... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 You may want to take that kind of commentary out of this thread, sizzle. I get your point, however it's a direct and complete answer to your question, which, itself, was in context with the thread. Hopefully others will understand that and resist the urge to take it any further here. There is the TT thread for any follow up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I get your point, however it's a direct and complete answer to your question, which, itself, was in context with the thread. Hopefully others will understand that and resist the urge to take it any further here. There is the TT thread for any follow up. Actually my comment is directed at nothing more than Thomas suddenly starting to post this stuff. It seems curious to me, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the substance of his posts. How you feel my post called for a brief politically charge rant is beyond me. It has no place in a hockey thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Actually my comment is directed at nothing more than Thomas suddenly starting to post this stuff. It seems curious to me, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the substance of his posts. How you feel my post called for a brief politically charge rant is beyond me. It has no place in a hockey thread. See, you're dredging this out. What I said was NOT a political rant. Without providing some detail to my answer to your question, the answer would not give you a complete picture of WHY, which is what you asked. The reason WHY he has started to post "this stuff" is tied directly to the substance of his posts. If you don't have an understanding of the posts and the context surrounding them, then you will never appreciate WHY he is posting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 See, you're dredging this out. What I said was NOT a political rant. Without providing some detail to my answer to your question, the answer would not give you a complete picture of WHY, which is what you asked. The reason WHY he has started to post "this stuff" is tied directly to the substance of his posts. If you don't have an understanding of the posts, then you will never appreciate WHY he is posting them. I know the substance and I don't care. My point is that he has never said a word up until this point but now he has suddenly decided to. He's obviously had his set of beliefs for a while now, but for whatever reason he now wants to make them public. Your "details" have absolutely nothing to do with what that reason is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I know the substance and I don't care. My point is that he has never said a word up until this point but now he has suddenly decided to. He's obviously had his set of beliefs for a while now, but for whatever reason he now wants to make them public. Your "details" have absolutely nothing to do with what that reason is. He's the goaltender of a Stanley Cup champ and was invited to a White House event. He has a pulpit now. It makes perfect sense that he would voice his opinion now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who Else? Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I know the substance and I don't care. My point is that he has never said a word up until this point but now he has suddenly decided to. He's obviously had his set of beliefs for a while now, but for whatever reason he now wants to make them public. Your "details" have absolutely nothing to do with what that reason is. Its a presidetial election year and he is an American. Four years ago no one would have paid attention to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaFontaineToMogilny Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I'm loving that he's giving people fits. The fact that there are people who have no idea what he was talking about is...sad. Very sad. And then to be so negative towards him for a view he clearly has put thought into, when, in many cases the criticizer has barely a grasp of what's going on strikes me as...uh...alarming. I'm glad TT is using his celebrity to raise awareness of conservative issues. It's no different than some idiot actor shedding tears over polar bears on Conan. Your highly partisan comment on the state of the Union in a thread about whats going on around the league can only possibly lead to derailing the thread and a bunch of people getting in a tissy. The best case scenario is that people just ignore it and let it go, and then it has accomplished very little. Worst case, 20 pages from now It's all Bush was a nazi, Obama is a commie bickering. It is similar with Tim Thomas. As a team athlete, taking a highly public and partisan stand can only serve to disrupt the team balance and cause disturbance. People are already starting to suggest that the White House snub was the start of the Bruins recent poor play. Quite ridicolous, but that is what people do. Hell, some people even suggest that the Sabres play harder for James Patrick since they beat the Bruins 6-0. To pour more gasoline on the fire by standing by another highly polarizing issue is not very smart in my opinion. Everyone knows the media would love to run up a shitstorm about how Thomas the partisan hack is derailing the defending champions. And yes, I do realize that Tim Thomas has the right to express himself politically like everyone else. But he also needs to realize that there is not two Tim Thomases. People don't seperate between Tim Thomas 'the Glenn Beck parrot' and Tim Thomas 'the Boston Bruins goalie'. Everytime he opens his mouth people will instantly think of him as a Boston Bruin. Around the league there are many players with different political opinions, probably a whole lot of them who agree with Thomas, yet they don't get mixed up in it. In fact, through most team sports, you don't often see high profile atheletes front any sort of controversial views or causes. There's a good reason for this, and it is because it can do nothing good for your team, it only carries potential negative impact. Personally I hope Tim Thomas goes full on Bill O'Reilly melt down loony and takes the Bruins down with him, I'm not sure I'd feel the same way if I was a Boston fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 He's the goaltender of a Stanley Cup champ and was invited to a White House event. He has a pulpit now. It makes perfect sense that he would voice his opinion now. See, now this I can get behind. He got a taste of power (probably not the best word but you get the point) and now he wants more. I find the hit and run style a bit curious though. If you're going to put your views out there, whether it's political or what you think of a Shannahan suspension, you should expect a response. We're living in a world where the media wants to know what color panties Derek Roy is wearing. They're going to react to stuff like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 See, you're dredging this out. What I said was NOT a political rant. Without providing some detail to my answer to your question, the answer would not give you a complete picture of WHY, which is what you asked. The reason WHY he has started to post "this stuff" is tied directly to the substance of his posts. If you don't have an understanding of the posts and the context surrounding them, then you will never appreciate WHY he is posting them. Then why did you focus on Obama and the liberals? TT's simple message lately is the GOVERNMENT is taking over our lives and if we don't speak up and do something about it, it will eventually be too late. Funny how one side will take somebody's comments and run with it like it belongs in their ideology, when in fact you can just as easily take TT's comments and apply it to republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I was explaining his POV. If you want to debate the merits of his POV, then move it to a new thread. The details I laid out are important in understanding his motives, whether you agree with any of that or not. I am 100% certain if you could talk 1-on-1 with Thomas, my two paragraph explanation above is 100% correct. I'm not going to take the bait on arguing the politics of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I'm just going to toss out this little grenade: every president in the history of this country has deviated from the tenets and words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, particularly if you read them literally word for word. People only complain about it when it's being violated in ways they disagree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I was explaining his POV. If you want to debate the merits of his POV, then move it to a new thread. The details I laid out are important in understanding his motives, whether you agree with any of that or not. I am 100% certain if you could talk 1-on-1 with Thomas, my two paragraph explanation above is 100% correct. I'm not going to take the bait on arguing the politics of it. You twist his words to imply he was directing his comments at Obama and the liberals, and then tell me to move it to a different thread because I called you out on it? Nice........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 He's the goaltender of a Stanley Cup champ and was invited to a White House event. He has a pulpit now. It makes perfect sense that he would voice his opinion now. That's what I think, too. Or maybe he is considering a run for office down the line, as someone suggested; he's not going to be a goalie forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I'm just going to toss out this little grenade: every president in the history of this country has deviated from the tenets and words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, particularly if you read them literally word for word. People only complain about it when it's being violated in ways they disagree with. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 You twist his words to imply he was directing his comments at Obama and the liberals, and then tell me to move it to a different thread because I called you out on it? Nice........ Really? Who else can he be talking about? Who is behind the issues he has raised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Its a presidetial election year and he is an American. Four years ago no one would have paid attention to him. I'm not paying attention to him now either, or sizzle's alarmist views (not meant as a slam). Righties have been preaching the end of the world as we not it for as long as I have known what a righty was. That's fine, that's their view and they have a right to it. I just can't get that worked up over stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I'm just going to toss out this little grenade: every president in the history of this country has deviated from the tenets and words of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, particularly if you read them literally word for word. People only complain about it when it's being violated in ways they disagree with. There is truth to this, but the degree to which it has occurred in the past has rarely gone this far. FDR, Lincoln, Wilson are among the tops for such deviations. Obama is engaging in a power grab of extreme proportions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 All I can say is, if Tim Thomas' opinion is so important to you that it would change your position then you need to rip up your voter registration card and seek professional help. I'd rather take advise from Carl Everett. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Really? Who else can he be talking about? Who is behind the issues he has raised? It certainly isn't the President of the United States, who, in reality, holds very little power to shape policy and legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 All I can say is, if Tim Thomas' opinion is so important to you that it would change your position then you need to rip up your voter registration card and seek professional help. I'd rather take advise from Carl Everett. :doh: Because I can't resist: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Really? Who else can he be talking about? Who is behind the issues he has raised? Our entire corrupt political system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 There is truth to this, but the degree to which it has occurred in the past has rarely gone this far. FDR, Lincoln, Wilson are among the tops for such deviations. Obama is engaging in a power grab of extreme proportions. That simply isn't true. He's not doing more than an average president. And most of the time it's not even a true power grab, it's Congress either delegating powers through legislation or not doing anything to assert their constitutional authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I'm not paying attention to him now either, or sizzle's alarmist views (not meant as a slam). Righties have been preaching the end of the world as we not it for as long as I have known what a righty was. That's fine, that's their view and they have a right to it. I just can't get that worked up over stuff. It doesn't bother me. I understand that you, and a lot of people, do not "see" things the way I, or other conservatives, do. To be honest, "conservative" is not really an appropriate label for my views - and perhaps for a lot of other people who you might consider conservative. If you get your information from the standard news, you are being fed an inaccurate caricature of that political/social bent. Anyway, my point for replying is to note that "the end of the world" has been coming on since Washington's first term, when they started deviating from the founding documents. It has accelerated since WWII because the fundamental quality that made this country great - the peoples' understanding (however tacitly) and passion for "freedom" - has undergone a forced realignment. It certainly isn't the President of the United States, who, in reality, holds very little power to shape policy and legislation. Then how can he presume to order insurance companies to pay for something they don't want to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Because I can't resist: Outstanding! :clapping: That simply isn't true. He's not doing more than an average president. And most of the time it's not even a true power grab, it's Congress either delegating powers through legislation or not doing anything to assert their constitutional authority. It may be hard to judge after the way GW Sandusky'd the Constitution for 7 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Then how can he presume to order insurance companies to pay for something they don't want to? You missed my point. No matter who holds the office, or what they say, or what they do ... policy is dictated by those very few who hold the real power. Presidents come and go, but this group does not change. The President, Congress and the Supreme Court are all puppets, who are put in place to do the bidding of this group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.