Who cares? No one was asking Thomas to put his arm around Obama with a big thumbs up and a cheesy grin. He was there as part of his team. He could have just stood there with a pissy look on his face.
Thomas cares. And yes, he could have just stood there with a pissy look on his face. He chose not to.
And some people care that he didn’t, and think he’s a duschbag. Is this fun or what?
Seriously, who gives a fuck? How many people here knew who Tim Thomas was last weekend? I live in Boston and I didn’t know. Isn’t hockey the least popular of the “big four” sports in America? I’m pretty sure that he’s an asshole and a moron, and I’m equally sure that President Obama didn’t particularly care.
I don’t know about moron, but I’ve actually never heard of Thomas being an asshole. shrug As for hockey’s popularity in the U.S., it depends on where you live. While Pittsburgh’s primarily a football town, the Penguins are still huge. Mario Lemieux is almost a god in this city. And Detroit is known as Hockey Town. I always thought that the Bruins were pretty big in Boston.
Again, yes, the Bruin organization COULD have made it manditory for him to go. They chose not to, which was probably a wise move on their part, but I’m sure they’re not too thrilled with him at the moment.
(BTW, the president gets a jersey like that from EVERY team that visits the White House. Football teams, hockey teams, etc. Even for a single term, that’s about eight jerseys. You gotta wonder what they do with all that crap. Especially if it’s a team they hate.)
Once again, I think he did a real disservice to his teammates. THOSE are the people he really let down. He should have gone for their sake, at the very least.
It’s not a political event.
The last part is probably true largely because Manny is an asshole, just like James Harrison. They were largely ignored because:
- Nobody expects better of them
- They didn’t try to inject politics into a non-partisan celebration
- There is no indication that they lied about the reasons for not attending
To your first point, the rest of the cite is irrelevant because the point was to refute what you said in your post. To quote you:
Let’s address the points you had wrong:
- Theo Epstein did not miss both White House visits
- There is no evidence his missing the 2nd visit to the White House had anything to do with George Bush. In fact, given his first visit was when Bush was in office, he probably didn’t have too big an issue with it.
- Third, you clearly didn’t even bother to read the thread to see that the division on this issue is hardly along political lines, and thus assuming “liberal toads” would have a problem with it is flatly inaccurate.
- There is no evidence that Epstein was making a “statement of dissent” when he didn’t go the second time.
So basically, you were wrong in almost every way, with the exception of noting that the second time Epstein did not attend. That (alone) in no was justifies the tone, tenor, or substance of your post.
Bullshit. Stop speculating, and provide some proof.
It barely registered because people were discussing why Manny was absent. The implication is that Theo absence was felt less than the team’s star player. It has nothing to do with politics or anything else.
His GM stated that it was political before the statement was released. CITE:
So nobody made assumptions it was political. His GM said that Thomas stated that it was before the facebook post was released. People were reacting to definitive statements made by those close to the situation. No one had to assume anything.
I never accused him of such a thing. Those that did should probably not have said that unless they have some evidence that he is, but that’s the downside of throwing your lot in with people who really are bigots and racists. It’s unfair, but it’s the nature of the beast. That said, I agree people shouldn’t just assume he is a racist because he hates Obama.
Hardly an apology. I doubt anyone was offended by your “aggressive language”. They are more than likely embarrassed for you. You didn’t bother to fact-check anything you said, read the previous comments, or know the rules of the board before posting. Then, rather than actually retract the false statements and unsupported suppositions you made, you double down on the vitriol before offering a half-assed apology.
Political, no. Promotional, yes. Which is basically what this was. So yes, they very well COULD have said, “you’ll go to the White House, or you’ll be talking to your agent.” It wouldn’t have been very wise to do so on their part, but it would have been within their rights. So, as I keep saying, he really fucked over the rest of the organization. Not cool. Like I also said, I’ve never heard of Thomas being a dick – but in this case, it was a dick thing to do. He was diplomatic about it, but it was still dickish.
(Oh, and while it’s rare, there have been goalies who are also goons. Ron Hextall, for one. Surprise, surprise, he played with Philadelphia for most of his career)
So, you think it’s okay to fire someone for their political views? Can you be fired for yours as well, then? This strikes me as a very disturbing precedent.
I disagree with those who think an invite to the White House isn’t political. It isn’t necessary for the president to congratulate them like this. It isn’t necessary for the president to go to disaster areas, either. It would often be better to send experts: emergency crews, engineers, etc. but if the president doesn’t go, people start yammering and stop pitching in to help out.
If the president was in the stadium and wants to shake the teams hands, or gives a call to the locker room, my advice is to shake his hand, say thank you, etc. But, if it’s an invite, and your conscience says you can’t keep quiet, I don’t vote to go against your conscience.
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
So it would have been classier if Thomas had pulled an Eartha Kitt and let Obama have a piece of his mind in front of all his teammates?
[/QUOTE]
And I don’t vote to make it uncomfortable to your team mates by speaking up with them in the room. Seems to me the respectful thing to do is not go.
There’s more to the context of that incident. Johnson invited Kitt and a bunch of other prominent women to discuss juvenile delinquency. Each of them were asked to give their opinion on the matter. Johnson just didn’t like Kitt’s opinion.
But Kitt didn’t show up for a ceremonial occasion and then shit all over it just to be an asshole. She was specifically asked what she thought was the reason for juvenile delinquency and she answered the question.
The fact that this hurt Eartha Kitt’s career says a lot more about American society at the time than it does about Eartha Kitt.
I don’t see why it’s a problem, provided you live in a right to work state. Political ideology isn’t race, gender, or religion.
In this instance, where the employee is a public figure and his political views conflict with his responsibilities to his employer*, I think it’s certainly okay. I think it would be stupid to fire him over this, but certainly not illegal.
*visiting the White House is something that comes along with being a pro athlete in America, just like volunteering for Habitat for Humanity or attending camps for underprivileged kids or whatever.
They wouldn’t be firing for his political views, but for his refusal to participate in promotional events. Which is what this is considered, no matter what people say. (How many times do athletes have to meet with the mayor, or the governor? It’s all about public relations.)
And yes, I believe you can in some instances be fired for your political views. I highly, highly doubt the Bruins will trade Thomas for doing so, and they’d be stupid to do so. But unless he has a no-trade clause in his contract, (and I believe he does), they very well could, or would be in their rights to do so.
If push came to shove the criteria for “political” is evident whereas the the criteria for “promotional” is a matter of opinion. The idea that he fucked over anybody is again a matter of opinion. Is there any evidence that any team has suffered in the past either financially or personally over a photograph with a president?
I didn’t mean he hurt them financially. I meant, it was bad PR. He put his employers in an awkward position, and basically snubbed his teammates. Putting the focus on HIM, rather on the team. Yes, the old cliche about being a “team player” is just that, a “cliche”, but here it fits.
Players meet with political figures all the time, and it has nothing to do with politics. How many times do they take pictures with the mayor of their town? (Jesus, Luke Ravenstahl lost a bet with the mayor of Denver and had to take a picture of himself tebowing while wearing a Broncos jersey!)
Like I said, it’s PR. Your opinion may differ, but in the world of sports, it’s not seen as a pushing any political agenda. You meet with important people.
I’m not seeing the awkward position unless you want to suggest that players are owned property. So one of the players didn’t show up. BFD. Obama doesn’t follow the sport or the team so this is nothing but gratuitous political glurge.
And the idea that players take pictures with politicians all the time is not really relevant. Far more players DON’T take pictures with politicians. It’s the purview of the individual player who they associate with. It sounds like you’re making a case for the “beautiful people” hanging around each other as some kind of expected behavior. I think you’ll find quite a few people abhor that kind of social life.
Well, I don’t know how it is in your neck of the woods, but around here the mayor is pretty much a fixture around the sports arenas.
I’ve never been one to follow a sport to the point I would buy a hat with a logo on it. I’ve never understood the intensity that people put into the effort. Yes they’re fun to watch on some level but I get more excited over a decent cover band.
I’ve also never understood the idol worship of movie actors, sports figures and politicians. To me they’re people with large ego’s and little talent and most of them would starve if they had to work for a living. If I knew a famous person I’d hang out with them away from the limelight but I have less than zero desire to be seen with someone famous just for the sake of it.
So you’re saying you’re not really much of a sports fan then? Or rather, just a casual one?
I think Thomas is a douchebag. The more I heard him speak last year, the less respect I had for him; he’d rather insult the opposition than praise his own team mates, even after important playoff wins. I disagree with his politics, and I’m of the opinion that his decision to not attend the event at the White House makes him and his team look bad (they seem to be good at that…).
Thomas could have issued a statement a day or two before the event, saying he wouldn’t go for whatever reasons, but instead chose to issue a statement afterwards, only once people started asking where the reigning Vezina, Conne Smyth and Stanley Cup winning goalie (complete with statistics records) was. He made it about him, rather than politely and discreetly declining the invitation, congratulating his team and letting them enjoy the event if they chose to. In a way, he took some of their happiness away in the name of his politics.
So, it’s not what he did that I dislike, it’s how he did it.
And this man talks about participating in the All-Star events as a “celebration of hockey.” If being congratulated for winning the Stanley Cup by the President of the United States isn’t a “celebration of hockey”, I don’t know what is.
No, it’s a team promotional event and all are expected to attend. There are events in the city of Boston (like the Duck Boat parade after the Stanley Cup victory) which are hosted by the mayor of Boston, also a Democrat. He attended all of those without saying anything. He has no objection to appearing with politicians, just with this politician. The team can’t compel him to attend, but they certainly could impose some consequences. They chose not to, and I understand the reasoning, but it does make me feel less of Thomas.
I would not be surprised in the slightest to find that part of the employment contract for most sports players includes attendance at promotional and other non-sporting events. It would be interesting to know if this is the case here or not.
According to the Bruins, it is.