T1B

Supposedly, Rome and Stern had a drag out fight on the radio today, with Rome asking him about the fix being in, with NBA lottery, and Stern asking Rome if he still beats his wife.

link
http://deadspin.com/5918141/?utm_campai ... socialflow

Never heard that Rome was a wife beater, but it's not all that uncommon among men of limited stature.

Rome was a total punk for asking Stern if the lottery was fixed. Is he kidding? That's completely rude, insulting, unprofessional and crass. Stern was properly disgusted and Rome pouted like a bitch for the rest of the show.

I can't decide which is more incredulous to me... that people still listen to Rome or that people still don't have bradley on ignore.

Toss up.

Bwahaha! That Stern blast was epic!! Rome brought a pillow to a knife fight.

I don't think Stern got over. Sports dudes have been saying the same exact quote to reporters ever since I can remember (when posed with a particularly annoying question by said reporter.)

They both came off as huge bitches, but more so Stern. If you can't handle the tough questions then don't do interviews. Pretty unprofessional for a man in his position to issue that kind of retort.

Ucant, is this true? If so, it makes Stern seem a lot less douchey. I'd never heard of this reply before.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:They both came off as huge bitches,

No way! Jim Rome a bitch?

The question was fair.
Stern is a bitch.
Answer the question, cunt.

"Have you stopped beating your wife yet" is not a question based on anything Rome has done, but is merely Stern's way of attempting to spin this to claim that the question he was asked does not deserve the dignity of an answer.

Would have been easy to answer the question.

Stern refused.

Draw your own conclusion.

Yeah, Stern was trying to show that Rome's question was a bad one to begin with.

Do you still beat your wife?
Yes. Then you're a wife beater.
No. Then you used to be a wife beater.

Unanswerable question. Unless, of course, you do still beat your wife. I stayed at Holiday Inn Express.

Python wrote:Yeah, Stern was trying to show that Rome's question was a bad one to begin with.

Do you still beat your wife?
Yes. Then you're a wife beater.
No. Then you used to be a wife beater.

Unanswerable question. Unless, of course, you do still beat your wife. I stayed at Holiday Inn Express.

Yeah, we get it.

Sincerely,

1990s

Python wrote:I stayed at Holiday Inn Express.

What
Would
trev
Do?

Screw_Michigan wrote:Yeah, we get it.

Sincerely,

1990s

Obviously not. See one of the posts above.

DC Smackmaster wrote:Ucant, is this true? If so, it makes Stern seem a lot less douchey. I'd never heard of this reply before.

Complex Question: specific form of circular logic, a complex question is a question that assumes its own conclusion so that any attempt to answer the question necessarily leads to accepting the conclusion. The most famous example of the complex question fallacy:

"Do you still beat your wife?"

If this question is answered, it becomes an argument with the conclusion that you have in fact beaten your wife at some point in time. The problem is that a complex question is really two questions that demand one answer. This can be committed out of ignorance, but it can also be a purposeful deception.

Another form of this fallacy is to ask for an explanation of something which is untrue or not yet established.

Yeah, we get it.

Sincerely,

1990s

I don't get it.

I don't get it.

Not sure why Rome didn't simply reply, "I've never beaten my wife, and there has been no media speculation that I may have ever beaten my wife. Mister Commissioner, your question is in the form of an accusation bordering on slander and well beneath someone of your public reputation. In fact, it was downright slimy of you to go there, and I look forward to your sincere apology. Be that as it may, I'm sure you're well aware that there has been rampant media speculation regarding the possibility of league tampering in this year's draft selection, just as there was regarding the Patrick Ewing/New York Knicks draft, and you know I would be remiss in fulfilling my responsibilities as a reporter if I didn't inquire as to the possibility of league tampering in this instance.

"It's a fair and rather pressing question, Mister Commissioner, and your resorting to juvenile name-calling seems a rather artless dodge. Are you sure you wouldn't rather just answer the question?

"Oh, and I've heard that Stephen A. Smith thinks you've raped more young boys just over the past few months than Jerry Sandusky allegedly did during his entire tenure at Penn State. Is Mister Smith at least in the ballpark?"

There's nothing wrong with Tang.

I like Tang. Either form.

Stern: Do you still drink Tang?

The NBA put itself in this position with the nixing of the Paul deal while they owned the team. There is an appearance of a conflict in this case. The NBA put themselves in that situation, ergo they are stupid assfucks are greedy cheating fuckholes. Neither of those choices are good. That's on the NBA. I would have phrased it differently than Rome did but Stern is an ass for responding like a petulant child seeing as he put himself in the hot kitchen in the first place.

Yep. Stern came off as a total ass.

Where are the "rampant media speculations" as to a fixed NBA lottery? Who? Based on what? Unless Rome had solid evidence--like a witness in the shower room, etc.--he had no business whatsoever raising such a question. What an utterly unprofessional hack. He's probably actually been drinking that 5-hr caffeine slam crap and has started to fritz his spinning top.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: Based on what? Unless Rome had solid evidence--like a witness in the shower room, etc.--he had no business whatsoever raising such a question.

The question from Rome was not worded well, but to answer your question...
The NBA owned the NO team when the NBA A) nixed the Paul deal and B) picked NO first in the draft. That is what is known as a conflict of interest. That conflict has lead some people to speculate as to WTF is going on. A far as the "Who" goes, you can easily goggle it.

Roach wrote: He may be a hack, but certainly is not unprofessional. He gets paid, and paid very well for doing his schtick. Prostitutes are professionals, sluts are not. You would know that if you weren't a virgin (limit that to interaction with female humans).

STFU you stupid old fuck. He was talking about Rome ACTING unprofessional.

Hmm..if Rome's "Chris" moment was defining then I suppose you're right, he was just doing his job. My bad, I thought he had slightly moved past the nasty little prick as portrayed in Any Given Sunday. Anyways, "professional" in case was meant to imply some basic decency and graceful discourse. But no fat jokes!