bruin haters redux

no apology from the bruin hater. instead, he now claims he was complimentary and not sexist or dismissive of women athletes in general and of male athletes not playing football:

1) In the column, I wrote, "UCLA’s women’s teams have won 30 championships. That’s more than the total titles won each by Tennessee, Colorado and Nebraska." Period. That’s what I wrote. Folks, this was a compliment. Nothing more. Some thought I was mocking women and being sexist.

2) I also wrote, "The Bruins have been more successful than any other school in sports that don’t make headlines or money. But that’s not the worst development, particularly when mixed with 11 men’s basketball championships and that whole Wooden Era thing." Period. That’s what I wrote. Again, this was intended as praise. Nothing more. Do you really think someone would attempt to demean the contributions of John Wooden? No one, not even me, not even 10 of me, is that big of an idiot.

Given the tone of my column, it’s understandable how these points were misconstrued.

misconstrued? folks, this is called revisionist history. again, here is the original column entitled, "ucla's titles add up, but do they count?" hard to misconstrue that one.

and then i laughed again for his sorry attempt to re-write his original column.