the suit. It would discourage people from suing unless they have a pretty strong case, and if the "evil" corporation lost, they would be responsible for all of the fees. I *think* this is the way it's done in the UK, although I'm not 100% positive.

ZoNeSeeK
01-13-2008, 07:51 PM
Yeah true - you would know beforehand whether you'd win or not. These things are pretty cut and dried

Jon
01-14-2008, 07:30 AM
I remember Howard Cosell saying "Look at that little monkey go" about receiver Alvin Garrett of the Washington Redskins. While some saw "little monkey" as a racial slur, others who knew Cosell were quick to point out that he used this term routinely in an approving way to describe quicker, smaller players of all ethnicities. Among the evidence adduced to support this claim is video footage of a 1972 preseason game, between the New York Giants and the Kansas City Chiefs, during which Cosell refers to Mike Adamle, a 5-foot-9-inch, 197-pound Caucasian male, as a "little monkey." I was watching both games and never felt this was an insult much less a racial slur. I also saw a game where he made the same statement about Darell Green, a black man. This was about a year before the Alvin Garrett incident. No one said a thing then. Cosell never broad casted on Monday Night Football after the Alvin Garrett incident.

ZoNeSeeK
01-14-2008, 10:58 PM
Do you know what would be awesome? If someone with a whiny little bitch of a law suit fronts up to court and the judge orders them to get a big fuckoff slap in the face for being such a little bitch and having a cry over something so retarded.

Jon
01-15-2008, 12:46 AM
Do you know what would be awesome? If someone with a whiny little bitch of a law suit fronts up to court and the judge orders them to get a big fuckoff slap in the face for being such a little bitch and having a cry over something so retarded.



Don't sugar coat it...say what you feel!:D :D

TerribleT
01-15-2008, 04:51 PM
Do you know what would be awesome? If someone with a whiny little bitch of a law suit fronts up to court and the judge orders them to get a big fuckoff slap in the face for being such a little bitch and having a cry over something so retarded.

:rofl:

Jimmy
01-15-2008, 07:42 PM
If that guy's getting punished, then so should this guy :


Smith: 'Hitler was a good person'

By WENN world entertainment news - Sunday, December 23 11:30 am

Will Smith has stunned the world by declaring that even Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was essentially a "good" person.

The Men In Black star, 39, is determined to see the best in people, and is convinced the former German leader did not fully understand the extent of the pain and suffering his actions would cause during his time in power in the 1930s and '40s.

He says, "Even Hitler didn't wake up going, 'Let me do the most evil thing I can do today'.

"I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good'. Stuff like that just needs reprogramming."

Hitler's totalitarian leadership as Fuhrer during 1934 until his eventual suicide in 1945 resulted in the persecution of an estimated six million Jews in the Holocaust, and his invasion of Poland in 1939 led to the start of the Second World War.

Will didn't mean it in the way it looks like, and neither did the announcer.

Matt
01-16-2008, 09:00 AM
I think Will Smith should be able to say he believes people are essentially trying to do what they thing is right.

Even if he is referring to Hitler.

Above that, and on topic. What about this hubbub about Hilary Clinton, does she have a right to say civil rights really took off when LBJ signed it into law?

IWasSentWest
01-16-2008, 09:25 AM
im so fuckin' glad that somebody sees the shit the same way i do. sharpton and jackson can shove a thumb up there ass, and do better for america than what they seem to think they're doin. the NAACP? why the fuck cant we have a NAAWP? white history month? a JFK or a FDR day? bc of those fuckin hypocrites who only care about there own goddamn race and nobody elses. sure they got treated like shit some 200+ years ago, i can understand that. but that was a LONG time ago, quit throwin the damn slave card, racism is poisoning america shit and move on. good fuckin lord

and also, hispanics have it worse than blacks do, IMO. so why wont sharpton or jackson do some shit for them? help them out, start an association for hispanics, fight for there fucking rights. if u think bout it, sharpton fighting for only black rights and ignoring other races....now thats fuckin racist. like i said, hypocritical bastards

Jorge
01-16-2008, 10:50 AM
I kind of wish I were black. It'd be cool if it was a crime to offend me. Or in cases like this, if it was a crime to say something that completely unrelated parties thought might offend me. Yeah, that'd kick ass.