A Quote by Rex Ryan

I have no problem at all if somebody disagrees with me on my politics, or on this, that or whatever. That's fine. — © Rex Ryan
I have no problem at all if somebody disagrees with me on my politics, or on this, that or whatever. That's fine.
I am not keen on the idea of an oversharer. I don't like that as a problem. I have more of a problem with an undershare. If I'm talking to somebody and I ask them how their love life is and they say "fine," that's a problem for me. I want to know things about people, I feel like we're all here on this planet, and intimacy is important.
Somebody who had read Lila asked me, ‘Why do you write about the problem of loneliness?’ I said: ‘It’s not a problem. It’s a condition. It’s a passion of a kind. It’s not a problem. I think that people make it a problem by interpreting it that way.’?
If I'm characterized as a character actor, that's fine with me. Whatever they want to call me is fine.
So you can say whatever you want and quote me however you want about politics and make the next payday, and that's fine because I'm making that deal with you, but just mention the movie along the way, OK?
Even if somebody disagrees with you, their life is still valuable.
He who disagrees with me in private, call him a fool. He who disagrees with me in public, call him an ambulance.
For me, it's fine to be aggressive and play hard. As long as you're not getting personal, it's fine, and you can do whatever you can to upset the opposition.
I have no problem with someone who disagrees with my life. That's your right to feel that way.
Going to school on a campus where the faculty overwhelmingly disagrees with you, and where the student body overwhelmingly disagrees with you, is challenging. If you go in without a firm foundation, it can undermine what you believe.
I'm fine with whatever comes my way, and whatever doesn't come my way I'm fine with too. I have a very laissez-faire attitude with the whole thing.
A person with 'oppositional conversational style' is a person who, in conversation, disagrees with and corrects whatever you say. He or she may do this in a friendly way, or a belligerent way, but this person frames remarks in opposition to whatever you venture.
If you look at social movements in Latin America, there are spaces where alternative politics are thought about on the ground, at the grassroots level, but they are always under threat. The problem in North Africa and the Middle East is the politics of oil. It means that the spaces for truly grassroots politics, involving those masses of people excluded from high politics, are very quickly closed down. They are not really allowed any kind of autonomy to develop, and that seems to be the real problem, which gets us back to the neo-colonial relationship.
The NAACP ignores the wellspring of racism from within its own ranks, daring to brand anyone who disagrees with the standard they bear for the plantation-politics Democrats as 'white nationalists.'
In Washington, if someone disagrees with you, the problem must be your heart - you must be evil.
If you've really got a problem with me, and you came and told me you had a problem with me, I'd be interested to listen to you. But if you're just some loser that sits there and hammers away on some blog form or whatever, I don't have time for that. Why even worry about it?
I was quite eager to work, anytime somebody was offering me a job, if I liked the role. Because I was always very discriminating from the very beginning, in the sense that I had absolutely no problem saying no to jobs when they came along if somehow they didn't fit into my universe - whatever that was.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!