Plan B Forum

You might think that this belongs in the news section, but I disagree. This guy might be only a hockey player but on this subject he is right at least in theory. We are slowly making the same mistake that Mexico made just after the beginning of their country and look how well it turned out for them.
Both parties and both left and right philosophies have contribute to this problem; however, liberals are in the vanguard. To many liberals the phrase, "states’ rights" is a curse word.
______________________________________________________________________


Tim Thomas on Obama snub: ‘Not about politics or party’ but ‘right as a Free Citizen’

Tim Thomas was the only Boston Bruins player from their 2011 Stanley Cup championship team that chose not to attend a White House celebration of their achievement. Cam Neely, the Bruins' team president, cited Thomas's "own opinions and political beliefs" for that absence.
On the official Facebook page for Tim Thomas — his other page is for his hockey camps — the Bruins goalie and playoff MVP clarified his absence from the White House event:
"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"
Something tells me that with Thomas slated to appear in the 2011 NHL All-Star Game this weekend, this might not be the only public statement he'll make on this controversy. It's overshadowed the Bruins' visit to the White House. It'll likely do the same for Thomas's participation in the midseason classic.
UPDATE: Cam Neely with a statement from the B's:
"As an organization we were honored by President Obama's invitation to the White House. It was a great day and a perfect way to cap our team's achievement from last season. It was a day that none of us will soon forget. We are disappointed that Tim chose not to join us, and his views certainly do not reflect those of the Jacobs family or the Bruins organization. This will be the last public comment from the Bruins organization on this subject."

Oh please, what total bullshit. It was a non-political event, to honor a TEAM he was part of, and he decided to use it as a political weapon. It was insulting to the Office of the President and to every American.

It is as disrespectful as if any President only invited the members of his party from the winning teams that get so-honored, and left the others off the list.

Tim is perfectly free to his opinions, and no one is or was trying to stifle his speech. He is a disrespectful, spoiled, overpaid athlete.

I'm inclined to agree with Guin,......








Of course it should be pointed out that this is hockey so really, WGAS....

They GAS is Boston, for sure.

This issue has gotten plenty of press, and the majority (of both political stripes) agree he was disrespectful, and this wasn't the method, time, or place, to air his views.

And frankly, lots of people have disagreements with the President. Isn't the more productive route, if you're one of the few who actually gets to be in his presence, to take the opportunity to discuss, rather than ignore and walk away.

Hockey players. Is there anything they don't know?

Seriously, this guy's "only public statement" reveals him to be an idiot. Also, can we hold him to that promise?

Guinevere wrote:Oh please, what total bullshit. It was a non-political event, to honor a TEAM he was part of, and he decided to use it as a political weapon. It was insulting to the Office of the President and to every American.

It is as disrespectful as if any President only invited the members of his party from the winning teams that get so-honored, and left the others off the list.

Tim is perfectly free to his opinions, and no one is or was trying to stifle his speech. He is a disrespectful, spoiled, overpaid athlete.

Disrespect is a tactic that was most significantly used turning the Vietnam era. Regardless of his use of this tactic, his message is correct.

Clockwise, or counterclockwise?

Well, I have to say that it's not coming as a huge surprise to me that there are rude assholes playing in the National Hockey League....

Sue U wrote:Hockey players. Is there anything they don't know?

Seriously, this guy's "only public statement" reveals him to be an idiot. Also, can we hold him to that promise?

Why because he sees unlimited federal government power as dangerous. May I refer you to the so called federal government of the former Soviet Union?

liberty wrote:Why because he sees unlimited federal government power as dangerous.

Because he took an occasion that was supposed to be about his team and their accomplishments and the city they represent and the fans that have supported them throughout the years, and he made it all about himself because he felt the need to have a hissy fit.

It was a trailer trash move, which explains why you like it so much.

The 1824 Constitution was composed of 7 titles and 171 articles, and was based on the Constitution of Cadiz for American issues, on the United States Constitution for the formula for federal representation and organization, and on the Constitutional Decree for the Liberty of Mexican America of 1814, which abolished the monarchy. It introduced the system of federalism in a popular representative republic with Catholicism as official religion. The 1824 constitution does not expressly state the rights of citizens. The right to equality of citizens was restricted by the continuation of military and ecclesiastical courts. The most relevant articles were:[1]
1. The Mexican nation is sovereign and free from the Spanish government and any other nation.
3. The religion of the nation is the Roman Catholic Church and is protected by law and prohibits any other.
4. The Mexican nation adopts as its form of government a popular federal representative republic.
6. The supreme power of the federation is divided into Legislative power, Executive power and Judiciary power.
7. Legislative power is deposited in a Congress of two chambers—a Chamber of Deputies and a Chamber of Senators.
50. Political freedom of press in the federation and the states (paragraph 1).
74. Executive power is vested in a person called the President of the United Mexican States.
75. It provides the figure of vice president, who in case of physical or moral impossibility of the president, exercise the powers and prerogatives of the latter.
95. The term of the president and vice president shall be four years.
123. Judiciary power lies in a Supreme Court, the Circuit Courts and the District Courts.
124. The Supreme Court consists of eleven members divided into three rooms and a prosecutor.
157. The individual state governments will be formed by the same three powers.
Although this was not stipulated in the constitution, slavery was prohibited in the Republic. Miguel Hidalgo promulgated the abolition in Guadalajara on 6 December 1810. President Guadalupe Victoria declared slavery abolished too, but it was President Vicente Guerrero who made the decree of Abolition of Slavery on 15 September 1829.
“ 1. Slavery is abolished in the Republic.
2. Therefore are free those who until this day were considered as slaves.
3. When circumstances of the treasury permit it, it will compensate slave owners in the terms that is held by law.
_____________________________________________________________________

And then the liberal hero Santa Anna put an end to this corrupt inefficient system. The country needed a strong man and all powerful central authority to protect their rights and wellbeing and it has worked out so great.

It was a "non-political" event?

Part of the President's official duties, I presume.

Why is it when a Liberal shuns an event like this it is sign of courage and principle, but when a conservative does it, it is an outrage?

Can you imagine what guin's reaction would have been if the same player had done exactly the same thing and Bush43 had been president?

Non-political?

This guy is the POTUS, every breath he takes contains political posturing.

It may have not been the smartest thing this player ever did, but I say go for it, excercise your rights.

Sure, and to hell with the rest of the team, and all the work they put in to get where they are, because making a spectacle of himself was more important than allowing everyone else to celebrate their victory.

dgs49 wrote:Why is it when a Liberal shuns an event like this it is sign of courage and principle, but when a conservative does it, it is an outrage?

When, exactly, did a liberal athlete -- or member of any other organization -- snub an invitation by a President to attend a White House function honoring that person's organization, and who said it was a "sign of courage and principle"? Do you realy think everyone else is as petty, small-minded and mean spirited as you apparently are?

See: Theo Epstein!

Sure, and to hell with the rest of the team, and all the work they put in to get where they are, because making a spectacle of himself was more important than allowing everyone else to celebrate their victory.

They're all grown boys, I'm sure they can deal with it.

I'm sure they all did deal with it, because that's what adults do. They don't stamp their feet and have a tantrum and go screaming "LOOK AT ME!! LOOK AT ME!!" to the press in what should have been a moment for the entire team.

Jarlaxle wrote:See: Theo Epstein!

I'll assume he didn't go when he was BoSox GM, but I haven't seen anything about that except for mentions today attempting to justify Thomas. Did he announce why he didn't go? Did he make it an issue of his own politics? Does anyone even know what his political views are? Did anyone say it was the right thing to do?

And by the way, if he had made an announcement that he wouldn't go with his team to the White House because he disagreed with Bush's policies, I would have said that was a dick move, too. If you're invited to the White House as the World Series champions, you go; you're not there to attend a fund raiser or make a campaign appearance. Not everything has to be a political manifesto.

ETA:
As far as I can tell Theo Epstein has never made any kind of public show of his political leanings. He did contribtue $1,000 to Obama's campaign in '08 and $500 to Martha Coakley in 2010, but these are very modest donations especially compared to other members of the franchise (e.g., Curt Schilling donated $2,300 to John McCain).

This guy is the POTUS, every breath he takes contains political posturing.

Damn straight!

I for one am sick and tired of how the President keeps trying to curry political favor with those Thanksgiving and Mother's Day proclamations.