Barkley On Gambling And The S.O.B.s Out To Get Him

Thursday, May 22, 2008

Charles Barkley was on Dan Patrick's show today and had some interesting comments on the gambling issue and his critics....

I'm not sure Barkley knows this, but most people really like him. It also seems like a very paranoid statement to say people are "out to get you", but that doesn't mean they aren't. I know that Chuck likes to be public, but the sooner he stops talking about this the sooner it will go away.



Don't be a hypocrite. Where's your outrage? An ESPN personality gets drunk and curses while bashing Notre Dame, and you don't think that qualifies her to ask Tiger Woods tough questions. But this guy carries a $400,000 debt to a casino through the season, while he's providing analysis about a league that had a major off-season gambling issue. And what do you suggest? That he stop talking about it so it will go away? I know you have likes and dislikes. And Barkley's more likable. But seriously, you should try to have some consistency.

Anonymous said...
May 22, 2008, 4:23:00 PM  

'aa hates', I think you are comparing two different things. If you get drunk at an ESPN function and bash a religion, that's a little different than what CB does on his own time, legally, with his own money.

AA, I thought this interview was great, I tuned in this morning, I love when DP tries to end the segment and Charles is like "Dan! I'm not done!". They sounded like a 60 year old couple the way they argue, and what's the deal with Dan wanting to "hold" $1 million for four years? I think he needed to think through that one more time before he said it.

Dan Patrick' show is a daily listen at this point. He's one of the very few MSM guys I really enjoy...he says what he means and usually tells it like it is.

TheFolkist said...
May 22, 2008, 4:41:00 PM  

Hahaha that's the funniest hate comment I've got in awhile. Good job.

May 22, 2008, 4:49:00 PM  

In "aa hates" defense, she didn't bash a religion. She bashed Notre Dame--which also isn't illegal. I can only imagine what a post on this site would look like if it was our girl Dana--and not Barkley--who carried a $400,000 gambling debt around.

Anonymous said...
May 22, 2008, 9:18:00 PM  

In "aa hates" defense, she didn't bash a religion. She bashed Notre Dame--which also isn't illegal.

Thankfully, "F--- Jesus" is only applicable to Celtics fans booing Ray Allen and his struggles.

May 22, 2008, 10:04:00 PM  

Rick James--You read AA too much. Nobody has reported that she said "F--- Jesus." Back in January, The Big Lead interviewed the reporter, and he said "I never heard Dana Jacobson say F--- Jesus. That's why I never printed it. I also talked to people who were there and they did not hear her say it either." What she said was "F--- Touchdown Jesus," which I'm sure you know is a Notre Dame symbol. That's a big difference.

Anonymous said...
May 22, 2008, 10:19:00 PM  

I think the person who makes a fake name and then responds to a comment he made an hour ago reads AA too much. But I'm glad to have you.

May 22, 2008, 10:25:00 PM  

I can't figure out why you won't address the criticisms, AA. They seem to hit the mark to me.

Anonymous said...
May 22, 2008, 10:41:00 PM  

What criticism? One random guy trying to get under my skin for some reason???

Comparing someone getting drunk and cursing a blue streak at a company function versus a guy who lost $400K doing something legal and something that millions of people do is laughable.

I don't even understand what your/their point is/was.

May 22, 2008, 10:53:00 PM  

I've got to back aa on this one (not that it matters what I think, I'm sure).

First, the initial poster tried to blur the lines by mixing sports gambling and Donehey (sp?) with what Barkley does as a commentator. No discernable connection, really.

Second, Dana Jacobsen was suspended by ESPN only after people became outraged when the info was leaked. ESPN drug their feet on a issue that they shouldn't have. Barkley's problem is personal and doesn't affect his work.

Anonymous said...
May 22, 2008, 11:01:00 PM  

Does any of this have to do with Charles Barkley in the least bit? The Dana Jacobsen thing has been discussed here ad infinitum (with results I know AA doesn't even want to revisit) and has no bearing on anything relating to Charles Barkley. As long as she's on 'First Take,' Dana Jacobsen doesn't need to be "freed."

May 22, 2008, 11:44:00 PM  

Post a Comment