Columnist wishes for death of competitive eater

July 4, 2007 at 10:36 pm by ojrifkin · More posts about:Health

Mike Downey of the Chicago Tribune offers a negative review of Nathan’s hot dog eating contest in his latest column

I wish Kobayashi, Chestnut or one of these guys would explode like that gastronome from Monty Python’s “The Meaning of Life” who eats one morsel too many.

Comments (10)

10 Comments »

  1. shazam said (Registered June 27, 2007)

    July 4, 2007 @ 10:45 pm

    Who’s the more sickening — the fool, or the fool who wishes his death?

  2. Gwen Perry said

    July 4, 2007 @ 11:22 pm

    That columnist is wrong. He has every right to think competitive eating is either stupid or disgusting but he shouldn’t wish death on anybody.

  3. KevinRoss said

    July 5, 2007 @ 12:27 am

    That guy should change his name to Captain Irony. He tells us “Could somebody please, please, please, I beg you, put a stop to all this news coverage of that totally repulsive 4th of July hot dog-eating contest?” as he is writing a news story about that very contest. Wow.

  4. Carey Poehlmann said

    July 5, 2007 @ 12:39 am

    “If I wanted to watch uncivilized creatures eat, I would go to a zoo.” And if you didn’t want to, then you could have changed the channel, dick head.

  5. anonymous said

    July 5, 2007 @ 5:43 am

    He could write bullshit like that because noone in CE has access to his phone or real email. As a third party that noone ever heard of , he realizes this and can get away with saying whatver the hell he wants.

  6. mike landrich said (Registered July 4, 2007)

    July 5, 2007 @ 9:02 am

    Here’s a copy of the e-mail I sent to this douchebag columnist. I thought about being offensive, but decided it carries more weight keeping it clean. I recommend all of us voice our displeasure to this idiot. E-mail away……….

    “Here’s the beauty of America’s media. ESPN has the right to broadcast whatever they want, we can watch whatever we want, you can whine about it in your column (which coincidentally gives it more publicity), we can can read your column and finally, I can send this e-mail. I left out one right you have, but apparently forgot to exercise. You have the right to not watch something of which you disapprove. Turn the channel, just like I do during shows of which I disapprove.

    I understand your column, and therefore livelihood, revolves around nothing more substantial than writing about what you observe in society, but wishing a competitor would explode from consuming one last morsel is the equivalent of me wishing a columnist would suffer a severe stroke from straining to write more about less.”

  7. anonymous said

    July 5, 2007 @ 9:47 am

    why even bother. He probobly never reads them to begin with

  8. Doesn't Get It said

    July 5, 2007 @ 9:57 am

    Mike, I applaud your response to this narrow-minded pinhead. To have taken the high road was most certainly the best way to handle the situation. It’s too bad he didn’t take the time to get to know any of the people he based aside from reading their AOL profiles. You’re right – he’s the idiot.

  9. carey poehlmann said

    July 5, 2007 @ 9:58 am

    Very civil, Mike. I feel that he isn’t worth the time or energy, because any feedback to him will only show him how his comments stir up publicity. I am sure a lot of readers are going to turn away from reading his articles from now on, and THEN he will see the ill effects of his actions. Perhaps a letter to the editor instead. I am going to write one.

  10. mike landrich said (Registered July 4, 2007)

    July 5, 2007 @ 11:59 pm

    Beinf civil is tough sometimes, but being a prick to this douchebag would’ve just fed his ego, and made all of us look bad.

RSS feed for comments on this post

Leave a Comment

Log in | Register | Comments by users who have not logged in will be held for approval