Wow, Tiger got Dissed by Dan Jenkins?

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

Yes. He acts like a prick, and this event is a very good example. It was a SATIRE! He's a public figure, grow some thicker skin.

The fact is, in the scheme of things, very few people knew or cared about this until Tiger went off. Now it is everywhere and for no other reason than Tiger just can't help being a prick. Gotta get back at old, mean Dan Jenkins! Jenkins is an old man who is pretty much retired and probably is loving the attention so, believe me, the only loser in this is Tiger Woods.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

If Jenkins did a fake interview with Christina Kim that hit on her weight, incurring a back injury during a massage, her golf failings,  fashion style and history of depression would you tell her to get a thicker skin too or is it different because her name isn't Tiger?

You said this before and I ignored it. Since you won't let it go, I will tell you that nobody would do that to Christina Kim because she is a likeable individual and doesn't treat the media like dirt. Besides the fact that Christina Kim has often addressed that stuff herself because she has something called self-awareness, something Tiger is sadly lacking.

[iacas]

And you most probably would never have heard about it if Tiger hadn't got his panties in a wad about it. THAT's become the story, not a poorly conceived satirical piece that didn't even have a link to the internet until this. I read it a week ago when I got the magazine and forgot about it a minute later.

I read the story and found it tasteless a week or so ago.

Golfers who get Golf Digest - some 1.25 million in the U.S. alone - would have been able to read the article. So… No. I don't agree.

BTW, those same 1.25 million people are probably the only ones really talking about Tiger responding to the article, too.

Yes. He acts like a prick, and this event is a very good example. It was a SATIRE! He's a public figure, grow some thicker skin.

No, sorry, that's not the answer to everything.

Tiger puts up with a lot. Seriously, his adultery and stuff was HIS PERSONAL LIFE and yet he stood around and let Billy Payne trash him during a press conference for a tournament he'd won four times. They didn't do that for Arnie's adultery. They didn't do it for any other golfer's adultery. It had nothing to do with golf, and yet, he's sat silently by while people who have made a lot of money off his backs trashed him repeatedly and got their licks in, and continue to do so.

Fine, he's a public figure… but there's a line. You don't get to do certain things. Tiger felt this was across the line. It misrepresented HIM. It wasn't just someone saying "I think Tiger is a jerk and a weenie" - it was someone pretending that Tiger was DOING those things and SAYING those things about himself.

Pretty easy to me to see why it was across the line Tiger had drawn in his mind for what he'd take and the shit he didn't want to take.

The fact is, in the scheme of things, very few people knew or cared about this until Tiger went off.

Stop saying things like that as fact when you have no clue how true or accurate it is.

You do this frequently, particularly when the topic is Tiger Woods, who you clearly dislike.

Point being, that just because Tiger might look petty from this, and might not have anything to gain, that does not mean that something doesn't need to be said.  As far as we know, Tiger is smart enough to know that this might reflect badly on him, but he still decides its worth it because he doesn't want to let Jenkins get away with being a "petty, vindictive fool."

Yes.

[newtogolf]

You said this before and I ignored it. Since you won't let it go, I will tell you that nobody would do that to Christina Kim because she is a likeable individual and doesn't treat the media like dirt. Besides the fact that Christina Kim has often addressed that stuff herself because she has something called self-awareness, something Tiger is sadly lacking.

You're avoiding the question I asked.  I didn't ask if someone would write an article about Christina Kim, I asked if they did would you suggest she get a thicker skin?  I don't find her that likeable, I don't dislike either.  What more would you like Tiger to address?  He's discussed his infidelity, his relationship with Stevie, do you want him to have a press conference on his tipping philosophy?  You and Jenkins have an axe to grind with Tiger, it's that simple.

[jamo]

@phan52 , this wasn't Stephen Colbert and a staff full of comedians deftly weaving together a five-minute bit. This was a stodgy old writer who has been told his entire career how much of a legend he is and who clearly believes his own hype. You've got to earn and establish the title "satirist" by actually getting laughs. Jenkins did done nothing of the sort.

[Valleygolfer]

Yes. He acts like a prick, and this event is a very good example. It was a SATIRE! He's a public figure, grow some thicker skin.

The fact is, in the scheme of things, very few people knew or cared about this until Tiger went off. Now it is everywhere and for no other reason than Tiger just can't help being a prick. Gotta get back at old, mean Dan Jenkins! Jenkins is an old man who is pretty much retired and probably is loving the attention so, believe me, the only loser in this is Tiger Woods.

You kinda act like a prick. The way you (and Spitfisher) carry a torch hating him like he f$%#ed your mom in front of you... So he doesn't act the way you "want" him to....bfd...  He has a right to call someone out if he feels like it. These are personal attacks, fighting words if it were. If someone who barely knows you barraged you with insults about you to everyone you know would that be cool? You think you know the guy because you were a helper at a tournament and experienced a fraction of a second of time with him? Some people have their line, Jenkins crossed Tiger's...

[Spitfisher]

You kinda act like a prick. The way you (and Spitfisher) carry a torch hating him like he f$%#ed your mom in front of you... So he doesn't act the way you "want" him to....bfd...  He has a right to call someone out if he feels like it. These are personal attacks, fighting words if it were. If someone who barely knows you barraged you with insults about you to everyone you know would that be cool? You think you know the guy because you were a helper at a tournament and experienced a fraction of a second of time with him? Some people have their line, Jenkins crossed Tiger's...

Wow, that's deep. And now you pass judgement that I carry a torch of hatred for him. I take the word hate very seriously, I teach children never to use it. go back to my posts and show me the hatred- I dare you. You need to get both a life and a clue. Because outside of your little world and this forum there are many people that do not share your opinion of what you wrote above. Now back to our regularly scheduled programing.....

[phan52]

@phan52 , this wasn't Stephen Colbert and a staff full of comedians deftly weaving together a five-minute bit. This was a stodgy old writer who has been told his entire career how much of a legend he is and who clearly believes his own hype. You've got to earn and establish the title "satirist" by actually getting laughs. Jenkins did done nothing of the sort.

Dan Jenkins has made a 50 year career out of being a satirist. If people didn't think all those years that he was any good at it he wouldn't have HAD that career. But he's way past his prime and hasn't done anything relevant in years, and a whiny, petulant, thin-skinned Tiger Woods just put him front and center in the mainstream media.

[iacas]

Dan Jenkins has made a 50 year career out of being a satirist. If people didn't think all those years that he was any good at it he wouldn't have HAD that career.

So that means he gets to cross the line without a response? No. Funny in the distant past doesn't mean always funny. This wasn't funny. Please. Your severe dislike of Tiger is flavoring your opinion once again. Can't wait until you start trying to convince us you're actually a fan…

[phan52]

Golfers who get Golf Digest - some 1.25 million in the U.S. alone - would have been able to read the article. So… No. I don't agree.

BTW, those same 1.25 million people are probably the only ones really talking about Tiger responding to the article, too.

Wrong. The 1.25 million people who get Golf Digest is nothing compared to the many millions more who found a piece about the event on their mainstream media homepage this morning because of Tiger's petulant response. There was nothing like that on ANY major websites last week when Jenkins' FAKE interview was published. That is just a fact.

[iacas]

Wrong. The 1.25 million people who get Golf Digest is nothing compared to the many millions more who found a piece about the event on their mainstream media homepage this morning because of Tiger's petulant response. There was nothing like that on ANY major websites last week when Jenkins' FAKE interview was published. That is just a fact.

:facepalm: You said " And you most probably would never have heard about it if Tiger hadn't got his panties in a wad about it. "

The only "you" in that sentence is someone participating right here in this discussion. A golfer. It's incorrect - a stretch at best - to assume that golfers avid enough to be on a golf forum - would have "most probably never have heard about it."

Seriously, dude, enough with the baseless opinions stated as fact. It's your MO, and the act has worn thin. You don't just get to make stuff up.

You're also assuming that those who read the article in their "mainstream media homepage" are all going to side against Tiger. I showed my wife and she sympathized with Tiger. Many sympathized with the nude celebs too. Just because more people know about this does not mean that you can assume everyone's going to side with Jenkins. Jenkins is now thought to be a giant ass by more people today than he was two days ago. Two days ago it was just golf fans who thought he was an ass. Today it's likely more…

[phan52]

So that means he gets to cross the line without a response? No. Funny in the distant past doesn't mean always funny. This wasn't funny.

Please. Your severe dislike of Tiger is flavoring your opinion once again. Can't wait until you start trying to convince us you're actually a fan…

I don't have a "severe" dislike for Tiger but I do think he is a major jerk. As far as being a fan is concerned, I certainly pay more attention to a tournament when he is in the field. He is great for golf and I hope he gets his mojo back. It's just too bad he's such a jerk.

[iacas]

I don't have a "severe" dislike for Tiger

Sure thing. We've had your number on this for years. Seriously, just embrace the hate or whatever.

[phan52]

Here's another fact: you said "And you most probably would never have heard about it if Tiger hadn't got his panties in a wad about it."

The only "you" in that sentence is someone participating right here in this discussion. A golfer. It's incorrect - a stretch at best - to assume that golfers avid enough to be on a golf forum - would have "most probably never have heard about it."

Seriously, dude, enough with the baseless opinions stated as fact. It's your MO, and the act has worn thin. You don't just get to make stuff up.

You're also assuming that those who read the article in their "mainstream media homepage" are all going to side against Tiger. I showed my wife and she sympathized with Tiger. Many sympathized with the nude celebs too. Just because more people know about this does not mean that you can assume everyone's going to side with Jenkins. Jenkins is now thought to be a giant ass by more people today than he was two days ago. Two days ago it was just golf fans who thought he was an ass. Today it's likely more…

How come the other thread that was posted over a week ago got a total of about five responses before yesterday when Golf Digest finally posted the link? It was a piece buried on almost the back page of the magazine and got very little attention. So yeah, most people either didn't see it or register much of an opinion of it. It was fluff. Now it's a big deal. Dan Jenkins thanks you, Tiger.

[Valleygolfer]

Wow, that's deep. And now you pass judgement that I carry a torch of hatred for him. I take the word hate very seriously, I teach children never to use it. go back to my posts and show me the hatred- I dare you. You need to get both a life and a clue. Because outside of your little world and this forum there are many people that do not share your opinion of what you wrote above. Now back to our regularly scheduled programing.....

Funny. You're upset yet you expect Tiger to suck it up...

[newtogolf]

How come the other thread that was posted over a week ago got a total of about five responses before yesterday when Golf Digest finally posted the link? It was a piece buried on almost the back page of the magazine and got very little attention. So yeah, most people either didn't see it or register much of an opinion of it. It was fluff. Now it's a big deal. Dan Jenkins thanks you, Tiger.

When I received my copy in the mail I skipped over Jenkins article because it didn't appear to be worth my time to read.  When the first thread about the article was posted here I went back and read it.  I didn't comment on that thread because the fake interview was so pathetic and biased it didn't warrant a comment and I didn't have anything to add to the discussion.

[phan52]

Sure thing. We've had your number on this for years. Seriously, just embrace the hate or whatever.

And you continue to embrace your certainty about somebody you don't know. I really don't care.

[iacas]

And you continue to embrace your certainty about somebody you don't know. I really don't care.

We know you. Your posts about Tiger say plenty. If you don't care, stop posting about it.

[Valleygolfer]

How come the other thread that was posted over a week ago got a total of about five responses before yesterday when Golf Digest finally posted the link? It was a piece buried on almost the back page of the magazine and got very little attention. So yeah, most people either didn't see it or register much of an opinion of it. It was fluff. Now it's a big deal. Dan Jenkins thanks you, Tiger.

I am not a subscriber to GD and there was no link available so I couldn't comment until now or I would have.