Dave,
I suspect you would want Tiger to be political on your side of the aisle. From your prospective Tiger could be more damaging by endorsing causes that you are not allied with. Count your blessings.

Where Woods might enter the political arena doesn't much matter. It's the cone of silence surrounding his "brand." Even if he came out as the biggest Ayn Rand lunatic of them all, he'd still be less marketable. And would be fair game for commentary that could easily reduce that value further.

For example: What I've found most facist-inating is how he's nicknamed for an imperialist collaborator - a local scout in Vietnam. Did his namesake survive? One Tiger makes Nikes for pennies, the other hawks them for centimillions. Irony, where is thy 9 iron?

Keep on, DZ, you kick metric tons of ass.

Mr. Zirin,
I love your column, but sometimes wonder about how you draw your lines. I agree with what you say about Tiger. However, not long ago you praised Lebron James for saying he wanted to "dunk on George W. Bush" but failed to even mention that he--just like Tiger--smiles and charms for Nike, sells their shoes with gusto, turning a blind eye to their sweatshops. I find Lebron a much more likable character than Tiger, which makes his silence all the more frustrating. But shouldn't we have our standards? And, when it comes to this one, doesn't King James falls as far short as the fallen Tiger?

I mean, for all of the sponsor reasons we should already be done with Tiger, but I don't understand the implication of that last sentence.

Are you saying if Tiger was more political someone should have his back?

I mean, for all of the sponsor reasons we should already be done with Tiger, but I don't understand the implication of that last sentence.

Are you saying if Tiger was more political someone should have his back?

I mean, for all of the sponsor reasons we should already be done with Tiger, but I don't understand the implication of that last sentence.

Are you saying if Tiger was more political someone should have his back?

I mean, for all of the sponsor reasons we should already be done with Tiger, but I don't understand the implication of that last sentence.

Are you saying if Tiger was more political someone should have his back?

Internet froze for some reason, please feel free to delete the excess.

Folks - I defend the right of athletes to be political no matter what they stand for. What I can't stand is when TIger and others SAY they don't want anything to do with politics, when in reality they are cutting deals with countries that traffic in human rights abuses etc.

Also, I really do think there is a qualitative difference between fronting for a shoe company that plays dirty with workers, and Tiger's sponsorships. He is the first billionaire athlete for a reason.

This article on Woods is unfathomably off the mark. As a sports commentator is it possible Zirin can be so out of touch with reality.

Exactly what about the article is off the mark?

I remember when Tiger first hit the scene, a lot of people were very inspired-- here was the first Black player at the top of golf, breaking uncharted territory. Winning at Augusta, which for years had disgusting discriminatory policies excluding Blacks from membership.

Fast forward a few years and you have a guy who won't even take a stand when a commentator makes a statement to the effect that the only way for him to be beaten is to be lynched.

Tiger's talent gives him a unique platform that he could most certainly use for good, but he certainly hasn't used that opportunity. Dave is right on the money that his dedication to the almighty dollar over any other principle deserves condemnation.

Just for curiosity should we the public treat him a Black person or as a Calibian as he wishes to be recognized. I understand the one-drop blood designation but do we owe it to Tiger to accept him on his terms. Just asking.

Huh???????

DZ you sure don't soft sell it...nice...

shine the light of truth

I'd add that i use Gillette blades, since before Tiger was their pitch-man, and I will continue to use them...

I still have a year to go on my ATT contract, and in this difficult times I don't want to pay the penalty (hey Tiger, pick me up, okay?).

But, next time I need consultants for my multi national, I'm checking with E&Y and Pricewaterhouse first...Accenture ain't getting a dime off of me...I'll show them !

Well said DZ,

If Tiger is to benefit from his so-called 'non-political' stances, he should at least be called out for it. Can't be neutral on that train companeros!

Excellent reference to the imperial gambit in indochina up there too. And anybody who understands TL's comments please translate for me, I am in need of assistance.

I like it, a good come back.

Touche...
:')

Although I agree with you DZ I have to say it's very hard to care when your looking at making a billion dollars.

The mind can rationalize everything. "I'll do good with it...etc"

When has a person like you or America in general accepted a non-white person, particularly a black person, on their own terms? Why just Tiger? Because you don't want to accept his particular image as representative of a black man?

Just out of curiosity, how would you treat a black person vs a "Caublinasian"? Not the same?

Your bigotry is disgusting. In case you haven't noticed this is an anti-racist site. Take your postings to the KKK site where they might be appreciated.

I defer to that great philosopher Rodney King: Can't we all just get along?


PS. To DZ Thanks for helping us to find another club that we can use on Tiger.

Racism is generally internalized and/or institutionalized. Prejudice simply means making judgements about something on limited information and is something we all posess my conspiritorial brother. The real problem is the historical legacy of white supremacy which many have done much to combat, but which still lingers in the unexamined assumptions of many individuals and institutions.

We should cut TL some slack, my brother, and instead of aspersions being lobbed we should do our best to foster some critical self examination in such individuals. There is much going on in and around all of us of which we are not aware.

Spare me the lecture dude. You disturbed by my tone? Want me to play nice? Whatever dude...

Given that neither you nor he stated otherwise, it's apparent you both feel what I'm saying, which is all that really matters. Don't care if you don't like the way I say it. Ask yourself why you chose to defend TL and lecture me rather than address him directly and challenge him to do just what you suggested (examine his own thoughts and beliefs).

Peace

Conspiracy Brother,

Good points, and I completely agree. I was just pointing out that some of those people, particularly those who aren't speaking directly on behalf of the powers, are reachable.

And actually, my lecture wasn't for you, so no need to feel hostile. I just wanted to get at it sideways so as not to make it too confrontational and incite the reaction that that can bring (from TL). There is limited space here for such subtle dialogue, face to face is much better.

No problem with the tone as I can be as violent as the next person, just want it to go to a constructive purpose.

I don't mean to draw this out, but it's apparent you don't understand where I'm coming from. I'm not sure how you define violent but at no point did I threaten or suggest any violent act toward TL (nor do I advocate violence). I just don't agree with you that I should mask my anger and disgust regarding this topic. Muted, unemotional, sideways conversation does not necessarily equate to constructive conversation. Speaking directly, from the heart without fear or malicious intent is both productive and honest. We need more honest dialogue and less politically correct b.s. And no, it won't always be pleasant.

PS
Merry Christmas

Thanks for raising these questions dave, even if people don't believe these points, about Tiger they at least can hear them and consider them.

It makes me question even the "good" aspects of Tiger, the fact that he's been a trailblazer, a "pioneer" in such a historically racist and elite sport. Like your example in the Phillipines, do what good comes from the spread of golf? it means more displaced impoverished people.
Maybe we should resist golf as we have been all along, as the classist, racist machine that it is?

Conspiracy Brother,
I once again agree with everything you said, and I think the difficulty here may be with the medium of communication. By violence I may have meant 'aggression' or even lack of fear.

I also agree that muted, etc, conversation does not "necessarily" equate to effective communication, but perhaps "sometimes" it can. I try not to be dogmatic in these things.

Once again, no conflict was intended as I think we stand for similar or probably even the same things. I think I'm too wry, interpersonal and long winded for the blogging medium so I think I'll stop.

"I hope we remember that Mr. Woods didn't choose to leave golf until his sponsors left him"...but we dont really know that, do we? I'm certainly no champion of Tiger, but in the days after the story broke there were a few bits and pieces for Tiger to get his head around. Like the immmediate story of the car crash, like the suggested use of drugs, like the constant increase of new skeletons in the closet.

My point is that we dont know why Tiger decided to take time off. Maybe it took time for such a person to realised just how much sh1t he was in, and that he could not just smile that smile and make it all go away. Maybe Elin's reactions during this time changed, she may have started being pissed off but coping, but as time went by, it may have become clear that things were beyond repair.

So, much as it suits your story to try to align Tiger's decision to withdraw from golf with his sponsors decision to withdraw their support of him, you just dont know that is the case. It is equally likely that Nike asked him to take a back seat if he wanted their continued support. Or that the mother in law demanded it. Or that he decided he could not face the crowds in January with a marriage either broken or at breaking point.

Let's face it, we're not short of ammo with which to castigate him, those wishing judge him harshly have plenty to beat him with, so why not stick to using these facts, rather than cobbled together timelines and tenuous suppositions.