Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: Alan Baker on 9 Dec 2009 18:06 In article <4b1f518a$0$14898$882e0bbb(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, assimilate(a)borg.org wrote: > On 8-Dec-2009, Alan Baker <alangbaker(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. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 9 Dec 2009 18:07 In article <545e9759-cd09-4a15-a6c8-b66a7e7bd94b(a)a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, dsc-ky <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > You don't know what kind of man he is, because you've never been close > > > > to being in his shoes. > > > > > Really... I do know... > > > > > he's a liar > > > he's an adulterer > > > > And do you know how man others are, or would be if they lived in his > > circumstances? Do you *know* that you wouldn't be? > > So it's okay... as long as other people like him do it too??? > > > > > > he's given to throwing fits > > > > No. He's given to outbursts of temper. > > Oh... that's much better... > > > > > > he's a womanizer > > > > And you're not, or wouldn't be if you had the chance? Is this judgement, > > or just envy? > > I'm not... and I have plenty of chances (I work at a University... > remember). But I *choose* not too. No envy. I had my wild time in my > 20s before marriage. Of course, Tiger would have said the same thing, so how do we know you're not lying? > > > > As I said before this whole mess is a shame. I wish he hadn't done all > > > these things. I doubt anything good can come from it. > > > > Certainly you're not doing anything to help it. > > He hasn't called... :) -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Alan Baker on 9 Dec 2009 18:08 In article <4820i5lr0g5obn3gashlg15pq7antgcahu(a)4ax.com>, Loudon Briggs <larebe(a)bbz.net> wrote: > Alan Baker <alangbaker(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 Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Loudon Briggs on 9 Dec 2009 20:45 Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >In article <4820i5lr0g5obn3gashlg15pq7antgcahu(a)4ax.com>, > Loudon Briggs <larebe(a)bbz.net> wrote: > >> Alan Baker <alangbaker(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. -- Loudon R. Briggs larebe(a)bbz.net Phoenix, AZ "How Can You Not Like A Game Where It's Okay To Get Teed Off, Tote A Six-Iron, Shoot Birdies, and If You're Under Par It's A Great Day!" (from "Frank & Ernest" by Bob Thaves -- used with permission)
From: Alan Baker on 9 Dec 2009 21:00
In article <lrj0i5t0186ar6hvo2e97n6j1tgndcujjh(a)4ax.com>, Loudon Briggs <larebe(a)bbz.net> wrote: > Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > >In article <4820i5lr0g5obn3gashlg15pq7antgcahu(a)4ax.com>, > > Loudon Briggs <larebe(a)bbz.net> wrote: > > > >> Alan Baker <alangbaker(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> |