Don,
Because the "Campaigner-in-Chief" wants us to look like dorks.....
It's Obama's revenge against JimWhite. Black guys can get away with wearing that stuff.
Last edited:
Don,
Because the "Campaigner-in-Chief" wants us to look like dorks.....
Well I don't think USA was anywhere near in contention for the gold medal for worst outfit of the parade, that had to be between us and the Swedes. Stella McCartney's ensemble was terrible and Sweden look like they forgot and picked something up from Next instead.Don,
Because the "Campaigner-in-Chief" wants us to look like dorks.....
I think that was the Czechs. They also had blue brollies, so I assume that the welly and brolly combination was taking the piss out of the British weather. So top marks to them!What was the country with the Blue galoshes? What the heck were they dressed for?
Ours looked like the population of Romford had won a scratch card and turned up.Well I don't think USA was anywhere near in contention for the gold medal for worst outfit of the parade, that had to be between us and the Swedes. Stella McCartney's ensemble was terrible and Sweden look like they forgot and picked something up from Next instead.
IOW, the Canucks owned the sport when no body else wanted the sport. Now that the sport has some value they are a has been.From the mid 50's on the game resembled the game they play now.
Back when Canada did 'own' the sport, in the 20's, 30's and after the war they played with 7 people per side or only had a few teams in the whole tourneyment. Heck in 1932 there were only a total of 48 hockey players in the entire tournement.
Is it really true?First, these uniforms are crap. They look like garbage from some Euro reject project and everyone is laughing about them. Second, they're made in China.
So I have but one question: Why?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/13/sport/us-uniform-controversy/index.html?hpt=hp_c2