11/21/24
January 24, 2008
Hidden: Jim Brown calls out Tiger Woods: I thought that Tiger handled this very well. Apparently Jim Brown thinks Tiger should have called in Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
Who is Jim Brown to tell Tiger what he should or shouldn't do, isn't he FREE to respond anyway he wants to?
posted by Familyman at 04:38 PM on January 24, 2008
Somebody please pull this thread before a number of us get embarrassed. Jim Brown and Tiger Woods have differring opinions of the incident, as do we all. Please remember that opinions are like @$$holes; everyone has one, and most of them stink.
posted by Howard_T at 04:56 PM on January 24, 2008
Howard T, not before some of us get embarrassed but before we "seem" like asses for expressing our true feelings.
posted by hump9n at 05:05 PM on January 24, 2008
I understand that on this site we are not supposed to say racially insensitive things, but on a site the prides itself on being high-minded, is it not accpetable to discuss issues like race as they pertain to sports? After all, everyone does have an opinion, and yours might change mine or vice-versa. Isnt communication the whole point? Unless we do listen to eachother and respect each others opinions, even if we disagree with them, we will never bridge the racial divide.
posted by elijahin24 at 05:06 PM on January 24, 2008
True, elijah - but it never actually works. These inevitably become forums for the advancement of bigotry. I wish it were different. You should read some of the football team name debates we've had. Theeerrrrrrrrrrrrre Great!
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:23 PM on January 24, 2008
My genetic code creates mRNA which produce proteins that pigment my skin cells. Race is only an issue because people have difficulty accepting that our bodies are just puppets being controlled by a ridiculously potent brain. Here's a fun game: You know how you always say "my brain" when you discuss your brain? Well that's silly. You don't own your brain. You are your brain. So instead, call "your" brain by whatever you've been calling yourself all these years. If your name is Bill, think of your brain as Bill. Look at your arms and legs. Bill is controlling those. Touch something, Smell something, Taste something. Bill's got sensations covered. Pull on your skin, poke yourself in the belly. What a funny costume Bill has! But whatever costume Bill has, it's just a costume. Bill the brain is Bill. The best part of the game is when you start looking at other people as costumes. Let's say you're in a group of five people. Ignore the shells, including your own. Picture each of the five brains floating in the room, producing movement and noise, generating thoughts. It's a fun game. Go deep with it. It made me think about things differently. "How many times must a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see?" "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try. No hell below us. Above us, only sky."
posted by DudeDykstra at 05:45 PM on January 24, 2008
Who cares? If you let this crap rent space in your brain? You deserve the stress.
posted by scotsman at 05:48 PM on January 24, 2008
What jmd82 said. We don't need a new thread each time some new "development" arises in this non-issue.
posted by scully at 05:53 PM on January 24, 2008
I am really confused here. I am a white middle-class man that has twins in my care (foster parent). It just so happens that they are "African American". I don't know why race is such an issue. I have my biological children that simply refer to them as their brother or sister. They love them very much and I couldn't be more proud. But, when does all this madness end? I hear Don Imus make racial comments and loose his job. He appologized and if the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were "true" reverends, they understand the good book says to forgive. Not after they prove this, or after they have been fired, but to forgive unconditionally. I don't understand what church they represent. Further, I hear African American people toss racial comments all the time. Kanye West, Eddie Murphy and Chris Rock make a living on this stuff, making fun of "whitey". I think that is classless and a white person would loose their job over such comments, but it is ok for them? Double standard. Racism is a two-way street. Until people realize that I am not part of the culture that fostered the same feelings that people were subjected to decades ago, we will never move past this. I have been discriminated against in polynesian cultures. I hated it. But, until people learn to forgive, I will have to be content to kiss my kids (all of them) goodnight and wish for a better world for them in the future. One where the color of your skin has nothing to do with the worth of your actions.
posted by Mickster at 05:54 PM on January 24, 2008
Jim Brown and others like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton promote the idea that we should continue to rehash the old history and keep the divide alive. Tiger obviously doesn't share this attitude. Which way seems to have more merit? I say good for Tiger.
posted by whitedog65 at 06:20 PM on January 24, 2008
The original comment was made to Tiger. It is Tigers job to deal with it. Tiger DID deal with it. Case closed. When a comment is made to Jim Brown, then he can deal with it in his own way. And when a comment is made to me, I will deal with it in my own way.
posted by scuubie at 06:27 PM on January 24, 2008
Tiger has dealt with Kelly's unfortunate racist comments. Kelly has apologized to Tiger and the world-at-large on more than one occasion. While I do think Kelly's punishment should have had a greater personal financial impact, I do believe she has gotten the message. They have moved on, let's do so as well....
posted by Roy R. at 06:47 PM on January 24, 2008
Racism is a cycle. First some, not all but some, white people had black slaves, then when the black people were freed, they were treated badly. as a result many, not all, but many black people became racist against white people as a group. Some black people have acted on their hatred of white people, causing their victims, who had previously never had a racist thaught, to hate black people. And on and on and on. the pathetic thing is that the people on both sides who provoke the biggotry are a very small percentage of the group, but the victims of boggotry dont always limit their hatred to those who had hurt, or wronged them. They spread it over the entire race. everyone who engages in racism is guilty. Red and yellow, black and white. none are compleatly innocent. People like al sharpton, and jessie jackson, and rush limgaugh perpetuate the problem, and are therefore more guilty than others. Now it seems that jim brown wants to join that rank. I dont think anyone would deny that he is one of, if not the, best player in the history of the NFL, but he is doing more harm than good here.
posted by elijahin24 at 06:54 PM on January 24, 2008
I bet the network set Brown up. Asked him to call Tiger out to make some headlines. I wouldn't be surprised if that type of thing happened all the time. It's more subtle than putting a noose on the cover of a magazine, but achieves the same purpose: lots of pub.
posted by DudeDykstra at 07:03 PM on January 24, 2008
Tiger made the right call. Forgive and forget. Jim Brown is still Afro-centric. Dude Dysrstra, sounds like you've been hanging out with Weedy McSmokey!
posted by McPhilby at 07:06 PM on January 24, 2008
Still not a story.
posted by geekyguy at 07:46 PM on January 24, 2008
race hustlers hustle....where's the story in that
posted by shudacudawuda at 08:04 PM on January 24, 2008
Why do people still talk about this story man. Tiger Woods doesn't want to talk about it and that's good. If the remarks weren't pointed at Jim Brown, why does he care? Jim Brown just wants the media to notice cuz he's black (shocking) like Tiger woods the master of golf.
posted by Scars at 09:14 PM on January 24, 2008
Dear Jim, Shut the fuck up. Love, The Rest of the World
posted by wfrazerjr at 09:29 PM on January 24, 2008
My genetic code creates mRNA which produce proteins that pigment my skin cells. Race is only an issue because people have difficulty accepting that our bodies are just puppets being controlled by a ridiculously potent brain. As geneticists learn more about the human genome they are finding that race will ultimately have to be redefined. So far geneticists have found that if there are three unrelated people sitting in a room, say two caucasion and one African American, one of the caucasions could be gentically of the same "race" as the African American and not of the same race as the second caucasion. Anthropologists have strong scientific evidence that humans originated in Africa then spread to other regions of the world. Some studies indicate that initial migration out of Africa involved humans that came from parallel, but different branches of pre-humans, some of those branches evolved, others did not, some of the early survivors later became casulties of evolution. Research and samples of remains indicate that some of the remaining branches migrated northward and some intermixed, while others did not. In the case of an African that is genetically of the same "race" as a European or an Asian, one explanation is that the two people came from the same racial strain that evolved into modern humans in different parts of the world. On the subject of Jim Brown calling out Tiger Woods, I support Tiger's position. If race as we know it is injected into every silly remark that is made by someone, we will never advance as a society. The suspension was the correct action for the announcer and Tiger Woods is ok that whar she said was a slip that does not represent what she is as a person, the situation should end with those actions.
posted by Cave_Man at 10:05 PM on January 24, 2008
So far geneticists have found that if there are three unrelated people sitting in a room, say two caucasion and one African American, one of the caucasions could be gentically of the same "race" as the African American and not of the same race as the second caucasion. I'd like to see the peer-reviewed publication for this...Regardless, per society's definition of race, all you'd have to do is a search for the DNA which produces our skin color's pigment (assuming me know what DNA produces certain pigments, this is trivial) to find out who is what race. And, while I don't think race should be an issue (after all, I think most people, race-baiters included would say that), the difference is that color-defined differentiation is readily accessible and never going away. We see it. It's BOOM, right in the face. On some level, I see what you mean. But on the whole as far as humanity is concerned? I think genetics to too far removed from the majority's mind for any genetic findings concerning race to matter. What we say on the macro level is just too in the face.
posted by jmd82 at 10:18 PM on January 24, 2008
But, until people learn to forgive, I will have to be content to kiss my kids (all of them) goodnight and wish for a better world for them in the future. One where the color of your skin has nothing to do with the worth of your actions. posted by Mickster at 5:54 PM CST on January 24 The world will be a much better place for your children. People that feel everything in life revolves around race are of a dying breed, soon their numbers will be insignificant, life will progressively improve as they die off (excuse me if "die off" sound draconian to you, but to me, the situation is what it is).
posted by Cave_Man at 10:20 PM on January 24, 2008
The person made a mistake, that's it. End of story. No one should be "held accountable" or "defend" anything. People need to get a life!!
posted by jbg044 at 11:59 PM on January 24, 2008
It's a world gone mad! Democrats attacking each other and now black people attacking black people! Must be another "right wing conspiracy"!
posted by sandskater at 12:10 AM on January 25, 2008
elijahin24, Just how in the hell did you come up with Rush Limbaugh in your last post??? If your going to throw him in with Sharpton & Jackson, think maybe you could spell his name right?
posted by Buckfever14 at 01:09 AM on January 25, 2008
I agree with one statement in this article - this is a non-issue. Brown looks as silly now as he did when he was 48 and claimed he could make a come-back and play in the NFL.
posted by longgreenline at 01:30 AM on January 25, 2008
Buckfever14- Please read before noting spelling errors.
posted by Nakeman at 02:06 AM on January 25, 2008
elijahin24, Just how in the hell did you come up with Rush Limbaugh in your last post??? If your going to throw him in with Sharpton & Jackson, think maybe you could spell his name right? I didnt figure i would have to tell the story on a sports page, but rush threw gas on the fire a few years ago when he was on espn. In refrence to donavan mcnabb, he said something to the effect that mcnabb wasnt as good as people think he is, but that his success is the result of people wanting to see a successfull black quarterback.
posted by elijahin24 at 05:33 AM on January 25, 2008
I lost a lot of respect for Jim Brown during the whole situation with Maurice Clarett getting suspended at Ohio State in 2001. What was a mistake by a college freshman that should have resulted in a 1-2 game suspension and a lesson learned turned into season-long (and ultimately career-ending) suspension and the start of a very unfortunate downward spiral for a talented football player. Brown was instrumental in helping Clarett get a lawyer and encouraging him to fight a losing battle, when accepting his punishment appeared to be the easy and obvious choice. Not that Jim Brown is solely responsible for all of Clarett's troubles by any stretch, but he certainly had his role in the whole situation. (Note: I don't recall race being a significant issue in this situation, but it is another example of Brown stirring the pot in an issue that didn't involve him.)
posted by bender at 07:46 AM on January 25, 2008
While some may only know Jim Brown as being the greatest running back in Cleveland Browns history and/or from being "afro-centric", Mr. Brown's voice should speak volumes. My interpretation of what Mr. Brown was saying was that Tiger should've used this unfortunate opportunity to speak out against racial discrimination even if it was just a error in judgement. The moment race is brought up, people want to just sweep it under the rug, so to speak, in order to not deal with the issue at hand. Granted, Tiger did accept Kelly Tilghman's apology but the fact of the matter is, having those words being spoken on live television for a sport that was for many years, excluding black people from participating, can still make blacks very uncomfortable. Even though those remarks were directed at Tiger Woods in jest, they were still hurtful not just to Tiger but for many people of color. "Who is Jim Brown to tell Tiger what he should or shouldn't do...." Mr. Brown has every right to speak about issues he feels strongly about especially if someone asks him a question about it. This is a man that has dealt with racism in ways that most of us cannot and will not ever understand. So before people start making claims that he's "stirring the pot", let us not forget that this is a man that has "been there and done that" for over 50 years dealing with racial discrimination and is only stating the obvious, that today's black pro athletes are so image conscious that when given the chance to speak out against racial, social, or conscious discriminations, they choose to not speak at all.
posted by BornIcon at 08:34 AM on January 25, 2008
I understand that while this is Tiger's problem to address as he sees fit (and that he has done so), and that Jim Brown and Al Sharpton and all the other activists have a different opinion that was heavily informed by the era in which they grew up, it's not exactly that cut & dried. We may be in the era of Obama and Oprah and Tiger instead of Dick Gregory and Angela Davis and Tommie Smith, but one did come from the other. Jim Brown is well within his right to make sure the historical and spiritual heft of the word "lynching" was understood. Race relations are better than they were 40 years ago, but humanity has a way of forgetting history.
posted by chicobangs at 08:40 AM on January 25, 2008
Brown does come from a different era in race relations, and I think that's what is part of his (along with Sharpton and Jackson's) frustration. He's still expecting people like Tiger Woods, and other big-name black athletes, to speak out on these issues with passion when they are so far removed from the issues that many don't even see them as urgent! Tiger Woods is living an existence where the color of his skin is a distant second (or maybe further down the list) to the size of his bank account. These racially sensitive issues don't impact Woods, or Shaq, or LeBron, because they can purchase respect from anyone they desire. The racial problems that have existed, and continue to exist today (of which Brown and others are concerned) are still very prevalent to middle (if there still is such a thing) and lower class blacks and minorities. Incredible amounts of money have served to insulate the biggest of black star-athletes today from the struggles others have faced and continue to face.
posted by dyams at 09:18 AM on January 25, 2008
lynching,hanging,strungup whatever word you use. I don't see any cowboy's of the wild west or countries or states where it's an accepted form of capital punishment complaining
posted by nesf at 09:19 AM on January 25, 2008
I've always liked Jim Brown because he cut through the bullshit and told it like it is, but I think he's off the mark on this one. If he, Sharpton, and Jackson want to talk about racial sensitivity, maybe they should start with Chris Rock.
posted by MGDADDYO at 09:23 AM on January 25, 2008
The fact that this is even an issue is the part that is crazy. A commentator said something accidentally. She said she was sorry. Tiger said its ok. End of story. But, the media can’t let it go. They feel Tigers job is to make a strong statement against racism. HIS JOB IS TO GOLF. Tiger said his peace but people can’t let it go. Let the person who has never put their foot in their mouth cast the first stone. Everyone makes mistakes. Should this woman be fired ala Don Imus?? And who the hell cares what Jim Brown says other then ESPN. Who made him the voice of our society? Tiger handled this the right way. Why cant our media do the same instead of just stirring the pot?
posted by Debo270 at 09:30 AM on January 25, 2008
Jim Brown has to have somebody else do the talking when it comes to any type of relations. His own past * would seem to prevent anyone from really putting any belief into his words. * Go to the last 6 paragraphs!
posted by jojomfd1 at 09:33 AM on January 25, 2008
I'd like to see the peer-reviewed publication for this...Regardless, per society's definition of race, all you'd have to do is a search for the DNA which produces our skin color's pigment (assuming me know what DNA produces certain pigments, this is trivial) to find out who is what race. I have supplied one link on how geneticists are defining race. The issue is a complex one, but in essence, two people that are physically different can share a higher percentage of common genes with each other than they do with people that look like them physically. It all boils down to which genes are examined. There are differences between "races" that are important for medical reasons, scientists are studying why those diffences exist, are they geographical mutations to genes, ect? As seen by recent comments by Watson (who along with Francis Crick defined the earliest model of the human genome), there is debate among experienced geneticists as to the meaning and importance of genetic variation among humankind. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00055DC8-3BAA-1FA8-BBAA83414B7F0000 A scientific discussion of "race" is dry and basically flies over the head of most people. Either Time Magazine or Newsweek Magazine did an entire issue several years ago where the editors and scientific consultants broke down scientific research so that it was understandable to lay people. The conclusion was that race was a characterization that had little basis in genetics. On the issue of Jim Brown. He has a right to say what he thinks. The fact is that the reality of race that an older person like him experienced is different from what a younger person like Tiger Woods experiences, i.e, their perceptions of Tilghman's comment are grounded in the realities of their lives to date.
posted by Cave_Man at 09:39 AM on January 25, 2008
Jim Brown is one angry man. But then so is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. It seems like complaining is the "in" thing to do when something doesn't go your way or someone gets their feathers ruffled. An apology isn't good enough any more. People have to be suspended or fired so whoever got their feelings hurt feels better. The past is exactly that, the past. No one can change what happened 200 years ago. It should never be forgotten but it shouldn't be used as a crutch either. We, as a society will never learn to co-exist as long as the past keeps being thrown around the way it is. Things are better today than they ever have been and they will get better down the road. Let the past be the past. Jim, Jesse, and Al need to focus on making today better without using the past the way they do. I like the way Tiger handled the situation. An apology was good enough for him. Why isn't it good enough for everyone else? Jim, Jesse, and Al are not Tiger Woods. Just because Tiger is African-American, he has to have the same opinion that Jim, Jesse, and Al do? Is he not his own person who can make up his own mind? There is a valuable lesson here that J, J, and A should look at and learn from.
posted by dbt302 at 09:41 AM on January 25, 2008
Why cant our media do the same instead of just stirring the pot? Because it sells. Jackson and Sharpton are race baiters and extortionists who depend on perpetuating racism to try and stay relevant. Apologies were made and accepted. If they're going to hold this over her head forever then might I remind them of Tawanna Brawley.
posted by budman13 at 09:48 AM on January 25, 2008
Cave_Man- Interesting article, thanks. FWIW, I used to do genetic cancer research and I know exactly what it is talking about and I don't disagree with your assertion from a scientific standpoint. In an weird way, though, I find "race" an interesting study in natural selection (such as dark skin for hot weather climates versus pale for cold weather, sickle cell prevalence in malaria-infested regions, etc). Regardless, I just don't think science will have much if any impact on society's accepted definition of race- the color of our skin.
posted by jmd82 at 10:04 AM on January 25, 2008
But if Al, Jim and Jesse want to be "outraged" thats fine but what right do they have to tell Tiger how he should feel or what he should say. We keep hearing that it is Tigers duty to his people to stand up for his people. WHY? Why is it his job to make it right.
posted by Debo270 at 10:04 AM on January 25, 2008
I wonder if Jim Brown apologized when he threw that woman off the hotel balcony? Seems to me Mr. Brown has bigger fish to fry of his own, and should leave Tiger alone. IMO, Tiger did exactly what he should have, he tried to diffuse the situation and move on. Other people not involved are now keeping it going for what??
posted by jojomfd1 at 10:05 AM on January 25, 2008
Other people not involved are now keeping it going for what?? From what I can tell, to raise awareness that racism is still very prevalent in today's society, even towards black, multi-millionaire, professional athletes that kids look up to. I wonder if Jim Brown apologized when he threw that woman off the hotel balcony? And what exactly does that have to do with this situation? Oh, I get it, that's your way of trying to make Jim Brown look less like the individual who truly cares about social consciousness that he is.
posted by BornIcon at 10:39 AM on January 25, 2008
This boils down to the fact we all live in "glass houses". What does social consciousness mean? Should some announcer, journalists or common sports fan utter that Phil "beat" Tiger in a golf tournament, do you think the racists watchdogs, et al, will spring forth with self righteous indignation? Of course they would, take it to the bank!!!!
posted by EdH at 10:57 AM on January 25, 2008
I don't see any cowboy's of the wild west or countries or states where it's an accepted form of capital punishment complaining Not that this is even worth addressing or on topic, but name a couple of those places. Hanging's been outlawed as an Eighth Amendment violation for years. BornIcon, I'm with you here and I think Jim Brown was right to ride Michael Jordan about taking a stand instead of just taking sneaker money, but at some point it stopped being about What's Right or Jordan or Tiger Woods and it starts to feel like Jim Brown trying to stay relevant. While there is always the hope a black athlete will try to wrestle with these difficult issues, not everyone is Jim Brown, not everyone grew up like Jim Brown, so maybe Jim Brown should take that into account before he treats every famous black person like they're Jim Brown.
posted by yerfatma at 11:05 AM on January 25, 2008
And what exactly does that have to do with this situation? Oh, I get it, that's your way of trying to make Jim Brown look less like the individual who truly cares about social consciousness that he is. Thats not what it meant a bit, but nice try. The person who conducted this interview is the one that screwed up and interviewed Jim Brown, The man with a checkered past. He sits on the TV and complains about Tiger not taking the opportunity to stand up for his race, when look at the things that Jim Brown has done to further the stereotype that people have had for a long time. I believe he is a hypocrit for saying that an appology is not enough, when he won't even give that and he does worse!
posted by jojomfd1 at 11:18 AM on January 25, 2008
The person who conducted this interview is the one that screwed up and interviewed Jim Brown, The man with a checkered past. If Dick Gregory had said the exact same words, what would your reaction have been?
posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:46 AM on January 25, 2008
Jim Brown, The A man with a checkered past. Fixed that. Everyone, even the mighty Tiger Woods, has some embarrassing crap in their closets. Everyone's a hypocrite. To call someone on it in the middle of a discussion about something else entirely is the very definition of a straw man argument. (And thank you, closet racists, for being completely predictable and talking about the white majority as if they were some put-upon minority. You are the wind beneath humanity's wings.) That said, back to the topic. It's not whether Tiger's reaction was right or wrong. It's his. If this was 1968 or 1958, I guarantee you his reaction would be different. Skin tone aside, he's a well-read and highly educated adult. He's not 17. He's 30, and a well-traveled and highly aware 30 at that. He's not making these decisions in a vacuum. Jim Brown may have a point, but in effect his words come off as trying to disqualify Tiger's opinion as invalid. 40 years ago, his point would resonate a lot more than it is today. It's kind of encouraging, actually.
posted by chicobangs at 11:56 AM on January 25, 2008
To me Tiger Woods seems like a class act. Jim Brown doesn't. Isn't it interesting that two people of the same color can act and think so differently? Wow ass holes and non ass holes come in all colors. What a novel idea.
posted by Atheist at 12:04 PM on January 25, 2008
i think jim brown should keep out of something that doesnt concern him. i think him sharpton and jackson should all get together and start trying to help people instead of getting people all riled up
posted by joeduprey at 12:18 PM on January 25, 2008
This FPP sucks. Where are Sharpton and Jackson mentioned at all in the article? Can we please confine the race-baiting to the comments instead of including it in the FPP?
posted by bperk at 12:19 PM on January 25, 2008
Talk about Brown making something out of nothing! Woods asked ESPN to do down play the comment because they are friends. Of course that didn't happen because down playing it wouldn't be news worthy. Where are Sharpton and Jackson mentioned at all in the article? Do they have to be? Obviously there is a corilation with Sharpton/Jackson and the idiocy of this story. Both men had a place and a purpose at one time, now they are shells of their former selves getting every bit of publicity they can.
posted by B10 at 12:43 PM on January 25, 2008
It should be pointed out, that woods and kelly tilghman are not strangers. I dont know that they are friends, but they certainly are colleagues. They have had a positive working relationship for years now. Even if brown was right in principal (which i dont believe he is) would you throw someone under the bus if you knew and liked that person? I think mr. brown needs to consider what he is asking of tiger. He isnt saying some tv announcer said something that he should be fired for. He is saying that this person whom you have worked with, and respected, said something that YOU should hang her out to dry for. The issue is not just that he is being to hard on tilghman, but that by saying he should burn a bridge, he is asking too much from tiger himself.
posted by elijahin24 at 12:51 PM on January 25, 2008
Do they have to be? Obviously there is a corilation with Sharpton/Jackson and the idiocy of this story. Obviously, because you say so. Both men had a place and a purpose at one time, now they are shells of their former selves getting every bit of publicity they can. So, every useless bastard has a "correlation" with every other useless bastard? That's an interesting redefinition of "correlation".
posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:13 PM on January 25, 2008
Well LBB there you go again, someone else can't have an opinion w/o u chiming in telling them how wrong they are. I'm not saying there useless at all. I'm saying that they catch more headlines than they do good at this point in their "careers". They are a far cry from what Kennedy, King, Johnson, parks and all the other civil rights leaders from the 60's did. They all didn't do what they did for headlines or for publicity. They did what they did for the betterment of mankind and didn't care about the piddly BS that the so called "civil rights leaders" of today do. They're more worried about political correctness than they are people. But I'm quite positive you'll beg to differ and half of the blog will say shame on me for disagreeing with you.
posted by B10 at 02:03 PM on January 25, 2008
Well if that is your fear B10 let me go on record as being of the half that agrees with you. I would also add malcom to your list from the sixtys. There was a time when both shaprton and jackson were real leaders. Its sad to see what they have become. The ironic thing is that if everyone of every color would do what tiger did, which is to forgive, the race issue might finaly be allowed to die. Today, its tiger who is showing real leadership to the black community. By showing what they must do to end this issue. White people cant do it. Our ancestors threw the first stone. The right to forgive that is not on us. It is on the black people. While i dont blame people like jackson and sharpton for their frustration, they have to realize sooner or later, that it isnt solving anything.
posted by elijahin24 at 02:29 PM on January 25, 2008
As long as statments about race stir the feelings as these postings reflect, then society as a whole has a long way to go. These feelings will probably never go away. Look at history. Always some poor SOB to make fun of and ridicule. It is a sad sad world.
posted by RA at 02:43 PM on January 25, 2008
To be fair, Al Sharpton had chimed in loudly on this long before Jim Brown picked it up, and I'd seen that he'd said something about the story again today, which I succeeded in ignoring on my way out the door.
posted by chicobangs at 03:00 PM on January 25, 2008
Well LBB there you go again, someone else can't have an opinion w/o u chiming in telling them how wrong they are. Well B10 there you go again, playing the "here's LBB picking on poor persecuted me because she's a big old meanie" card again without bothering to consider whether you just said something that didn't make a whole lot of sense. I'm not saying there useless at all. When did the word "useless" come in? bperk made a very valid point: Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had to do with Jim Brown's statements, were not mentioned in the article, and should not have been mentioned in the FPP. They were, however, so what's the result? A bunch people who can't be bothered to follow the link and read the article write foaming at the mouth comments about Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. You blew right past bperk's point about the fpp and started a tirade about who's a real civil right's leader and who isn't...thereby kind of validating the point.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:15 PM on January 25, 2008
Jim Brown tells it like it is and says what he feels must be said. You have to respect the man for that. I'm in no position to even suggest that he is off base for criticizing Tiger. Tiger obviously doesn't feel the need to speak out on the issue further, but I don't think that makes him a bad guy either. He doesn't have to be the social conscience for this sort of thing. Or this.
posted by curlyelk at 03:48 PM on January 25, 2008
Where are Sharpton and Jackson mentioned at all in the article? Do they have to be? Yes. There is absolutely no reason to mention either Sharpton or Jackson except as a method to discount Jim Brown's comments. Those kind of opinions should be included in the comments, not in FPPs. Tinman should have let Jim Brown's comments stand without the race baiting. And, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are, in fact, two different people. I haven't read any public comments that Jackson has even made on this issue. Why is he relevant to this story? Today, its tiger who is showing real leadership to the black community. By showing what they must do to end this issue. White people cant do it. Blaming black people for their own oppression. How enlightened!
posted by bperk at 03:52 PM on January 25, 2008
It should be pointed out, that woods and kelly tilghman are not strangers. I dont know that they are friends, but they certainly are colleagues. They have had a positive working relationship for years now. They apparently met during college competitions. Woods came into college having an already massive reputation due to his dominance as an amateur, so it makes sense that a much lesser known college golfer would want to meet to and get to know him as a person. In competition, being around a winner and studying how that person operate often helps make people better.
posted by Cave_Man at 03:53 PM on January 25, 2008
So, every useless bastard has a "correlation" with every other useless bastard? That's an interesting redefinition of "correlation". useless came in to play right there. Well B10 there you go again, playing the "here's LBB picking on poor persecuted me because she's a big old meanie" card again without bothering to consider whether you just said something that didn't make a whole lot of sense. Did you just say "she's a big old meanie"? Well gosh darnet, quit being a meanie. What I said did make sense but obviously you didn't read my 2nd post very closely. You blew right past bperk's point about the fpp and started a tirade about who's a real civil right's leader and who isn't...thereby kind of validating the point. really? So we can read the articles but can't expand on them? I see. It wasn't on CNN and ESPN that Tiger wanted it dropped and Sharpton, Jackson and Brown were the ones that made a big deal about it. Infact, I believe it was Brown that called Tiger an explitive. I was simply adding to the discussion, I didn't realize that we could ONLY comment on what was in the article. You're unbelievable in some of the things you spout. You have the right to spout them but they are odd sometimes.
posted by B10 at 03:55 PM on January 25, 2008
Blaming black people for their own oppression. How enlightened! posted by bperk at 3:52 PM CST on January 25 The poster was pointing out a truism. Forgiveness is in the hands of the oppressed, not the oppressor. In order for us to move closer to our potential as humankind, forgiveness must happen.
posted by Cave_Man at 04:20 PM on January 25, 2008
I was simply adding to the discussion, I didn't realize that we could ONLY comment on what was in the article. If you wanted to simply add to the discussion, that would have been fine. As it was, you were replying to, and quoting, a comment that pointed out why it was inappropriate to inject Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in the FPP. You missed the point of the previous comment, which was why it was inappropriate in the FPP. You wanted to talk about correlations between Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jim Brown, which had nothing to do with bperk's point. It was a non sequitur. You're unbelievable in some of the things you spout. You have the right to spout them but they are odd sometimes. I see. You said something that didn't make any sense, I pointed that out, and so you've got to make it personal. You really should work on the difference between disagreeing with someone's line of argument and spouting a lot of, "There you go again, you always, you never, you're unbelievable, blah blah blah." Indulging in the latter neither strengthens your point nor detracts from mine.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:32 PM on January 25, 2008
I suggest not posting this type of article again. Stick to sports and leave the social issues to Metafilter.
posted by Nakeman at 04:38 PM on January 25, 2008
It wasn't on CNN and ESPN that Tiger wanted it dropped and Sharpton, Jackson and Brown were the ones that made a big deal about it. Can you please provide a link to Jackson making a big deal about this? I can't find what you are referring to.
posted by bperk at 04:39 PM on January 25, 2008
Jim Brown= Greatest Running Back Ever? Yes Jim Brown= Great Human Being? Not So Much
posted by texasred at 04:42 PM on January 25, 2008
Tiger's late father did not raise his son to be a Poster Person he raised him to be the Best that he could be. So don't look for Mr Woods to do anything less.
posted by thatch at 05:07 PM on January 25, 2008
Blaming black people for their own oppression. How enlightened! I would respond to this but cave man made my point much more eloquently than i was able to when he said... Forgiveness is in the hands of the oppressed, not the oppressor. In order for us to move closer to our potential as humankind, forgiveness must happen. If my statement was taken as my blaming black people for their own oppression that is not at all what i meant, and i thank cave man for clarifying it for me. Unfortunately, it turns out that enlightenment doesnt always come with the ability to properly articulate it
posted by elijahin24 at 05:36 PM on January 25, 2008
Can you please provide a link to Jackson making a big deal about this? I can't find what you are referring to. Actually, I heard it on ESPN Radio this morning.
posted by B10 at 06:53 PM on January 25, 2008
I see. You said something that didn't make any sense, I pointed that out, and so you've got to make it personal This is one of a few times on different boards you've said something about things getting personal. Tell me, do u take everything that way. If so....why? That sounds like a problem that you need 2 work out. Do you have a complex about something? This is a sports blog where different people have different opinions that from time to time will not be the same as yours. If you take things from a sports blog personal than that's your problem. I never make it personal, if you take it that way than so be it. You said something that didn't make any sense, I pointed that out Is that what you did? O.K. you're right, whatever. You wanted to talk about correlations between Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Jim Brown, which had nothing to do with bperk's point. I was commenting on the comment before mine, get a grip. Look I'm done with this discussion with you. Obviously you have aproblem when people don't agree with you and that's fine, I understand. You'll get no further comments from me on this subject. Although I'm quite positive that I'll hear from you again the next time I say something that you don't like. LOL Whatever.
posted by B10 at 07:08 PM on January 25, 2008
I thinking we all should have listened to Howard_T. (3rd Post)
posted by BoKnows at 07:24 PM on January 25, 2008
I thinking we all should have listened to Howard_T. (3rd Post) WOW! HOWARD_T sure did hit that one on the head.
posted by B10 at 07:36 PM on January 25, 2008
Bo and b10, look at it this way at least we are arguing about meanies, and useless people instead of race. LBB, did i spell "meanies" right? jk. Everybody loosen up. lets sing Kum Bah yah, my lord kum bah yah...
posted by elijahin24 at 08:13 PM on January 25, 2008
Didn't we already have one Tiger Woods handles controversy well- Other people don't post deleted today?