Quotes of the day
posted at 10:30 pm on January 6, 2010 by Allahpundit
“2) What he said was offensive to Buddhists and other non-Christians. Really? If non-Christians are really offended that many Christians believe that Christianity is true and wish that other people would adopt it, well, they need to get out more. If the argument is that they’re offended because he openly stated his view, then the question is why we should maintain an informal rule of social etiquette that forbids people from proclaiming their faith superior in important respects to other faiths. And the main reason to do that would seem to be, again, to avoid giving offense. Maybe people should just grow thicker skins instead. A Buddhist who is confident in his beliefs would know why he rejects Hume’s counsel and slough it off.”
***
“Why should we maintain an informal social etiquette that discourages people from openly disparaging other people’s religions and touting their own as superior? Gee, that seems kind of obvious to me. I strongly doubt that Wehner and Ponnuru would be happy to see, say, Muslims going on television to blame Mark Sanford’s Christianity for his adultery and urge him to convert to Islam. Of course, I can’t prove this, because no major television network would ever allow it. But I’d at least like to hear them say that they’d be happy to see their rule applied to all religions. Otherwise, they need to admit that what they favor is not some wild theological free-for-all in our public discourse, with all religions touting their superiority and disparaging others, but rather a privileged place for Christianity.”
***
***
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
What do you take for a Brit Hume overdose?
fogw on January 6, 2010 at 10:33 PM
This whole episode merely illustrates the blatant hostility the left truly holds for traditional Christianity. Christians need to realize the truth of that and move on, knowing that the left regards them as an enemy.
cynccook on January 6, 2010 at 10:34 PM
Wowwwwwwww
let’s make a mountain out of thin air, shall we?
blatantblue on January 6, 2010 at 10:36 PM
Sanchez: so let’s say somebody were to, I don’t know, say, kill somebody – accidentally of course. Are you saying I, er that person, could get away with it in Buddhism but not Christianity, or is it the other way around? Just, you know, hypothetically speaking.
Ted Torgerson on January 6, 2010 at 10:37 PM
because it’s politically correct to maintain it.
ted c on January 6, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Really? This person really doesn’t understand Christianity then. That is exactly what they are in favor of. It’s the people who won’t limit it to discourse that’s the problem.
Perhaps it’s the relentless need to shut religious people up in public discourse, ALL religious people, that breeds some of the frustration we see. Hmmm?
Rocks on January 6, 2010 at 10:39 PM
Kind of looks like Brit got under allahpundit’s atheist skin, don’t it?
Sort of like a splinter you just can’t get out….
(I have no problem with the discussions, but I’ve seen Brit’s face on here a lot more lately than I expected from his controversial clip and the aftermath).
cs89 on January 6, 2010 at 10:39 PM
Wow. A guy exercises two of his constitutional rights. Let’s crucify him!
Tennman on January 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM
I’ve been skirting this issue, but if CNN is covering it, any dunce can see the ultimate motive behind it being covered after the 1st 24 hours. And, gee, aren’t those few viewers watching anyway?
Marcus on January 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM
“Rick Sanchez discusses the the difference between Christianity and Buddhism with a Buddhism expert”….Who represented Christianity? Sorry, I can’t watch the vid.
d1carter on January 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM
So what…
… Warren Beatty Slept with 12,775 women.
Seven Percent Solution on January 6, 2010 at 10:41 PM
God bless Brit Hume for speaking his opinion. Shame on anyone who is against his free speech rights as well as his right to exercise his freedom of religion.
dthorny on January 6, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Jesus Christ = EVIL
Jesus, illegal immigrant = GOOD
SouthernGent on January 6, 2010 at 10:42 PM
Maybe Hot Air should bring Robert Spencer back.
Connie on January 6, 2010 at 10:45 PM
Jesus Christ = EVIL
Jesus, illegal immigrant = GOOD
SouthernGent on January 6, 2010 at 10:42
Ha. I was just thinking that if the commentator had been a devout Muslim who had humbly and sincerely suggesed that Tiger could find redemption with Islam, what would the reaction have been? Hmmmm. I wonder.
cynccook on January 6, 2010 at 10:46 PM
This made me laugh.
tetriskid on January 6, 2010 at 10:47 PM
3 minutes of MSLSD…..and a doctor to resusitate you from the coma.
The point is to speak the gospel truth to them. God’s Word does the rest. Their response is either accept it or reject it.
dthorny on January 6, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Ya think?!
Norwegian on January 6, 2010 at 10:47 PM
The biggest musckle-ley RINO of them all, Gov. Schwarzenegger, had a good quote today coming out guns blazing against his “A” President: “They get the corn, we get the husks.” (guess which state)
Marcus on January 6, 2010 at 10:48 PM
SILENCE, I keel you.
dthorny on January 6, 2010 at 10:48 PM
BTW, Schwarzy was talking healthcare.
Marcus on January 6, 2010 at 10:49 PM
If it was a Liberal doing the reacting… Crickets. Regardless of how the Muslim said it, even if there were threats of dismemberment.
Holger on January 6, 2010 at 10:49 PM
You too have the right to be offended, cry like a baby? Yeah you have that right also.
The right to expect that somebody else must cry with you because your a baby? Not so much.
Speakup on January 6, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Move along there’s truly nothing to see here.
Mason on January 6, 2010 at 10:50 PM
I have been an ardent Buddhist and still love many of it traditions and technologies of the mind. And I am not a Christian. But I do understand what Hume was emphasizing. Even the Buddha taught that you had to provide the correct medicine for the current affliction of the mind. For someone who has so sullied his reputation and life, Tiger Woods really could use a hearty dose of Christian forgiveness, redemption and healing and usually this comes only by entering the Christian faith. Buddhists should not be too attached to Buddhism; it sometimes is the wrong medicine. The Passion of the Christ, the drama of the resurrection from Death is sometimes the best and only way to renew ones life.
mbabbitt on January 6, 2010 at 10:50 PM
How DARE HE give an opinion. /
Sheesh this is so stupid. To those offended GROW the F UP.
CWforFreedom on January 6, 2010 at 10:50 PM
This Brit Hume thing is getting really tiresome. This is a whole lot to do about nothing. Some people seem to think Brit’s sin is greater than that of Tiger’s. I’m sure Tiger isn’t offended at all. No one is talking about what a dirtbag he is…the Christian has taken his place.
ramrants on January 6, 2010 at 10:51 PM
I’m a booty-hist
blatantblue on January 6, 2010 at 10:53 PM
It has to do a lot with maintaining the lowest common denominator. To heck with trying to have a better more meaningful life.
CWforFreedom on January 6, 2010 at 10:53 PM
Dear Mr. Chesterton,
What’s the difference between Buddhism and Christianity? Is there a difference?
Signed,
Muddled
Dear Muddled,
The very thing which has made some moderns think Christianity inferior to Buddhism is the very thing that saves Christians from complete spiritual pride—I mean the fact that the Christian looks to a God outside him, and not merely inside him. If anybody thinks that there is little or no difference between Christianity and Buddhism, let him look at the religious art of the two creeds. In the most perverse and hideous picture of mediaeval asceticism the eyes of the Saints are wide open, for they are looking at something not themselves. But the eyes of the Buddhist images are commonly closed, for they are looking within. They are self-centered, self-satisfied in their very denial of self.
Your friend,
G.K. Chesterton
http://gilbertmagazine.com/page_16.html
ninjapirate on January 6, 2010 at 10:54 PM
By the very act of belonging to a given faith, rather than another, one is implicityly declaring, that in their opinion, that faith is better than the others, so I don’t see how making that declaration an explicit one makes one wit of difference.
Unless they agree that the other faith is superior, they should not be offended. If they do think the other faith is superior, then they should join that faith. The only way they should be offended is if they do think the other faith is superior and tried to join it but were rejected.
MB4 on January 6, 2010 at 10:55 PM
Telling someone they should become a Christian when the are in the midst of a family crisis is not Christian as any Christian knows.
What a shame you bring our love to the Father down to the level of your pal Cesar.
Observation on January 6, 2010 at 10:58 PM
I like this very much.
John the Libertarian on January 6, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Is this still news? I think I am missing something.
FireBlogger on January 6, 2010 at 11:01 PM
Allah did you donate your leg’s to keep this story alive?
heshtesh on January 6, 2010 at 11:02 PM
Brit Hume is a commentator.
He commented on an event/persona in the news.
The outcry over his comments has no real relationship to the gravitas of his comment. It is, or appears to be, however, a designed effort to knock off yet another non-Left commentator, one who has shown repeatedly that he is one of the most professional and fair and balanced commentators out there.
They tried to knock off Rush…and failed, Even went after O’Reilly, and failed. Tried to crucify Coulter…and failed. When it comes to the point where it is accepted practice that any commentator of any stripe be pre-approved by the Left before being allowed to make comments on current events we will have lost all that is sacred about our First Amendment. That will leave the Second Amendment having priority, if Thomas Jefferson is to be understood correctly.
The Left should tread very carefully, as each Right they infringe, by their boisterous condemnation, and to supplant with yet another “right,” will have consequences that will far outlast the current Administration, Congress and current crop of Leftists.
coldwarrior on January 6, 2010 at 11:03 PM
BTW, I still don’t know what the Brit Hume deal is because I haven’t watched the video and have managed to avoid every story about it… but there’s a time and a place for everything… not on the news…
ninjapirate on January 6, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Pardon my french, but WTF??
Erich66 on January 6, 2010 at 11:04 PM
What an utterly dipsh1tted ‘controversey’.
rayra on January 6, 2010 at 11:07 PM
On the other hand, when various pundits and opinion leaders insist that there is no God and label religious believers as ignorant, that is free speech to be celebrated — and it is the height of intolerance to suggest that such individuals should be subjected to the same social pressure not to disparage the religious views of others.
RhymesWithRight on January 6, 2010 at 11:11 PM
1. Sanchez is a complete jerk, which I understand does not offer the kind of forgiveness and redemption that being a decent person does.
2. The “self-awareness” of Buddhism offers forgiveness and redemption? Seriously? Isn’t that more like self-delusion, the “faith” practiced by those nimrods driving around with a “COEXIST” bumper sticker?
I mean, let’s be real here. Hume’s point stands. Who really believes you can redeem yourself? It requires a completely different viewpoint of human nature than is commonly held in the West, which tends to see man as fallen. But if man is not fallen, and can redeem himself, then can you actually call it “redemption”?
It’s no wonder Hollywood stars flock to Buddhism, the same way they flock to defend Roman Polanski. I mean, Polanski was one with the godhead when he slept with that young girl, right?
3. I love how every topic except religious faith is completely off-limits in public. We can have GLSEN instructing teenagers in the art of fisting safely, but let’s not bring up religion–that’s too touchy!
cackcon on January 6, 2010 at 11:13 PM
I don’t see anything wrong with what Hume did. He believes that Christ is the path to redemption and he’s getting paid to speak his mind. As a Christian I really wouldn’t mind a Jew telling me Judaism is the true way or a Muslim telling me Islam is the true way. As long as they aren’t forcing it on me I take it as their opinion. The only people who would be affected by a call to convert would be those interested in converting and intolerant scum bags. It’s called being an adult and not being offended by differing opinions. But let’s cut to the heart of the matter: a bunch of leftist media filth who are atheist and only are concerned because it’s more mudslinging at their enemies. And those people can all rot in the hell they don’t believe in.
chicagojedi on January 6, 2010 at 11:15 PM
Perhaps not in the West.
OldEnglish on January 6, 2010 at 11:15 PM
No, it is not news. It’s just an insecure AP looking for self-validation.
Connie on January 6, 2010 at 11:15 PM
I think that “Tiger” is more in a financial crisis than a family crisis.
MB4 on January 6, 2010 at 11:18 PM
It’s when a man is at his lowest that one should reveal to him the saving grace of God.
Zaire67 on January 6, 2010 at 11:20 PM
OK, I mentally X’ed out the Chait piece right there. What a slime bucket TBR has become.
ddrintn on January 6, 2010 at 11:20 PM
*Oops, “TNR”
ddrintn on January 6, 2010 at 11:20 PM
On a barely-related note, can we get some popular movement going for someone to ask President Obama what he thinks of evolution? I mean, the media made a huge deal out of President Bush’s views, but wouldn’t it be more intriguing if a self-professed Christian believed humans evolved from monkeys? That’s the man-bites-dog angle, isn’t it?
Just saying, anyways…
cackcon on January 6, 2010 at 11:21 PM
Brit spoke from the heart, exercising his First Amendment rights in the process. That said, freedom of speech does not grant you from freedom of criticism. When Brit’s critics air their opinions at the Fox commentator, we are all observing freedom of speech reflected back.
This is not to say that we can yell “FIRE” in a crowded room where no such threat exists, nor can we libel or slander someone without the potential of legal consequences.
But everyone needs to tap the breaks a bit before slamming the First Amendment rights of others. The marketplace of ideas will sort out most of it, with lots of folks airing their opinions (pro and con) on a variety of platforms.
CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and all the rest will rue the day they abandoned the journey of objective journalism and became the Lamestream Media of the 21st Century.
itzWicks on January 6, 2010 at 11:21 PM
Love it.
beachgirlusa on January 6, 2010 at 11:23 PM
OT: How many Malik Shabazz’s are there in the USA? Malik Shabazz visited the White House last year but not the one everyone knows…per the White House. So did Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Bertha Lewis but not the ones everyone knows?
d1carter on January 6, 2010 at 11:25 PM
Clearly he is against it as he believes in rapid pace socialist fascist design.
MB4 on January 6, 2010 at 11:25 PM
I remain a huge fan of Brit Hume but count me among the minority here whom feel that his statement was inappropriate and/or impolite. I don’t think it’s a good idea for American’s to start fighting amongst each other in the general public, (which is what national television is), about who’s religion is better. (With the exception of barbaric religions like Islam and the Mayan’s religion, to name a few.)
If Brit had given the same counsel to Tiger privately or in an appropriate venue it would be an entirely different matter.
That being said, Brit is right. America is predominantly a Christian nation, and Christians, (and no doubt most religions), love it when people convert. If Tiger convertes to Christianity a large share of Christians would immediately sing his praises and forgive him—even if they may never know if he’s changed his deplorable behavior in the slightest.
Whereas if he converted to some other minority religion that met Brit’s qualifications for forgiveness and redemption, the impact would be relatively insignificant.
FloatingRock on January 6, 2010 at 11:30 PM
To clarify about my use of the phrase “general public” in relation to national TV, I was referring to a news channel. 700 club is national TV as well but I think that would have been an appropriate venue, IMO.
FloatingRock on January 6, 2010 at 11:37 PM
It’s truly hilarious watching/listening/reading as the Liberal Left collectively have a Perez Hilton-at-the-Pageant moment.
What a bunch of ….
Doorgunner on January 6, 2010 at 11:42 PM
Wait that dude is a Buddhist scholar? It might as well say “Rick Sanchez talks with rich white kid who thought taking up Buddhism would get him lucky with hippy chicks”
Rick shouldn’t be the guy to talk about any moral argument, religion, politics, celebrities. The guy shouldn’t even be doing the weather, god knows he might.
Rbastid on January 6, 2010 at 11:48 PM
What a bizarre overreaction.
powerpro on January 6, 2010 at 11:51 PM
So, on the day that that slimebucket Chris Dodd announced that he was retiring and Joe Scarborough got the huge scoop on the Taliban double agent, this several day- old crap that’s been hashed out to death in previous HA comment threads makes the Quote of the Day? Seriously?
Weak, dude.
Dukeboy01 on January 6, 2010 at 11:52 PM
Palin/Hume 2012!
Mirimichi on January 6, 2010 at 11:53 PM
I agree. That’s one good reason why this doesn’t rise to a fireable offense, IMO, although that’s up to Fox.
But if I had said something like that to a client at the corporations I’ve worked for I’d probably be fired, but that’s because corporations generally don’t want to alienate their potential customer base. It’s a different situation.
If Fox News even wanted to go so far as to become a Christian news channel, that their prerogative.
But given that Fox News isn’t expressly a Christian channel I think Brit’s comment was appropriate. Considering his history and value to the network, if I were responsible for deciding Brit’s future at Fox News, I would just sit down with him and explain that we don’t want to alienate our viewers and and ask him to not make such divisive comments in the future. We want Buddhist’s to feel welcome.
FloatingRock on January 6, 2010 at 11:56 PM
FIFM
FloatingRock on January 6, 2010 at 11:57 PM
So when Richard Gere and Harrison Ford get on T.V. and tell me that Buddhism is what’s right for everyone or Tom Cruise tells me that Scientology is #1, I’m supposed to be offended?
Thanks, I’ll make a note of it.
29Victor on January 6, 2010 at 11:58 PM
I’m glad nobody has chosen to argue with me because I want to watch a movie. :)
FloatingRock on January 7, 2010 at 12:05 AM
“Be who you are and say what you feel—-
Because those that matter—don’t mind–
And those that mind–
don’t matter.”
dragondrop on January 7, 2010 at 12:06 AM
The undercurrent of this ‘drams’ is another vicious attack on freedom of speech and the press, in fact most of the 1st amendment since religion is involved. Once again the constitution gets in the way of those who would impose their will on everyone.
docdave on January 7, 2010 at 12:08 AM
What’s the proper time to tell them? When they’re busy getting a Lewinsky from girlfriend #13?
RBMN on January 7, 2010 at 12:11 AM
I never thought I would see the day when expressing ones Christianity and hoping for someones salvation after they caused such a terrible disaster to their lives and their loved ones life.Since when should we be ashamed to say what we believe?Sad times indeed.
sandee on January 7, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Sorry that didn’t come out quite like I wanted, but I’m angry about the uproar regarding this.
sandee on January 7, 2010 at 12:16 AM
Meanwhile.
Goods Producing vs. Government Payrolls
MB4 on January 7, 2010 at 12:18 AM
Why is that?
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 12:28 AM
.
With all due respect sandee, I don’t think the problem is with Christians expressing their faith. For a thought experiment, imagine your outrage if the religious affiliation of Hume and Woods were reversed and Hume had encouraged Woods to convert to Buddhism.
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:28 AM
Proper direction of outrage:
Muslims Slaughter Seven at Church after Christmas Mass
Connie on January 7, 2010 at 12:29 AM
ronfi, It wouldn’t bother me because it would be his opinion. If I’m not mistaken we still are allowed to have one.
sandee on January 7, 2010 at 12:33 AM
.
Given the context, I find that hard to swallow.
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:34 AM
You didn’t ask me, but I would expect a Buddhist to find Buddhism superior to Christianity – so it would neither surprise or upset me. I would expect the same of anyone who followed a particular faith (or non-faith, as we frequently see around here). It’s only outrageous when a Christian feels that way and says so, it seems. Odd, that.
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 12:37 AM
Oh man, I wish people would leave Brit Hume alone! I am really tired of being polite while people rip apart my Christian faith. When you have been through the pain of a close loved one lost to suicide, faith is the biggest comfort and I am so grateful to have it. In fact, Brit’s words reminded me of how wonderful it is to have my faith, not that I needed reminding, but his words about the Light of Jesus was inspiring to me.
Another media distraction from what is happening with Their One. Look over here at Brit Hume exercising his rights while we drain your bank account in the name of “healthcare” or national security failures.
Geesh already!
margategop517 on January 7, 2010 at 12:38 AM
ronsfi. Brit Hume is a brilliant man and also a very religious one. The fact that he cared for Tiger Woods salvation is admirable to me. He sincerely wished for his well being. I ask you,if he had said he needed to go to counseling would that have been more acceptable to you?
sandee on January 7, 2010 at 12:38 AM
I don’t think that what Hume said was offensive just kind of weird. However the way that incident is being flogged outweirds the original incident.
Anyway it is not my place to say so (being a heathen and foreigner)but I have observed quite a few people here citing first amendment to defend Hume, which is kind of surprising as first amendment doesn’t mean freedom from criticism. Also Hollywood apart Buddhism in small percentages of percentages is beneficial.
Gaurav on January 7, 2010 at 12:38 AM
.
Really do they ever stop? This is such BS. If a Prominent Buddhist commentator on a major network (like that would ever happen), implied that Christianity was amoral, on air, or for that matter off air, you would be having a tizzy fit.
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:41 AM
Why is that? You swallow everything else.
daesleeper on January 7, 2010 at 12:42 AM
.
Like?
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:44 AM
Who implied that Buddhism was “amoral”? And please, tell me the last time you heard a Christian on a major network suggest that someone turn to Christ for forgiveness and redemption. You make it sound like it happens multiple times a day. I think even you know that is far from the truth. If what Hume did wasn’t unusual, we wouldn’t be talking about it.
Give me a break.
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 12:47 AM
They wouldn’t have a foot to stand on, therefore your premise is rejected.
daesleeper on January 7, 2010 at 12:48 AM
He is as anti-christian as I have encountered outside the lunacy at lgf.
daesleeper on January 7, 2010 at 12:49 AM
.
As is Hume’s
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:50 AM
That is because those criticizing Hume’s remarks seem to be suggesting he should have kept his mouth shut. No one said that people don’t have the right to criticize him, but he is free to talk about his faith publicly – for now, at least.
Sheesh.
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 12:51 AM
Our puritan forefathers are rolling in their graves. There were three things they found fit to discuss in the market place. Politics, Religion and economics everything else was considered fluff. Now the only thing acceptable in the marketplace is sports and sex. No wonder we have essentially lost our republic.
chemman on January 7, 2010 at 12:52 AM
Some people are just very, very threatened by Christianity. I can’t begin to understand why – they’re afraid of…what, exactly? Frankly, I think it’s a form of paranoia.
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 12:53 AM
TRUTH
daesleeper on January 7, 2010 at 12:57 AM
.
OH YES! Those great Republicans…The Puritans. LOL.
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:58 AM
.
Of course. Anyone who doesn’t see it your way is completely insane. yeesh. Good night thumper trolls, it’s lights out at the state home.
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 12:59 AM
I’m not Christian and my husband is, and I’m not offended by his insistance that his beliefs are legitimate and true or the insinuation that mine are not. In fact, I feel badly for him that he carries worries for my (nonexistant) immortal soul.
What Brit said wasn’t a big freakin’ deal. No one in their right mind can actually think that it’s wrong to state why one believes that their religion is superior– that’s what they choose the religion to begin with.
And for the record, there was never any statement made blaming Woods’ infedelity on his Buddhism, only that he wouldn’t be able to get the same kind of forgiveness. So the comparison given earlier about if a Muslim blamed a Christian’s actions on their religion is not a valid one.
RachDubya on January 7, 2010 at 1:00 AM
What else would you call a denial of truth? Glad you picked up on that!
daesleeper on January 7, 2010 at 1:01 AM
Well opining that Hume should not have said that is not really a violating since it is not a coercion, anyway I think this is too minor point to lose the inner peace.
Om Shanthi :@)
Gaurav on January 7, 2010 at 1:02 AM
You could always hang around and tell us what the big threat is – why you can’t stand to hear Brit Hume say the name of Jesus on national television, why it’s so incredibly offensive and harmful, and how no one will ever be the same again.
P.S. BOO!
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 1:05 AM
+10
capitalist piglet on January 7, 2010 at 1:06 AM
Telling someone they should become a Christian when the are in the midst of a family crisis is not Christian as any Christian knows.
What a shame you bring our love to the Father down to the level of your pal Cesar.
Observation on January 6, 2010 at 10:58 PM
Ummmm, lots of people turn to their religion, i.e. God, during a crisis. Me thinks you need to get over yourself.
ramrants on January 7, 2010 at 1:07 AM
.
I could give a shid personally, but I can see how others might find it condescending and even insulting. Why are you so threatened by me?
ronsfi on January 7, 2010 at 1:13 AM
I’m starting to think that the first sentence in Brit Hume’s obit (decades from now) will be about his 2010 New Years advice for Tiger Woods. This is unbelievable.
RBMN on January 7, 2010 at 1:15 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »