OT: The Round Mound Sounds Off

by fisheyes on Feb 17, 2008 4:56 PM PST

Charles Barkley had some interesting things to say on Wolf Blitzer's show yesterday. Gotta love the guy for always speaking candidly. He seems to have no fear of the moralistic loudmouths who will inevitably villify him for his remarks. A video clip of his remarks is here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/17/charles-barkley-slams-rep_n_87068.html

Poll

Do you agree with Chuck?

Yes

46 votes

No

15 votes

61 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 32 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

PREACH IT BROTHER!! AMEN!!

Sometimes it seems that Chuck is one of the few national people that still have some balls on them. Jesus would be a Democrat, hanging out with lepurs, and the down trodden not these holier-than-though-I'm-better-than-you-cause-I-got-Jesus conservative christians. I am not christian and I echo everything that Chuck says. If I were Christian I would believe that your spirituality is something between you and Jesus, no church involved. Forgiveness, non prejudice, and tolerance are three pillars of christianity as I see it and the CC movement has none of those to my observation.

PREACH IT CHUCK!!

Vote Jerryd Bayless in '08

by SpyderRyder on Feb 17, 2008 9:07 PM PST reply actions

Why don't you ask Jesus how he would vote

He is available anytime & can meet you anywhere. He has a book out & you don't ever have to go to Church.

by tweener on Feb 18, 2008 9:36 AM PST up reply actions

I don't necessarily

agree or disagree with Sir Charles, but I love the fact that he has the sack to say stuff like this on national TV. Nothing wishy-washy about the man, you always know exactly where he stands.

by coolguyrob on Feb 17, 2008 9:20 PM PST reply actions

inflammatory and divisive

I don't like statements like that because they are divisive and inflammatory, that's all I'll say about that. The biggest problem with politics these days is that everyone is a pundit and their biggest tool is name calling. I have zero respect for someone with anything less than a well informed and intelligent conversation. Stick to basketball Chuck.

by mark twain on Feb 17, 2008 9:44 PM PST reply actions

Truth hurts, huh? nt

by grimc on Feb 17, 2008 11:13 PM PST up reply actions

um

Not sure what you're trying to imply with this comment. But since you don't know me from Adam, and couldn't possibly even know my religious or political beliefs, then I'd suggest you stay away from these sort of drive by attacks. "Truth hurts..." ??? You have absolutely no right to assault me like that. You don't know if I'm a liberal, centrist, or conservative. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Atheist. How could you possibly know? Why don't you keep these sort of ridiculous comments at the O Live forum where you'd probably get lot's of fanfare for such an intelligent comment as, "truth hurts, doesn't it?"...

by mark twain on Feb 18, 2008 8:30 AM PST up reply actions

Actually

We can figure out quite a lot about Mark Twain's beliefs. I thought he was dead, of course, but perhaps reports of his demise have been greatly exaggerated. The fact that you are posting here is perhaps evidence of life after death?

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 12:22 PM PST up reply actions

What Barkley said

was true. You clearly are adversely affected by it. Ergo: Truth hurts, huh?

What's truly ridiculous is a statement like "Stick to basketball." You don't like what Barkley says, so you think he should just shut up.

Maybe you should read what Twain wrote about religion and Christianity in particular. Maybe you'd want him to go post on OLive, too.

by grimc on Feb 18, 2008 9:30 PM PST up reply actions

Interesting

When a conservative says this kind of stuff about liberals, they squeal like a stuck pig.

This kind of stuff convinces no one of anything and only inflames people on both sides.

People need to return to the perspective that people who disagree with them politically are not the enemy. 99%+ of Americans, whatever their politics, want what is best for America. They just have different ideas about what "best" is.

There's no point in flaming people who want the same thing you do but have different ideas of how to get there. It's much more profitable to discuss the merits of the ideas.

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 12:21 AM PST reply actions

Exactly

It seems to me that people either don't know how to argue anymore, or just have decided to spin gets better results. Rhetoric is an aid to logic in convincing people, but now it just seems that Rhetoric is given the weight of logic (i.e., analogies, attacks on opponents, and argument from authority are used to make points over, say, a well constructed syllogism with well-defined and understood, if not universally accepted, terms.

There is also this mindset that if I prove the other guy wrong, I am right by default. History is littered with philosophers who wrote shining criticisms of accepted or peer ideas, but failed to come up with solid ideas on their own after tearing other people's down (I remember fuzzily this happening in a Francis Bacon treatise back in college, for instance). Criticism is always needed, but you should be putting out a clear, incisive, positive idea of your own every now and then (not aiming this at anyone, just extending a comment into a rant).

I will never waste a beer. There are too many sober kids in India. -Rod Benson

by supremepuntiff on Feb 18, 2008 12:45 AM PST up reply actions

You must not...

........... listen to Michael Savage, Rush, etc. very much, do you?

They go on and on and on and on and on and on EVERY DAY. And there's no "squealing like a stuck pig."

So stop making stuff up!

"You don't live by the jumpshot, you die by the jumpshot." ---Charles Barkley, 2/7/08

by timbo on Feb 18, 2008 7:59 AM PST up reply actions

Actually, no, I don't listen to them

I'll just say this little bit more about Charles' comments, and then I'll leave it.

For a guy who thinks judging people is wrong and hypocritical, he sounds awfully judgmental (and therefore hypocritical) to me.
Anyone who knows anything about what Christians have always believed, going right back to Jesus Christ and the apostles, knows that they have always said that doing certain things are wrong. Jesus said that about an awful lot of things. So either Jesus also was hypocritical, or Charles isn't really understanding what Jesus was teaching. Since Charles is better known as a basketball player than as a theologian or Bible scholar, this is hardly surprising.

None of this is to say anything about the rights or wrongs of any political positions, just about the validity of the approach that he has chosen to take in discussing these things. By the standard he articulated (if that's the right word for it), Jesus and the apostles were fake Christians, too. Perhaps it would be better if he reconsidered that particular line of attack.

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 9:10 AM PST up reply actions

ironically...

Jesus reserved his harshest criticism for... the hypocritical religious establishment. Substitute "scribes and pharisees" in to what Charles said, and it sounds an awful lot like what Jesus was saying.

Not saying Charles neccesarily is right, just pointing it out.

And Christians have said from the very beginning all sorts of things to do... and they have misunderstood Jesus, from the very beginning, down right to the disciples themselves.

As far as Jesus telling his followers what to do, it was this: "Love one another"
and Paul says that the WHOLE law is fullfilled in this. Everyone should stand up for what they believe in, Christian or not. Like you said, Jesus certainly did. But Christians do have a special responsibility that they ought to live by if they are really following Jesus, and that's to speak the truth in love, and even to love their enemies.

by TimG on Feb 18, 2008 9:33 AM PST up reply actions

Yes, but...

His criticism of the religious establishment wasn't because they were saying that some things were wrong. It was because they were saying one thing and doing another.

Charles is criticizing people because they are saying that some things are wrong. It isn't at all the same thing.

Now, if Charles were criticizing that pastor in Colorado who got caught last year saying one thing and doing another, that would be one thing. Or guys like Swaggart. But he isn't, he's just criticizing people who believe and say that certain things are wrong.

He's upset about people who think homosexuality is wrong, and so oppose gay marriage. But that doesn't make a person a hypocrite.

Most people think that racism is wrong, and so we oppose segregation. That doesn't make us judgmental hypocrites. Christians should make judgments against racism, and no one would call them hypocrites for doing so, least of all Charles.

So Charles' objection is not that people are wrong to make moral judgments, but that he doesn't like this particular moral judgment that they are making. You may agree with him, or you may not, but ranting about people judging and being hypocrites is a pretty silly way to address it.

"Love on another", including your enemies, doesn't mean you agree with everything they do, nor does it mean you don't think that the government should restrict certain activities. Just because you love even murderers doesn't mean that murder should be legal. "Love one another," as you rightly say, should affect the way a person would speak and act towards others, but it does not result in a libertine attitude towards government.

And obviously, many on the religious right do not speak the truth in love. But Charles seems to be painting with a pretty broad brush here. He seems to have something against all conservatives.

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 10:45 AM PST up reply actions

Yeah, I pretty much agree with you

I don't think Charles is on some higher moral ground... He was just saying what he thinks, and at the same time making sweeping generalizations, which doesn't make him really any different than the people he was criticizing, who tend to do the same thing, oftentimes. But while I don't really think (albeit, i don't really know him at all) that Charles was being all moral himself, I think the points he was making at least touched on some truth. Unfortunately, I think a lot of christian leaders deserve as much, if not more, criticism than those on the other side of the political spectrum. Thing is, Christianity today has become largely legalistic, which is sad because it is the exact thing that Jesus came to save us from. And some of the leading religious right figures are absolute models of judgement, condemnation, and legalism.
I'm not a liberal, however. And I respect, in many ways, many of those leaders... but like you said, that doesn't mean I agree with everything they say. They bring what they've got. And Charles, he's bringing what he's got also. That's all I'm really saying. Anyway, thanks for engaging me clearly jscot, I respect you're opinion.

Now.. basketball, anyone? lol...

by TimG on Feb 18, 2008 11:30 AM PST up reply actions

Basketball? What's that?

Thanks for the discussion, TimG, good stuff. Perhaps one more point, which (based on your comments) I'm sure you would agree with, but I think it is good to say in these discussions:

I think Jesus would have been very concerned with the positions we take, but (and here's the truth a lot of people overlook) just as concerned with how we hold and express those positions, and how we relate to people who disagree with us.

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 12:14 PM PST up reply actions

Yes

If not even more concerned with the how than with the what. (cf. 1Cor 13... "If I know all mysteries and all knowledge, and have all faith so as to move mountains, and have not love, I am nothing.)

Hey, talk of religion/politics doesn't always end up angry--this is proof of that. Like you said, good stuff.

by TimG on Feb 18, 2008 1:44 PM PST up reply actions

What an idiot

Wolf Blitzer is. What is he implying when he asks Charles if he isn't afraid to express his opinion? Good grief. I realize that our right to an opinion is in jeapordy in america, but give me a break. What? Are the fascists going to come and haul him off to a waterboarding session? Tell 'em Chuck. And then go back to Basketball. I do appreciate your efforts though.

by annthefan on Feb 18, 2008 2:25 AM PST reply actions

Chuck goes up tough in the key...

............ and muscles it for 2!

Chuck's point about Presidents being surrounded advisers is completely on the mark. All the American people need to be sure of is to elect a President who doesn't surround themself with incompetent hacks or corrupt and venal manipulators. Not naming any names here, ha ha.

It SHOCKED Wolf Blitzer -- SHOCKED, I say -- to hear unfiltered political commentary on CNN's airwaves. He's so used to hearing spin and mushballs that he somehow seems to have lost touch with the fact that that's how real people talk...

Funny, but I always thought Barkley was a Republican...

"You don't live by the jumpshot, you die by the jumpshot." ---Charles Barkley, 2/7/08

by timbo on Feb 18, 2008 7:58 AM PST reply actions

Do you think Jesus could dunk?

I bet if they had basketball back in his day, he would have a wicked cross-over and could dunk over Pontius Pilatus.

"Darkness warshed over the Dude - darker'n a black steer's tookus on a moonless prairie night. There was no bottom." The Stranger from The Big Lebowski (1999)

by tominhawaii on Feb 18, 2008 11:37 AM PST reply actions

That would be SO great to emcee...

AND NOW, IMMANUEL, SAVIOR OF THE WORLD, THE SATAN-STOPPER! ECCE HOMO, THE MESSIAH--JESUUUUUUUUUUUUUS CHRIST!

by TimG on Feb 18, 2008 11:45 AM PST up reply actions

Also, he could play with Webster

That way we would have the Definition playing with the Word.

by TimG on Feb 18, 2008 11:51 AM PST up reply actions

politics AND religion all in one thread...

page down...

RUDY > MJ

by myemic23 on Feb 18, 2008 11:40 AM PST reply actions

It all ties together, you see

from the otherworldly play of Jesus (Shuttleworth) in last night's ASG to the spiritual assist provided by the apostle (Chris) Paul, the world of hoops is just so enmeshed with the world of religion that it's impossible to try and draw any demarcations between the two.

Politics is in the mix, too, as the life of the life of the "most political" of the biblical prophets teaches us.

by knickfan on Feb 18, 2008 12:11 PM PST up reply actions

not good debating either

we should be concentrating on the blazers second half and pondering next year..this verbal sparring is going to create bad blood amongst you.... cant we just all get along.... dont we all bleed red,black & a splash of silver?

if it can be conceived it can be achieved

by lyfefindsaway on Feb 18, 2008 12:07 PM PST reply actions

Bleeding red, black, and silver

How can we know who bleeds what? The best way is to stab each other in the back with our political weapons.

I think we can agree to disagree on a lot of things and still agree on the Blazers. And I think we can be friends even if we disagree on some of these things. It doesn't have to be mean-spirited.

Look, if we can have a civil sports blog, then I think even politics can be civil. It's just the next step....

I don't see anyone dishing out nasty personal attacks here.

by jscot on Feb 18, 2008 12:18 PM PST up reply actions

huh?? what post were you reading

jscot!!!.. ..never mind...go blazers

if it can be conceived it can be achieved

by lyfefindsaway on Feb 19, 2008 12:01 AM PST up reply actions

Yeah, never mind

I was trying to make a joke about bleeding, since you had talked about us all bleeding red, black, and silver. Then, I tried to make a serious point about we can discuss this stuff, since you had said it wasn't good to debate it.

The whole thing fell flat. Just ignore....

by jscot on Feb 19, 2008 12:06 AM PST up reply actions

When I was at school

good boys from slums use to fight with you before become your friends. I called that the "Quarrelsomes´ friendship". They were honest, hard guys, but actually very honest. So you´ll fight guys, you´ll forgive and you´ll be sincerily friends.

I like Brandon Roy, whatever planet he comes from. (Bill Walton?)

by amlmart1 on Feb 18, 2008 12:52 PM PST reply actions

Were you an Outsider?

Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.

"Darkness warshed over the Dude - darker'n a black steer's tookus on a moonless prairie night. There was no bottom." The Stranger from The Big Lebowski (1999)

by tominhawaii on Feb 19, 2008 10:52 AM PST up reply actions

youre not from america correct ??

well simmering comments from someone could increase a propensity to be critical of others future post because of a past "grilling" ..good boys from the slums???? just saying that in n.e portland could get you a date with a mortician...just sayin... i love youre rudy post..I hope this guy translates to the nba..im am sooooo amped up

if it can be conceived it can be achieved

by lyfefindsaway on Feb 19, 2008 12:07 AM PST reply actions