Irrelevant
Well-known member
We wear it like a badge of honor.apparent that Americans simply don't care how bad they look.
2026 Winter Olympics
- Thread starter brymoore
- Start date
noharleyyet
Well-known member
And allegedly 2 ID's.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
The outrage is definitely outrageous, optics are still bad, but par for the course. Id totally still go to the wh if invited, no matter who was pres
Caseknife
Well-known member
Totally a matter of respect, may only be for the position, not necessarily for the placeholder.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
But I'd definitely understand if others wouldn't. Everyone has their own line in the sand
The ONLY person who I would take interest in their opinion is, in regards to the White House, and all that, would be Ellen Hughes.
She has the best perspective from both sides of the coin than anyone.
"at the end of the day, it's just about the country."
"These players, both the men and women, can bring so much unity to a group and to a country,” she said. “People that cheered on that don’t watch hockey, people that have politics on one side or on the other side, and that’s all both the men’s team and the women’s team care about."
She also spoke about the "synergy" between the two squads.
“If you could see what we see from the inside, and the men and women sharing, you know, dorm rooms and halls and flex floors and the camaraderie and the synergy and the way the women cheered on the men and the way the men cheered on the women — that’s what it’s all about," she said. "And the other things they cannot control. They care about humanity. They care about unity and they care about the country.”
UNITY!
For Hillary Knight to make the comment, I feel was in bad taste, and was in a sense a look at me moment.
I saw the interview on ESPN, and was a little disappointed in the sense that ESPN steered the conversation to cause controversy, when it could have been a great opportunity to bring people together.
At times she made me think that she wasn’t sure how the men felt about the woman’s team, and whether the men supported the women or not. At least that’s how I saw it.
So again (and you won’t see it on ESPN) Ellen Hughes was a better gauge and more honest insight to the two teams.
We had a great opportunity to bring our nation together, if only for a little while, and the haters, once again made it a shirt show….
She has the best perspective from both sides of the coin than anyone.
"at the end of the day, it's just about the country."
"These players, both the men and women, can bring so much unity to a group and to a country,” she said. “People that cheered on that don’t watch hockey, people that have politics on one side or on the other side, and that’s all both the men’s team and the women’s team care about."
She also spoke about the "synergy" between the two squads.
“If you could see what we see from the inside, and the men and women sharing, you know, dorm rooms and halls and flex floors and the camaraderie and the synergy and the way the women cheered on the men and the way the men cheered on the women — that’s what it’s all about," she said. "And the other things they cannot control. They care about humanity. They care about unity and they care about the country.”
UNITY!
For Hillary Knight to make the comment, I feel was in bad taste, and was in a sense a look at me moment.
I saw the interview on ESPN, and was a little disappointed in the sense that ESPN steered the conversation to cause controversy, when it could have been a great opportunity to bring people together.
At times she made me think that she wasn’t sure how the men felt about the woman’s team, and whether the men supported the women or not. At least that’s how I saw it.
So again (and you won’t see it on ESPN) Ellen Hughes was a better gauge and more honest insight to the two teams.
We had a great opportunity to bring our nation together, if only for a little while, and the haters, once again made it a shirt show….
Redmt
Well-known member
I didn't realize that soccer had a good part?
Wind Gypsy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2017
- Messages
- 2,990
It does slow things down a bit because puck possession becomes so huge when there is so much space. But suspense? you just know someone is about to have a scoring opportunity in short order when it's 3v3. You dont want to miss 30 seconds of 3v3 where as it's not quite as critical when 5v5.
Agree with consensus that it'd be better to have medal games at least 5v5. Kind of hate for a bunch of NHLers to have multiple extended OT games in the olympics though. We want to keep it best vs best so keeping work load minimal is positive IMO.
this is Hillary's "look at me" moment. Likely her best chance for them to reach a broader audience than she ever will again. So yes, she's gonna have to face the elephant in the room. Other than that, i agree with you.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,567
Ditto. That's a place where you are celebrated for accomplishment.
The state of the union though? That's a highly political event, you get trotted out there to support a political agenda. Its completely different, and IMO invites legitimate questions of political intent by the players.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I might still go. I mean, how many invites do you get to something like that?
I don't know that putting the weight of the world on the shoulders of some boys who are all jacked up on winning a gold medal and being the toast of the nation justifies the notion that they're part of the unholy cabal to end democracy and be stooges for the autocracy.
They're hockey players. Not that bright.
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,567
Don't disagree, just drawing the difference from which I think many find it fair to question the intent of their decision to attend the State of the Union speech.
Several of the women play for the pro team in my state. Reporting here is clear and consistent--they have indicated they didn't have any problems with the men--in the locker room, or their decisions to attend things--but did not like the presidents comments.
For those not familiar, the Hughes boys mother was a coach for the women so it's highly doubtful they would have gone along with the presidents jokes.
Maybe it's found fair because we've entered into a world where people feel the need to politicize every single thing that happens. Or we have a populace that is so addicted to the dopamine rush of arguing about anything that they jump to those reactions for the rush, not the truth. Sometimes, things just are. People want to jump to conclusions. The conflict is addicting. The conflict is clicks. The conflict is the currency by which the social engineers succeed.
By next February, will anyone remember or care about this? Is it just another moment of anger the nation gets to wallow in before we move to the next seemingly massive, yet ultimately miniscule thing that is designed to keep us controlled by the same people we spend our days railing against?
Are we all just prisoners of our own devices?
Bonasababy
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2024
- Messages
- 1,567
Perhaps care is needed when they entire the masters chambers, gathering to meet the beast?
Perhaps care is needed when they entire the masters chambers, gathering to meet the beast?
The similarities between the meaning of that song and what is transpiring today shouldn't be lost on old duffers like us.
Similar threads
