Juli Inkster for Commissioner in 2010
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
Email
PrintI know I have already posted on this subject before, but Geoff Shackelford is officially on board with my campaign to nominate Juli Inkster for LPGA Tour Commissioner when Carolyn Bivens' tenure ends.
It's interesting the piece that he links to, though, in support of my our position. It's the weekly Doug Ferguson piece with golf news and notes, dated 10/21. Ferguson uses this quote from Inkster:
“The Asian players ... it’s kind of a respect thing, a pecking order thing,” Inkster said. “They are brought up to really honor their roots and their grandparents, and the people before them, and the higher-ups. So all of a sudden, you put an 18- or 19-year-old girl that’s maybe not really comfortable with her English.
“Playing with four CEOs — men or women — she is not going to feel comfortable going up there and making small talk. That’s not the way they are brought up.”
Her solution? Have them accompany a veteran who makes everyone comfortable in pro-ams — and there’s no shortage of those on the LPGA Tour, whether it’s Inkster, Meg Mallon or Lorena Ochoa.
“Count that as their pro-am, just so they can learn,” Inkster said. “It’s teaching these girls how to play a pro-am more than teaching them English. If I get four Korean men in this pro-am, even though I don’t speak their language, I’m going to make it fun for them.”
The problem is that this wasn't said at the Kapalua LPGA Classic. It was said by Inkster during the Samsung World Championship...two weeks ago...in a story by Gwen Knapp of the San Fran Chronicle.
Look, I know golf news is slow right now. But not that slow.
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
actually...
…it IS that slow. :-) But it doesn’t excuse poor research…especially when it links to more Doug Ferguson drivel.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
and...
…I still haven’t heard a decent reason to have Julie Inkster as commissioner. No business experience running something like this – just because she plays well doesn’t mean she is a good leader.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Barack Obama
Has no executive experience whatsoever and he’s up 10 points. So why not? VOTE FOR CHANGE!
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
LMAO
yet another reason to be concerned for our country – he has no experience, yet he points at the opposing VP candidate to say that she has no experience…but she has more than he does. sigh – people are going to vote for a xeroxed poster and have a confused look on their face when you bring up the name of Karl Marx.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Might as well have some levity
about it – instead of a 70 comment match :), so I do agree that Palin has more “executive” experience. What she said yesterday about the role of the vice-president was really funny, though. To your point about Marxism, there’s some polling that suggests that younger people don’t even know what socialism actually means. That’s really scary no matter who you vote for.
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
to an 8 year old...
…how DO you explain the job of the VP to an 8 year old ? :-)
Can it be that surprising when grade school teachers beat it into kids’ heads that we live in a democracy and it is backed up by TV and radio news – and even big time conservative talk show hosts repeat that we live in a democracy – that kids don’t know the difference between the types of government ? I’ve heard people call Bush a facist and a Nazi, but don’t have a clue what they are talking about.
Give a guess as to which way those kids will be voting. :-/
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
What's the old saying?
If you’re under 30 (or something) and vote Republican, you have no heart. If you’re over 30 and vote Democrat, you have no brain.
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
or...
…a democrat is just a republican who hasn’t been mugged yet. :-)
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
time
Isn’t it time we had the smartest guy in class as the president? Both Bush and McCain got into the schools they did as legacies. Scholastically, both finished at the bottom of their respective classes. Neither possesses intellectual curiosity nor good judgment.
Barack Obama has finished at the top of his class throughout his education. He was president of the Harvard Law Review and has taught constitutional law. Intellectually, he’s everything Bush and McCain are not.
Forget all the wing-nut ranting, Obama is a centrist who will listen attentively to both sides of an issue without an ideological filter. Recovery from the abuses of the Bush administration will take someone with judgment. That’s a quality McCain doesn’t have.
"centrist" ??
Karl Marx was a centrist ? “Neighborhood Organizers” doing work for unions are centrists ?
Have to agree with you that we really could use some GOOD candidates for a change. I’m not thrilled with either of these guys.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
interesting
Each time Faux News changes its talking points on Obama, you spout them.
His community organizing was helping people who had lost their jobs when a steel mill shut down. He was not a union organizer. And I don’t recall hearing him quote Karl Marx.
What are you so damn afraid of???
ummm...
putting a guy in charge of the White House who is more in line with the old USSR than he is with the Constitution of the United States ?
Guess you missed reading Karl Marx – he was real big on redistribution of wealth – taking money from people who produce and giving it to people who do nothing. Giving the credit to the government, naturally. That’s a basic tenet of Obama’s plans.
And yes – Obama was doing work for the unions – it was a steel mill that shut down because the Unions made demands that the mill couldn’t stay open under – so they closed.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
what you missed...
Marx didn’t write about redistributing money, he wrote about redistributing land and the means of production, neither of which has been proposed.
putting a guy in charge of the White House who is more in line with the old USSR than he is with the Constitution of the United States ?
That proves you know nothing about Obama’s proposals and are only spouting what Limbaugh, Hannity and Phillips have told you about him and what he stands for, none of which are true.
actually
I don’t listen to any of those guys – haven’t for years
Redistribution of wealth is not limited to money – you’re playing word games.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
you still haven't answered
What are you afraid of?
You’re streaming extreme right-wing talking points, so you have to get them from somewhere. Oh, wait… you make this crap up and they get it from you!
read again
first line – “putting a guy in charge of the White House who is more in line with the old USSR than he is with the Constitution of the United States ?” I answered you right away.
Now you’re assuming I have some pipeline to Republican headquarters to get talking points ? Wow – I didn’t know I was so connected. I don’t need talking points to listen to what Obama says and be able to hear where his ideas are coming from.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I did
you ignored them – I gave you Obama’s philosophy and gave you the same thing from Marx
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
hhhmmmm...
…well it IS summertime in Australia in January – and Robert Allenby says that the courses are perfect down there. :-)
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I have to say
that the charges of Marxism are way out of touch here. Marxism was extremely far left and basically assumed that the State owned everything – land, crops, businesses, resources, and even people.
right...
…which is the way Obama’s philosophy leans. He is more of a Marxist than a Constitutionalist.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
If you're going to use a term
I would argue “socialist” is the most accurate derogatory term – if that’s not a complete oxymoron :)
“Spreading the wealth around” could be interpreted a lot of ways, really. I thought of it as intending to make all Americans prosperous through a combination of things, including tax hikes on the highest brackets.
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
assumption
Why is the assumption that redistribution is always from the top down. Doesn’t redistributing taxpayer dollars to corporations count? One example: Halliburton. What about exempting corporations from paying their rightful taxes on income, thus ensuring we, the middle class, get stuck with the cost of running government. Example: Exxon-Mobil.
Why don’t the radical right-wingers ever complain about that?
lol
“radical right wingers” – that’s funny. There were people nationwide who complained about what happened with Exxon.
The reason money was given to corporations to keep them afloat was because they EMPLOY people. You’re ready to shut down Exxon or AIG or any of these screwed up companies ?
I’m right there with you that some of these corporate crooks should be behind bars – but your idea is to take those employees who are doing work in the market off of the company payrolls and put them on the welfare rolls – under the thumb of the government.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I didn’t say “spreading money around” – I said “taking money from people who produce and giving it to people who do nothing.” That is a basic tenet of Marxism. “From each according to his means – TO each according to his needs.”
Here’s the thing – EVERY type of government CAN work under the ideal conditions that it requires. The United States was founded on the idea that people should get out and work and produce. The idea of the government taking the wealth or personal property was abhorent to them. Read the Constitution. Read the Bill of Rights. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Federalist Papers.
Obama wants the goverment to be in charge of people who don’t contribute to the country by punishing the people who actually do the work or own the businesses.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
The Federalist Papers
Practically called for a monarchy from its most extreme members – e.g., Alexander Hamilton. The Bill of Rights actually doesn’t talk about property rights at all – intellectual, physical, or personal – except for the prescription of eminent domain.
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
A few...
…not many – and those members eventually moved toward the Constitution that was signed. You can’t pick bits and pieces out of the middle and ignore where they ended up.
you don’t think eminent domain is important ???
Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Tenth Amendment – Powers of states and people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I do think it's important
but, I was talking about how property rights are not expressly covered in the Bill of Rights. Amendments 9 and 10 provide protections against the Hamiltonian crowd that wanted to rely on English Common Law tradition. But, they do not expressly cover property rights. And, actually, neither does eminent domain – really – as Kelo v. New London demonstrates.
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Protections AGAINST government
9 and 10 specify that the government does not have any rights outside what is spelled out to them in the Constitution – which means that Fannie and Freddie, Medicare and Medicade, Welfare, Social Security, and even the income tax deduction system are not powers given to the federal gov’t. STATES are supposed to be doing what the federal govt has usurped.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
9 & 10
Basically say that anything that isn’t spelled out in the Constitution, an Amendment to it, or other legislation passed that doesn’t violate the Constitution and its Amendments, is assumed to be the right of the state (when it comes to making laws) or the people (when it comes to personal rights).
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 23, 2008 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Enough already!
Why do so many comments on this site wind up degrading into a political discussion? Jeez, I come here to get away from crap like that!
Until the election is over, maybe Ryan should rename this the “Waffle Room”.
Haha
I don’t know if there’s much haggling either. ;)
I would just stay away from the comments section for 2 weeks. I promise that I’ll keep posting good golf news :)
by Ryan Ballengee on Oct 22, 2008 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Los Altos Hills
I don’t believe Juli Inkster will give up her pretty much idyllic life in California to go to FL.
That’s what I was going to post when I got to the diary, but I allowed myself to get sidetracked.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
