Charles Barkley's Other Prediction


Former NBA great Charles Barkley who's been seen of late wearing a dress for Weight Watchers commercials made a prediction about the upcoming election when he noticed that Mitt Romney was at the Boston Celtics game. The camera zoomed in on Romney and Barkley said:
"Mitt Romney. Listen main man, we're going to beat you like a drum in November. Don't take it personally. You seem like a nice guy. But you're going down, bro," Barkley said.

This is getting a lot of attention from the media. But let's just remember that this isn't Barkley's first prediction.

In 1993, Barkley led the Phoenix Suns to the NBA championship series where they would meet...Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls. Barkley then made a prediction too.

Barkley said, “God wants us to win the championship. I told Michael Jordan the other day that it was destiny for us to win.

Ahem.

The Bulls won in six. So let's not put too much stock in Barkley's predictions.

And here's just a random pic of Barkley. Just 'cause.


Comments

  1. Yawn. Just another sad old man whose 15 minutes were up long ago.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Barkley's entire schtick is based upon the fact that he "sounds funny" when he talks: "What you talking 'bout Willis!". Ha, ha - the first 500 times ..

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hm. On loosely the same subject, do you know of any pastoral teachings on trash-talking? Obviously denigrating your opponent should be way out of line for a Catholic, and at the other extreme there's no reason to object to inspiring pep-talks. That broad middle seems ripe for reflection on, and an area for guidance by Christian principles.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Since Barkley is free to read this post, this is for him, an opinion, his, ours, and yours. Since the issue has been opened by Barkley, he is fair game.

    ReplyDelete
  5. There's nothing wrong with trash talk. It has a legitimate strategic purpose—it can help your morale and hurt your opponent's.

    The problem is simply that Barkley is trash-talking on the wrong side, and he's probably wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This post is beneath you. A paid sports commentator comments on something else, in a stupid fashion. You reply with the grade school response of "yeah well, you were wrong before about some unrelated thing. Oh, and, you were once arrested for something.........so this proves ....blah blah blah"

    Grow up, Archbold. And stop with the idiotic ad hominems. It does a disservice to the insights you bring to other issues. And makes your arguments look petty and petulant, kinda like Santorum.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hey, too-stupid-to-sign-the-combox, how is Santorum petty and petulant, exactly? When has he ever been either?

    Especially compared to Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi, less than charitable wisdom, see the debates, see the interviews whenever he was pushed. he got easily flustered. Its no big deal, it just means he cant adequately distinguish between argument and personal attacks. a lot of people, like myself, dont do this well, but I dont run for office, where this is a requisite quality that one needs to cultivate.

    I didnt claim that the Obamas were able to take criticism well. Although their narcissism is different than Santorum, whose folksiness is quite endearing. But endearing doesnt win debates, and it doesnt win campaigns.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Did Mr. Archbold add hominids? I missed that bit. I can't do maths very well myself anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The trick to avoid people being less than charitable, still-doesn't-know-his-own-name, is not to need charity. There were no arguments directed toward Santorum—gotcha questions are personal attacks.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment