Justice

Indeed. The Sandinistas were pretty ruthless. Of course, we'll always have you here to appologize for them and completely blow out of proportion any of Reagan's mistakes. God, how many times does it have to be said: We've made mistakes. We've actually recognized them, though. And to ignore the wrongs of governments like the Sandinistas, to try and understate anything and everything they've done wrong completely is just as an injustice to the truth as saying "Reagan did no wrong". Frankly, you had something good going until you had to make the "OMG BUSH=SADDAM" remarks that totally fall off-base.

Uh, looking purely statistically, you're wrong. There are way more than twice as many whites in the US than blacks, so technically a higher number of the black population commit. When you are saying stuff like this, percentages do matter. Especially when you are talking behavior within a certain population. Plus, the actual numbers are: A lot closer than ya think.

I dub thee Undersecretary in charge of the Admiralty of Tropical Penguins.

A few points: Okay, fair enough point on Ethan. I guess I he should probably go a bit more into that because I really haven't seen enough of that explanation out there. To me, at first it seemed like "I smoulder with Generic Rage", but perhaps I see it wrong. And I only mention Tamu because he does have that huge fanbase. If he wins, I'd concede immediately that he completely deserved it. Frankly, I'd rather there be more of an assurance that the 'popular' picks get taken out if they suck quickly (i.e. Having judging go on for a few more rounds and then letting the public decide). That, and allow less popular people develop and show their stuff so that they can get popular. On the wrestling part: A good part of personality is in the wrestling itself. From Hulk Hogan to Eddie Guerrero, what you do in the ring does make a lot of you. Would Hogan be the same without his 'Hulking up'? Would Eddie be the same without his cheating? I understand it's personality, but they shouldn't single out one aspect, it should really be them as a whole. I think even if they decided the matches through popularity or something, as long as they had this idea of one-on-one competition the entire thing would be a bit more sensible than who has the largest mouth to run. Not to say you are wrong, that's perhaps one of the best arguments I've seen for this. But this is just my opinion. It makes more sense to have at least the wrestling present, even if it's technically on the backburner. And I only mention a deadline because comments are involved. Indeed, you have the flipside, but I honestly dislike the idea of people rping early and basically getting punished for it because they are the first to go and others can make adjustments from there. And we completely agree on the comments. I think they need to be more indepth: Why the hell was it bad? Why was it good? Give us points, reasons why it was weak. I'd love to learn why you thought this promo was good, why it was bad, and explain it out. The discussion we are having right now works for the simple reason that we are taking time in thinking out our points and making them.

Fuckin' A! No more "International Community" BS comin' from 'dis place.

Agreed. That was brilliant. I think Tom saying it the same way Brian did without even noticing it was just as funny.

My entire look at this thing: I think the entire thing is fatally flawed for a few reasons. 1) Not having a solid or set system to make sure that they filter out the bad stuff out in the opening round. 2nd Chance RPs were bad ideas, a lack of definition with the concept (I didn't RP because I honestly couldn't figure what the hell the competition actually was), and generally ambigious reasons for people advancing. This led to way too many people being let in and, frankly, I think allowed a few popular choices to sneak past the filter. 2) The simple ability to be completely wowed by a generic and played gimmick. See Ethan and Kennedy (I hate "I've killed people and can easily kill anyone" gimmick. Perhaps the biggest failing of the Clan in my eyes) of the first round. Oh dear God, he hates X-Net! What originality! Pfft. If he hates X-Net, then he'd fucking leave and not be their fucking ratings tool. God help me, does no one else see this contradiction? 3) Public opinion. Honestly, it's nto that hard to have a hardcore fanbase and not have any talent at all. I think they should have at least stuck with judge opinions for at least a few roudns to make sure they weeded out all the stragglers that might have gotten in. I honestly thinks that Tamu would rather win for his RPs (His last one was excellent, especially with the kids) rather than his OoC reputation. 4) Complete Wrestling Disconnect. I agree completely with Toxx that it's hard to shoot words across at people for 8 weeks without any actual action. With American Idol, this makes sense, because hey, it's about music. Problem is, this is wrestling. We aren't having matches, we are just having insults and blowjobs being given out. Perhaps one of the biggest weaknesses in the entire competition. At least have matches or something to make the thing interesting, or form it into an actual show. Let the characters actually interact and stuff! Jeez... 5) Deadlines: I don't think that the RPs should be posted at different times. I think that gives an advantage to anyone who comes after them. It allows them to look and say "I like this, but I don't like this" and tailor them to those specifacations. Get them done in the first three days, don't put on any comments, and then when it's all locked up put on comments so no one can change their styles in-round to gain an advantage. And to finish up: 6) Judging Style. Not themselves, but it'd be better to not give people cliffnotes and let them respond in RPs through voting. I think that it's well-meant, but ultimately I think it's a mistake. Their comments aren't a big help (Outside of maybe Rachel's, who seems to be better able to express herself) since they aren't really that different. I mean, I'd like them to be a bit more specific when pointing out flaws or strengths. That's my overall view of the thing. And Dave, you've explained your reasons pretty well. I don't think anyone is faulting you for supporting a friend who you feel should win. I think you've actually been a good observer and 'X-Net' Advocate .

Justice and Rule vs. Deja Vu, Tornado Tag Match for the Tag Titles And the beginning of the Infamous "OMG WTF TLC" debate. I personally just love this match because it was my first real comedy match, but was in an actual serious setting. That, and the ending was one of my absolute favorites to write.

Not true. LBJ and Carter created bigger and bigger deficits (Also consider what they would be adjusted, as well) until Reagan did it, and then Reagan's economy was perhaps the best we've ever had, making the deficit less of a problem because of the massive growth we had. Your arguments are as short-sighted those who used it before you. The impact the deficit makes is completely dependent on the context, and a deficit isn't necessarily a problem in certain contexts. And I'd attribute the Clinton Years non-deficit to both sides putting up hard fronts at the start, therefore forcing Clinton to make sure that his budget will at least pass, so no frills. More necessity than anything else.

Yeah, pretty much the idea. Just thinking of stupid ways to disqualify and discredit people. I mean, if you found a third-grade picture of someone and they are picking their nose or something like that, what real bearing does that have? It's just simple comedic purpose.

Pretty good, pretty good. My personal favorite is Pretzler saying "That's it, I'm gone." Frankly, though, I think you should strike back at the Tamu guy with an official-style Campaign Commercial attacking various wrestlers with dirty secrets from their past. I think it'd be hilarious to think of Toxxic holding up a picture of Ethan Andrews in the third grade picking his nose and saying "Is this REALLY the man you want to be X-Net Icon?" Or try deporting Tamu for being a foreigner (If he really is). Taking a new stance is good. Taking a guy's gimmick for a promo and surpassing him with it, though, is that much better.

Why did I make such a great career without ever feeling the need to defend my honor at every turn? Seriously, a joke is a joke. Sometimes you get burned, you need not go on rants about anything and everything. We are passing 'ludacris' right here and getting into blantantly stupid territory. Please, stop. No more online penis measuring.

King, I want your fucking stats and so does Spike. Hurry it. ... I mean... Ah, fuck.

My eye is on this thread. If you can keep the discourse civil, it'll be okay. But, in all seriousness, you guys need to talk to CC about problems rather than just posting shit on the board for imaginary wrestling cock-mearsuring contests. Please, talk to us, we will work things out. I swear. Justice "The SWF's One and Only Judge"

Ugh. Sorry it's so late. Tonight and last night were pretty... well, interesting. Anyways, congrats to the winners. I'll post some comments soon.

This was my first thought.

Fucking Crusen!! *marks out*

Whath' 'el yu gat aganst as, ya lampy bast'rd?

Plus they occasionally have Jim Norton. Which makes them better than anything Stern could ever do. This perhaps the best reason stated in the entire thread. Jim Norton = Ratings.

My blood went cold when I read what he had wrote...

If you have insider, it's completely accessible. All the old promos and stuff are still there. We should honestly see if we can get help from IGN to move it over to our own forum so they can just delete it. Isn't that possible, or are the formats too different to do?

For the Cruiserweight Title!

I think he wanted the rest of the Middle East to believe he had them, to thwart any attempted invasions, however the minute it looked like America was thinking about going to war, it seemed pretty evident that he didn't actually have them. He was still a threat to the enter stability of the Middle East, whether it or not he had them. A man committing with a bank robbery with a convincing replica is committing robbery just the same as a man with a real gun. There's no point in second guessing with information we didn't have previously. It's just too bad nobody will be held accountable for fucking up the intel as bad as they did. Alas... Because that's why we had all those firings in the CIA and a new head of Central Intelligence. God damn it all, no responsibility! Damn, how did I miss this for so long? *Shrugs* And this holds no water whatsoever. There's a term in psychology called "Hindsight Bias", which is what you have in spades. You act as though information today were easily accessible years ago, obviously showing how a 'bad' a decision this was. Well fuck, even if this 'wasn't as bad as we were led to believe', it certainly needed to be done for a multitude of other reasons (Such as the ones mentioned in the Congressional bill giving Bush the leeway to start the conflict). Considering this last month had the 2nd lowest casualty count since we've been in Iraq, I think they are feeling a bit better. But hey, we all know your motto: When the going gets tough, we cry like sissies and run away with our tails tucked between our legs. And a free Iraq moving towards Democracy. Fuck, man, there's a double whammy there! Hey, let's figure out other ways to shit and completely trivialize the sacrifice of 1500 Americans for the sake of a shitty and petty political argument... Already have, will continue to because you obviously have no sense of 'recency'. People can't act on information they didn't have that we have now. Conservative asshole point: Since when is it a good idea to have unprotected sex at 16? That's not really hindsight bias, that's just common sense. Not a valid comparison. More Moderate Point: I know that I am in favor of targeting the small percentage of people who blantantly abuse the welfare system. Ironically enough, this percentage is made up by a sizable amount of 'welfare moms'. I'd love to see social services take away children from these people for having 6 kids on welfare, but oh well. Apparently having sex at 16 is comparable to being given inaccurate information and acting on it in the correct manner. Since when is 'having underage sex' the right solution to anything? Seriously, man, if this is your only point, give up because it doesn't work at all. Why not? With all those sand niggers there, who would care?[/s] Perhaps we can stop speaking in gross overgeneralizations and try to make an actual salient point here so we can actually start, well, debating. Well, as long as we are making huge, incorrect assumptions, I'm sure that's what that welfare mom said so many years ago when the guy asked her 'Condoms'?

Uh, no, he's not. He's not saying that you aren't PC Socialists, he's defending PC Socialists by making an overgeneralization. If he had said "Wow, way to overgeneralize a group of people there", you'd be right. But he wasn't. He was defending the idea of everyone being PC Socialists. So you are both wrong.

Too bad he's part of a dying breed in Canada. Elaborate. Canadian exports are up, our government has much more of a voice in the world community and patriotism is clearly at high right now. Charitable donations are also up. Please explain. It means Don Cherry isn't some pc socialist, like Canada's gov't has become. Yeah, what a terrible shame that is. Fuck open mindedness. Fuck caring for your fellow man. There's a distinct difference between caring for your fellow man, and doing fucking everything for him while trying not to offend anyone who might possibly have a difference of opinion. That's what PC socialism is, not simply caring for your fellow man.