I wasn't going to write anything about
Tiger Woods until I was provoked into it tonight by some "sports analyst" on
Larry King, weeping and moaning about what a great "tragedy" it was that he announced he was indefinitely suspending his golf career. A tragedy because, this guy said, Tiger really "hated the scrutiny," hated being under the microscope" that came with his career and was sort of thinking about pulling the plug before he has now been forced to.
Oh, bullshit.
I reproduce the quote on this subject uttered last year from the Greatest Philosopher Of Our Time.
George Carlin:
"I'd like to begin by saying fuck Lance Armstrong. Fuck him and his balls and his bicycles and his steroids and his yellow shirts and the dumb empty expression on his face. I'm tired of that asshole. And while you're at it, fuck Tiger Woods too! That's another jack-off I can do without."
These were the opening words of Carlin's last routine, which I was able to see from the front row of the Vegas
Orleans show room last year three days before he died.
Too bad that George didn't live long enough to see this day. He would have laughed his ass off. Carlin's final riff went on to ask since when are we not allowed to choose our own heroes? Why do we have to have them stuffed down our throats and up our...noses by every huckster and sycophant in sight?
I have no sympathy for Woods nor do I share any concern whatsoever that the poor baby might now lose his
$110 million a year in endorsing everything from shaving cream to butt powder. When you live (big time) by publicity, you die by publicity. Seems simple enough for me.
When you have your face stuck on every product between here and Kingdom Come you better damn well think twice about where you stick your Johnson. (This is by the way one more reason why I so love and respect the real Champ --
Muhammad Ali. Only recently did he make any significant commercial endorsement and that was for health foods. Imagine the literal billions he could have made selling his name).
When it comes to
Armstrong and
Williams, by the way, I respect their formidable athletic talents. But they don't do much to enrich my life. Watching a bike race or a golf match on TV is like watching flies fornicate (another hat tip to Carlin). And you learn nothing from it, except that some people are born with more physical prowess than others.
Personally, I have much greater admiration for
mathematical geniuses like
Phil Hellmuth,
Phil Ivey, Chris Ferguson and
Daniel Negreanu -- poker superstars who have to use their
brains to win a game. These are intellects in the same class as a
Bobby Fischer.
Watching them around a table out-think, out-strategize and out-calculate each other is ten times more engaging than watching a guy hitting a ball with a stick, walking over to it, and hitting it again. These guys make plenty of millions on their own and readily endorse whole brands of poker sites and related items. But they are not gonna get any stamps of approval from Nike, Tag-Heur, GM, General Mills or Gatorade because everyone knows that champion poker players -- unlike golfers- are lying, cheating scoundrels -- even if they have IQ's of 150 plus.
Woods' melt-down was rather predictable, I fear. And on this issue, I do extend my sympathy. He was raised as a sort of a child cyborg, groomed and shaped from age two to become the superstar he
is was.Very few things come free in this world. And when you rob adolescence from a child because you are too busy showing him off as a trick pony, it should come as little surprise that he becomes emotionally stunted as a permanent and randy 16 year old. Woods' father passed away three years ago. Unlike Carlin, he is lucky that he didn't live long enough to see what he helped create.
Late word is that Nike is sticking by its $30 million a year contract with Tiger. Is there a swoosh jock strap?
This entry was posted
on Friday, December 11th, 2009 at 7:54 pm and is filed under Main.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
I wasn't going to write anything about Tiger Woods until I was provoked into it tonight by some "sports analyst" on Larry King, weeping and moaning about what a great "tragedy" it was that he announced he was indefinitely suspending his golf career. A tragedy because, this guy said, Tiger really "hated the scrutiny," hated being under the microscope" that came with his career and was sort of thinking about pulling the plug before he has now been forced to.
Oh, bullshit.
I reproduce the quote on this subject uttered last year from the Greatest Philosopher Of Our Time.
George Carlin: "I'd like to begin by saying fuck Lance Armstrong. Fuck him and his balls and his bicycles and his steroids and his yellow shirts and the dumb empty expression on his face. I'm tired of that asshole. And while you're at it, fuck Tiger Woods too! That's another jack-off I can do without."
These were the opening words of Carlin's last routine, which I was able to see from the front row of the Vegas Orleans show room last year three days before he died.
Too bad that George didn't live long enough to see this day. He would have laughed his ass off. Carlin's final riff went on to ask since when are we not allowed to choose our own heroes? Why do we have to have them stuffed down our throats and up our...noses by every huckster and sycophant in sight?
I have no sympathy for Woods nor do I share any concern whatsoever that the poor baby might now lose his $110 million a year in endorsing everything from shaving cream to butt powder. When you live (big time) by publicity, you die by publicity. Seems simple enough for me.
When you have your face stuck on every product between here and Kingdom Come you better damn well think twice about where you stick your Johnson. (This is by the way one more reason why I so love and respect the real Champ -- Muhammad Ali. Only recently did he make any significant commercial endorsement and that was for health foods. Imagine the literal billions he could have made selling his name).
When it comes to Armstrong and Williams, by the way, I respect their formidable athletic talents. But they don't do much to enrich my life. Watching a bike race or a golf match on TV is like watching flies fornicate (another hat tip to Carlin). And you learn nothing from it, except that some people are born with more physical prowess than others.
Personally, I have much greater admiration for mathematical geniuses like Phil Hellmuth, Phil Ivey, Chris Ferguson and Daniel Negreanu -- poker superstars who have to use their brains to win a game. These are intellects in the same class as a Bobby Fischer.
Watching them around a table out-think, out-strategize and out-calculate each other is ten times more engaging than watching a guy hitting a ball with a stick, walking over to it, and hitting it again. These guys make plenty of millions on their own and readily endorse whole brands of poker sites and related items. But they are not gonna get any stamps of approval from Nike, Tag-Heur, GM, General Mills or Gatorade because everyone knows that champion poker players -- unlike golfers- are lying, cheating scoundrels -- even if they have IQ's of 150 plus.
Woods' melt-down was rather predictable, I fear. And on this issue, I do extend my sympathy. He was raised as a sort of a child cyborg, groomed and shaped from age two to become the superstar he is was.Very few things come free in this world. And when you rob adolescence from a child because you are too busy showing him off as a trick pony, it should come as little surprise that he becomes emotionally stunted as a permanent and randy 16 year old. Woods' father passed away three years ago. Unlike Carlin, he is lucky that he didn't live long enough to see what he helped create.
Late word is that Nike is sticking by its $30 million a year contract with Tiger. Is there a swoosh jock strap?
December 11th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
1) Exactly.
2) I don’t give a single damn about his private life.
3) Also, think of all the money Ali lost because of his inability to box while he refused to fight in the Viet Nam war. Name any sports figure who would do that now. Anyone… (of course we pussy out of making anyone face that choice by havng a war(s) with no draft).
December 11th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Pat Tillman?
December 11th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
To me, golf and poker are similar, in that I can see why people *do* both, but I can’t imagine watching either of them. It’s kind of like watching paint dry.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
To me, this is more of a wtf-why-do-we-care story than even MJ’s death. I’ve been staying away from the news, so I don’t know the full story on Tiger, nor do I plan on ever finding out. Has he spoken at all to the press, though? Is he whining? I might like to see that.
I just hope all of his mistresses get to make tons of cash off of this. It’s only fair. Even if Tiger has to pay them off for silence.
December 11th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
See, I just don’t see what the big deal is. To me, this looks like every case of male-side marital infidelity in the history of the world. The shenanigans are discovered, the wife throws an operatic fit, the police struggle mightily to keep from laughing. It’s something that happens.
December 11th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Marc – I don’t think golf is much of a spectator game unless you really happen to be into it, but neither is watching guys play poker, no matter how hard they’re thinking. Both appeal to a pretty hard core fan. As for Woods, he’s always seemed like something of a cipher and more than a bit immature, so I’m not surprised when the surface gets scratched and a totally self-centered schmuck is revealed.
December 12th, 2009 at 5:21 am
“…the Greatest Philosopher Of Our Time.”
yep.
December 12th, 2009 at 7:34 am
so I’m not surprised when the surface gets scratched and a totally self-centered schmuck is revealed.
***************
The “totally self-centered shmuck” did find a little time to donate millions to chaties and start his own foundation, my nephew is a recepient of a scholarship from the Tiger Woods Foundation.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Heh, He’s a good looking, sharp dressing, sharp personal qualities, highly successful, world famous, filthy rich, and has to travel alone. I blame it on the gorgeous babes offering themselves to him. I know how it is.
He’s not Jesus….but then again, for all we know, Jesus wasn’t perfect either.
Oh, and those babes should not get a goddamn cent. They new he was married, knew exactly what they were doing, and got it. They should be real proud of themselves….fucking whores.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Proud of themselves for literally fucking up a married man, his career, and his family life. Selfish bitches.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Before the News broadcasts turned into entertainment broadcasts, you use to have to go to the girlie tabloid broadcasts programs to get the dirt on others personal problems.
Now you don’t, and the bloodsucking parasites are out in locust swarms finishing the destruction of one’s personal life and privacy doing really cheap shit for big bucks. Sick bastards. I hate human nature.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Jim
Get out your tool box; that screw is coming loose again.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Robt & Jim have nailed it.
I can only add the glee coming from the right-wing blogoshpere in seeing a man fire-hosed down the fairway because of the color of his skin.
Seperate but unequal attention being paid at an unconscious level in order to Woods in his place. Thus there can be a media frenzy over a Larry Craig which is both amplified and on steriods when the moral miscreant is a person of color.
Thus on Monicamemo or the Hannity blogs the great unwashed make invideous comparisons between Woods and OJ Simpson; Woods and Obama. This comparison reveals the depth on innate racial stereotypical fears stemming from an individual who is perceived subconsciously of breaking all of the taboos and the delicious cathartic effect in the unfolding spectacle in seeing a black man broken.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Jim, sorry, but this is hardly the fault of what is undeniably a blood sucking media. It’s the fault of a blood sucking athlete who wasnt satisfied just making $22 million playing golf, but who wanted to make a billion by plastering his mug all over creation and by doing so with a squeaky clean image. The sort of gross notoriety he bought to himself and then to his hypocrisy seems to me to be fair game. I love it when jokers like Woods sell their names to be put on everything imaginable so you cant walk ten feet anywhere in the world without seeing their name and image and then.. when they get in a jam.. come weeping onto TV and ask that the public grant them and their families privacy. Ha! It’s easy to be private, You do it by being private. If Woods was only a golf super star and not a commercial barker, then one could have sympathy. Not his fault that he’s a great golfer and he would have the right to be left alone and unmolested by the public. But when he reaps a billion dollars by saying: “Look at me! Look at me!” then we will damn well look at him.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Oh Christ Pablo… I just read your drivel. You are a totally lost cause. You think Woods is getting it because he is BLACK? My God. The juicy part here is Pablo the Radical stepping up to defend Woods the Corporate Pitchman!
If being black or half black was such a turn off to the American people then why on earth would the most powerful of corporations associate their products with his image to boost sales?
Don’t know what kind of self-enclosed ideological fishbowl you dwell in, pal, but my perception from living in what is described as The Real World is that Americans WORSHIP Tiger Woods.
Man, are you ever lost.
What a few hundred wack jobs write on extreme right wing blogs is exactly what we would expect from right wing wack jobs. Wow, they are racist. Didn’t know that before.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Jim R – you completely undermine your alleged moral philosophy stated here repeatedly in other areas with that crap. It’s called “responsibility” – it appears that in today’s crazy, mixed up world, supposed “conservatives” have less of a clue about it than most people. As for Tiger’s charitable donations, that’s great and I’m sure he consulted his tax lawyer about that, but for a billionaire to shell out even tens of millions for his foundation is not a sign that he’s sacrificing anything to help other people. Thanks Tiger, but consult the New Testament on the widow’s mite for better insight into the personal character issue as it relates to these celebrity foundations.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Incidentally, if Tiger Woods wants to spend what would appear to be most of his spare time chasing skirts and trysting with cocktail waitresses, that’s fine with me. I wouldn’t criticize him for it. What I would criticize is carefully constructing a fictional character who then appears to be in the midst of a family and public image crisis when his real-life commitments are revealed.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
And just to be clear, by “screw loose” I mean your id-fueled ejaculations of “fucking whores” and “selfish bitches.”
He has consensual affairs with women, and *they* are whores and bitches?
I sometimes hear that Islam hating is the last acceptable prejudice, but not in Jim’s world.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Not to associate myself with the above insanity spewed by Jim and Pablo, but the problem with Marc and Reg’s position in identifying Tiger and other rich celebrities as deserving to have their dirty laundry aired out in public is a subjective and moral judgement (albeit on a serial philanderer like Tiger, with whom it is difficult to sympathize). Was it not equally fair for Eliot Spitzer and JFK to have their private life exposed, since by holding high offices, they presented themselves as men of character?
Food for thought: did the young and attractive CNN anchor deserve to recently have pictures taken of herself unclothed in her hotel room? If not, then why not? Certainly, these pictures were undoubtedly taken illegally; but isn’t her network also guilty of probing into the private lives of people by publishing film footage/pictures obtained from God knows who/what source? Isn’t she a party to this kind of muckraking, “GOTCHA!” pseudo-journalism that is more and more bent on capturing famous people at their most vulnerable? What makes her network different from awful TMZ, which much to her chagrin published some of the photos?
Marc Cooper is a prominent journalist, and blogger; but like each and every one of us (including myself), Tiger Woods is no less deserving of his privacy than any one of us. Every time we cast judgments or opinions about others, we have given up our right to privacy. Every human should either be entitled to their privacy, or have none. It is as simple as that.
December 12th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
That should have read, in the last paragraph – “Marc Cooper and all of us are no more deserving of privacy than Tiger Woods.” Such a hurry tonight, finally seeing “Blindside”
December 12th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
David, um, yeah.
Good try for trying to examine the right to privacy via comparisons — Spitzer, JKF, the CNN reporter, etc. But I think you know what the real verdict here is, since you yourself hinted at it — Tiger Woods is a slut.
Sure, everyone has some claim to privacy. But TW bargained his way trying to use his squeaky clean family facade to enrich himself. There’s a basic ‘truth in advertising’ thingy here that’s been obliterated.
He’s a fraud.
_____
But hey, my girlfriend demands I see Blindside with her so no spoilers, okay?
December 12th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
Yes, everyone has a right to privacy in some sense, but when you are a public figure you’ve pretty much forfeited it de facto in many areas. It’s not pretty, but that’s the price these folks pay. And, yes, I think Eliot Spitzer, JFK and Clinton can’t be considered above having their dirty laundry brought out, whether in real time or via historical review. I don’t think that politicians should necessarily lose their jobs for sexual transgressions, but it’s really up to the public to guage the hypocrisy and “yuck” factors. I think that the degree of sanctimony one has projected and the scale of the transgressions are going to be at play. One woman encounters most people can comprehend and forgive. Serial philandering, gay encounters by “anti-gay” pols and involvement in prostitution seem to have a bigger “yuck” factor than adultery with one person. The reality is that public figures no longer have much in the way of a right to privacy in matters of sexual indiscretion. Maybe they should, but they never again will.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Come on, David. Be serious. Yes, there is a basic right to privacy. Bu it, like everything else, is up for sale. Tiger Woods auctioned off his privacy for $110 million a year and now he has to live with the consequences. As to yours truly… pay me one $50m lump sum and I will provide a complete private history and will also be happy to live stream the rest of my life. I found Tiger’s plea to respect his privacy to be downright insulting. You can’t have it both ways. Actions and commercial deals have consequences.
As to Spitzer. He was busted also for his gross hypocrisy. He campaigned politically against prostitution. Ditto with Clinton. He made the sexual history of women germaine both to new welfare and sex harrassment legislation he signed. He was also busted for his hypocrisy. And I might add for his terrible judgment, Something one has to consider in a president.
December 13th, 2009 at 8:28 am
“…it’s really up to the public to guage the hypocrisy and “yuck” factors. I think that the degree of sanctimony one has projected and the scale of the transgressions are going to be at play.”
The notion of allowing the public to make these decisions – in a country where the majority of its population cannot find Afghanistan on a map, and a 1/3 of it believes in the rapture – is pretty frightening. South Carolina, for example, has no problem with their disgraced governor remaining in the governor’s mansion, but Bill Clinton was not worthy of forgiveness (using what standard, I am unsure).
“…pay me one $50m lump sum and I will provide a complete private history and will also be happy to live stream the rest of my life.”
A Marc Cooper reality show would definitely improve my poker game immensely.:)
If privacy can be taken away (or “put up for sale”) from someone, is free speech next? I can recall Ann Coulter at the University of Kansas a few years ago (the appearance in which she had a pie thrown at her by some meathead). Outside of the hall in which she was lecturing, there were a number of local activists screaming, “no free speech for fascists!” Their reasoning (no less valid than the points Reg and Marc are making here, IMHO) for wanting to deny Coulter her right to speak is that “she doesn’t deserve free speech, because she is in favor of taking it away from all of us who don’t support this President [Bush]!”
We can talk all we want about all of money and the hypocrisy in this. And there is probably even more of the latter than the former. But once we decide who is worthy of privacy based on hypocrisy/deceit/false branding/etc, then there is no reason why free speech shouldn’t fall into the same subjective realm. Which is scary in my opinion.
December 13th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Marc touched on this pretty well, but I believe that the real problem here are the legions of morons (corporate sponsors, fans, media) who look up to, and put on a pedestal, people like Tiger who can perform well a menial physical activity. I find them to be even more pathetic than Tiger himself.
December 13th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Marc Speaks:
“You think Woods is getting it because he is BLACK? My God. The juicy part here is Pablo the Radical stepping up to defend Woods the Corporate Pitchman!”
————————–
No I don’t. I noted that compared with a Larry Craig, the lynching of Woods is done with more relish and gusto; and this is ingrained in American culture: the glee of the right blogosphere uttering that which many more only dare to think.
BTW most people who witness lynchings fob it off as being mere spectators.
As your self-appointed foil Marc, I must defend by saying that serial marital infidelity is not that uncommon. Locker room revelations evoke jelousy, not scorn. However the public media deluge yields the obligatory, cursory response of indignation: genuflection with the prayerful syncopated fist to the chest while the mind is miles away in pari delicto.
So if all the rightous indignation is feigned there must be something else to the morality tale being unfolded 24/7; eclipsing all issues of war and peace.
It is scripted. It has a beginning, a middle, an end. Everyone knows the ending in a public crucifixtion.
.
.
(on a personal note I am hoping this blog will provide insights on todays election in Chile)
December 13th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Well,Pablo, if you suggest that the masses might be susceptible to a primal blood lust, that it is an irrational, seething mass that takes pleasure in the suffering of others because of its banality and venality — you are not alone. There are apparently a number of high paid corporate marketeers who have the same dim view of people. They believe that people are base enough to buy deodarant, razor blades and over priced watches because a guy who hits a ball with a stick tells them to. Play to that human stupidity and sometimes you win — and sometimes you lose.
December 13th, 2009 at 10:43 am
I’m glad Marc is weighing in here a lot, it’s important to know
where we stand on the big issues. The Clinton hunt of the
nighties required journalists to do a lot of weird moral
yoga to justify their key hole peeping (and, ultimately,
extortion abetting) which would make great contributions
to their own wallets and the wise, prudent moral
common sense that is the hallmark of our time.
See Coop’s last piece before 9-11, a
celebration of the Media’s performance on Gary
Condut, and you’ll get the idea.
The great libertarian loudmouths are not really
much on self reflection. I’m reading Carlin’s book
now and it’s pretty good, he obviously spent a lot
of time on it over the years and it’s a very honest
and entertaining work. I have a feeling, however,
George is not going to mention that in mid-
nighties he had a routine that went something like
“FUCK airport security, take a chance!!” Presenting
the then threadbare Airport Security as a great
violation of his personal freedom. Opps.
So it is with the Cooper/Hitchens fetish with
Clintons Sex Life, it was a weird, tacky pathology
that degraded Coopers own talent. Also, it fueled
bedrock wisdom that led to the election
of George W Bush. World economic meltdown,
tens of thousands dead in needless wars. But at
least he didn’t cheat on his wife. We should also
note that these two printed (and in the left media,
were ALLOWED to print) a lot of tawdry gossip
that wasn’t true.
Tiger Woods is about as meaningful as
the yellow happy face of the seventies. To
anyone with half a brain, that’s the significance
he has. He’s far less offensive than a scuzzy
Infotainment hack like Chris Matthews, who
Cooper admires.
But I’ll keep an open mind. What we MIGHT
take away from Tiger Woods is a lesson in
not trusting black guys who play golf.
December 13th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Third:
Why do I sense a vendetta? Do you keep a pendoflex of Cooper’s writings?
I take it you (like me) find most journalists covering the empire wanting. So why personalize? Whatever the merit of your picked bone with the host is being ofuscated by the snark.
On Clinton: Speculative coverage right down to the last pubic hair was warranted because Clinton made it an issue by his public denials. Contradictory assertions are relevant to the issue of Clinton’s honesty regardless of their obvious tantalizing nature.
Whatever the effect that Cooper/Hitchens had on the public “bedrock wisdom” regarding Clinton had no effect whatsoever on the Supreme Court (who elected Bush 5-4 while admonishing future courts that their decision is expressly intended NOT to create legal precedent).
For the second time,
Cooper did not throw the election, Third.
Finally, you write:
“What we MIGHT
take away from Tiger Woods is a lesson in
not trusting black guys who play golf.”
Drop the golf part and I think the subliminal cultural messege is clear.
December 13th, 2009 at 11:30 am
I would let Ann Coulter speak just so I could throw a pie in her face.
Cool.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Boy – 3rdRate. That last line really showed your “open mind.” Are you sure you’re not Woody. Oh, wait. It was a joke. Too bad you don’t give George Carlin – who got paid for his comic remarks – the same benefit of the doubt on his airport security…uh… JOKE. Note: If John Stossel had made the same comment on ABC, I might get upset. Carlin on HBO, not so much.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Pablo – I don’t think you understand why that joke actually IS racist. For you, it’s “drop the golf part” and you’ve got a white guy saying “don’t trust black guys…” But the “joke” hinges on liberal bullshit, wherein black guys are supposed to conform to their stereotypes of what’s “cool.” Before Tiger, that supposedly didn’t include golf, among a certain cloistered liberal element. I live in Oakland, so when I play golf here or in Alameda I see lots of black guys. Also lots of women of all sorts, but tons of young Asian women for whatever reason. Some of them are scary good players. Of course, ultimately, it’s all silly shit, sticks and balls, an afternoon in the fresh air and quite meaningless beyond the thing itself. But your reduction…contortion is a better word, actually… is even sillier lefty bullshit.
December 13th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Reg:
Whaa?
I said Larry Craigs ilk get the media spotlight because of the salacious nature of the scandal… and in Woods case the spotlight is amped up.
It’s not the golf (hell, even you play), no, it’s the spectacle of falling off the cliff.
December 13th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
I was referring to your last line. Maybe I misunderstood.
December 13th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Reg is right about telivised poker of any kind, whether it be the pros of celebrities. I think Bill Maher, of whom Sergio is a big fan, announced that one of his “new rules” is that if you’re going to televise an event it should be somewhat more exciting than watching paint dry, and on that poker doestn come close to making the cut. Just saying
December 13th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Based upon liberal attacks to any who dare criticize Obama and other blacks, Marc is a racist and closet Klansman. On top of everything, Woods was going out with white women! Why was he dissing the sisters?
December 13th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
This is often paint drying.
Where’s your national health care , US Empire?
December 13th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Mohammed Ali Roach Spray Commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XftrXVOZehQ
Still, not the conscienceless greed head that is Woods.
“In 2008, Chevron entered a five-year relationship with Tiger Woods’ foundation under the guise of philanthropy. But if Woods had a shred of social conscience, this partnership would never have existed. Lawsuits have been issued against Chevron for dumping toxic waste all over the planet.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-zirin/tiger-woods-deserves-your_b_374029.html
December 14th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
I’ve always thought that the only thing more boring than golf on TV is golf on radio. Then I saw that poker was being televised as a sport!
The problem with Pablo’s comparison between coverage of Larry Craig and Tiger Woods is that virtually no one in America could have identified Larry Craig in a lineup before the scandal (and maybe 1 in 8 or 10 could now). Tiger Woods is ubiquitous. What Woods does in any aspect of his life is for that reason alone far more important to Americans than anything Larry Craig could do save cast the deciding vote on whether we should attack Mars.
What disgusts me more than anything else is that Accenture, of all corporations, is separating itself from Woods and his endorsement contract with the company. Accenture! You might remember them better under the name Arthur Andersen. It changed its corporate name after it was caught aiding and abetting Enron in their conspiracy to defraud investors and to double-charge Californian grannies for electrical power. Now, however, they have changed the corporate name and cannot be associated with a guy who cheats on his wife, not the American people.
Perhaps Tiger should learn from his former joint venturer. Change his name to Eagle Forest. Or perhaps, like Arthur Andersen, change it to some sharp-sounding non-word like Victorite! or something.
I think Marc is right that his sheltered, bubble-boy upbringing is coming home to roost. If you’ve ever seen him on the sidelines of a Stanford U. basketball game, you can see he has a lot of little kid still in him. However, I don’t think he is uniquely selfish or greedy. He has done a lot more for kids particularly than a lot of his peer super-athletes.
December 14th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Reg,
I’m happy to let Carlin slip, it was this post that tends
to paint George as one of the great minds of our time.
Alas, on this issue he was massively wrong, in a manner
hang-the-goverment libertarians tend to be. In his
memoir, he also speaks of the military as the “war
business” and the Government keeping wars going for
the money. For this I am more indebted to Carlin
than I can ever express.
My joke about Black guys playing golf was
kidding on the square and I’ll go further. Pure
speculation, but the national obsession with this
Tiger Woods nonsense may be a subliminal way
for liberals (note this crap’s big play on Rachel
and Keith) to vent what they dare not speak:
utter frustration with the ghastly performance of
Obama in his first year.
May he prove me utterly wrong in 2010.
December 14th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Why was he “dissing the sisters,” Woody? Are you reading the 1993 printing of “Speaking of Negroes”?
December 14th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Pablo: Why personalize? Because comfy “present
company excluded” generalizations let everyone off
the hook and end up meaningless. I give journalists
or anyone else a wide birth to, from time to time,
swing wild. But you can see the utter consistency
in what Cooper said then and what he says now,
so why shouldn’t he be held accountable for it?
December 14th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Oh, Pablo, that other thing you said was really dumb too.
The scandal mongering of the Clinton years was fueled
by far right interests, with suckers like Coop/Hitch
playing along. Hitch, we would later see, was always
a right reactionary whose “contrarian” act gave liberals
a dirty little thrill. At any rate, tabloid journalism is
about MONEY, and you’ve simply bought one of the
many silly justifications offered to defend it.
December 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
I don’t watch Olberman, but Maddow looked embarrassed and damned near apologized when she had to do a breaking Tiger Woods story. She doesn’t need a golfer doing I-Hop waitresses to as some subliminal surrogate to make cogent criticisms of the Obama administration. The network makes them do these dumb-ass stories – I sent Ed Schultz a “WTF?” email when he devoted most of an hour to Michael Jackson and he responded that he knew it was crap but he didn’t have any choice – price of holding that seat. Schultz also has been free about criticizing Obama as he sees it before Tiger. You’re making a nutty association that says more about you than MSNBC, Rachel or Tiger.
December 14th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Well, you give our celeb progressive talking heads a LOT of
credit, thou I suspect there maybe something in what you
say. Maddow, as well illustrated by Somesby, does a LOT of
stupid clowning around to counterbalance her sometimes
worthwhile show. They must have to open her fist and
force that million bucks in it every year.
I would offer the Salon coverage as further evidence
to support my nutty association; the level of “freedom”
being demonstrated in criticizing Obama strikes me as
being pretty much on the “tsk tsk’ level. As for Shultz,
what, is Obama being too hard on the Blue Dogs?
And as you were one who signed off on the most
rancid sexism thrown at Hillary Clinton in Campaign,
I think I look elsewhere for judgements on the racial
sensitivity.
December 14th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Dave Zirin has a sharp and in my opinion brilliant piece on Tiger posted over at the Nation. Yes, it should come as little surprise that Woods, a mega star, has some shady corprate connection. That said, Zirin is right, after all Tiger has always come across as a corporate/technocrat type creation so if there any wonder that after his sponsors bailed on him, there were few if any willing to have his back. Read Zirin rather persuAsivaly elucidate this teachable moment, son
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091221/zirin/print
December 15th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
The Nike “loyalty” results, I think, from considerations in addition to profits. A great deal of Nike stock is owned by its athlete endorsers, particularly Michael Jordan. Jordan and Charles Barkley, in fact, are Woods’ Las Vegas running buddies. I’m sure that Phil Knight talked at least to Jordan about this, and for many reasons, including friendship, you can be sure Jordan would support Woods.
December 15th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Very nice post. I’m learning more about playing the game of golf from your blog, then I’ve ever did from even my own golf teacher. Hope it’s ok that I share this post on Facebook?
March 7th, 2010 at 1:49 am
Daniel Negreanu is in fact my favourite poker player. I just love how he is capable of revealing the other gamers playing cards
It is so amusing to see the faces of his opponents, when he tells them their precise hand.