Tim Thomas' decision to skip the Bruins' White House ceremony has already created a distraction on what should have been a great day for the franchise. Thomas should have seen this coming.
Jan 24, 2012 - When word got out that Boston Bruins goalie Tim Thomas had decided to skip the Bruins' Stanley Cup celebration at the White House Monday, reaction was almost immediate on Twitter.
Not all of it was favorable to Thomas, but he had some support.
Keep in mind, too, that most of this activity came long before anyone knew the real reason for Thomas backing out of the trip. That statement from Thomas didn't come until later in the day Monday.
Naturally, I felt the need to chime in.
No issue with Tim Thomas not going to the White House. I would never turn it down, but it's not a law that you have to do it.
— Bruce Ciskie (@BruceCiskie) January 23, 2012
In all honesty, I don't have a problem with such a decision. It says more about a person when they stand by their convictions, no matter how wrong you may think they are, than when they eschew their convictions to tow a party or company line.
(Oddly enough, the idea that so many in Washington seem willing to set their own feelings aside in favor of divisive partisan politics could be a huge part of Thomas' problem with government.)
Thomas did what he felt was right, and he did it knowing he would probably end up having to answer for the decision, at least in the short term.
Thomas did his best to diffuse the controversy with his explanation for skipping out on his team's day with President Obama.
"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"
You don't get to say something isn't about politics when it's blatantly obvious it is, but that's neither here nor there.
I buy the part where he basically says this has nothing to do with the party that has control of the White House. No reason not to believe him, frankly.
My issue isn't so much with his words. It's with what he created by doing this.
Thomas is -- whether he likes it or not -- one of the most visible players on his team. He was the goalie whose tires everyone but Roberto Luongo pumped on the Bruins' way to the Cup last spring. He had two shutouts in the Final, including in the Bruins' riot-inciting Game 7 win. He got to show off his acting skills in one of the Discover "Peggy" ads.
His decision to skip a newsworthy White House ceremony -- one that was attended by every other player and executive and coach, and live-tweeted by television voice Jack Edwards -- has drawn plenty of scrutiny. Appearing on NHL Network with Bill Pidto and E.J. Hradek Monday, forward Patrice Bergeron didn't get three questions into the interview before he was asked about his feelings.
(Bergeron, by the way, smartly deflected the question as much as he could, trying to respect Thomas' decision, whether he agreed with it or not.)
Monday night, the Bruins issued a statement through team president Cam Neely.
"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."
(Interesting, I'd say, that Neely talks about Thomas' "views" without using a word associated with "politics." Careful choice of words here by the club.)
Thomas has created a distraction for his team. And if Neely, Claude Julien, and the gang think this story is going to go away because they want it to, they're probably going to be disappointed. The Bruins play at Washington Tuesday night. The PR staff can shield Thomas from the media during the morning skate, but good luck keeping the vultures from circling his locker after the game.
And if he won't talk, reporters aren't idiots. They know that they'll be expected by their editors, news directors, or other immediate bosses to ask any Bruins player who is willing to give interviews about Thomas.
When All-Star Weekend kicks off, I'm sure Thomas will be asked to answer some questions for the media. He's crazy if he doesn't think he'll be asked to address his decision.
If there's any silver lining for Thomas and the Bruins, it's that the All Star Break is near. It works out perfectly for this story to go away before Boston returns to meaningful action next week.
In the meantime, it's a rather unnecessary distraction that overshadows what really should have been a wonderful and historic day for the Boston Bruins organization.
10 comments
Comments
It's only a distraction
because people like you keep talking and writing about it. I really have to wonder, would you guys be promoting this story as much if it someone skipped because they didn’t like Bush?
The guy believes obama is a threat to out Constitution- newsflash: so does half the country. What is the big deal?
"If guns cause crime then all of mine are defective."
by detroit_fan on Jan 24, 2012 3:12 PM EST reply actions
It's only a distraction
If someone boycotted Bush, conservatives would be all over them saying they were traitors and Un-American. But boycotting Obama is OK by them.
Half the country. You Tea Baggers can’t help yourself with your exaggerations, can you?
by d_ex_machina on Jan 24, 2012 6:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
tea bagger?
i hated bush, am an atheist and vote only libertarian. i love how you liberals preach tolerance and acceptance then blast anyone whit a view different than your own, makes you look so foolish.
and yes half is accurate- the pools show this morons approval rating stands at a pathetic 44%-that’s according to gallop.
"If guns cause crime then all of mine are defective."
by detroit_fan on Jan 24, 2012 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
*polls*
"If guns cause crime then all of mine are defective."
by detroit_fan on Jan 24, 2012 8:17 PM EST up reply actions
He does not mention Obama by name anywhere in his statement.
You are putting words in his mouth.
by 13_Legion on Jan 24, 2012 10:23 PM EST up reply actions
But he did
in his first three articles posted a few days before this one.
And i agree with detroit_fan, if a repub does this it gets headlines and creates a stir but if a guy did this during bush era, nothing. You wouldnt hear anything, why? because liberals own the majority of the media and only write about the good and the bad of others. A bunch of liberal union thugs…
by jdn8011 on Jan 29, 2012 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
The big deal is
that sports figures are rarely allowed (either by the teams or “society”) to be seen as real people. Perpetuating the myth helps solidify the brand, which in turn boosts profits.
While I believe they hold a great deal of value in society, we should remember that sports are the distraction from decisions that have real impact on people, not the other way around.
by Adam Pearce on Jan 24, 2012 4:13 PM EST reply actions
I think it speaks poorly of his character
It shows that he is a poor sport. Yeah, you lost the election. Get over it. There’s another one in 4 years. I would expect him to show up to honor the office, even if he disagrees with the man in it. I wouldn’t give him a pass if he refused to say the pledge of allegiance or to cover his heart during the national anthem, and I don’t give him a pass for this.
by tyrantking on Jan 24, 2012 5:12 PM EST reply actions
What do you mean lost the election?
Where in that statement does he say he blames the President alone, or just the current administration? All three branches of government are mentioned.
by 13_Legion on Jan 24, 2012 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
It's still a free country
Nobody is obligated to accept an invitation that they are uncomfortable with. I happen to agree with Thomas politically, but if a liberal sports star did the same thing during a conservative administration, if that remote possibility ever occurs, I will support him or her as well. The “distraction” is in the eye of the critics who think we should march in lockstep to whoever happens to be in the White House (as long as they agree with their politics). Kudos Tim.
Don't put your beer in the microwave, eh. It'll boil.- Bob McKenzie
by ExPatCapFan on Jan 25, 2012 2:22 AM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed