WowBB Forums Home 
WowBB Forums > Sports And Wrestling > Sports Talk > Tim Thomas no-shows Presidential visit with Boston Bruins

 Moderated by: Ron, brodiescomics, beejmi  
AuthorPost
the squared circle
Mr Hockey


Joined: Thu Feb 21st, 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7765
Status: 
Offline

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=385861

The 2011 Stanley Cup champion Boston Bruins made their long-awaited visit to the White House on Monday, but it was without the one player whose postseason heroics got them there in the first place.

Conn Smythe Trophy winning-goaltender Tim Thomas did not attend the visit hosted by U.S. President Barack Obama and the team explained that he would post a statement regarding his actions on his Facebook page on Monday night.

"Everybody has their own opinions and political beliefs. He chose not to join us," Bruins president Cam Neely told Joe Haggerty of CSNNE.com at the visit. "We certainly would have liked to have him come and join us. But it's his choice. It's obviously not a choice most of the guys...well all of the guys came except for Tim. But it's his decision and his choice." 

President Obama honoured the Bruins for their championship won last spring and their charitable work off the ice.

The Bruins won their first Stanley Cup title in 39 years last June when they beat the Vancouver Canucks in seven games.

It was the latest in a string of Boston professional sports championships in recent years, including the Celtics in 2008, the Red Sox in 2007 and the New England Patriots in 2005.

The Patriots face the New York Giants in next month's Super Bowl.

Obama says, "the Bruins, the Sox, the Celtics, now the Patriots. Enough already, Boston."

The White House said the Boston Bruins Foundation has donated more than US$7 million to charities in New England.

- with files from the Associated Press

CanadianHorseman



Joined: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Canada
Posts: 14026
Status: 
Offline
Yeah - the sh*t is gonna hit the fan big time over this. Not only was Thomas the Conn Smythe Trophy winner but he was the only American on last year's team.

Last edited on Mon Jan 23rd, 2012 10:04 pm by CanadianHorseman

freebirdsforever2001
Fantasia is running wild!


Joined: Tue Jul 8th, 2008
Location: Pittsgrove, New Jersey USA
Posts: 20758
Status: 
Offline
Commie bastard!

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
asshole

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
who gives a flying fuck if someone doesn't want to meet the President.  I sure as hell wouldn't go if he invited me to the White House, and it has nothing to do with the party either, its just I think its fucking stupid.  All they do is grab ass for the camera's for a few minutes, the President makes a speech, the team gives a jersey with the Presidents name, grab ass some more, then the secret service agents lead you to the exit.  No big deal

This reminds me of the woman who caused a stir for wearing flip flops when some womans team met Bush.  Big fucking deal if she wore flip flops, there is no official dress code for meeting the President either.  If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

Baby Cyndi would probably join you.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

Baby Cyndi would probably join you.
I think she make a better wife for Obama myself

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: who gives a flying fuck if someone doesn't want to meet the President.  I sure as hell wouldn't go if he invited me to the White House, and it has nothing to do with the party either, its just I think its fucking stupid.  All they do is grab ass for the camera's for a few minutes, the President makes a speech, the team gives a jersey with the Presidents name, grab ass some more, then the secret service agents lead you to the exit.  No big deal

This reminds me of the woman who caused a stir for wearing flip flops when some womans team met Bush.  Big fucking deal if she wore flip flops, there is no official dress code for meeting the President either.  If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

call me old fashion but I think there still is a certain amount of respect the President, regardless of political affiliation, deserves.  As Americans we ought to at least have respect for what the Office means.  so fuck him.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: mike3775 wrote: who gives a flying fuck if someone doesn't want to meet the President.  I sure as hell wouldn't go if he invited me to the White House, and it has nothing to do with the party either, its just I think its fucking stupid.  All they do is grab ass for the camera's for a few minutes, the President makes a speech, the team gives a jersey with the Presidents name, grab ass some more, then the secret service agents lead you to the exit.  No big deal

This reminds me of the woman who caused a stir for wearing flip flops when some womans team met Bush.  Big fucking deal if she wore flip flops, there is no official dress code for meeting the President either.  If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

call me old fashion but I think there still is a certain amount of respect the President, regardless of political affiliation, deserves.  As Americans we ought to at least have respect for what the Office means.  so fuck him.
And in the United States, we also have the right to refuse to go to an event thrown by the President of the United States as well.

He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 

Just because the guy is the President, does not mean that people have to drop everything to go pay a visit to him either.

And that office has lost so much respect over the years, they are still about the level Nixon left it in when he resigned. 

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 12:46 am by mike3775

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote:
mike3775 wrote: who gives a flying fuck if someone doesn't want to meet the President.  I sure as hell wouldn't go if he invited me to the White House, and it has nothing to do with the party either, its just I think its fucking stupid.  All they do is grab ass for the camera's for a few minutes, the President makes a speech, the team gives a jersey with the Presidents name, grab ass some more, then the secret service agents lead you to the exit.  No big deal

This reminds me of the woman who caused a stir for wearing flip flops when some womans team met Bush.  Big fucking deal if she wore flip flops, there is no official dress code for meeting the President either.  If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

call me old fashion but I think there still is a certain amount of respect the President, regardless of political affiliation, deserves.  As Americans we ought to at least have respect for what the Office means.  so fuck him.

My feelings exactly. This is in line with that Joe Whatsisname Rep from whatever state he was from who yelled "Liar!" during Obama's speech a little while back. It's just another piece of evidence of lack of respect.

CanadianHorseman



Joined: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Canada
Posts: 14026
Status: 
Offline
Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.

sek69



Joined: Fri Dec 21st, 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 5509
Status: 
Offline
Your team was invited to meet the President. Yes, he has the right not to go, but what does it hurt to suck it up for the brief time you're there with your teammates? Refusing to go and giving some "GUBMINT IN PEOPLUZ BUIZNEZZ TOO MUCH" just makes you look like a knuckle dragging idiot trying to passive-aggressively make some political statement while claiming you aren't.

Guys on ESPN radio had it correct (which is something that doesn't happen often): everyone these days knows their rights, few know their responsibilities.  I think it's kind of silly the President has to meet with seemingly every pro and college team that wins a championship, but it's a tradition, and you'd think someone who plays a sport under intense scrutiny for head injury but still considers fighting a sacred part of their culture would understand that.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote:
Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I don't think I remember any athletes blatantly no-showing over the years, much less any no-showing Bush or because of political reasons. Do you really remember any specifically? The only one I can remember not turning up was Manny, but that was because he was a dope and probably overslept. But it certainly wasn't driven by politics.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
So there is a responsibility to attend if invited, even though someone doesn't want to go if they are an athlete?  Maybe the teams better start putting it in the athletes contracts that they must attend these functions then, oh wait, then the uproar would be that they are forcing people to attend, which I say they can't have it both ways.


freebirdsforever2001
Fantasia is running wild!


Joined: Tue Jul 8th, 2008
Location: Pittsgrove, New Jersey USA
Posts: 20758
Status: 
Offline
CanadianHorseman wrote: Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.


Thomas likes White Robes and White Hats?

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

lobo316



Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: Raptorville
Posts: 43488
Status: 
Offline
Who cares ? He's only an athlete. Those of you who think he's an asshole for
not meeting Obama, I ask this.
Would you feel the same way about player X who refused to meet Dubya, if
Dubya was still Pres ?

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
lobo316 wrote: Who cares ? He's only an athlete. Those of you who think he's an asshole for
not meeting Obama, I ask this.
Would you feel the same way about player X who refused to meet Dubya, if
Dubya was still Pres ?

yes... I wrote two different times in this thread.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: lobo316 wrote: Who cares ? He's only an athlete. Those of you who think he's an asshole for
not meeting Obama, I ask this.
Would you feel the same way about player X who refused to meet Dubya, if
Dubya was still Pres ?

yes... I wrote two different times in this thread.


Same here...as much as I hated Dubya, I think a move like this shows little class and just serves to build grow and already large division in this country.

And again, I can't reiterate enough, I'm a huge mark for Tim Thomas.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.


tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.




He can do as he likes, but this all comes down to an athlete having a sore vagina over an election result.  Regardless of political affiliation, people have the right to no-show a presidential visit.  Other people have the right to call them Midol-gargling jackasses over it.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.




He can do as he likes, but this all comes down to an athlete having a sore vagina over an election result.  Regardless of political affiliation, people have the right to no-show a presidential visit.  Other people have the right to call them Midol-gargling jackasses over it.

I agree, but that is something that seems to be overlooked in all of this.  I agree with him on principal, but I also do not hold the office of President on a pedestal either.  Its just a job title that costs millions to get that pays very little and is nothing better than a corporate shill

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.



conflicting with their views how?  because they are conservative and don't agree with policies and decisions of a specific administration?  because they feel that blacks are inferior?  I don't even think that is the reason, but who knows?  I thought conservatives were the ones who were supposed to be Patriotic.  Most people don't even understand why their views conflict. 

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.



conflicting with their views how?  because they are conservative and don't agree with policies and decisions of a specific administration?  because they feel that blacks are inferior?  I don't even think that is the reason, but who knows?  I thought conservatives were the ones who were supposed to be Patriotic.  Most people don't even understand why their views conflict. 
If he didn't vote for the guy(which I highly doubt he did), why should he be forced to have a photo op with the guy?


lobo316



Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: Raptorville
Posts: 43488
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: yellowdog wrote: lobo316 wrote: Who cares ? He's only an athlete. Those of you who think he's an asshole for
not meeting Obama, I ask this.
Would you feel the same way about player X who refused to meet Dubya, if
Dubya was still Pres ?

yes... I wrote two different times in this thread.


Same here...as much as I hated Dubya, I think a move like this shows little class and just serves to build grow and already large division in this country.

And again, I can't reiterate enough, I'm a huge mark for Tim Thomas.

 

I'm glad Thomas exercised his right of free thought. If he doesn't want to meet Pres., fine.
I wouldn't want to meet the Pres, whether he/she be Dem/Rep, liberal/conservative,
white/black,  whatever. I would refuse the invitation even if the pres was
Chinese.


yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.



conflicting with their views how?  because they are conservative and don't agree with policies and decisions of a specific administration?  because they feel that blacks are inferior?  I don't even think that is the reason, but who knows?  I thought conservatives were the ones who were supposed to be Patriotic.  Most people don't even understand why their views conflict. 
If he didn't vote for the guy(which I highly doubt he did), why should he be forced to have a photo op with the guy?



I feel like I'm talking in circles here...  He should not be forced to have a photo op, but so what if he didn't vote for him?  Respect for the office, our country and the President. 

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote:
Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I don't think I remember any athletes blatantly no-showing over the years, much less any no-showing Bush or because of political reasons. Do you really remember any specifically? The only one I can remember not turning up was Manny, but that was because he was a dope and probably overslept. But it certainly wasn't driven by politics.


James Harrison of the Steelers after they won the 2006 Super Bowl.  Joey Porter on that same team reluctantly went, wearing dark sunglasses, and said he intended to tell Bush off, but wound up not doing it.  And sek of all people would know this full well.  That's why he's my first example. 

I also remember when Bush threw out the first pitch before the 2001 World Series, a group of 5 or 6 Yankees kept their distance in the locker room and wouldn't greet him for political reasons, but given the whole 9/11 thing didn't want to make a big deal about it.  It was just done, they wouldn't take part in the glad-handing and went about their business.  No big deal. 

Edit: Also Pedro Martinez claimed he had a "scheduling problem", a ridiculous and vague excuse when invited to the White House, but he no-showed a Bush meeting as well.


Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 02:47 pm by srossi

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: mike3775 wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
I love how people are supposed to do the "right thing" even if it conflicts with their views.



conflicting with their views how?  because they are conservative and don't agree with policies and decisions of a specific administration?  because they feel that blacks are inferior?  I don't even think that is the reason, but who knows?  I thought conservatives were the ones who were supposed to be Patriotic.  Most people don't even understand why their views conflict. 
If he didn't vote for the guy(which I highly doubt he did), why should he be forced to have a photo op with the guy?



I feel like I'm talking in circles here...  He should not be forced to have a photo op, but so what if he didn't vote for him?  Respect for the office, our country and the President. 
If he has no respect for the office, its no big deal.  People are making this out to be bigger than it really is. 

Remember respect is earned, not a given

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  


you're wrong about my respecting the other team.  The only person I called batshit crazy was Michelle Bachmann and I stand by that statement.  I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load. 

Not sure how you got to "not as principled as you'd like to be or lying" Even though I don't consider myself super-partisan, I think I've been extremely consistent in my views and positions here. 

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  


you're wrong about my respecting the other team.  The only person I called batshit crazy was Michelle Bachmann and I stand by that statement.  I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load. 

Not sure how you got to "not as principled as you'd like to be or lying" Even though I don't consider myself super-partisan, I think I've been extremely consistent in my views and positions here. 

So if Michelle Bachmann had been elected President and you were in a position to shake her hand and take a picture with her, would you do it? 

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  


you're wrong about my respecting the other team.  The only person I called batshit crazy was Michelle Bachmann and I stand by that statement.  I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load. 

Not sure how you got to "not as principled as you'd like to be or lying" Even though I don't consider myself super-partisan, I think I've been extremely consistent in my views and positions here. 

So if Michelle Bachmann had been elected President and you were in a position to shake her hand and take a picture with her, would you do it? 


yes, for all the reasons I stated. 

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  


you're wrong about my respecting the other team.  The only person I called batshit crazy was Michelle Bachmann and I stand by that statement.  I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load. 

Not sure how you got to "not as principled as you'd like to be or lying" Even though I don't consider myself super-partisan, I think I've been extremely consistent in my views and positions here. 

So if Michelle Bachmann had been elected President and you were in a position to shake her hand and take a picture with her, would you do it? 


yes, for all the reasons I stated. 

We need to sticky this thread for posterity for the next time a Republican is in the White House.  I already know the things said about Bush and the way Republicans used the old "respect the office argmument" then, and now it's been reversed.  Another 5 years and it'll go the other way again.  Will make for fun reading. 

Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: yellowdog wrote: srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I would have had the same reaction regardless of political affiliation.  I think I said that in my first post about this.  The first time this pissed me off was when some members of the Ryder Cup team were whining about meeting with Clinton.  It has become a tradition in this country that championship teams get invited to the White House.  It's about respect... respect for the office, respect for the country and respect for the President.  So Rossi, you're suggesting we're on the verge of a revolution like in 1776?  Tim Thomas not going to the White House is like our founders signing the Declaration of Independence and going to war with England? See how silly that looks when you read it?  You have the "right" to do a lot of things.  That doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I see how silly it is when smart people suddenly act dumb to try to prove their point.  This isn't about being on the verge of a revolution, this is about the presidency not being a God-bestowed monarchy and the office not being treated as such in this country, a principle deeply rooted in the very foundation of this country and driven home by George Washington in all of his early speeches after becoming our first president.  This "respect the office" cry is a joke when no one respects the office when it's held by the "other team".  I'd love to see how respectful you'll be to the office if any of this GOP crop actually were elected after all of the "batshit crazy" comments on this board about them.  To betray your opinions and shake the hand of some of these morons just because they have a title is not what this country is about.  I for one wouldn't have been able to look myself in the mirror if I ever shook Bush's hand for a photo op after everything he did, he was nothing short of a monster and a despicable human.  My opinions aren't as strong about Obama but the principle remains the same for his detractors.  So you're either not as principled as you'd like to be or you're lying.  I actually think it's the latter.  This is where the super-partisans run into trouble on this board, the lack of consistency can never be reconciled.  


you're wrong about my respecting the other team.  The only person I called batshit crazy was Michelle Bachmann and I stand by that statement.  I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load. 

Not sure how you got to "not as principled as you'd like to be or lying" Even though I don't consider myself super-partisan, I think I've been extremely consistent in my views and positions here. 

So if Michelle Bachmann had been elected President and you were in a position to shake her hand and take a picture with her, would you do it? 


yes, for all the reasons I stated. 

We need to sticky this thread for posterity for the next time a Republican is in the White House.  I already know the things said about Bush and the way Republicans used the old "respect the office argmument" then, and now it's been reversed.  Another 5 years and it'll go the other way again.  Will make for fun reading. 

Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.

but you said President and that's pure fiction.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.
What if that person was giving her the donkey punch?

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: srossi wrote: Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.
What if that person was giving her the donkey punch?

That's fine, but her husband would probably enjoy it more.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: srossi wrote: Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.
What if that person was giving her the donkey punch?

That's fine, but her husband would probably enjoy it more.

I'm not sure if you mean her husband would enjoy her getting the donkey punch or taking one himself.  I would believe either.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: srossi wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: srossi wrote: Just for the record, anyone who would smile and pose with Bachmann, whether she's President or dog-catcher, disgusts me.
What if that person was giving her the donkey punch?

That's fine, but her husband would probably enjoy it more.

I'm not sure if you mean her husband would enjoy her getting the donkey punch or taking one himself.  I would believe either.

I meant the latter.  These are the Bachmanns we're talking about, not the Gingriches.  No open marriages here, just some closeted gay sex on the side like God intended.

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 03:42 pm by srossi

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote:
Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I don't think I remember any athletes blatantly no-showing over the years, much less any no-showing Bush or because of political reasons. Do you really remember any specifically? The only one I can remember not turning up was Manny, but that was because he was a dope and probably overslept. But it certainly wasn't driven by politics.


James Harrison of the Steelers after they won the 2006 Super Bowl.  Joey Porter on that same team reluctantly went, wearing dark sunglasses, and said he intended to tell Bush off, but wound up not doing it.  And sek of all people would know this full well.  That's why he's my first example. 

I also remember when Bush threw out the first pitch before the 2001 World Series, a group of 5 or 6 Yankees kept their distance in the locker room and wouldn't greet him for political reasons, but given the whole 9/11 thing didn't want to make a big deal about it.  It was just done, they wouldn't take part in the glad-handing and went about their business.  No big deal. 

Edit: Also Pedro Martinez claimed he had a "scheduling problem", a ridiculous and vague excuse when invited to the White House, but he no-showed a Bush meeting as well.




Nice Googling job.  I Googled these too, since I sincerely forgot about these examples.  Time to poke some holes in your examples.

Let's start with Pedro.  Come on.  Seriously? Pedro?  Do you really think him no-showing has anything to do with politics?  That's just asinine.  Same with Manny.  Those two doofuses didn't go because they didn't want to.  And I really don't have a problem with that; I have a lot more respect if somebody were to say, "You know what, I'm too lazy/stupid/apathetic/disengaged to go to the White House" rather than turning it political.

I also have more respect for the excuse of Delote West--who's likely certifiably bipolar--rather than Thomas'.  At least West was just listening to the voices in his head, not the voices of the Tea Party.

And then there's your Harrison example.  Twice he didn't go to the WH.  Neither time was it political.  He just didn't "feel the need to go" (an actual quote that conveniently was left out of your example above).

As far as Joey Porter goes, he's the only one that might--MIGHT--fit the criteria.  But at the end of the day, "Porter later said the bravado was taken out of context and that he was excited to meet Bush and visit the White House".  So comparing him to Thomas isn't really fair. 
 
Look, I don't give a shit if Thomas went or not.  I really don't.  But all's he accomplishes by making such a big stink about this is perpetuate disrespect and hostility at a time when disrespect and hostility is at an all time high.  I don't know why he couldn't have just had a "family emergency" and been done with it.  Instead he has to attention whore his way through something which, in retrospect, should have been a positive event.

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 03:43 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

The point of this thread is that Marcus Bachmann wants the donkey punch.  Please work on your reading comprehension.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

The point of this thread is that Marcus Bachmann wants the donkey punch.  Please work on your reading comprehension.
I think she already gets enough of em though

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote:
Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.
I don't think I remember any athletes blatantly no-showing over the years, much less any no-showing Bush or because of political reasons. Do you really remember any specifically? The only one I can remember not turning up was Manny, but that was because he was a dope and probably overslept. But it certainly wasn't driven by politics.


James Harrison of the Steelers after they won the 2006 Super Bowl.  Joey Porter on that same team reluctantly went, wearing dark sunglasses, and said he intended to tell Bush off, but wound up not doing it.  And sek of all people would know this full well.  That's why he's my first example. 

I also remember when Bush threw out the first pitch before the 2001 World Series, a group of 5 or 6 Yankees kept their distance in the locker room and wouldn't greet him for political reasons, but given the whole 9/11 thing didn't want to make a big deal about it.  It was just done, they wouldn't take part in the glad-handing and went about their business.  No big deal. 

Edit: Also Pedro Martinez claimed he had a "scheduling problem", a ridiculous and vague excuse when invited to the White House, but he no-showed a Bush meeting as well.




Nice Googling job.  I Googled these too, since I sincerely forgot about these examples.  Time to poke some holes in your examples.

You asked for examples in what I took as a sincere question because you legitimately didn't know/didn't remember.  I provided some.  You can have your opinions over how political or not the examples were, but they no-showed.  Hundreds of other celebrities publicly trounced Bush too, the man was absolutely reviled especially in celebrity (typically liberal) circles, so I don't get how this is anything new just because it happened to Obama.  The "respect for the office" bit is a Rush Limbaugh talking point from 2002 that he conveniently forgot about in 2008 and it's very disappointing to hear liberals use it now that "their guy" is the one taking some flak.  That's my main point.  

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because the whole concept of Remembrance Day is bigger than one man or one soldier.  Just as the whole concept of being honored at the White House is bigger than one President or one athlete.  That, and because it's a douche move.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 03:57 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

The point of this thread is that Marcus Bachmann wants the donkey punch.  Please work on your reading comprehension.

I thought the point of the thread was that Bachmann's husband is a homo.  Why are you flip-flopping?  What are you trying to hide? 

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

The point of this thread is that Marcus Bachmann wants the donkey punch.  Please work on your reading comprehension.

I thought the point of the thread was that Bachmann's husband is a homo.  Why are you flip-flopping?  What are you trying to hide? 

Marcus is Bachmann's husband, unless Michelle changed her name.  Please reference my second sentence.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: srossi wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

The point of this thread is that Marcus Bachmann wants the donkey punch.  Please work on your reading comprehension.

I thought the point of the thread was that Bachmann's husband is a homo.  Why are you flip-flopping?  What are you trying to hide? 

Marcus is Bachmann's husband, unless Michelle changed her name.  Please reference my second sentence.

A husband and wife shouldn't be allowed to have names that start with the same letter.  Very confusing.  We should work on a constitutional amendment for that.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.

Eh, maybe.  I don't know.  I don't really care.  I just felt like typing a bit today.

Kinda bored now, tho.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.

Eh, maybe.  I don't know.  I don't really care.  I just felt like typing a bit today.

Kinda bored now, tho.

I'm gonna take that as a victory and add 20 cred points to my account.  I will be expecting Beej to convert that to mana by the close of business today.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.

Eh, maybe.  I don't know.  I don't really care.  I just felt like typing a bit today.

Kinda bored now, tho.

I'm gonna take that as a victory and add 20 cred points to my account.  I will be expecting Beej to convert that to mana by the close of business today.

Do we have an update on the cred point standings?  Because even though you might've bested me this time, Mr. Smartest Guy in the Room, I am still far and away your superior.

Yeah, that right.  Eat it, New Yorker.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.
Exactly

If it was a violation of his contract, then it would be a douche move, but its not in his contract that he MUST APPEAR before the almighty President of the United States because they won the Stanley Cup.

I guess I am a douche because I refused to attend an Obama fundraiser that the wife was invited to when he was last in Chicago, and so was she for not going.

And here is one for you DFG, am I supposed to show respect for a drunk driver who saved a couple's life after he was released from prison even though he still has yet to pay for the damages he caused to my family?  He is a hero and all, does he deserve my respect for that?

Seriously I need to know what the acceptable standards are nowadays for respect, so that I can teach my kids the proper ways to show respect, since the way I was raised no longer applies it seems

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 04:11 pm by mike3775

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote: Basically what I take from this thread now, is that the age old adage of respect is earned, not rewarded does not apply to the title of President of the United States.  I must remember to re-educate my kids on that respect aspect.

Oh, bullshit.  Not everything has to be political. Not everybody has to "OMG IMA GONNA MAKE ME A STATEMENT BY GOD!" all the time.  Just fucking suck it up and do it.  By making this political, Thomas is making this something it's not; kind of like how you are as well.   

Here's another example, and I'm going to use the IFC comedy "Todd Margaret" as an example.  In one episode, Todd Margaret, an American transplaned in the UK, is filmed on British televison during a Remembrance Day ceremony pouring a can of an energy drink on the ground.  Unfortunately, because of the camera angle, it looks like he's pissing on a Remembrance Day monument.  Immediately, he becomes the most reviled man in Britian.

Now, let's change that up a bit.  Let's say Todd Margaret really hated wars and, in turn, hates veterans.  Let's say, in an attempt to express his contempt, he really did piss on the Remembrance Day monument.  By your example, that's a perfectly acceptable way to express your displeasure, right?  Because, after all, the veterans didn't "earn" his respect; after all, they're really just hired killers.  So why not piss on this monument?  Because it's a douche move, that's why.

Hate to break it to you, but like it or not, society and peer pressure dictate a lot of what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable.  Thomas isn't making a statement; he's just being a douche.


What an atrocious example.  There are actual laws involving decensy and desecration that usually prevent public urination period, and urination on certain monuments in particular.  Not sure how types of vandalism or destruction of property is similar at all.  That's like saying that if you don't respect your neighbor you can smash his windows in.  Well clearly you can't, you shouldn't, and no one would debate that.  But if you don't respect your neighbor, you don't have to say good morning to him and no one would think twice about it.  Now you're just getting ridiculous.
Exactly

If it was a violation of his contract, then it would be a douche move, but its not in his contract that he MUST APPEAR before the almighty President of the United States because they won the Stanley Cup.

I guess I am a douche because I refused to attend an Obama fundraiser that the wife was invited to when he was last in Chicago, and so was she for not going.

And here is one for you DFG, am I supposed to show respect for a drunk driver who saved a couple's life after he was released from prison even though he still has yet to pay for the damages he caused to my family?  He is a hero and all, does he deserve my respect for that?




I'm trying to read your post, but all's I'm seeing is "asdl;khasdl;ghasepioseradlsjfasdlk"....

Again, please refer to the post where I said I was bored now.  Collect your cred points at the door.

Principal_Raditch



Joined: Mon Feb 18th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 6857
Status: 
Offline
Truth is...it's much more impressive for the players to meet Stephen Harper than Obama.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
Principal_Raditch wrote: Truth is...it's much more impressive for the players to meet Stephen Harper than Obama.

Typical hockey racism.

lobo316



Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: Raptorville
Posts: 43488
Status: 
Offline
CanadianHorseman wrote: Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.


Aw fuck. Maybe he was just trying to be funny.

the squared circle
Mr Hockey


Joined: Thu Feb 21st, 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7765
Status: 
Offline
lobo316 wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.


Aw fuck. Maybe he was just trying to be funny.

I assume the same as lobo, but that was pretty stupid of Hodge to insinuate that. Hodge is known though, for having very dry and sarcastic humour.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
the squared circle wrote: lobo316 wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.


Aw fuck. Maybe he was just trying to be funny.

I assume the same as lobo, but that was pretty stupid of Hodge to insinuate that. Hodge is known though, for having very dry and sarcastic humour.

I don't even know who Hodge is, but even I can tell he's goofing around.

clawmaster
Hall Of Famer
 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: The Bowels Of East Central Illinois
Posts: 48216
Status: 
Offline
Has Tim Thomas commented publicly on the matter yet?

lobo316



Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: Raptorville
Posts: 43488
Status: 
Offline
clawmaster wrote: Has Tim Thomas commented publicly on the matter yet?


here's his statement

 

 

I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.

This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

TT

 

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/175798/tim-thomas-boston-bruins-goalie-calls-bullshit-on-u-s-govt-with-naive-libertarian-statement/

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
lobo316 wrote: clawmaster wrote: Has Tim Thomas commented publicly on the matter yet?


here's his statement

 

 

I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.

This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

TT

 

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/175798/tim-thomas-boston-bruins-goalie-calls-bullshit-on-u-s-govt-with-naive-libertarian-statement/

Good for him standing up in what he believes in, even if he will probably lose the PR war on this one.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: yellowdog wrote:
mike3775 wrote: who gives a flying fuck if someone doesn't want to meet the President.  I sure as hell wouldn't go if he invited me to the White House, and it has nothing to do with the party either, its just I think its fucking stupid.  All they do is grab ass for the camera's for a few minutes, the President makes a speech, the team gives a jersey with the Presidents name, grab ass some more, then the secret service agents lead you to the exit.  No big deal

This reminds me of the woman who caused a stir for wearing flip flops when some womans team met Bush.  Big fucking deal if she wore flip flops, there is no official dress code for meeting the President either.  If I wanted to wear a depends diaper and have a big baby bottle, no one could stop me.

call me old fashion but I think there still is a certain amount of respect the President, regardless of political affiliation, deserves.  As Americans we ought to at least have respect for what the Office means.  so fuck him.

My feelings exactly. This is in line with that Joe Whatsisname Rep from whatever state he was from who yelled "Liar!" during Obama's speech a little while back. It's just another piece of evidence of lack of respect.


 

 

Disagree entirely with DFG and YD.  Dude doesn't want to go, he shoudn't go.  We are SUPPOSED to protest things & politicians we don't agree with. He isn't breaking laws or causing riots. He's simply declining an invitation & SHOULD decline if he believes that is the right thing to do.

 

Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

 

Again, WHY is our society so determined to protect liars, cheats & crooks, yet looks down on those with the personal fortitude to speak out aganst them?  We say "look at all the bad shit they do," then someone takes an agressive stance against it, and he gets chastised for not going with traditon. What kind of conditioned, BS is that?

 

Fuck "the Office of President" until someone in that office convinces me to think otherwise.  You are free to let the "office" protect the crooks in it. I choose not to.


Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 08:36 pm by BayouBoogie

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: Somehow I doubt the people who object to this felt the same way over the handful of athletes who refused to meet with Bush over the years.  They were right then, and Thomas is right now.  This is a non-story.  He doesn't have to go anywhere he doesn't want to go and he doesn't even have to respect anyone he doesn't want to respect.  I seem to recall this country being founded on a shocking lack of respect for certain members of royalty.

A-Fucking-Men.  The hypocracy in criticizing someone for taking such a simple, non-violent stance for something they believe in is absurd.

 

Disagree with his opinion all you want. Say he's wrong to be sick of our government or wrong to distrust Obama, or whatever, if that's what you belive in. But acting like he has some obligation to go somewhere he doesn't want to go, or kiss an ass that he doesn't want to kiss is scary thinking, IMO.

Count Grog
Hall Of Famer


Joined: Sun Oct 21st, 2007
Location: Fuquay Varina, NC, USA
Posts: 15603
Status: 
Offline
I am hearing he is a big Tea party supporter and while he claims it was about either party becaus ethey are both to blame it is blatant disrespect of the presient much like the asshole Congressman tonight who is boycotting the Stae of the Union Address.  If this was Bush Fox news and Rush Limbaughs head would explode because of the blantant disrespect for the office not the person.  You go and you smile and stay quiet and its done.  Now he has turned this into a huge Fing deal.  Its all part of the crumbling of our social institions and lack of respect of the government.  Congress is gridlocked because they can't get a long or agree on anything.  I was on a town hall conference call with 4 congressmen last night and they said they don't know their republican counter parts any more becaus eno one is ever there together and now even the committees meet by party lines and only get together to vote.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.

Better analysis of that charge than I can provide here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/09/joe-wilson/joe-wilson-south-carolina-said-obama-lied-he-didnt/

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
I liked this post of mine so much that I thought I'd post it again for added emphasis:

I believe professional athletes represent teams, cities, regions and as champions, our country.  Jesus, this isn't a war.  Maybe that's why Dems and GOPs can't get anything done, because they are the mortal enemy and can't even shake the hand of their "enemy."  This "standing up for my rights and principles" is a load.

There.  I feel better.  I'm done.  No disrespect to those that disagree, but that's the way I strongly feel.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
OK. I just read the whole thing. Rossi, excellent points. I felt like quoting just about all of your posts on this thread because you nailed it all, IMO (hoping you didn't nail Bachman's hubby, too, but to each their own).

 

I see some mighty crawfishing on the part of some of those against it (YD has stayed consistent, though I don't agree with his conclusions). DFG, did you seriously say that people who refused to see Bush are ok because their reasons are better than Thomas's???  Are you guys seriously forgetting how badly Bush was ridiculed & talked about? They made a friggin Hollywood movie about a sitting President and made him as a crooked buffoon (and it wasn't a comedy). Respect for the friggin office?? Really??????

 

There was an awful lot of "I'd think the same for anyone under any circumstance," then all of a sudden it was

-"what about this guy" - "yeah, but he did it for a different reason"

"ok, this guy?" - "his reason was cool, too"

"and this one?"  "well, he's crazy so he's ok ... (and then the kicker that kind of ties it all up): AT LEAST HE ISN'T DOING IT BECAUSE OF THE TEA PARTY GETTING IN HIS HEAD, LIKE THOMAS"

AHA!

 

So it all goes back to what rossi pointed out early on. You don't like what he did because you disagree with his political opinions. If he did it for different reasons, it'd be ok. Not that he made a big stink or openly disrespected Obama, he just declined an invitation. But he's in the Tea Party, and Obama is a black Dem, so THOMAS IS WRONG.

 

It's not that WHAT he did was so bad, others have done it, but they are ok, because their public reasoning was cool.  It's his REASON for doing it that is so bad. So we are back to regulating people's opinions.

And after reading all of these posts, that is the only reasoning against what he did that I see. Well, YD, might really believe that we have some weird obligation to treat the President as more than just a citizen in an important post (which is odd to me since, as rossi pointed out, our entire nation was founded on the idea that our leaders SHOULD NOT be above the ordinary citizen & that we are obligated as citizens to speak out against the government when we don't think it is doing right by our people)

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 09:48 pm by BayouBoogie

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
Count Grog wrote: I am hearing he is a big Tea party supporter and while he claims it was about either party becaus ethey are both to blame it is blatant disrespect of the presient much like the asshole Congressman tonight who is boycotting the Stae of the Union Address.  If this was Bush Fox news and Rush Limbaughs head would explode because of the blantant disrespect for the office not the person.  You go and you smile and stay quiet and its done.  Now he has turned this into a huge Fing deal.  Its all part of the crumbling of our social institions and lack of respect of the government.  Congress is gridlocked because they can't get a long or agree on anything.  I was on a town hall conference call with 4 congressmen last night and they said they don't know their republican counter parts any more becaus eno one is ever there together and now even the committees meet by party lines and only get together to vote.

 

And since it's Obama, the anti-Fox stations and commentators are having fits. Same fucking thing when Clinton was Pres, then Bush, then Obama. They all forget overnight that they didn't have a lick of respect for the last President of the "other" party."

The office is nothing more than a job ( a VERY important one, which gives all the more reason to hold the person in that office to a HIGHER stadard, not a lower one). It is defined by the people in that role, and as far as I'm concerned, they aren't the most respectable crew.

Also, if Thomas truly believes in what he believes, why would he want it to just quietly go away? You don't just go and smile and let it pass if you have convictions.

 

And Congress has been gridlocked for many years. All the more reason to stop playing this bullshit where we "respect the office" when the guy in it is for "my" party. I'm ready to hold these assholes in office responsible for "respecting the office," not the citizens they serve.

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 09:28 pm by BayouBoogie

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.

yellowdog



Joined: Fri Mar 5th, 2010
Location: New Bern, North Carolina USA
Posts: 3811
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.


let me guess... you're free to be an asshole if you want?

CanadianHorseman



Joined: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Canada
Posts: 14026
Status: 
Offline
lobo316 wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: Now it's getting stupid and it's just going to get worse. What do you think TSN's Dave Hodge was trying to imply with this tweet:





TSNDaveHodge Dave Hodge - TSN
Don't know if it's fair to point this out, but Tim Thomas has three children named Kiley, Kelsey and Keegan.


Aw fuck. Maybe he was just trying to be funny.

I'm sure he was but it really was a dumb thing to say. By the way - over at HF Boards somebody posted this gem:
I wonder if this guy Hodge has ever looked into the implications of the initials of the president's daughters, Sasha & Malia?

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
yellowdog wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.


let me guess... you're free to be an asshole if you want?


Pretty much.  But let me go on record as saying I'm firmly AGAINST being an asshole whenever I want, because, you know, I believe in society, and I kind of like most (some, a few) people. 

But mostly it's because I don't want everybody to perceive me as being a dick.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.


 
I see where you are going and it's a fucking ridiculous argument that slaps logic and reality in the face.
 

You'd do nothing of the sort. You'd be kicked out as anyone who disrupts a meeting would be & you'll be arrested if you refuse to leave or shut up. If you want to yell a single word or two then shut the fuck up or be removed, that is your right, and I say it's your obligation if you feel strongly & think the scene you make is worth it.


But comparing yelling a single word or phrase to the disruption you described in your post is as crazy as the post you made where you compare pissing on things and defacing property to quietly declining an invitation.

BTW, it is NOT your legal right to act like that in a structured setting. Not sure where you get that idea from. You could be kicked out of a comedy club for too much of that, much less a friggin speech. A damn bar owner can kick you out if he doesn't like the way you are acting. You can be kicked out of a convenience store for harassing people. How can you think you have the right to continually disrupt a speech with no consequences?

Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2012 10:16 pm by BayouBoogie

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

Per the article I linked, Obama was not lying in the statement that preluded the outburst by Wilson.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.


I think we're getting off track with a comparison of a Rep in the act of conducting business and a private citizen who basically didn't do anything at all.  The Rep was absolutely looking for the cred points and he got them.  His name is out there, he's trying to climb the ladder in his party, and he got cold, hard cash in return from supporters.  That's partisan politics as usual and I don't agree with it.  He could've rebutted through the media like everyone else but he wanted to make a spectacle of himself and mission accomplished.  And if someone was to scream "Liar" every time a politician lied, all you'd hear is an infinite scream of "Liar" until everyone in politics was hoarse, which might not be such a bad thing.  But I don't see how that incident enters into anything else in this thread though. 

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

If you give a speech some day, let me know, because I wouldn't miss it for the world.  I'll heckle you so much that your head will spin around like Reagan MacNeil.

If you say I'm being disrespectful or ignorant or downright uncivil, I'll say tough shit, it's my right to do it and FUCK YOU if you think otherwise.

See what I'm getting at here?  Probably not.

I will let you know when that happens. 

Just like the Gingrich is upset because NBC News didn't allow applause in the Republican Debate.  Why not?

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: Further, I think Rep What-his-name SHOULD yell "liar" if the Pres is lying through his teeth.  Just going along with shit you strongly disagree with & keeping your mouth shut because tradition dictates you should is NOT the way it's supposed to be done. 

I'm of the opinion that Joe Wilson yelled that to score Tea Party cred points.  I doubt beej can convert those to Congressional mana.



He probably did. He seems like a bit of a glory hounding D-Bag, but I can't say what the man's motives were, and Obama WAS lying through his teeth, so I'm glad someone spoke spoke out about it.

Per the article I linked, Obama was not lying in the statement that preluded the outburst by Wilson.



OK, then "Joe Wilson" was wrong. But my point wasn't backing "Wilson." It was bakcing the idea that we need to speak out when we feel it's necessary.

 

And rossi is again on point. The Wilson scenario really has nothing to do with giving Thomas grief for declining the invitation.

kargol



Joined: Thu Oct 18th, 2007
Location: Brum, United Kingdom
Posts: 4385
Status: 
Offline
lobo316 wrote:

here's his statement

 

 

I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.

This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

TT

 

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/175798/tim-thomas-boston-bruins-goalie-calls-bullshit-on-u-s-govt-with-naive-libertarian-statement/

Wouldn't have been better for him to speak to the one man in the country that could do something about it?

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: BTW, it is NOT your legal right to act like that in a structured setting. Not sure where you get that idea from. You could be kicked out of a comedy club for too much of that, much less a friggin speech. A damn bar owner can kick you out if he doesn't like the way you are acting. You can be kicked out of a convenience store for harassing people. How can you think you have the right to continually disrupt a speech with no consequences?
Meh.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
kargol wrote:
lobo316 wrote:

here's his statement

 

 

I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.

This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

TT

 

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/175798/tim-thomas-boston-bruins-goalie-calls-bullshit-on-u-s-govt-with-naive-libertarian-statement/

Wouldn't have been better for him to speak to the one man in the country that could do something about it?


I don't think so. The political/corporate property he could have met at that White House photo op knows good and damn well that many people feel the way Thomas does, whether it's from his heart, a Tea Party talking point, or both. Glad handing and bullshitting isn't going to do anything in this particular instance.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote:
BayouBoogie wrote: BTW, it is NOT your legal right to act like that in a structured setting. Not sure where you get that idea from. You could be kicked out of a comedy club for too much of that, much less a friggin speech. A damn bar owner can kick you out if he doesn't like the way you are acting. You can be kicked out of a convenience store for harassing people. How can you think you have the right to continually disrupt a speech with no consequences?
Meh.


Well? Seriously. Your example made no sense. How is yelling a phrase to make a point (no matter how assholish and unprofessional it may be) the same as what you described? And how do you think "it's your right" to do what you described? I certainly wouldn't allow it if it were my event (unless I'm running wrestling matches, an athletic event, or some kind of audience participation based show). What Wilson did and what you described aren't even close to the same thing. Nor are they relevant to the discussion at hand.

And sorry I'm going so strongly, as you really do seem like a solid guy. One of the people on here I would enjoy grabbing a beer and some laughs with. I know I can come across harsh sometimes, but I just feel that some of your arguments on this are an exercise in logical fallacy. He didn't chastise the President until his head spun like Linda Blair, he didn't piss on anything or destroy any property, he didn't flip Obama off and shout him down in front of people, he didn't even rudely interrupt him with an accusation like Rep Wilson did. He politely declined an invite to the White House. How all the other stuff pertains, I'm not sure. I'm also not sure why James Harrison doing it because he didn't feel like going is acceptable if Thomas not going because he didn't want to isn't?

Those analogies weren't even close to being relevant. I can't help but think, having read this whole thread, that the facts that Obama is the President in question and the athlete in question is a Tea Partier are coloring your opinion.


Last edited on Wed Jan 25th, 2012 12:11 am by BayouBoogie

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
kargol wrote: lobo316 wrote:

here's his statement

 

 

I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.

This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

TT

 

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/175798/tim-thomas-boston-bruins-goalie-calls-bullshit-on-u-s-govt-with-naive-libertarian-statement/

Wouldn't have been better for him to speak to the one man in the country that could do something about it?
From what I have read about these things, there really isn't much time to talk to the President.  Its basically show up X amount of time prior to the event, get placed where you are going to be filmed at(usually the rose garden or the East Room),  The President shows up, does a few minutes of mugging for the camera's, gets the jersey, the President speaks, more mugging for camera's then secret service escorts the team towards the exit.  These typically do not last much longer than 30-45 minutes and are planned down to the minute for the most part

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote:
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote:
BayouBoogie wrote: BTW, it is NOT your legal right to act like that in a structured setting. Not sure where you get that idea from. You could be kicked out of a comedy club for too much of that, much less a friggin speech. A damn bar owner can kick you out if he doesn't like the way you are acting. You can be kicked out of a convenience store for harassing people. How can you think you have the right to continually disrupt a speech with no consequences?
Meh.


Well? Seriously. Your example made no sense. How is yelling a phrase to make a point (no matter how assholish and unprofessional it may be) the same as what you described? And how do you think "it's your right" to do what you described? I certainly wouldn't allow it if it were my event (unless I'm running wrestling matches, an athletic event, or some kind of audience participation based show). What Wilson did and what you described aren't even close to the same thing. Nor are they relevant to the discussion at hand.

And sorry I'm going so strongly, as you really do seem like a solid guy. One of the people on here I would enjoy grabbing a beer and some laughs with. I know I can come across harsh sometimes, but I just feel that some of your arguments on this are an exercise in logical fallacy. He didn't chastise the President until his head spun like Linda Blair, he didn't piss on anything or destroy any property, he didn't flip Obama off and shout him down in front of people, he didn't even rudely interrupt him with an accusation like Rep Wilson did. He politely declined an invite to the White House. How all the other stuff pertains, I'm not sure. I'm also not sure why James Harrison doing it because he didn't feel like going is acceptable if Thomas not going because he didn't want to isn't?

Those analogies weren't even close to being relevant. I can't help but think, having read this whole thread, that the facts that Obama is the President in question and the athlete in question is a Tea Partier are coloring your opinion.



{Pssssttt...Dude...I'm just goofing around...Trolling if you will...I was bored today...I really kind of don't give a shit one way or another...pass it on...}

The Ghost Of Amerorig Past



Joined: Thu Feb 3rd, 2011
Location: Flatulence Town
Posts: 409
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote:
BayouBoogie wrote:
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote:
BayouBoogie wrote: BTW, it is NOT your legal right to act like that in a structured setting. Not sure where you get that idea from. You could be kicked out of a comedy club for too much of that, much less a friggin speech. A damn bar owner can kick you out if he doesn't like the way you are acting. You can be kicked out of a convenience store for harassing people. How can you think you have the right to continually disrupt a speech with no consequences?
Meh.


Well? Seriously. Your example made no sense. How is yelling a phrase to make a point (no matter how assholish and unprofessional it may be) the same as what you described? And how do you think "it's your right" to do what you described? I certainly wouldn't allow it if it were my event (unless I'm running wrestling matches, an athletic event, or some kind of audience participation based show). What Wilson did and what you described aren't even close to the same thing. Nor are they relevant to the discussion at hand.

And sorry I'm going so strongly, as you really do seem like a solid guy. One of the people on here I would enjoy grabbing a beer and some laughs with. I know I can come across harsh sometimes, but I just feel that some of your arguments on this are an exercise in logical fallacy. He didn't chastise the President until his head spun like Linda Blair, he didn't piss on anything or destroy any property, he didn't flip Obama off and shout him down in front of people, he didn't even rudely interrupt him with an accusation like Rep Wilson did. He politely declined an invite to the White House. How all the other stuff pertains, I'm not sure. I'm also not sure why James Harrison doing it because he didn't feel like going is acceptable if Thomas not going because he didn't want to isn't?

Those analogies weren't even close to being relevant. I can't help but think, having read this whole thread, that the facts that Obama is the President in question and the athlete in question is a Tea Partier are coloring your opinion.



{Pssssttt...Dude...I'm just goofing around...Trolling if you will...I was bored today...I really kind of don't give a shit one way or another...pass it on...}

What a twat.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote:

And sorry I'm going so strongly, as you really do seem like a solid guy. One of the people on here I would enjoy grabbing a beer and some laughs with.


Oh, and by the way, thanks; for the record, I'm usually in pretty solid form in any establishment that has unlimited access to booze.

That's why I now drink Sloe Gin Fizzies at work throughout the course of my day.

Last edited on Wed Jan 25th, 2012 01:40 am by dogfacedgremlin34

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
You can tell it's almost POTY time when all kinds of people come out of the wood work the last few weeks and stir it up.

The Ghost Of Amerorig Past



Joined: Thu Feb 3rd, 2011
Location: Flatulence Town
Posts: 409
Status: 
Offline
stone2k wrote:
You can tell it's almost POTY time when all kinds of people come out of the wood work the last few weeks and stir it up.

You got my vote punkass.

CanadianHorseman



Joined: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Canada
Posts: 14026
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 


According to today's PTI some big names to pass on meeting The Prez include Michael Jordan ( played golf instead ), Larry Bird and Manny Ramirez who was probably afraid of getting tested that day.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
well you can't blame his highness Michael Jordan for not wanting to meet the "lowly" President of the United States, his ego wouldn't allow it

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
CanadianHorseman wrote: mike3775 wrote: He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 


According to today's PTI some big names to pass on meeting The Prez include Michael Jordan ( played golf instead ), Larry Bird and Manny Ramirez who was probably afraid of getting tested that day.

I never heard Jordan take a stand on anything the least bit divisive because he was afraid it would hurt his marketability, so I'd love to hear that story.

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: mike3775 wrote: He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 


According to today's PTI some big names to pass on meeting The Prez include Michael Jordan ( played golf instead ), Larry Bird and Manny Ramirez who was probably afraid of getting tested that day.

I never heard Jordan take a stand on anything the least bit divisive because he was afraid it would hurt his marketability, so I'd love to hear that story.
Probably when he re-retired after the second 3 peat

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: srossi wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: mike3775 wrote: He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 


According to today's PTI some big names to pass on meeting The Prez include Michael Jordan ( played golf instead ), Larry Bird and Manny Ramirez who was probably afraid of getting tested that day.

I never heard Jordan take a stand on anything the least bit divisive because he was afraid it would hurt his marketability, so I'd love to hear that story.
Probably when he re-retired after the second 3 peat


 

 

No, it was after the 1st title, when HW Bush was in office. I don't think he publicly gave a reason, other than that he was golfing instead.


 

EDIT:  Ok, I just read a couple of articles to refresh my memory. Apparently Jordan said it was a 3-day family vacation and he wasn't going to cancel it.  The media attacked him, predicting that his invincible armor of public perception would finally be cracked. Jay Moriotti went hard at him. The fans didn't give a shit, since he kept kicking ass on the court. Bush said it was no big deal to him, and commended Jordan for his charitable work.

Last edited on Thu Jan 26th, 2012 07:03 pm by BayouBoogie

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: mike3775 wrote: srossi wrote: CanadianHorseman wrote: mike3775 wrote: He isn't the first athlete to not go to an invitation and he sure as hell won't be the last. 


According to today's PTI some big names to pass on meeting The Prez include Michael Jordan ( played golf instead ), Larry Bird and Manny Ramirez who was probably afraid of getting tested that day.

I never heard Jordan take a stand on anything the least bit divisive because he was afraid it would hurt his marketability, so I'd love to hear that story.
Probably when he re-retired after the second 3 peat


 

 

No, it was after the 1st title, when HW Bush was in office. I don't think he publicly gave a reason, other than that he was golfing instead.


 

EDIT:  Ok, I just read a couple of articles to refresh my memory. Apparently Jordan said it was a 3-day family vacation and he wasn't going to cancel it.  The media attacked him, predicting that his invincible armor of public perception would finally be cracked. Jay Moriotti went hard at him. The fans didn't give a shit, since he kept kicking ass on the court. Bush said it was no big deal to him, and commended Jordan for his charitable work.

well if it was a family vacation, no one should be expected to drop everything for that, I don't blame him.  Of course I didnt remember any of that either

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!

Last edited on Thu Jan 26th, 2012 10:05 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!
Every elected official feels they are deserving of respect even if they are not


mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!
Every elected official feels they are deserving of respect even if they are not


dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote:
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!
Every elected official feels they are deserving of respect even if they are not



You're probably the same type of guy who throws a hissy fit whenever somebody burns the American flag.

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
While watching the All Star Draft, the first thing James Duthie said to Thomas after he was picked was ...

"Uh...Pretty uneventful week for you all in all?" 

Thomas laughed,and said "Yeah, no problem" while waving his hand.

Duthie followed it up with "Did you expect this thing to get so big?"

Thomas answered "Ya know, I followed my conscience (he stumbled on the word conscience)... I am extremely grateful for all the support I have gotten from my teammates, fans and friends. I said in that statement that would be the only time that I would be addressing that topic. And, uh, we are here in Ottawa to celebrate the game of Hockey, and I am just extremely excited to be a part of that."

sek69



Joined: Fri Dec 21st, 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 5509
Status: 
Offline
So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.

Also for the record, since rossi decided to use me as an example way back on page 2 or 3 with Harrison declining to go to the WH twice, I didn't like it then either. I'm pretty sure it wasn't political with him because he's a nut, but it still showed a lack of respect on his part.

I know it's really hard to believe someone can actually not be partisan for 5 goddamn minutes in today's culture, but the fact that expecting people to act civil in the presence of the President is somehow a quaint idea is kind of sad.

I don't think it's a secret I was not a fan of W to say the least, but I fail to see that if I had somehow done something to merit going to the White House it would make me a hypocrite if I went. Being next to someone or even in the same room with them doesn't somehow mean you endorse their views of the world. Now if I got invited to join W for a GOP fundraiser, then fuck that and fuck him. If I'm part of a team that was invited to meet the President for five minutes, I shake his hand, get a picture taken, and then go home.


mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: mike3775 wrote:
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!
Every elected official feels they are deserving of respect even if they are not



You're probably the same type of guy who throws a hissy fit whenever somebody burns the American flag.
Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.


Shawn Michaels said the same thing about the points of the Maple Leaf on the Canadian Flag.

See how everything comes full circle back to rasslin' here?

mike3775



Joined: Mon Oct 15th, 2007
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 17634
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.


Shawn Michaels said the same thing about the points of the Maple Leaf on the Canadian Flag.

See how everything comes full circle back to rasslin' here?
he also humped it as well, which was great in its own right

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: Well, at least I'm not alone.  The Gov. of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts feels the exact same way I do (granted, he's a good pal of Obama, but still).

http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7506935/massachusetts-governor-says-boston-bruins-tim-thomas-snub-lack-grace

It's funny that the whole Jan Brewer thing happened just the day after.  It seems that many have lost any sense of respect, or decorum, or how you're meant to behave in a civilized society.  It's like nobdy gives a shit anymore.

STAY CLASSY, USA!

I still beg to ask the question, how is politely declinging an invitation "classless."  How is standing up for something in a respectful way suddenly "disrespectful"?  That'as what we are supposed to do in our political system.  Going to the White House and being rude would be one thing. Politely declining is another.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.


Shawn Michaels said the same thing about the points of the Maple Leaf on the Canadian Flag.

See how everything comes full circle back to rasslin' here?
he also humped it as well, which was great in its own right

People who get offended by the desecration of a piece of cloth that was probably made in China tend to not care nearly as much about the desecration of the principles the cloth is supposed to represent.  Funny how that works. 

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 

 

How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 

 

How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

My takeaway from some people's comments here is that they obviously respect the office of the President a lot more than all of the recent Presidents respect the office of the President.  And that attitude won't change that.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: mike3775 wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.


Shawn Michaels said the same thing about the points of the Maple Leaf on the Canadian Flag.

See how everything comes full circle back to rasslin' here?
he also humped it as well, which was great in its own right

People who get offended by the desecration of a piece of cloth that was probably made in China tend to not care nearly as much about the desecration of the principles the cloth is supposed to represent.  Funny how that works. 

 

 

That's the whole reason people are encouraged to worship the cloth rather than the principles it is menat to represent. that way, people can blatantly disregard the principles, yet still drum up blind support by doihg it for"theflag/country" itself.

It's the same as this argument about disrespecting the Office of the President by calling out the crooks in the office.  We are worshiping the ofiice itself, rather than recognizing that unsavory elements might find their way in that office. 

 

It's false idolitry and its as old as civilization.  Get the people to worship the idols, then you can shift what it is that the idol actually represents, but the people will still defend it, because they've been trained that it is the idol (office/flag) that is important, moreso than any abstract ideas the idol was originally meant to represent.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 

 

How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

My takeaway from some people's comments here is that they obviously respect the office of the President a lot more than all of the recent Presidents respect the office of the President.  And that attitude won't change that.



 

 

Well said. 

 

The President is a citizen sworn to uphold that office to the best of his ability. The day we can't hold that citizen responsible or take civilised stances against the men in that office is the day we've officially given up on trying to keep the American expreiment alive.

 

The office and the man in it are two seperate things. This wasn't a United States appreciation day that he boycotted.  It was a photo op that he earned by winning a game, and he politely declined it, as is well within his rights.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 04:23 pm by BayouBoogie

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 
How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

Boogie, to answer your question above, I'm pretty much in agreement with sek.  I was trying to convey the same message through a number of posts than he summed up in one paragraph (so way to go, sek).

I guess the larger point I'm trying to get across is just that I'm concerned with this alarming trend of incivility that's permeating politics, and the fact that nobody really cares or feels the need to be civil to anybody else so long as "OMG, THEY'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FRUM ME!!!" I mean, really--at the end of the day, you're a fucking hockey player; frankly, I wouldn't have given a shit if he went or not, so long as he didn't make a big deal about it.  Well, Thomas turned it political, which I thought was entirely unnecessary; this ceremony was completely apolitical, and he managed to turn it into something that it never should've been turned into.  Sometimes, you just have to, literally and figuratively, "take one for the team".

So given my thoughts on this topic, I started thinking about if I would've been so adamant were Bush in office (whom I couldn't stand); I think I would've thought the same, because, as mentioned, it's should be more about the "idea" of being honored at the White House and by the PotUS; it shouldn't be about who the PotUS is at the particular time.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 
How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

My takeaway from some people's comments here is that they obviously respect the office of the President a lot more than all of the recent Presidents respect the office of the President.  And that attitude won't change that.

Your takeaway should also be that by and large, US citizens, following their own leaders examples, are turning into uncivilized louts who seem to take great pleasure in finding ways to politicize everything and anything even when no politics should be involved.

Look, I'm all for free speech.  I love it to pieces.  But not every occasion falls under the wide swath of free speech.  Sometimes, in certain instances, after having put things in perspective, it's evident that one might--just might--be better off shutting the fuck up and moving on with one's life.  What's the old saying?  "Pick your battles"?

The Thomas situation is great example of this.  What did Thomas gain from this?  Absolutely nothing.  His brand has taken a tremendous hit, and all so he could boo hoo based on his political beliefs.  Something that was meant to be a positive had suddenly turned negative and ugly.  Well, maybe he's okay with that, and I hope he is.  But we'll see if he's still as thrilled with his decision after his jersey sales decrease by a huge percentage.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 04:32 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 
How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

Boogie, to answer your question above, I'm pretty much in agreement with sek.  I was trying to convey the same message through a number of posts than he summed up in one paragraph (so way to go, sek).

I guess the larger point I'm trying to get across is just that I'm concerned with this alarming trend of incivility that's permeating politics, and the fact that nobody really cares or feels the need to be civil to anybody else so long as "OMG, THEY'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FRUM ME!!!" I mean, really--at the end of the day, you're a fucking hockey player; frankly, I wouldn't have given a shit if he went or not, so long as he didn't make a big deal about it.  Well, Thomas turned it political, which I thought was entirely unnecessary; this ceremony was completely apolitical, and he managed to turn it into something that it never should've been turned into.  Sometimes, you just have to, literally and figuratively, "take one for the team".

So given my thoughts on this topic, I started thinking about if I would've been so adamant were Bush in office (whom I couldn't stand); I think I would've thought the same, because, as mentioned, it's should be more about the "idea" of being honored at the White House and by the PotUS; it shouldn't be about who the PotUS is at the particular time.

But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  Red herrings have been brought up throughout this thread including the Rep who shouted out "Liar" and that nutjob Jan Brewer who is one of the main reasons why Arizona is a laughingstock.  Maybe there are civility issues there.  But the main topic is a hockey player who simply wouldn't meet with the president.  No one made a big deal about it except the media and people in this thread who decided they wanted to take offense.  Thomas made one very brief statement about the issue that was perfectly civil and now is trying to move on.  So the civility argument just doesn't hold up.  The only lack of civility shown here has been towards Thomas.

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote:
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: tofu_chipmunk wrote: mike3775 wrote: Nope, I consider it a first amendment right.  If someone wants to spit, kick, walk, toss, burn,wipe their ass, pick their nose, etc with an American Flag, they have that right to do exactly that

The points of the embroidered stars really are the best thing for digging out boogers.


Shawn Michaels said the same thing about the points of the Maple Leaf on the Canadian Flag.

See how everything comes full circle back to rasslin' here?
he also humped it as well, which was great in its own right


The Canadian flag is a great lay, will do shit that the ol' stars and stripes won't.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: sek69 wrote: So the takeaway here is that apparently everyone in the US now is incapable of separating the office from the person who holds it.





 
How can you come to that conclusion? I see it the opposite way. If you DO respect the office, then you SHOULD take a stand if you think the people IN the office are desecrating it.  I think it's your stance that can't seperate the two. You see a guy in "the office", so he must be respected along with the office he's in, and I do not agree with that at all.  I think you are FAILING to seperate the two by taking that stance. You are letting the office itself protect the crooks in the office, when we should be keenly aware that they are two different things.

Boogie, to answer your question above, I'm pretty much in agreement with sek.  I was trying to convey the same message through a number of posts than he summed up in one paragraph (so way to go, sek).

I guess the larger point I'm trying to get across is just that I'm concerned with this alarming trend of incivility that's permeating politics, and the fact that nobody really cares or feels the need to be civil to anybody else so long as "OMG, THEY'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FRUM ME!!!" I mean, really--at the end of the day, you're a fucking hockey player; frankly, I wouldn't have given a shit if he went or not, so long as he didn't make a big deal about it.  Well, Thomas turned it political, which I thought was entirely unnecessary; this ceremony was completely apolitical, and he managed to turn it into something that it never should've been turned into.  Sometimes, you just have to, literally and figuratively, "take one for the team".

So given my thoughts on this topic, I started thinking about if I would've been so adamant were Bush in office (whom I couldn't stand); I think I would've thought the same, because, as mentioned, it's should be more about the "idea" of being honored at the White House and by the PotUS; it shouldn't be about who the PotUS is at the particular time.

But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  Red herrings have been brought up throughout this thread including the Rep who shouted out "Liar" and that nutjob Jan Brewer who is one of the main reasons why Arizona is a laughingstock.  Maybe there are civility issues there.  But the main topic is a hockey player who simply wouldn't meet with the president.  No one made a big deal about it except the media and people in this thread who decided they wanted to take offense.  Thomas made one very brief statement about the issue that was perfectly civil and now is trying to move on.  So the civility argument just doesn't hold up.  The only lack of civility shown here has been towards Thomas.

But you had some red herrings of your own at the beginning of this thread, by claiming that any of the past presidential "no shows" athletes were politically motivated.  None of them really were, save *possibly maybe* that Steelers guy who ended up showing up anyways.

Look, at the end of the day, I agree with you entirely--this has blown up way bigger than it should have ever gotten.  But my main point is this whole situation could've been avoided entirely if Thomas had just "respectfully declined" and not turned it into something political.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 04:41 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
mike3775 wrote: So there is a responsibility to attend if invited, even though someone doesn't want to go if they are an athlete?  Maybe the teams better start putting it in the athletes contracts that they must attend these functions then, oh wait, then the uproar would be that they are forcing people to attend, which I say they can't have it both ways.



Read my post above again.  I don't give a shit if nobody wants to attend.  But just "respectfully decline"; you don't need commentary on why you're a no show. 

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  
But that's the thing:  it does.

Let's say I'm having a Super Bowl party and I decide to invite you, rossi.  I send you an Evite.  You respond no, and in the commentary section, you say, "I fucking hate your guts, your house sucks, and your dog smells!  Why would you think in a million years I would attend your stupid Super Bowl party!?!"

Now, couldn't you have just resonded "no" and left it at that?  Why would you feel the need to let everybody on my invite list know your personal feelings towards me unless your were (a) a jackass, or (b) an attention whore?  You just turned my innocuous Evite into something it wasn't nor should it have ever been.

The moral of this story?  I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 04:58 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

srossi

 

Joined: Sun Oct 14th, 2007
Location: New York USA
Posts: 49591
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  
But that's the thing:  it does.

Let's say I'm having a Super Bowl party and I decide to invite you, rossi.  I send you an Evite.  You respond no, and in the commentary section, you say, "I fucking hate your guts, your house sucks, and your dog smells!  Why would you think in a million years I would attend your stupid Super Bowl party!?!"

Now, couldn't you have just resonded "no" and left it at that?  Why would you feel the need to let everybody on my invite list know your personal feelings towards me unless your were (a) a jackass, or (b) an attention whore?  You just turned my innocuous Evite into something it wasn't nor should it have ever been.

The moral of this story?  I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year.

You were fine until you made that last post, then you went off the rails again.  If you can find anything in Thomas' statement remotely like "I hate your fucking guts" I'll eat my monitor.  He basically did just say no.  He didn't hold a press conference and eat Obama's dog.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  
But that's the thing:  it does.

Let's say I'm having a Super Bowl party and I decide to invite you, rossi.  I send you an Evite.  You respond no, and in the commentary section, you say, "I fucking hate your guts, your house sucks, and your dog smells!  Why would you think in a million years I would attend your stupid Super Bowl party!?!"

Now, couldn't you have just resonded "no" and left it at that?  Why would you feel the need to let everybody on my invite list know your personal feelings towards me unless your were (a) a jackass, or (b) an attention whore?  You just turned my innocuous Evite into something it wasn't nor should it have ever been.

The moral of this story?  I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year.




Again, that example does not fit what happened at all. He declined and  issued a short sweet statement to answer the critics & made it clear he's not going to talk about it publicly again. No cussing. No personal insults. He didn't even single Obama out personally. Hell, he went out of his way to say he has a problem with BOTH parties and the actions of ALL branches of Federal Government.

Your examples just are not relevant to what actually happened. The first part where you just say "no thanks' and leave it at that is much closer to what actually happened. 

You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part.   I can't help but think the criticism of Thomas is a purely partisan reaction from the "you can't insult Obama" crowd.

 
And I still don't see why being politically motivated is worse than simply not giving a shit? To me, not giving a shit IS insulting to the office, whereas having a reason not to go (and again, Thomas did NOT make the issue of this, the mdeia did) shows that he DOES care about the office and feels this is worth taking a stance. It also shows that he has the ability to seperate the office from the man, rather than thinking the man IS the office.


Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 05:43 pm by BayouBoogie

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
srossi wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  
But that's the thing:  it does.

Let's say I'm having a Super Bowl party and I decide to invite you, rossi.  I send you an Evite.  You respond no, and in the commentary section, you say, "I fucking hate your guts, your house sucks, and your dog smells!  Why would you think in a million years I would attend your stupid Super Bowl party!?!"

Now, couldn't you have just resonded "no" and left it at that?  Why would you feel the need to let everybody on my invite list know your personal feelings towards me unless your were (a) a jackass, or (b) an attention whore?  You just turned my innocuous Evite into something it wasn't nor should it have ever been.

The moral of this story?  I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year.

You were fine until you made that last post, then you went off the rails again.  If you can find anything in Thomas' statement remotely like "I hate your fucking guts" I'll eat my monitor.  He basically did just say no.  He didn't hold a press conference and eat Obama's dog.


Look rossi, I know you're a bright guy, and you've known me long enough to know how I write on these message boards; so don't play dumb and try to make my posts out to be somehting they're not.

I never said Thomas said that he hated Obama's guts.  I was using that for illustrative effect, saying saying YOU saying that to ME in an EVITE that was completely unrelated to anything that you wrote that it would not too dissimilar than the initial statement he released.  That's what it was about, and you know it.

Furthermore, I don't know if you didn't read/have forgotten his initial statement (which was posted right on page 4 of this very thread), but you're your sake, I'll post it again:

"I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People.

This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.

Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.
"

Sure sounds like he's calling out somebody to me.  So now...why was this necessary?

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 06:10 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: srossi wrote: But this has nothing to do with lack of civility.  
But that's the thing:  it does.

Let's say I'm having a Super Bowl party and I decide to invite you, rossi.  I send you an Evite.  You respond no, and in the commentary section, you say, "I fucking hate your guts, your house sucks, and your dog smells!  Why would you think in a million years I would attend your stupid Super Bowl party!?!"

Now, couldn't you have just resonded "no" and left it at that?  Why would you feel the need to let everybody on my invite list know your personal feelings towards me unless your were (a) a jackass, or (b) an attention whore?  You just turned my innocuous Evite into something it wasn't nor should it have ever been.

The moral of this story?  I'm not having a Super Bowl party this year.




Again, that example does not fit what happened at all. He declined and didn't say anything.

Not true.  Read my post above to rossi.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.



Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties and the statement was very civil.

 

Same question about your statements about pissing on things and breaking things. You ARE adding a hostile and personal element that simply isn't there. IN fact, the OPPOSITE is there. He is showing big respect for the offices of government by feeling so strongly about what is being done within it. Whether you believe that is his true motivation or not, it is his stated motivation and he has done nothing remotely like the hateful, disrespectful things you keep citing as analogies.

 


 

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 05:52 pm by BayouBoogie

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 05:52 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.


No, you are the one who isn't trying to play aoong. I did read your post and it was ridiculous. You keep pretending that he did things he did not do. Please show me an example of the disrespect you keep claiming is there. And try to do it without making up a scenario that isn't even close to what actually happened.

 

.. Or make another statement claiming that you are just trolling and don't really care one way or the other, like you did th eother day, because that makes much more sense than thinking you actually believe these irrelevant analogies you keep making.

 

 

 

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 05:56 pm by BayouBoogie

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.


No, you are the one who isn't trying to play aoong. I did read your post and it was ridiculous. You keep pretending that he did things he did not do. Please show me an example of the disrespect you keep claiming is there. And try to do it without making up a scenario that isn't even close to what actually happened.

 

.. Or make another statement claiming that you are just trolling and don't really care one way or the other, like you did th eother day, because that makes much more sense than thinking you actually believe these irrelevant analogies you keep making.

 

 

 

You still gonna buy me that beer?  Cuz I don't think I want it from you any more.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.


No, you are the one who isn't trying to play aoong. I did read your post and it was ridiculous. You keep pretending that he did things he did not do. Please show me an example of the disrespect you keep claiming is there. And try to do it without making up a scenario that isn't even close to what actually happened.

 

.. Or make another statement claiming that you are just trolling and don't really care one way or the other, like you did th eother day, because that makes much more sense than thinking you actually believe these irrelevant analogies you keep making.

 

 

 

You still gonna buy me that beer?  Cuz I don't think I want it from you any more.


And why the hell are your panties all in a wad anyways?  I can smell the spittle all over your computer screen from here.

The best thing about this thread is, after you play Murray to rossi's Carvelli, seeing how worked up I can get you.  Mission accomplished.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 06:00 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.


No, you are the one who isn't trying to play aoong. I did read your post and it was ridiculous. You keep pretending that he did things he did not do. Please show me an example of the disrespect you keep claiming is there. And try to do it without making up a scenario that isn't even close to what actually happened.

 

.. Or make another statement claiming that you are just trolling and don't really care one way or the other, like you did th eother day, because that makes much more sense than thinking you actually believe these irrelevant analogies you keep making.

 

 

 

You still gonna buy me that beer?  Cuz I don't think I want it from you any more.


And why the hell are your panties all in a wad anyways?  I can smell the spittle all over your computer screen from here.

The best thing about this thread is, after you play Murray to rossi's Carvelli, seeing how worked up I can get you.  Mission accomplished.

Oh yeah....and you're not invited to my Super Bowl party either.  You and rossi can just go eat buffalo wings and drink Nattie Lite together all night long for all I care.

Last edited on Fri Jan 27th, 2012 06:03 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

The Ghost Of Amerorig Past



Joined: Thu Feb 3rd, 2011
Location: Flatulence Town
Posts: 409
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: BayouBoogie wrote: You keep trying to add this element of personal hostilty against Obama that simply has not been dsiplayed on Thomas' part. 

Never once did I imply he was hostile to Obama.  If anything, I said he was hostile to the idea of the PotUS as a whole.


Well, where did that crazy ass example of "fuck you, I fucking hate your guts and want eveyrone to know it" come from? His statemnt was VERY different that that. he specifically said it's about things going on in all branches of Government and in both parties.

Jesus Christ, if you guys aren't going to bother to read my posts all the way through/try to understand what I'm saying, it's clear I'm wasting my time in this thread.

Done.


No, you are the one who isn't trying to play aoong. I did read your post and it was ridiculous. You keep pretending that he did things he did not do. Please show me an example of the disrespect you keep claiming is there. And try to do it without making up a scenario that isn't even close to what actually happened.

 

.. Or make another statement claiming that you are just trolling and don't really care one way or the other, like you did th eother day, because that makes much more sense than thinking you actually believe these irrelevant analogies you keep making.

 

 

 

You still gonna buy me that beer?  Cuz I don't think I want it from you any more.


And why the hell are your panties all in a wad anyways?  I can smell the spittle all over your computer screen from here.

The best thing about this thread is, after you play Murray to rossi's Carvelli, seeing how worked up I can get you.  Mission accomplished.

Oh yeah....and you're not invited to my Super Bowl party either.  You and rossi can just go eat buffalo wings and drink Nattie Lite together all night long for all I care.

whatt a bunch of fucking homos

tofu_chipmunk



Joined: Wed Aug 5th, 2009
Location: Suburban Fatlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 6706
Status: 
Offline
The Ghost Of Amerorig Past wrote: whatt a bunch of fucking homos
Yeah, and as I stated earlier in the thread, the Canadian flag is a better lay than these guys.  If you tell me that's not true, I'll eat my monitor.

broke



Joined: Tue Jan 22nd, 2008
Location: Bolton, ON
Posts: 3175
Status: 
Offline
Thomas identifies himself as something between a Libertarian and a Tea Partier.

Drank with him at a couple Bruins parties - nice enough guy.

CanadianHorseman



Joined: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Canada
Posts: 14026
Status: 
Offline
Well you knew it was just a matter of time but a Montreal writer now says that racism was behind Thomas no-showing at the White House.

http://www.nesn.com/2012/01/montreal-gazette-columnist-accuses-tim-thomas-of-skipping-white-house-visit-because-barack-obama-is-.html

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
CanadianHorseman wrote: Well you knew it was just a matter of time but a Montreal writer now says that racism was behind Thomas no-showing at the White House.

http://www.nesn.com/2012/01/montreal-gazette-columnist-accuses-tim-thomas-of-skipping-white-house-visit-because-barack-obama-is-.html

Was that seriously in the paper there, or just on-line? Either way, The Gazette needs to fire their writer and the story editor real quick, since that is a big time libel case that Thomas will easily win right there.

I went to the actual story linked, and they already edited it (and say they edited it right at the top)... I hope some one was able to get a screen shot of it.




Famous Mortimer



Joined: Thu Nov 6th, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2771
Status: 
Offline
I was reading about how Fox News has upped its anti-Obama rhetoric so much they're in danger of alienating normal, sensible Republican voters - but assholes like this guy clearly buy into it.


I think respect is earned, and although I disagree with Obama on several points, he's earned enough respect to get a handshake from most people, I'd say. Bush I don't think did; Clinton maybe (he did get rid of the debt, after all); Bush snr. I suppose (didn't really do anything, one way or the other); Reagan yes, if only for making some cool remarks about UFOs.

 

They've all done bad things, but we need to calm this shit down a little.

 

Disagree with the President all you like, but this just helps no-one. It alienates those Republicans who believe in sane, reasonable debate and respect; it alienates every Democrat supporter; and only feeds further into the ridiculous bullshit spewed by the Tea Party and the scumbags who pander to them.

Last edited on Tue Jan 31st, 2012 01:30 pm by Famous Mortimer

beejmi
The Big Kahuna


Joined: Sat Oct 13th, 2007
Location: Philly
Posts: 41572
Status: 
Offline
Isn't the "invite to the White House" all about "the team" and not individual players? Thomas made this "all about him". That's the only issue I see.

BayouBoogie



Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana USA
Posts: 6864
Status: 
Offline
Famous Mortimer wrote: I was reading about how Fox News has upped its anti-Obama rhetoric so much
How is that possible and what time frame are you talking about?  Last time I watched any FoxNews was last Feb or March, when my Dad was in the hospital and he'd have that crap on. I couldn't take it. it was utterly ridiculous. I don't think there was ever a 30 second period where Obama's name was not mentioned and it was ALL negative. Just snide remark after snide remark.  Not matter what the subject was, they found a way to turn it into a "criticism" of Obama. It was stomach turning to say the least.  I don't see how they could "up it" from that without just saying "Obama sucks ..." on a continual loop.

Last edited on Tue Jan 31st, 2012 03:50 pm by BayouBoogie

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
One theory I have about the lack of respect for politicians is that it started with the late night talk show hosts... Leno and Letterman among others have made a ton of money, making fun of the presidents.

dogfacedgremlin34
Will Kick Your Ass At Fantasy Football


Joined: Fri Feb 8th, 2008
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 10016
Status: 
Offline
stone2k wrote: One theory I have about the lack of respect for politicians is that it started with the late night talk show hosts... Leno and Letterman among others have made a ton of money, making fun of the presidents.



But that dates back to Chevy Chase on SNL in 1975 (Gerald Ford, anyone?) and before.  People in general are just more pissed off than ever, because they believe whatever the lie of the day is.

If you're going to blame anything, blame the 800 TV channels and the billion websites that make their $ based on their own cockamamie political theory.  It's like the cretins who put their shows on Public Access cable have taken over the goddamn world.

Last edited on Tue Jan 31st, 2012 04:51 pm by dogfacedgremlin34

stone2k



Joined: Mon Nov 29th, 2010
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts USA
Posts: 8946
Status: 
Offline
dogfacedgremlin34 wrote: stone2k wrote: One theory I have about the lack of respect for politicians is that it started with the late night talk show hosts... Leno and Letterman among others have made a ton of money, making fun of the presidents.



But that dates back to Chevy Chase on SNL in 1975 (Gerald Ford, anyone?) and before.  People in general are just more pissed off than ever, because they believe whatever the lie of the day is.

If you're going to blame anything, blame the 800 TV channels and the billion websites that make their $ based on their own cockamamie political theory.  It's like the cretins who put their shows on Public Access cable have taken over the goddamn world.

Carson also made a lot of political jokes... I was just using the 2 guys listed as examples... the 800 channels theory you have is good as well... probably a combo of both.



UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2013 Data 1 Systems