snuffbox

Enron. Energy task force. Haliburton. Thing is, nothing can really be shown that says they got preferential treatment. Enron? They made their money under Clinton's administration (with gov't contracts, to boot) and the company DIED in 2001 or so. Bush didn't give them ANYTHING for the campaign donations they made. He let them die because, darn it, they DESERVED to die. He didn't try and bail them out --- something the Congress did for the airline industry (when it shouldn't have) because one of the biggest lobbyists for that group is married to a prominent Congressman. Haliburton? Again, they have been used by the gov't to provide services for YEARS. Bush wasn't the first. They WON the contract to provide emergency services for the military (which eliminates the need to have competitive bids for contracts for every single thing the military or gov't needs done). Nothing illegal or improper there. And what, precisely, was illegal about the task force? I don't get the illegality here. They had CEO's of energy companies (which isn't too bad an idea when discussing shaping energy policy) and asked for their input. They promised the CEO's that the transcripts wouldn't be made public so that the CEO's could actually provide their honest evaluations rather than trying to play to their shareholders. I, honestly, don't see the controversy there. I really don't. -=Mike The real problem with Haliburton - Not about illegal/not, or that it had already been a government contracter for years and years prior. The problem was that the company had ties to Dick Cheney and that, obviously, is a major conflict of interest.

I think his huge win over Wlad(a very highly rated fight for HBO) would certainly give him a solid amount of recognizability. Hes probably not quite as 'big' as a Byrd or a Tua or a Tyson in name value but I think this is a fair fight for Heavyweight Championship of the World.

Enron. Energy task force. Haliburton.

Im watchin Friday Night Fights...yay!...

Um... no. Wow, they truly do live in their own world where the rest of the United States actually doesn't propogate the texan stereotype of ignorant tough-feeling hicks. Honestly, same thing can be said of New Yorkers. Or Bostonites, to be honest. Or people from Philly. -=Mike The people are like this everywhere....shit, the local Wisconsin hillbillies think theyre hotshit just cuz theyre 'cool' in the 'Sconsin Hills. People carry their localness everywhere, its just a fact of life. Texas, Boston, Cali, New Yawk, Minnesota, Wyoming, etc etc etc. Who gives a shit if he acted like a wanker back in the day? Im sure John Kerry and Howard Dean and Al Gore and on and on and on all acted pompous during their college days just like George Bush. The only exception to this might be a Bill Clinton whose meager youth may have made a bit more humble during his college years. Just my opnion on that though, I really have no idea, I just think his boorishness came later with his political successes.

I put bulshit like this article on the same level as Bush's 'cocaine abuse'. I dont care and I dont think it really matters. I also think that a majority of Americans agree with me about both.

Excellent page, although calling O'Reilly a vagina is an undeserved disservice to vaginas. True. The vagina is good for a few things besides a laugh. I'm not sure Bill is. -=Mike Vagina is good for so many things...making me drool, swoon, scream, spend money, say anything, do anything go anywhere...it truly is the lifeblood of all existence. Bill O Reilly....hmmm...well, at least hes put some heat on Jesse Jackson so he has done one thing of meaning. So, you're fervently pro-vagina --- but somewhat anti-Bush? Doesn't fit, does it? -=Mike nice

Sure you aren't And yes Mike, when O'reilly defends the administration he's a conservative boorish puppet blowhard, and when he criticizes the administration he's a straight shooting independent that speaks from his mind. I'm glad you've figured that out... What the fuck duder? Where can it be infered that I am a liberal? As stated a million times - I am a libertarian(not capitalized as I am not presently affiliated with the party of the same name). As posted many times I am socially liberal and very fiscally/governmentally conservative. Libertarian...grab hold of the word guy, say it over til you figure it out. I know Ann Coulter couldnt comprehend this one...I hope I can expect a lil better out of you though. My best friend is a Libertarian, member of the party and everything. Every political conversation we have I get a huge does of the laiser faire philosophy. From what I've read from you, you seem to be on the liberal side of the Libertarian spectrum (then again you admit you have no affiliation to the party, so I guess you're an independent and can choose to define yourself anyway you see fit...). Yes, I will agree with you that I am more 'liberal libertarian' than 'laissez-faire libertarian'. I do feel that there should be some government in our country and it should have some power over businesses. In my ideal world, it would be laissez faire...but I am wise enough to realize that at this point that couldnt possibly work out well in the US. I label my self libertarian due to my closeness to so many of the philosophies of the party...Constitution(I do in fact support the 2nd amendmant but am biased against it personally to to events in my own life), abortion rights, censorship(I am however against NAMBLA etc that are just wrong), drug laws, weakening govt powers, taxes, etc etc etc. But you are right and I agree...Im more liberal than laissez-faire. Not ideally, but realistically.

Its a shame that the campaign cant be about the two candidates distinct forums and differing views/policies/records. Kerry could easily focus on Bush's mishandling of the surpus, the deficit, Iraq, and the exploitation of 9-11 for example. All very legitimate topics to discuss while explaining how he is different. Bush can focus largely on the hypocrisy of Kerry. That seems fair to me and thus far seems to be his plan. Kerry seems intent on bringing the slander and the stupid. Bush will probably ride this intern thing and other nonsense, but so far he hasnt, and he should get some respect for running the more decent campaign so far. So far. Meh...at least Dean and Kucinich managed to provide some alternatives with their rhetoric.

Not only was it a horrible card...but one of the poorest promoted/managed events ever. Fucked up starting times, ticket info, etc just killed NWA's first attempt at payperview. Wasnt the double main event Ric Flair vs. Hawk(Im sure there was alot of suspense as to who was walking away with the belt after that one) and Dusty's clusterfuck steel cage match thats only purpose was to put himself over? Yeah, pretty horrible, and I dont even recall any undercard bouts but I think there was only like 3. At least the Bunkhouse Stampede match was mildly entertaining, imo.

They were all on Supertape 92. yep...thats the one. thanks.

Kliq = Main Event.

Excellent page, although calling O'Reilly a vagina is an undeserved disservice to vaginas. True. The vagina is good for a few things besides a laugh. I'm not sure Bill is. -=Mike Vagina is good for so many things...making me drool, swoon, scream, spend money, say anything, do anything go anywhere...it truly is the lifeblood of all existence. Bill O Reilly....hmmm...well, at least hes put some heat on Jesse Jackson so he has done one thing of meaning.

Sure you aren't And yes Mike, when O'reilly defends the administration he's a conservative boorish puppet blowhard, and when he criticizes the administration he's a straight shooting independent that speaks from his mind. I'm glad you've figured that out... What the fuck duder? Where can it be infered that I am a liberal? As stated a million times - I am a libertarian(not capitalized as I am not presently affiliated with the party of the same name). As posted many times I am socially liberal and very fiscally/governmentally conservative. Libertarian...grab hold of the word guy, say it over til you figure it out. I know Ann Coulter couldnt comprehend this one...I hope I can expect a lil better out of you though.

It is pretty comical, Mike usually seems to put up a pretty good arguement...I think this one and its backlash just adds to the comedy I guess. It would be pretty dificult to prove which is the more reliable source - Drudge or the NY Times. Both have their positives, negatives, and histories. It was just pretty ridiculous of the poli sci guru to make such a grand claim then use 'prove it' for his own reasoning. Would have been much better off leaving it alone, arguing over two different news sources reliability is inherantly fultile and basically useless.

Calloways plan - He will beat whomever he wants to.

Jeff Buckley - The Sky is a Landfill

Great lineup...Dylan, Dead, Dave, Trey, Willie, Primus, Byrne, Wilco, SCI, Ani, Chris Robinson, Umphreys...wow, Ill be there

Using wwe logic....doesnt that require repeated, brutal blows to the head?

Everyone, please shut the fuck up and stop ripping my lines. I brought that up with Drury already but also wasn't an asshole about it in the process. I didn't "steal anyone's lines". I never saw that thread, because I'm very rarely in GC so it must have been a coincidence. Sorry to shatter your perception that everyone pays attention to you at all times....sheesh... I have the exact opposite perspective, and the fact that it was a total coincidence and the thread had undeservedly gone unnoticed is what caused me to respond the way that I did. Thanks for being a literal reader. the fuck?

Why must you always say thanks after you post? It is just my thing. Thanks. Fucking lame Thanks

lower

I thought AWA was dead before SMW really existed...and I dont remember Brian Lee ever working for AWA at all... explain a lil please?

What about David Bowie?

I remember Tuesday in Texas being included on a Coliseum Video(dont remember which, Battle of the Superstars er some shit like that)...anyone know if that was the full card or not?