Danville_Wrestling

Well, there's also the thing I liked from the 1995 Survivor Series...one match the team would picked out of random people. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yea, the WILD CARD match from 1995 was very entertaining for me as a mark. You had HBK, Bulldog, and Sid on the same team with the debuting Ahmed Johnson and it was fun to see how HBK/Ahmed aligned against Bulldog/Sid. Plus, Cornette and DiBiase weren't sure if they could trust each other. Meanwhile, you had Razor Ramon as the only face on the other side along with Owen Hart & Yokozuna and Ramon's enemy Dean Douglas. I loved it when HBK gave Sid a Sweet Chin Music when Ramon moved out of the way, shrugged his shoulders, and then after Sid was eliminated he powerbombed HBK. It was just an interesting match b/c of all the rivalries that had been going on for most of the year and were suddenly thrown into one match. You didn't know if teammates would turn on each other or stick together to 'survive' the match. Also, that match was incredibly well booked b/c it made Ahmed look like a monster (eliminating Owen & Yokozuna) and made HBK appear like a resilient S.O.B. after taking a powerbomb and Razor's Edge and kicking out of both.

Demolition use Demolition Decapitation on Jannetty and eliminated the Rockers. Then, Ax avoids a conChairto, makes a hot tag to Smash, four-way brawl, and Smash pins Edge with a rollup after an Edge spear hits the ringpost.

What about Piper/Monsoon/Heenan @ SummerSlam 1991 where during the Perfect-Hart match, Heenan calls Piper's family out and Monsoon threatens to eject him from the booth? In fact, the commentary of that entire match was brillant as all three guys were firing on the right cylanders.

Well since moves keep getting banned left and right all of the finishers have to be crappy, unfortunately. I had no problem with the top rope bulldog, looked devastating enough. I didn't think RAW was too bad since we got more matches than we've gotten in a long time (and even TWO actual tag team matches)! However, JR gets on my nerves more than anything else week after week after week by damning everyone to hell or doing stupid things (ex. getting mad at Masters going off after HBK kicked him in the balls). I question, however, the logic of Cena CONSTANTLY playing second fiddle to someone ever since he's been on Raw. In fact, this is the first time since he's been on the Raw brand that he'll be in the main event of the pay-per-view. He had to play second fiddle to Batista-HHH @ Vengance (not that I disagree), second fiddle to Hogan-HBK for SummerSlam, and this is first shot @ the top versus Angle. It always seems that Cena's stuff takes place in the first hour so we can get more HBK in the second. Not that I hate HBK or anything, but the booking of HBK-Masters over Cena-Angle seems a helluva lot backwards.

Pretty good match, except for those two weird Irish whip sequences that Murdoch screwed up.

It's the New Blackjacks minus the mustaches!

Well I definitely can't complain about the number of matches on this week's show regardless of all the other lame stuff going on.

Lol, props to the Coach for ridiculing JR for wearing a cowboy hat in Nashville when broadcastin RAW after JR ripped Conway for wearing sunglasses.

OH F*CK NO! Don't tell me that they are jobbing Shelton to CONWAY?!?!

Hmm, so who gets to squash the Heart Throbs tonight?

Your definitely right. That was the very FIRST Monday Night Raw I'd ever seen and I specifically remember that angle. Horowitz-Jarrett was a pretty decent match and then Backlund used the opportunity to ambush Horowitz and get a shot @ the belt. Also, wasn't there some underlying storyline that Jarrett was afraid of the chicken wing or something? I think it all blew off on like a special Sunday show or something where Backlund had Jarrett in the chicken wing and looked set to win the title, but Razor Ramon interfered to save Jarrett's title so he'd get the IC match @ WM instead of Bret Hart (who was booked to fight Backlund in that "I Quit" Match where Backlund didn't submit, lol).

I think Thomas being CJ would've definitely made a big indention on the court, plus Thomas isn't that old so he would've had a lengthy tenure as CJ. I agree that Scalia's persona probably kept him from getting the slot, but I think Thomas was a slam dunk nomination. The Anita Hill issue has come and gone and there wasn't anything to be gained by the left of rehashing history. Even if they had, they would've had to waste so much time fighting him that it would've helped Roberts & Rehnquist's replacement. The only big reason I see Roberts getting the CJ slot is b/c Bush wanted a full court before October 3rd (because O'Connor said she won't leave until she has a replacement which I imagine we'll see after Roberts goes through). In other words, we are now replacing Rehnquist instead of O'Connor so this confirmation battle may not be that bad as Dems save their ammunition for the next round in case Bush goes the route of a Janice Rogers Brown or Priscilla Owen.

Wow, so that's like TWO matches booked for Raw tonight? Sounds like a DAMN good show

Vader coming back? Wow.

Yea, with Stephan Bonnar and Evan Tanner on my TV I think RAW is taking a backseat in October.

I'm not that surprised. Roberts is young and Bush may feel that he might as well take out two birds with one stone rather than make three different types of appointments. However, I say it's a stupid move b/c he could've tempted Dems to jump all over Thomas/Scalia being appointed CJ and made for an easy confirmation for Roberts and whoever else he choses. This is definitely going to make Roberts hearings even more interesting.

Yea, I'm not advocating against Scalia by any means and think he's a man of integrity as well. I'm just saying that opposition/heat may come on him for that 2000 election decision people don't want to forget (and for many reasons that entire election poisoned US politics to the degree that its bitter feelings still haven't gone away and won't for a long time). However, we know that Bush likes to do a bunch of "firsts" so it wouldn't surprise me to see him pass over Scalia and hand the torch to Thomas although the odds of that happening right now are about 100-1.

Well, I'll have to tape one of them and right now I'm leaning towards Raw being taped.

That's how the conspiracy theory goes, but given how the shows have been absolutley terrible over the summer and with this pay-per-view that's not outside the realm of possibility.

The controversy with Scalia is that he authored the opinion in Bush v. Gore I believe that gave Bush the White House. Thus, if Bush were to promote Scalia to Chief Justice it may be construed as "political payback." Then again, it seems that Bush has rewarded a lot of his daddy's friends and advisers with jobs in his cabinet so what else would be new, right?

Actually, a Thomas nomination to Chief Justice might not be so bad. Here's why: if Thomas is nominated again there will be a lightning rod of controversy among liberals and liberal organizations. Sure, we'll have the rehashing of Anita Hill, but since 1992 we've come to find out more details about that and the issue has lost some semblance of crediblity. I'm sure the Democrats would love to pour their $50m funds into opposing Thomas to the Chief Justice position, but at what cost? If the Dems spent all of their resources blocking a Thomas promotion to Chief Justice that means that Roberts and whoever replaces Rehnquist's seat on the court have a free ride. Thus, it wouldn't be outside of the realm of possibility for conservatives to use Thomas as bait for the Dems to spend all of their time with while they get two sure fire conservatives on the court. Plus, barring another big scandal (and Anita Hill won't work this time b/c it didn't work in 1992) Thomas would have the votes to be confirmed b/c I don't see the Dems wanting to launch into another tirade about a minority justice. After all, before Anita Hill Dems didn't want to take too many pot shots at him. Just something to think about because there is a TON of strategy that goes into these nominations and this isn't necessarily a bad one.

If that previous article is true then Bush isn't the one who deserves to be getting all the haterade. The Drudge Report showed the NO could've evacuated a lot of its poor people with school buses (giving a link to Yahoo! which showed those buses underwater). In fact, the NO mayor was SUPPOSED to use those buses by some type of order/law that concerns mass evacuations from the city. Just goes to show you once again how politics/bureaucracy keep getting us, our soldiers, and other people of the world killed. Absolutely sickening.

Alberto Gonzalez is my guess at who it will be. In other words, Roberts gets to replace Rehnquist as a big conservative on the court, Gonzalez gets to fill O'Connor's moderate role. I'd pick Orrin Hatch (easy confirmation there), but I don't think he wants to leave the Senate. The biggest question is what happens with the Chief Justice position. Does Scalia get it, does Thomas get it (first black to hold the job?), does Bush nominate a conservative female candidate for chief justice (first female chief justice?), or does he just pick another random dude for the court and peg him for chief justice @ the same time? This REALLY puts the Democrats in a quandry, much like when Rehnquist got the chief justice slot while Scalia was still up for nomination. Liberal groups attacked Rehnquist on possible KKK ties and spent all of their time with him allowing Scalia to get in unanimously. Thus, if the Dems put all their energy into Roberts this coming week then they won't have much of a hand to play if Bush nominates a real "big time" conservative (ala Janice Rogers Brown, another Robert Bork, etc.)

I've said it once and I'll say it a million more times: we're already seeing the political/social/cultural vultures swoop in and try to make this tragedy about them and how they can use it to degrade their opponents and boost themselves. GOP leaders like Chuck Hagel are blasting Bush over the disaster, the left is bashing him over slashing budget prepardness for New Orleans and cutting FEMA (although the FEMA criticism I feel is TOTALLY justified and is well explained in the September 1st or 2nd edition of the Christian Science Monitor), and the Hollywood/cultural crew is bashing him over the regular fodder. Personally, I want to worry about the blame later. Those people in NO don't care right now about whose to blame, they want help and we need to give it to them. We can investigate all of this crap later in Congress (where we'll waste more tax dollars writing up a bunch of more regulations and creating more bureaucracy so we can cut through even more red tape next time) and let it all be evaluated in a public forum.

Here's the big problem with this whole disaster issue: people are more interested in protecting their own damn spot than they are about helping the people of NO. Instead of the bureaucracy chiefs, politicians, other leaders doing what it takes to help people they are trying to go around and get their whole "angle" on it to make themselves look good and make other people look bad. It just goes to show you the mindset in the Beltway in Washington D.C. If it doesn't happen in D.C. then Congress and the bureaucracy doesn't give a crap until it's too late. We've already seen this from the nutjobs who blame the hurricane on "global warming" which demonstrates how low our country has gone. I guess we've reached the point where we are going to start blaming politicans for NATURAL DISASTERS. Also, we've got the whole race card being played here which is going to be divisive as all hell. That's great what Kayne said: the military is going to shoot any black person they see. You have lawlessness and anarchy going on down there with beatings and rapes and that idiot wants to try to justify that type of behavior. Better yet, you tell people this type of message and it's going to make the situation worse. Just wait till the National Guard has to shoot a criminal in the streets who happens to be black and all of the nutjobs in the country are going to be yelling and screaming about it not being a "justified" killing. There are parts of this country this day and age that make me sick. Everyone is looking out for themselves and nobody else and that is a reflection on not only society, but the government that represents it. No one wants to be held accountable and no one wants to step up and do what's right. At this pace this country won't last another 50 years. Also, Nancy Grace sucks. Nuff' said.