Jason Whitlock really ticks me off

We're going to smoke that evildoer out of his cave, remember?

Oh wait ... was that Osama bin Laden or Michael Phelps? ???

"Guess I'll roll another number for the road ..."

 

Or "Hero Member," as it says on one particular douchebag's forum, of which he is the only regularly posting member.

Huh-huh-huh.....he's a "member."

 

So Osama bin Laden was smoking a doobie with Michael Phelps and Jason Whitlock?

 

Naw, Jackie's not the Fat One. He's the Great One. (No apologies to Wayne Gretzky necessary)

 

Lighten up.

 

I haven't seen Obama knocking on Bin Laden's door, either, unless it's to give him a bailout or a $3 million bonus.

 

One had 2688 days to find him.

The other's had 58.

So how about we all shut the fuck up and keep the dimwitted politics on the politics board?

Thanks.

 

Nice language.

 

Oh, yeah. You're really going there on THIS board.

Jesus.

 

Three reactions:

1. Yes, you do give a crap. If you didn't, you wouldn't be responding.
2. Just by participating in a callout of Whitlock on this thread, you are no better than the other minions here who persist in giving him the in-awe-of celebrity treatment---if he were to walk into a room occupied you, it would take you 15 minuets to work up the nerve to speak to him, and let's see yuo say to his face what is being said in here. He's one of your PEERS for cryin' out loud!! Treat him as such.
3. Overrated???!!! He gets paid very, very well for being overrated, and this obviously is not an industry that frivolously throws around big salaries and retention bonuses not paid to CEOs.

 

It's not hero worship. It's water-cooler conversation.

I never read Whitlock, except when things are posted on here, but discussions about specifically named people -- usually columnists -- should be no surprise, or any problem.

Columnists are the celebrities of our industry. It makes sense that they're the ones who people -- even fellow journalists -- would talk about. It's just giving a topic a name, a face and a voice, which often is how things get talked about at all.

When we do it, it's just the intersection between our inner sports fans and our identities as sports journalists being reached.

I doubt Whitlock cares whether he or his columns come up in conversations. In fact, he would, and probably should, be more concerned if his name didn't come up, and if he and/or his writing didn't elicit polarizing reactions once in a while.

That's part of the whole point of being a columnist, isn't it?