godthedog

except she apparently listens to you, while my requests are promptly ignored.

earlier today i gave some homeless guy a few dollars & bought him a cup of coffee. i don't know if that counts.

which thread would that be? yes, i realize that question validates your whole point.

this thread needs stardust.

yes, i find myself staring at banky's avatar for inordinate amounts of time, it hypnotizes me. but dr tom's is still better. and i'm proud to admit that i don't care enough about the royalblue thing to know who it really is. i would make the obvious guess, but that reeks of effort.

taking the piss instead of presenting an actual argument just makes you look like an ignorant little shit. if you don't back up your claims, it will be assumed that you can't back them up. that's just the nature of debate. it is very different. i spent 3 solid days studying for my film history final, and my biology major roommate spent his weekend before finals watching sports, drinking beer at the apartment, then going downtown to drink more beer. on the whole, at my school, the film studies majors tend to frankly be much dorkier than the science majors. um...no, that's not a fact. our film studies program only takes the serious kids, to even declare it as a major you need to be at least a junior with a 3.0 average; that's not a HUGE feat, but it does weed out the slackers, and it's a requirement that biology & chemistry majors don't have. this seems like a very odd claim, as i know several professors who have spent their entire lives teaching film studies. and the demand is increasing faster than the supply, which gives me a sizable chance. that's what my philosophy major is for.

that kicks some serious ass right there, i envy you. they've got a 'ulysses' class here next semester but i can't take it, because a) i've already got all my upper-level electives done, and b) i don't have the prerequisites for it anyway. but i'm seriously considering just sitting in on the class without enrolling, just to check it out. anyway, my schedule: american lit since 1865--stupid, pissy little freshman-level elective that i need to graduate. i am not happy about having to take this class, but i can ace these kinds of classes in my sleep now. history of rock & roll--see above. dramatic writing I--counts toward my film studies major. i write all the damn time anyway, so i might as well get credit for it. film theory--required for the film studies major. academically, this is the area of film i'm most interested in, & it's being taught by one of my favorite teachers. i can't wait. so my classes are all either ridiculously fun, ridiculously easy, or both.

that was hilarious. i gotta go with yokozuna/luger from WM10. dear god was that thing bad. maybe the summerslam match was worse, but i don't remember it.

as would i. that damn thing has been stuck in my head since august.

just finished with mine today, so the "finals 5 o'clock shadow" is about to come off.

Ah, glorious irrelevancy. I am sure there are LESS relevant points to be made --- but I shudder to imagine them. i like cheese.

dylan got the beatles to start smoking pot. this was the single most influential act of any musician of the 20th century.

i've wanted to get the fuck out of this state for 4 years. unless i get some mythical full scholarship to emory, or have some incredibly lucrative offer to stay with one of my actor friends in atlanta, there's not much of anything that could make me STAY. significant other or no.

THAT'S your response? ...wow. i mean, i'd argue with that, but you didn't give me any arguments to work with. not a single one. this is what most of us call a johnson argument. that is, a claim which essentially says "i'm right and it's obvious that i'm right," in lieu of an actual argument stating WHY you're right. please explain to me how the "lazy stupid drunks" point is really the same as the "job interview" point. i actually do want to know. and a personal attack, also in lieu of anything resembling an argument or an explanation. still running with the johnson debate style theme. and the kicker: instead of actually responding to or trying to refute any points that i made, you promptly ignore them and instead believe that simply saying "film studies sucks" again will somehow prove you right. the transformation is complete... WJM=johnson you cannot argue worth a shit. it would be sad if it wasn't so funny. i encourage you to respond to this post & argue with me some more, so that i can keep doing this. eh...this just seems like a really weird claim to me. i mean, i know most of the film majors at my school, which is a school KNOWN for many of its students being lazy, stupid drunks, & there isn't a single one among them. on a separate point, i'll agree about the math majors being creative as well (based on the little i know about them; anybody more educated on it, feel free to refute me on this). problem-solving is a creative endeavor, it's just something that involves systems and concepts rather than art.

the "point" you were making in the first post was that film studies is a major for lazy, stupid drunks, not that there's less demand for film studies majors than math majors. the former has nothing to do with the latter; you apparently realized that your opinion of film studies majors doesn't really hold up in an argument (seeing as how it has no basis in reality), and changed the subject to make it appear that you were still right. i'd address the "job interview" point, but instead i'll thank stardust: "thank you, stardust." i know quite a few people making a comfortable living off of it. various colleges are adding film studies to their curriculum, and nobody i know is dropping it. so, since the job slots appear to be opening up more quickly than they're closing, i'll have as good a chance as any of getting in the field. except i'll be able to back up my opinion with actual reasons, and you won't. your first point was based on some pretty biased and narrow-minded perceptions, so you changed to another point that was based on some slightly different biased and narrow-minded perceptions.

nothing wrong with a non-serious band in and of itself (see the title of this thread), but not being serious has nothing to do with automatically being entertaining. primus is kind of hit-or-miss in that department.

'revolver' was #1 on their "greatest albums" list, therefore making it suck the least. you also missed their "100 greatest rock songs" list, where "satisfaction" was #1, "respect" was #2, and "stairway to heaven" was #3. dear god, why do i know this?

no offence, but you're a judgmental little shit. you are so right. no one in the history of the world could ever possibly want to major in film studies for the purpose of someday teaching film studies at a college or making films. good thing you didn't talk that kind of shit about philosophy majors, or i would've gotten really pissed.

dude, what does it matter who would win the match? it's rigged. but it is nice to daydream about what a feud between these 2 would be like, as it would perfectly fit the kind of role each of them is best at.

ain't no shame in that. even james f'ing joyce made his living from teaching.

the first disc of bob dylan's famous '66 royal albert hall concert is phenomenal.

god damn, man, congratulations. i'm a double major, philosophy and cinema studies, graduating this may. i hope to get into grad school, either for film production or cinema studies, but the places i applied to are so insanely competitive and expensive that i'm not holding my breath.

bad, bad, bad idea. the entire appeal of the flair/steamboat series was that the matches were so god damn great. flair/steamboat at WMXX would essentially be the flair/steamboat series without that whole "good match" thing going for it; without that, you've really got no appeal, & the greatness of the past matches would only make it seem that much worse. flair/sting at the final nitro was painful enough to watch, and if i see ricky f'ing steamboat doing that to himself, i will cry.

Nope. There'd be at least one rap off, which immediately sets the feud at rock bottom (pun intended) They'd have to really work hard to un do that. Hopefully they would save the battle rap (or song for Rock) till like RIGHT before the match. And your right, if they did do the rap off, it could damn near kill the feud right there. Because someone there would have to be humilated. Which neither the Rock nor Cena is used to in promos. dude, rocky's been humiliated by hurricane in promos before. whatever his reason for the veto (if he even did it), this was the right move to make. something like that is a HUGE rub, and the fed wouldn't want to blow their wad on something like this too early. cena just isn't ready for it. looks like they're looking to eventually making cena into a full-time main event draw, and if the timing is wrong the whole thing could just sputter out and not leave the company any better off than it was before. the scenario should definitely happen someday, but not so soon.

he speaks the truth. whenever the bad guy says "this good guy will never get another title shot," IT MEANS THE GOOD GUY WILL GET HIS TITLE SHOT.