Rob E Dangerously

wait.. Hogan and Austin are coming back next week? this might overshadow Viscera's return

"Nobody gives a damn about you Big Show"

ok.. I am definately suing the WWE they're ripping off Rick Shirley.. big time

THE EXPLODING CAKE!

Friday Night Lights should be an interesting movie

Rick Shirley is suing the WWE

YES!!!!!!!

Last week. so.. London and Kidman lost the titles to these guys.. and the FBI has returned It's Italy v. France/Japan!

when the fuck did Dupree and Suckzuki win the belts?

"The Insane Clown Posse has just laid out the Undertaker!"

I guess they also found Gangrel back in the batcave

Could they not find a white shirt that would fit Viscera?

I don't think Gangrel and Viscera are back fulltime considering the Undertaker just squashed them both

King Mabel is getting his revenge on the Undertaker for 1995

I use Liddy as my source. I always knew that Howard Dean was bad, and linked to John Dean

Misintrepreted what you said there. I guess Nader didn't want to be one of the rare candidates to be nominated via conference call. The Reform Party claimed to have had 18 dollars at a point in this year. The issue will be if the party qualifies as a party under Florida law. Nader could have made this easier if he formed his own party, with beer and hookers.. or he could have forgotten the party and the candidacy.

http://convention04.reformparty.org/cgi-bin/index.cgi Notice when the Reform party convention was held? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Aug28.html

No.. because he DIDN'T FOLLOW THE ELECTION LAWS What happens to you when you don't follow the rules? You're not rewarded for that. It sounds like your mind is made up. I'd imagine Nader's shot is questionable, unless there really is a "Republicans for Nader" movement. 2000 Nader would crush 2004 Nader. Part of it is just vengence for 2000. If the philosophy was "get rid of competition", then I guess the media has ignored the efforts to keep David Cobb off of the ballot. I guess the Democrats probably kidnapped the Worker's World Party candidate. I must have forgotten the amendment that says a candidate has a right to disregard rules. Since it's disenfranchising and all. Sure, in most of the states. We salute Ralph Nader for that. It's just that he doesn't have the signatures to get on the ballot in Florida, and the Reform Party is pretty much dead. Can you tell me where the Democrats aren't following the law, at least when it comes to filing? I guess that "Reform party isn't major" stuff was a distraction from the vast left wing conspiracy against Saint Ralph. This might be asking a bit much.. was it lawsuits, or challenges, to Nader himself, or to the signatures. You can see why the Democrats would be pretty freaking harsh on Ralph, right? I'm not totally sure what party, if any, you're with.. but here's a secret... both parties have been pulling this stuff for awhile. The Democrats in 2004 didn't invent challenging signatures against St. Ralph And yeah, Ralph isn't cheating in the case of the Reform party not being major. He went "endorse-ment" shopping, and only got the Reform carcass. http://www.ballot-access.org/2004/electoral.html 93,024 signatures to be an independent candidate (which Ralph could be, without the Reform party) We'll have to see if a party with ballot access in 6 states, no real state organizations and so on, can be called a major party, or an organized party. Can't blame them for not liking Ralph.. what did he ever do to hurt them?

This is a fun little red herring. With forged memo(s) [You do have suspicions that more than one memo, right?] I guess as part of the Democrats evil plan to talk about this all the time, John Kerry was sent out to talk about actual issues, and then he got massive media attention, by massive, I mean "not that much" The stuff Bush has done wrong since 2001 is much more important than the stuff from the 1970s

The Nader rule is still in effect for Polls. If the poll has Nader with 3% or more, it's bullshit. Nader still isn't on any more than 30 ballots, if I recall correctly. Nader is also 70 years old and unlikely to run in 2008. As for 5%.. who gets those matching funds anyways? Nader is running basically as an independent. If Ralph wanted to get on the ballot by himself in Florida, he should have found enough supporters (that voted for him in 2000 or Republicans) to get on the ballot. He failed to do that. The Reform Party is not a major party any more. They only have ballot access in 6 states and the party is pretty much dead. Although, you'd think that having Nader on the ballot in Idaho wouldn't hurt, since Idaho has never been a swing state. Anybody care to wonder why Democrats have a grudge against Nader? Basically, he was pretty much a useful idiot that indirectly helped Bush. Same goes for Zack de la Rocha, Michael Moore and others. But, I guess among you chicken littles, Saint Ralph doesn't have to follow election laws. And.. Perot effect? Not fucking likely.. Ross Perot, even after dropping out of the race for a few months, could still get 19% Ross Perot, even in 1996, got 8% Ross Perot, if he ran today, would beat Ralph Nader. The best shot that Nader has of getting a Perot effect is if he shrinks suddenly.

isn't Nader a millionaire? Nadar = a combination of Nader and RADAR

well.. unless by blowing a whistle, they shoot a dart. Then they could do that. But.. damn.. It doesn't seem like fights break out in the House these days. Probably because that doesn't really go over well. "I was only representating my district when I punched the Gentleman from Illinois in the face"

I've heard that Saget sucked dick for coke. And his obsession with cleanliness might be a sign of meth use

Rules are for squares

How does keeping Ralph Nader off of the ballot because his party isn't a major party (and they lacked the signatures to get him on the ballot anyways) cause people to be unable to vote? I guess by that logic, everybody who is running for President has to be on the ballot because if they're not, then people will be rendered unable to vote. Or something like that