Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: Alan Baker on 11 Dec 2009 17:14 In article <dfd729c9-f1b7-41de-9d1a-521b78908ef8(a)13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, Dene <gdstrue(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 10, 5:52�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > In article > > <8a3b9544-2084-40a9-86d2-14711b77e...(a)u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dene <gdst...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 9, 6:00�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > In article <lrj0i5t0186ar6hvo2e97n6j1tgndcu...(a)4ax.com>, > > > > �Loudon Briggs <lar...(a)bbz.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > > >In article <4820i5lr0g5obn3gashlg15pq7antgc...(a)4ax.com>, > > > > > > Loudon Briggs <lar...(a)bbz.net> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > BTW - Ken was right all along. > > > > > > > >> >> > > > Sorry, but since none of us actually know the man, you > > > > > >> >> > > > can't > > > > > >> >> > > > actually > > > > > >> >> > > > say that. > > > > > > > >> >> > > I though I just did... > > > > > > > >> ******* > > > > > >> >You think that it's OK, because Tiger Woods is a celebrity and > > > > > >> >who is > > > > > >> >it > > > > > >> >really hurting, but the fact remains that you don't know the man. > > > > > >> ******* > > > > > > > >> I think we're getting to know him better every day! > > > > > > > >That you think that is the problem. > > > > > > > Alan... at the top of your message, it indicates you're partially > > > > > responding to something I posted. There is nothing else in your > > > > > message even closely associated with anything I said. > > > > > > > Careless editing like that has often set off some of those arguments > > > > > on this Group that NOBODY ever wins. Unfortunately, "no editing" is > > > > > even more prevalent. > > > > > > I'm sorry, but I don't understand your objection. > > > > > > The fact that you really think you're gaining much insight into Tiger > > > > Woods' character is the problem. You're getting a tiny, much distorted > > > > (through the glass of a scandal-hungry media) slice and you think that > > > > you know something about Tiger Woods. > > > > > > -- > > > > Alan Baker > > > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>- Hide quoted > > > > text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > More of the same. �Baker disputes but doesn't offer a cite or specific > > > opinion in return. > > > > > -Greg > > > > More of the same, Greg declares it cowardly to talk about people he has > > killfiled, and then talks about me, whom he has in his killfile. > > > > > You're not KF'd on Google Groups. Look at the post. Big D means GG. > Little d means OE, which gives me the ability to plonk. What does that have to do with the fact that you declared talking about someone that is in one's killfile to be cowardly... ....and then proceeded to do it over and over. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 11 Dec 2009 17:14 In article <3b2f4527-3c3d-489a-a28f-5aa19ab2e565(a)2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, dsc-ky <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote: > On Dec 11, 11:00�am, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > In article > > <6f6d8026-00da-49ba-a5a4-6cf80cff3...(a)v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > > > > > �dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > On Dec 10, 8:51�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <8183adb0-21e5-48f1-8240-b1bc0379c...(a)m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > �dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 10, 2:11�pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > In article > > > > > > <41a11d73-2d73-4e05-bfdd-840a50b82...(a)e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 10, 12:14�am, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > > > > > > > > On �9-Dec-2009, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > You don't know what kind of man he is, because you've > > > > > > > > > > > never > > > > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > close > > > > > > > > > > > to being in his shoes. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is a man to be judged by his actions or not? > > > > > > > > > > > Absolutely, but a man should be judged on more than the > > > > > > > > > actions > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > happen to make it onto television. The view of television is > > > > > > > > > biased > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > covers only a very small slice of someone's life. > > > > > > > > > That small part is mostly all we have been talking about... > > > > > > > > But you've been using it to make statements about his whole life... > > > > > > > I have? I thought I was talking mostly about him being a punk, liar, > > > > > adulterer, etc. Is that his whole life? Things that pretty well > > > > > relate > > > > > directly to this scandal. > > > > > > Him "being a punk" is about his whole life? > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that there is very little that could make up for > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > he's > > > > > > > > done to his family. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > bill-o > > > > > > > > > Shhs... you aren't allowed an opinion without first getting > > > > > > > Baker's > > > > > > > approval... :) > > > > > > > > LOL > > > > > > > > Not the least in the world. I wonder why it is that so many who > > > > > > want to > > > > > > spout off suddenly think that anyone else discussing the merits of > > > > > > what > > > > > > they say is somehow trying to prevent them from saying it? > > > > > > > Because your feathers get really ruffled anytime anyone says anything > > > > > negative about Tiger... whether is just an opinion, verifiable fact > > > > > or > > > > > whatever. :):):) > > > > > > Nope. That's not it at all. Apparently, you don't know me very well, > > > > either. > > > > > > -- > > > > Alan Baker > > > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> > > > > > But I said that long before any of this happened... so it is not in > > > any way related to this particular incident alone. > > > > And you didn't know enough then to say it... > > > > -- > > Alan Baker > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > <://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> > > If it quacks like a punk... it probably is... LOL I guess that's as close as we'll get to you saying "you're right", so... -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: dsc-ky on 11 Dec 2009 17:54 On Dec 11, 5:13 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <27b5c892-5265-4bae-acba-55177f625...(a)u1g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > On Dec 11, 2:10 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > In article <7ofabcF3pteg...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > >news:alangbaker-E089A3.08004111122009(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > > In article <7of4h0F3nrbe...(a)mid.individual.net>, > > > > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiik...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > >> "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > > >>news:alangbaker-B57F39.23332910122009(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > >> > In article <4b21d52e$0$17352$882e0...(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, > > > > >> > assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > > > > > >> >> On 10-Dec-2009, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > >> >> > > It seems to me that there is very little that could make up for > > > > >> >> > > what > > > > >> >> > > he's > > > > >> >> > > done to his family. > > > > > >> >> > You don't even know precisely *what* he has done and you certainly > > > > >> >> > don't > > > > >> >> > know how his family feels about it. > > > > > >> >> this is quite possibly the silliest thing you've ever posted. > > > > > >> > How so? > > > > > >> > The following are all yes or no questions, Bill: > > > > > >> > Do you know what actually happened (versus what a lot of people with > > > > >> > their own agendas have said happened)? > > > > > >> > Do you know what his family actually feels about all of this? > > > > > >> > I dare you to answer those questions. > > > > > >> I dare you, LOL! > > > > > > Yup. Does English confuse you so much? > > > > > No, just your arrogance. > > > > LOL > > > > What is arrogant about asking someone to answer a couple of questions? > > > > Arrogant -- to me, at least -- would seem to be imagining that you know > > > the true character of a person > > > What character? > > As I was saying. We're listening... if you ever actually say anything... :)
From: assimilate on 12 Dec 2009 00:11 On 11-Dec-2009, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > Do you know what actually happened (versus what a lot of people with > their own agendas have said happened)? I know enough > Do you know what his family actually feels about all of this? humiliated -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 12 Dec 2009 00:17
On 11-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > As long as we differentiate between "an indication" and "all > you need to know," I have no problem with that point of view. > People are complex and always weak in places. Child prodigies > especially so. Overall, I think everyone would do better to > tend to their own failings than to harp on those of a celebrity. Good point; a rule I try to live by > > In my brief perusals of this group lately, I've been > especially entertained by the sight of unrepentant > bigots acting as though they can claim moral superiority > over somebody. The very people who are the very worst > that humanity has to offer think that they are better > than Tiger Woods because (a) their skin is pink, and > (b) Tiger has trouble keeping it in his pants. These > are EXACTLY the folks who most need to look in the > mirror before they start pointing at anyone else's > failings -- and the last ones who will ever do it. > The sad part is they never will; as long as they are pointing they don't have to confront their own failings -- bill-o |