Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
Tim Thomas abstains visiting the White House (Part 2)
Actually the Constitution was made because the Articles of Confederation didn't give enough power to the federal government. So if by what the country was founded on you mean the Constitution then sure it limits the federal government but the writers of the Constitution clearly had in mind the federal government needed more power than they had been giving it.
Partially true, the constitution was created because the government needed money to run. However, if they truly had wanted unlimited government they would have made it that way. The people wanted a bill of rights to protect their freedoms and states rights. They placed restrictions on government for a reason, and over the years those restrictions have became lax to the point that the government can and does do many things that it should not. It is getting to the point where the constitution is useless, which I believe is what Thomas was protesting.
Employees are not free, in the sense that they are bound to the contract that they sign with their employer. TT chose to break his commitment to his team and his employer, and placed himself ahead of both. Egotism and selfishness, that is the only way to describe his decision.
The Bruins encouraged him as much as possible and they could have forced him to go. But they didn't and I respect that.
I really don't think the Bruins really comprehended how big of an issue this is and will continue to be. I think they may regret allowing Thomas not to go. They also will wish Thomas had not come out with crazy unabomber like comments.
And really this can't get put back in a box. As much as the Bruins would like.. and probably Thomas would like... this isn't over. It is going to be impossible for Thomas not to comment more and make a bigger pile of crap.
This is horrible for the Bruins... they have to be so angry... they had no idea it would be such a cluster f u c k. They just thought Thomas wouldn't go and it would be a small deal.
Love it. Thomas just became one of my favorite athletes. I'm not going to say Obama is like Hitler or anything like that because that's obviously not true. But you have to recognize that the line should be drawn way before the level of dictators. If you don't want to mix politics and sports then NHL shouldn't do this in the first place. No way I would stand next to a ******** politician and smile.
If your President calls you to the White House, you go. Show some respect for THE OFFICE. If this was a foreign guy, that's one thing but Tim Thomas is supposed to be an American. **** him.
That president is supposed to honor the Constitution, yet, he's signing Bills that completely goes against amendments of the Constitution. See NDAA, signed on new year's eve
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undecided
There is a time and place to use your status for political reasons if you choose to do so, and i'd say this probably wasn't one of them.
In any situation, refusing to be in the presence of someone because you don't agree with their policies is absolutely childish.
This is the perfect time for it. Unfortunatley too many people brush it aside as being racist or a democrat. He's a patriot that doesn't like the way his country is headed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruins4Ever
Quoted from TSN:
"I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People," Thomas' statement read. "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," the statement continued, "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."
What part of that don't you agree with? Have you seen the **** that's been happening in the USA over the past several years? The complete lack of respect for the rights of their citizens (phone tapping, airport harassment), torture of political prisoners, bailouts of massive multinationals with taxpayer money, etc.
Really? You don't see these as being legitimate reasons for having a bit of disdain for the White House?
This
Quote:
Originally Posted by diophan
Obama says he will veto SOPA so someone refuses to visit Obama in the White House because of his.... opposition to SOPA?
So no, I don't think SOPA has anything to do with it. You're ascribing your own disliked legislation to TT's protest.
Why would you believe anything that comes out of the mouth of Oblabla. He also said he wouldn't sign NDAA, then he did when everybody was partying on Dec 31st.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5RingsAndABeer
So Tim Thomas is skipping the visit with Obama due to many of the changes that were brought about by George Bush as a result of 9/11?
Obama extended the Patriot act, the naked body scanners and pat downs were introduced during his tenure, torture is still happening in Gitmo and other POW camps, he started a war in Libya, drones are bombing Pakistan, Yemen and other countries on a daily basis, etc, etc, etc
I absolutely despised Bush when he was in office but I think Obama is even worst. Because he hides behind a Nobel prize and the obama zombies always play the race card as soon as you criticize him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota
funniest part: "I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People"
lol where was he when Bush was President? If he wanted to see liberties trampled look no further than the Patriot Act. Obama saves the auto industry, give them heath care and he's a dictator? Nice try, Timmy!
He was a nobody and the Bruins were not stanley cup Champion.
The Bruins encouraged him as much as possible and they could have forced him to go. But they didn't and I respect that.
I really don't think the Bruins really comprehended how big of an issue this is and will continue to be. I think they may regret allowing Thomas not to go. They also will wish Thomas had not come out with crazy unabomber like comments.
And really this can't get put back in a box. As much as the Bruins would like.. and probably Thomas would like... this isn't over. It is going to be impossible for Thomas not to comment more and make a bigger pile of crap.
This is horrible for the Bruins... they have to be so angry... they had no idea it would be such a cluster f u c k. They just thought Thomas wouldn't go and it would be a small deal.
I think they all wish Thomas had just called in sick for the day.
I can't imagine he would complain about bailing out the auto industry considering he grew up in Flint, Michigan and his father was a car salesman who got laid off.
Judging by his statement, which of course is all we have to go off of, I think that would be irrelevant in this case. A man can believe what he wants whether his father was an autoworker, a thief, or a doctor. His statement said that the federal government had grown out of control, and saving the auto industry, as well as bailing out Wall St, was an out of control action. It just proves that the United States is as close to a communist society as it is to a pure capitalist society.
If conservapedia wants to embarass itself my twisting the comment than that's their business. It doesn't really change the fact that what he said was a bash on everyone equally and it was unfortunately spot on our govt has let us down ons everal occassions and since we the people ultimately can run our govt and udnerstand it's workings thanks to the internet it's a bash on how we continue to let ourselves down
Fair enough. I guess I'll just summarize my point here as I don't feel either of us is going to change our tune.
I believe the statement Thomas made is perfectly legimate, partisan politics has been detrimental to the United States and both parties are part of the problem. However, I feel that Thomas' know political affiliations remove the legitmacy from his statement as we can infer it may not be truthful. The statement itself is a fair statement, but I don't feel he meant any of it which is a little sad IMO.
I feel this was a statement that should've been made a week ago when the trip to the White House was first announced. By waiting until the actual event Thomas took a nice team moment and turned it into his own political soapbox. I believe it is a selfish move on his part.
All this being said, I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree with your argument.
Love it. Thomas just became one of my favorite athletes. I'm not going to say Obama is like Hitler or anything like that because that's obviously not true. But you have to recognize that the line should be drawn way before the level of dictators. If you don't want to mix politics and sports then NHL shouldn't do this in the first place. No way I would stand next to a ******** politician and smile.
The thing about Obama is he is very good at pulling the wool over people's eyes, which is what all great dictators can do. Obama is a great speaker, he has the ability to make people believe what he is saying. Fortunately he doesn't have the power to be a dictator in this country. The federal government is out of control, but not that out of control yet.
Thomas is absolutely correct. People are starting wake up. They have been using "terror" as fear to remove our constitutional liberties. The government has been using "terror" to continue these ridiculous wars....and to spend billions on intervention in countries all over the world.
I commend Thomas for standing up for what he believes in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stugots
Just because a guy has previously supported a party/political figure doesn't mean he can't levy criticism against them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senateurs
That president is supposed to honor the Constitution, yet, he's signing Bills that completely goes against amendments of the Constitution. See NDAA, signed on new year's eve
This is the perfect time for it. Unfortunatley too many people brush it aside as being racist or a democrat. He's a patriot that doesn't like the way his country is headed.
This
Why would you believe anything that comes out of the mouth of Oblabla. He also said he wouldn't sign NDAA, then he did when everybody was partying on Dec 31st.
Obama extended the Patriot act, the naked body scanners and pat downs were introduced during his tenure, torture is still happening in Gitmo and other POW camps, he started a war in Libya, drones are bombing Pakistan, Yemen and other countries on a daily basis, etc, etc, etc
I absolutely despised Bush when he was in office but I think Obama is even worst. Because he hides behind a Nobel prize and the obama zombies always play the race card as soon as you criticize him.
He was a nobody and the Bruins were not stanley cup Champion.
Freakin thank you guys for injecting some sanity back into this thread. it's not about how legitmate his comments are or if he has some ulterior motive...seee the above....thats what the focus should be on
The only part ill disagree on is who's worse. Doesnt matter to me they're all horrible
How can anybody defend Obama and his tyranny? His complicity with Big Business and Big Banks in the financial **** of the American populace is enough for me to never wish to meet him. If you still believe that government protects you from the free market, I suggest you educate yourself about Austrian economics and get out of the kindergarten mentality that the people in government have your best interest in mind...
Why would you believe anything that comes out of the mouth of Oblabla. He also said he wouldn't sign NDAA, then he did when everybody was partying on Dec 31st.
Here is what the Obama administration said:
"The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision, which would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects... Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets."
This is what was done in response to Obama's veto threat:
"Addressing previous conflict with the Obama Administration regarding the wording of the Senate text, the Senate-House compromise text, in sub-section 1021(d), also affirms that nothing in the Act "is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force." The final version of the bill also provides, in sub-section(e), that "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." As reflected in Senate debate over the bill, there is a great deal of controversy over the status of existing law."
So how does him signing the bill make him a liar? He said he didn't like how it could be used to jail citizens and they put in a clause saying the bill didn't affect that.
Whether you like that part of the bill or not, he's not lying. Also there's no line item veto and it's a bill for funding national defense.
How can anybody defend Obama and his tyranny? His complicity with Big Business and Big Banks in the financial **** of the American populace is enough for me to never wish to meet him. If you still believe that government protects you from the free market, I suggest you educate yourself about Austrian economics and get out of the kindergarten mentality that the people in government have your best interest in mind...
Fair enough. I guess I'll just summarize my point here as I don't feel either of us is going to change our tune.
I believe the statement Thomas made is perfectly legimate, partisan politics has been detrimental to the United States and both parties are part of the problem. However, I feel that Thomas' know political affiliations remove the legitmacy from his statement as we can infer it may not be truthful. The statement itself is a fair statement, but I don't feel he meant any of it which is a little sad IMO.
I feel this was a statement that should've been made a week ago when the trip to the White House was first announced. By waiting until the actual event Thomas took a nice team moment and turned it into his own political soapbox. I believe it is a selfish move on his part.
All this being said, I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree with your argument.
Same here dont disagree. As someone concerned about the larger rights issues though Im just not at all concerned with him dissing his team. Bigger issues imo.
That said if he truly feels what this statement indicates he feels he should be doing a helluva lot more than he has done. Clearly though he is partisan in reality though this statement is a very fair and non partisan one which I loved.
Whats selfish about wanting to see not only your basic rights as an individual protected but the rights of the whole country? I can see that some people could take this as extreme arrogance but I dont care if hes arrogant it doesnt matter. I care about the fact that he's unfortunately actually right our govt has done some really f***ed things and passed some awful bills in the past decade with another huge one up for voting
It makes it better for people who are ignorant if he lists exactly what bills he is discussing but most people are well aware. I'd argue that if people dont know what hes referring to than they should ask those who are informed about it and find out for themselves. And tbh I wouldn't be shocked if he meant to be a slap at Obama alone but this actual comment if thats what he meant is completely stupid to make because it makes everyone look like ass
You are so ignorant and you don't even know you are ignorant. So is Timmy Thomas... so ignorant. You make a big media splash like Thomas did today.... and your ignorance will be displayed.
Here is what the Obama administration said:
"The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision, which would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects... Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets."
This is what was done in response to Obama's veto threat:
"Addressing previous conflict with the Obama Administration regarding the wording of the Senate text, the Senate-House compromise text, in sub-section 1021(d), also affirms that nothing in the Act "is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force." The final version of the bill also provides, in sub-section(e), that "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States." As reflected in Senate debate over the bill, there is a great deal of controversy over the status of existing law."
So how does him signing the bill make him a liar? He said he didn't like how it could be used to jail citizens and they put in a clause saying the bill didn't affect that.
Whether you like that part of the bill or not, he's not lying. Also there's no line item veto and it's a bill for funding national defense.
Unless Im mistaken he's done plenty of things and so did his predecessor that are more than deserving of him being lampooned.
