Danville_Wrestling

The Kentucky Wildcats are back....and hopefully will be better in this contest than last year.

The only problem with a trade is what kind of value you would get. Teams wouldn't know how long they would get Favre and if they know that the Packers are desperately trying to unload him then it weakens what the Packers can bargain for @ the negotiating table.

Yea, enable the PMs. I'm interested in WM 15 & 20 since I don't have those in my collection (and those are the only WM's I don't own). A price estimate + shipping would be nice.

I agree with you 100% as well. I don't complain about the pay. I think its a good salary for 180 days. My first teaching salary is $34,700. Which is a nice chunk of change in my view for getting summers off.

The Warrior's run down to the ring, if you could call it that, was sad to watch. However, its not like I can fault Hellwig. The guy is 49 years old. I can see why he has given up the ring. Crowd reaction seemed pretty dead to me too, really hurt the match.

I don't agree with this logic. In fact, I think that due to the fact that the Dems are predicted do to well in Congressional races (which makes zilch sense when you consider that this Congress has such low approval ratings...but then again its hardly like the GOP is doing anything in terms of candidates/policies to justify getting elected in these races to begin with) its a bonus for a McCain presidency given that Americans have traditionally favored divided governments at some level of Congress & the presidency. I would also argue that some of Bill Clinton's best presidential years from 1995-Lewinsky scandal were done in conjunction with a Republican dominated Congress thereby showing that divided government does not always produce gridlock (although when things turn ugly it can get UGLY). Furthermore, if the Democrats tried to block many of McCain's policy proposals, on the condition that they had no good ones to replace them with, you might see damage done to the Democrats in 2010 and 2012 elections helping McCain further. After all, a big bonus to Truman in 1948 was the "Do Nothing" Congress that was against him and his domestic policies. Divided government would be tricky to manage and to play it correctly in elections requires a lot of deft political maneuvering and skill, but to assume that McCain would be a 4-year lame duck in this thing is ridiculous. Having a Democratic controlled Congress and presidency doesn't always = good times either. Considering that the "Blue Dog" coalition is a pretty big influence in the House and that many of the Dems gains are going to come in conservative districts there could be opposition to a future Obama administration on liberal policy issues. Keep in mind that Clinton failed to push through universal health care in a Democratic controlled Congress, although I'd blame his wife for alienating those Democrats from day 1. Personally, I feel that whoever our next president is will lose in 2012 anyway. Oil prices won't be going down in the near future, I think we are on the verge of an Israeli-Iran war, and the economy will be tanking (and Nostrodamos/Mayans and those people think an asteroid will kill us on December 21st anyway). This is going to be an administration that will inherit problems of Carteresque proportions and unless the next president is a miracle worker (and I don't believe they will be) the 2012 election is going to be a landslide harking back to the days of Reagan. On another note, I can't STAND to hear John McCain give speeches. Its so awkward. Bush may not be able to speak well in public, but he sure will be missed if there is a McCain presidency on the horizon.

I was also an AP'er. However, I know some people that do not like AP's because it takes all the bright kids out of classrooms and leaves the rest of teachers with unruly environments of kids who could care less about learning leading to lowered standards for those students. My view of the matter is that's too bad because I felt that aside from AP's, the school never met my needs as a gifted student and I definitely would learn less if I was in a classroom of other apathetic classmates who just caused trouble.

Not that I disagree with your view but could you elaborate?

Well my opinion on the matter is that I think laws against gun ownership only disarm the citizenry against criminals who gets guns on the black market or through other illegal channels. How much so is up for debate, but I'm not convinced that just getting rid of guns stops violent crime. In fact, the crime wave in Chicago recently doesn't show much for that city supposedly protecting its citizenry with the ban. Local gun bans won't work because people could just get guns in other localities (as the D.C. gun ban shows). However, a national ban will never take place and if they tried it I think you'd see people finally wake up and react, even violently. And while the framer's may have had a different mindset on guns, we really don't have state militias anymore and I don't buy into the National Guard functioning as one because the federal government oversees/can use those (as we see in Iraq). I guess its just my heavy distrust for the federal government to do much right, but I definitely do not want the federal government controlling all the weaponry because as we see in disaster after disaster (Hurricane Katrina comes to mind), when you rely on the federal government to save you then your just setting yourself up to be screwed over. I just don't believe that a bunch of criminals thugs should be able to dictate the terms of gun use for the other millions of Americans who own firearms and use them responsibly. That said, I do favor increased punishments for criminals who use guns and don't believe they should be able to own guns again due to their actions.

Yea, I suppose they are open to talks with the opposition as long as it is not in a public forum where there could be open criticisms of how much the Mugabe administration has run Zimbabwe into the ground. This guy should've been kicked out of power back in 2002 when he last ran, but his African buddies (mostly Thabo Mbeki, who's about as worthless a president as you can find) supported him then and are holding back from calling for his ouster because they are just about as corrupt as he is. It's ironic to see Nigeria is asking for a postponed election since their last presidential election was hardly fair either. I'm surprised with crippling inflation that the military has continued to back Mugabe. Those guys must be getting whatever food is left in this country because their salaries have been severely curtailed due to economic mismanagement.

Tell me about it. Thank God I know how to coach speech & debate team (and have a track record of coaching well) because that's how I got my first teaching job a month or so ago and even selling that was difficult because the big question was "How is that going to bring money into our school?" I guess it also helped that the school I applied too wasn't too good at sports so they need to find success in some extra curricular activity.

I think that was the weakest chokeslam I've ever seen done by Gonzalez on Wippleman at the end of the match.

Well another problem is that the education profession is not attracting the best people into its field anyway. We've adopted a mindset in some circles that people with 4.0 GPA's shouldn't be teaching. Yes, you heard that right. Two friends of mine with 4.0's were turned down for some teaching jobs on the basis that they were overqualified or that they were "too smart" to teach. WHAT?!?!? Luckily I didn't have this problem. However, in my education courses I would always look around at those in the room and let me just say that they were not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Coming to this thread a bit late, but I agree with this 100%. I've been watching the 1994 season of RAW so I've been following the storylines up to and after the KOTR tournament (so I'm right at the point the Million Dollar Corporation starts forming...joy). It seems to me the best way to go with Diesel if you assumed he still beat Backlund was to have Luger turn heel instead of Tatanka at SummerSlam 1994. The heel turn would've worked better for Luger (since heel Tatanka sucked) and this would have provided Diesel a much better feud against the Corporation than Sid. Hell, Luger could've won the belt off of Diesel at the first In Your House thereby giving him the World title he wanted and that may have prevented Luger from jumping ship to WCW in mid-1995. I liked the 1993 show the best, but 1994 wasn't a bad effort. At least in the 1994 version you had no byes in the tournament. Looking at the bracket, though, the top part appeared stacked to me with IRS, Razor Ramon, and Bam Bam Bigelow as opposed to the lower half of which I only saw Tatanka and Owen as threats to make a deep run. I always thought Mabel being in the tournament as a waste of time and they should have just put the newly arrived Bob Holly (then known as Thurman Plugg) in that spot and then had Mabel job to Bigelow in the qualifying match instead.

Yea, I could never get hitting to work in this game either. All my games ended up 3-1 or 2-1, which is NOT the typical norm for college baseball. Recruiting was a pain as well. I'd always take WKU to the Sun Belt title in my first season and then lose in the Regionals in the final game to the #1 seed and then lots of my team would leave and I would have nothing to replace them. It got old fast. While I think EA made great baseball games, they started making them way too difficult in the later years. While I loved MVP 05, I could never get HR's in that game and that ticked me off greatly. At least in MLB 08 the Show I can hit a decent amount of HR's that are realistic on the highest difficulty level and its not arcadish.

I think everyone is going to start disliking old people real soon when they start retiring in droves and the government raises our taxes through the roof to pay for their retirement benefits which their generation screwed up.

I think our presidential choices get worse each and every year. I'm not thrilled about either guy because I hate McCain's stand on immigration and I do not like Obama's big government/raise taxes through the ceiling approach to governing. I guess this election just comes down to whether I think George W. Bush or Jimmy Carter is/was a better president because that's what both campaigns keep telling me I'm voting for. Very pathetic. I don't see this election being decided based on policy issues at all, which is very dangerous at a time like this in our history. It's like "where are the real leaders who can make a rationale decision?"

Yea, I don't either. I think Michigan is going to end up as a must-win for McCain. How do I get that map into a picture? I can't save it as a picture file when I go to the website to post my custom map here which I have McCain winning 274-264.

I think many of your predictions are right SuperJerk but I have to disagree about Obama winning New Hampshire as well as West Virginia. I think that's only a swing of nine electoral votes to McCain but I see those two states going red. On the tossup list I have Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Minnesota (since it only went to Kerry 51-49 last time), California (because Obama only has a 7 point lead there in recent polls), Missouri, Colorado, and Virginia. Pundits will probably add New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, and New Jersey to that list as well. What might save the election for McCain is how much of a backlash Obama is going to get for beating Hillary. You've got those crazy feminists out there arguing that even the VP slot isn't good enough and that the election was "stolen" from Hillary. Stolen how? This is where the Dems have much of themselves to blame for some of this mindset as their whining over the "stolen" 2000 and 2004 elections work themselves into mainstream argument [despite the fact that the Dems should've won in blowouts in 2000 & 2004; its faulty execution in 2000 and picking the wrong candidate the doomed them in 2004]. If the Dems somehow manage to lose this election I'm just going to have a long laugh. This party ALWAYS seems to screw up a sure thing in presidential politics, they just got lucky Bill Clinton fell into their lap in 1992 when all the major contenders chose not to run against Bush Sr.

This general election matchup is going to be very interesting as it has the potential to totally redraw the entire political map that we've seen in the last two presidential elections. I will say that I see Obama winning Virginia, Colorado, Oregon, and maybe Ohio out of the current map. I think McCain will win Florida and has the potential to pick off New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Michigan, Minnesota, and California. I say California because McCain has high favorability ratings among Latinos and you just can't ignore the racial aspect of Latinos voting for an African-American as those groups have been in a lot of contention in regards to California politics as of late. If the Dems lose California they'll effectively lose the election but that is my "out there" prediction early on in regards to this race. Kinda sucks how Hillary rained on Obama's parade today with those VP comments because that is all the press has been talking about as opposed to Obama's historic moment tonight.

I'm playing every game in my franchise so far and am enjoying it as the Reds. I'm 17-5 after having some pretty fun, close games with the Astros and the Cubs. I also had some problems with players stats getting too high so I upgraded to Hall of Fame difficulty after about 10 games into the season. Still having some trouble with the financial aspect so I'm letting the CPU handle the facilities aspect while I take care of the games, scouting, etc. Makes it easier that way. I've also got some decent prospects I called up such as a first baseman named Eddie Contrell who is .424 with 3 HR's and 6 RBI in about 6 games after getting called up. It's hard when trying to balance out the roster because Votto is doing well and when he's fresh he plays first but Contrell's fielding stats allow me to place him in RF or LF when Dunn or Griffey get tired (which is a lot in Griffey's case). The most memorable series I had so far was early in the season against the Phillies. In three of the four games I was trailing entering the 9th and in all three games Jeff Keppinger was the difference. In the first game, when I was down 5-4 with runners on the corners, he hit a double along the first base line and when a AAA callup from the Phillies attempted to throw the ball in to the infield they threw it into the crowd so I won. In the second game, I was down 10-4 entering the bottom of the ninth and I reeled off 7 runs, capped off by a Jeff Keppinger three run blast to win the game. Then in the final game of the four game series I was down 3-2 before Keppinger came up in a pinch hitting situation with the game tied 3-3 with runners at first and second and drove a single into center-left to score Alex Gonzalez and I won the game. Keppinger is my go-to guy in the clutch because he always comes up big EXCEPT in the field because he sucks at SS so he doesn't play too often.

I've been watching the 1994 season of RAW that I recently purchased and saw the segment where they did the coin toss between Bret Hart and Lex Luger for WrestleMania X. My question is did they use a two sided coin to guarantee that Luger would win or did they just fly by the seat of their pants and do an honest toss? It looked as if it was fair which kind of makes you wonder if it hit tails what that would've done to WWF booking because we would not have gotten Owen-Bret @ WrestleMania X.

Hillary's qualifications in the White House are SUBSTANTIALLY limited after Bill's first two years there. You have to remember, the health care reform debacle that she helped lead in 1994 was a major reason the Democrats lost control of Congress and were kept out of power until 2006. This essentially ruined the last part of Clinton's first term and could've turned out worse if Trent Lott hadn't stabbed Bob Dole in the back by making a deal on welfare reform (and don't read that much into this comment b/c we needed the reform and I could care less if it was made in the run-up to the election or not) which greatly aided Clinton in the '96 campaign. Hillary was pushed to the fringes in the WH after that mess so I have a major problem with her taking credit for things after that period b/c she wasn't playing that big of a role as has been substantiated by former Clinton staffers. Also, this contributed to Al Gore getting at least some influence back after sitting to the sides the first 2 years. So yea, Hillary was VP for about 2 years...and was a big failure. I have no trouble with her running on her husband's record if she wants to but she can't just take credit for the good stuff (the economy/budget planning) and run away from what people perceive as bad (ex. NAFTA, the numerous scandals such as Travelgate and Whitewater, a weak response to the U.S.S. Cole attack, etc.). It has to be balanced. I would also 100% agree with the fact that her 7 years in the Senate haven't seen much leadership and have instead been a location for political manuevering/pandering. I also think its stupid for people to argue that she can come back to the Senate and be majority leader. This has two problems. First, not many of her Senate colleagues are more favorable to her than their other colleagues. And second, she simply doesn't have the seniority built up to make a viable play for that position.

I just noticed something that should have been included in the game. While playing a franchise mode game at Wrigley Field as the Reds on HOF mode, I was slaughtering the Cubs 18-0 entering the 8th inning and the stadium was still packed. It figures that if you were destorying the home team by that much the stands would be virtually EMPTY by the time the game was over.

Must not be pitchers nights because early on the whole scoreboard is lit up all over the league. I think I'm going to move to another game because the Rays are already down 7-0 after 2 innings. Pretty embarassing pitching, for a while I thought I was watching a NCAA game.