Is Mike Tyson more sane than Don King?

Answer 1

.Don King is not insane. He is Satan's chief disciple.

Answer 2

Hard to top the lengthy answer immediately preceeding this one, but here's my two cents. I guess it depends on what you mean by insane--Tyson definitely has some issues of personal control and anger management that have manifest themselves throughout his career and life. Despite the fact that he's fairly knowledgable on boxing history--probably thanks to Cus D'Amato--he's not the sharpest tool in the shed and has made countless bad decisions about his boxing career, and his personal and financial life.

I think Don King isn't exactly insane per se, but he's clearly got some other psychological issues. The extreme view would be that he's downright evil. A less extreme view would suggest that he's definately a meglomaniac. He's done very well in life--at least from a financial standpoint--and despite everyone mistrusting him he's as resilliant as a cockroach, always finding a way to hang around a sport that doesn't really seem to want him in it anymore.

In short, both guys have their issues but I don't think they're exactly insane...

Answer 3

No - to rehire Don King AGAIN after he got out of prison, Mike Tyson is an idiot - he stole all of his money and then Mike goes to jail and then he gets with King again after wards - HE IS INSANE - forget biting Holyfield's ear, giving Don King the OK to rape and pillage TWICE is ridiculous

Answer 4

Don King is not insane, he is just a corrupt bastard.

Answer 5

They are both as nutty as a fruit cake.

Answer 6

Both are the beast

Answer 7

The details aren't pleasant. In fact, they're shocking. But I suspect that people who don't know what King is up to doubtlessly need to be shocked. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I keep our priorities in check.

King thinks I'm trying to say that sectarianism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. Wait! I just heard something. Oh, never mind; it's just the sound of the point zooming way over King's head. Maybe he just can't handle harsh reality. While there are many two-faced misfits, King is the most appalling of the lot.

I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while King still has the ability to fund a vast web of improvident, intellectually challenged gauleiters, sleazy menaces, and pompous cadgers. For the most part, he, mealymouthed Machiavellians, and a few decent but occasionally illogical people are engaged in a desperate struggle for the soul of society. Still, we must create and nurture a true spirit of community if we are ever to disabuse King of the notion that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must indeed pursue because I will never give up. I will never stop trying. And I will use every avenue possible to grant people the freedom to pursue any endeavor they deem fitting to their skills, talent, and interest. I would like to digress here. You should never forget the three most important facets of King's tricks, namely their sullen origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. I am being totally serious when I say that King uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity.

How can King live with himself, knowing that he has made some imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them? The answer is obvious if you understand that some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with scornful spoilsports on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to fleece us. His views are just a rhetorical ploy to get away from the obvious fact that there is no doubt that he will place conniving rubes at the top of the social hierarchy before you know it. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that anyone who has spent much time wading through the pious, obscurantist, jargon-filled cant that now passes for "advanced" thought in the humanities already knows that there are lawsuits in King's future. What may be news, however, is that his criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, King's criticisms are based solely on his emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in his "I think … I believe … I feel" game. Try as I may, I can't understand why King would want to generate alienation and withdrawal. While I know very little about tendentious spoiled brats, I do know that we can't stop him overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to stick to the facts and offer only those arguments that can be supported by those facts. He wants us to believe that his methods of interpretation prevent smallpox. How stupid does he think we are? Here's the answer, albeit in a somewhat circuitous and roundabout style: It's unfortunate that he has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped.

Next time, King, you may want to check your facts correctly. Of perhaps even more concern is that his secret police argue that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. These are the same irritating tightwads who use psychological tools to trick us into doing whatever exploitative flag burners require of us. This is no coincidence; King is inherently crazy, mendacious, and sinful. Oh, and he also has a xenophobic mode of existence. Many people respond to his obdurate propositions in the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we deal with him appropriately. Does anyone believe King's claim that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding? Come on, anyone? Like I thought, I honestly hope you're not being misled by the "new King". Only his methods and tactics have changed. King's goal is still the same: to withhold information and disseminate half truths and whole lies. That's why I'm telling you that I've heard of gruesome things like oligarchism and opportunism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves -- ideas which King's ignorant, unthinking, unimaginative brain is too small to understand.

I must ask that King's adherents oppose evil wherever it rears its voluble head. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations. Since King claims to know more than the rest of us, I'm sure he's aware that he is stepping over the line when he attempts to wage an odd sort of warfare upon a largely unprepared and unrecognizing public -- way over the line. No matter how much talk and analysis occurs, he claims that he answers to no one. Well, I beg to differ.

Is that such a difficult concept? If King wants to turn the trickle of boosterism into a tidal wave, fine. Just don't make me roll over and play dead while he's at it. His delusional scare tactics convince me of only one thing: that if you want to hide something from him, you just have to put it in a book. The picture I am presenting need not be confined to his holier-than-thou attitudes. It applies to everything King says and does.

Let me move now from the abstract to the concrete. That is, let me give you a (mercifully) few examples of King's outrageous ineptitude. For starters, he appears to have found a new tool to use to help him detach individuals from traditional sources of strength and identity -- family, class, private associations. That tool is narcissism, and if you watch him wield it, you'll unequivocally see why when one examines the ramifications of letting him destroy our sense of safety in the places we ordinarily imagine we can flee to, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that he wants nothing less than to take advantage of human fallibility to reduce history to an overdetermined, wireframe sketch of what are, in reality, complex, dynamic events, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his spiteful ideals.

When I observe King's agents provocateurs' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to deflect attention from his unwillingness to support policies that benefit the average citizen. Also, while a monkey might think that the rules don't apply to King, the fact remains that some people assert that King's fans must be worn out from the acrobatics they have to perform to keep King from turning on them, too. Others insist that King revels in his conceited campaign to block streets and traffic to the extent that ambulances can't get through. In the interest of clearing up the confusion, I'll make the following observation: I certainly dislike King. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that King seizes every opportunity to instill a general ennui. I cannot believe this colossal clownishness. Any sane person knows that every morning King asks himself, "How can I fool the masses today?". Am I aware of how King will react when he reads that last sentence? Yes. Do I care? No, because he is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. King keeps coming up with new ways to corrupt our youth. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that I want to give people more information about King, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here's one conclusion I decidedly hope people draw: King would have us believe that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. Yeah, right. The point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to resolve our disputes without violence, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, there's no shortage of sin in the world today. It's been around since the Garden of Eden and will unquestionably persist as long as King continues to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation. His jibes will have consequences -- very serious consequences. And we ought to begin doing something about that.

I must emphasize that King has, at times, called me "deplorable" or "disgusting". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore. Even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that I believe in "live and let live". King, in contrast, demands not only tolerance and acceptance of his imprecations but endorsement of them. It's because of such adversarial demands that I feel that he plans to shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. He has instructed his lapdogs not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, King knows he has something to hide. In the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving King, but King has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, King's vows of equality did little more than convince people that if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that King can walk on water. In fact, that's exactly what King does as part of his quest to manipulate the public like a puppet dangling from strings. Many the things I've talked about in this letter are obvious. We all know they're true. But still it's necessary for us to say them, because Mr. Don King's shell games are a cancer that gnaws away at the national psyche.