Jobber of the Week

How about everyone on the forum adopt Thumbtack's avatar, just to throw everything off-balance?

And here I thought at TSM the posters were too classy for internet porn.

So has Nevada, which is interesting to me. I know there's a lot of Dems in Vegas and a lot of Republicans everywhere else, but they've also been fighting Bush all term over Yucca Mountain, and who REALLY wants to vote for the guy who wants to use you for a waste dump?

Does that mean you bend like a piece of tinfoil once populist opinion stops swinging your way? It's too bad Candidate Butch, er, I mean, Marney bowed out of the race. Then we could get all our France hate with additional STEEL SPINES for all, to boot.

Why do people keep assuming Giulianni wants Bush? Rudy knows that all he has to do in 2008 is walk into the room and smile and the nomination will be a lock, and that people like me will vote for him. I know I can't be alone, and that there's other people out there dedicated to the defeat of GWB who'd vote Giulianni for Prez, screw VP, over just about anyone. I'm still not sure why so many people are looking forward to a re-election. Who in the fuck prefers the Republicans being a big government spending party instead of a conservative watchdog party? For the love of basic GOP values, let's vote Gridlock in 2004.

The moviegoing public doesn't care about Cannes and the movies they like. This is why movies like Day After Tomorrow and Troy do well at the box office, and not the ones that win Cannes awards. See above. The public doesn't watch Cannes arthouse stuff unless it's made a big issue by other merits. For documentary, which is not exactly a booming interest among public moviegoers. This is a stronger arguement, but a ton of Americans don't vote and don't care no matter what happens. There you go. And the media wave started from the shockwaves created by the Disney thing. Sorry, but this movie wasn't on the minds of people who aren't politically active until it got in the press being presented as a near-taboo subject (Ooh! He's calling out Fearless Leader, that'll make headlines.) Such an aura of controversy can only be generated by mass America somehow. And having one of the largest media conglomorates in the world bury the film because they think it's too much of a hot potato will give you that kind of press. What can you say? They're willing to let someone else make up their mind for them.

I support "Leave No Child A Virgin."

I do believe it would be appropriate to say that judging the approval of F911's message on it's box office earnings is stupid because 85% of the people who saw it went because Disney tried to shut it down. The movie didn't even register a blip in the general public's mind until Eisner made a stink about it.

Wait a minute. What?

Actually, Batista has often been Evolution's jobber so that Flair's legacy and Orton's push can be spared. All the OVW callups have suffered from so many of the same problems, that I think Benoit should just become the new Sammartino while WWE changes training camps and breeds another generation of wrestlers that'll hopefully be better than the last class of graduates.

Wow, it'll be just like the Bush Administration. A bunch of great minds united around... Well, you know. It'll also answer that life-long question, "can the secret service protect the President from the First Lady? And if she has secret service protection, is there a big gang fight in the room or what?" We've been wondering that one since Madison.

Wings was a bad show made worse by the fact that it was hyped up with "FROM THE PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT YOU CHEERS!" Eventually, someone realized it wasn't what everyone was expecting and Frasier was made, and all was well. Coach wasn't that bad for the first couple seasons. Lived longer than it was supposed to, though.

Who reads General Chat, anyway? Plus I was kind of interested in the whole "Should taxpayers be paying for this stuff?" angle, and not the "OMG BOOBS" replies that the non-CE population seems to love.

I will see that, but after "The Hunting of the President." Did I enjoy this film? Yeah, but I think it's political agenda hurt it. If it hadn't been hitting some of the trademark liberal lines like "Bush stole Florida" as well as Moore and the co-opting of HIS talking points about Florida and the Carlyle Group (all these subjects have very loose ties to media), it could have been more effective. After the first half of this movie, I was ready to reccomend it to almost anyone. Certainly libs, old-school conservatives with a hint of caution, though probably not neo-conservative fans of George W Bush. After seeing the second half of the movie, I probably wouldn't be able to reccomend it to conservatives of any degree, which is unfortunate, since many small-town conservatives see monopolies and consolidation as a bad thing themselves. It doesn't wear it's politics on it's sleeve like F9/11 or Outfoxed, but parades it around just enough to shoot it's main message in the foot. The Orwellian stuff isn't helping, but that's probably because 1984 has been referenced ad nauseum by anyone who feels their privacy is being infringed in any fashion.

Touche. All I meant by the speech was that I found the editing painfully obvious. I made my own opinion on that during my first viewing of the movie totally uninformed that it would happen. If I can see that in a tired stupor, I think an attentive audience would, too.

Thoughts: This movie shows why Michael Moore movies work so well, because Moore fills up his films with sarcasm, cartoons, and acid-tongued comedy. This film is more of the straight-up informative, and to that end after watching 30 minutes you feel like you can watch an hour. It can get pretty boring. While there's information about the media in here that people on both sides would nod their head, there's parts that Republicans will find tough to swallow. It is an indie left-wing movie, after all. There's WAY too many scenes of a speech by Michael Moore. He's more "OMG CORPORATE EVIL" instead of "OMG BUSH EVIL" here, but he's still there. At least somewhere in there he makes goofy noises that would make Screamin' Dean proud. The title warns you that you're going to see Orwellian references and comparisons. And while they're expected, I still didn't find them very relevant much of the time. Ditto constantly zooming in at words appearing in the dictionary ("Hey, let's zoom in on self-censorship.") The filmmaker mostly keeps his trap shut through the whole thing. He appears in the beginning, talking about how he's been persuing this subject for over twenty years, including video of an interview with an editor of the New York Post shot on an old videocamera. From there on he just opens it up to the interviewees, but again, liberal talking points rear their ugly head again. People who think that the wealthy should be able to do whatever they want with their money and not be obligated to help out the rest of society will want to shout at the screen for a few minutes, most of that time taken up by a Congressman from Vermont. Then there's someone talking about how the Republicans "stole the election" in 2000 and too much time on that stupid "blacks didn't get to vote" thing that just made my eyes roll. Suddently we go into F9/11 territory, asking questions that have probably already been examined or answered, or exposed as overblown. Why is Bush Sr profiting off his son's actions in the Carlyle Group? What's up with those bin-Laden families flying out of the country? (yes, I know, that was Clarke's fault.) The October suprise. It also at one point tries to respond to the whole liberal media bias thing, while risking defending the same media it spends the whole movie attacking while doing so. Things start getting so distant from the media and into Republican-bashing that I zone out until we get back to meda ownership. If you were waiting for the film to set it's sights on Clear Channel, this is where it goes full-out against them and the other communications companies. This is probably the best part, although it does foolishly speculate that the government could take over the net with excuses such as the fear of terrorism or indentity-theft, which is highly suspect since the net is, of course, a product of many nations. Otherwise, an okay movie that's not for everyone (especially the short attention spans) that basically says "Hey, how about some extra media owners here?"

No offense, but I expect about as unbiased a view of Moore from David T Hardy as I would expect Moore to give of Bush. I remember when he was simply that guy with the web site with this page that debunked shit in BFC. Except a lot of it was kind of obvious stuff, like how he spliced together different Heston speeches when even I, watching BFC for the first time at 2AM in the morning as a cure for insomnia, noticed the background changing. Who would be fooled by that? The blind, I guess, but anyone else?

Thought I'd push this up to the top to mention that I'm going to go see this film and I'll write my impressions as soon as I can.

I hope she sticks with Hurricane, then she gets booted down to Heat and I don't have to look at her anymore, which is a REALLY good thing. I'm happy that there's no Vince all over the shows and I'm happy that, even if I don't care for the latest incarnation of the character, I can hear Taker's REAL music and the huge pop from it again.

It would make sense. She's a member of the current administration and everyone knows who she is by now.

Foley has a new interview up that talks a lot about this, and I have to give him credit. Vague internet reports said he was unhappy about what was said about him in the book, but he seems to understand that Flair's book would be as uncensored as his was. However, he does bait at Flair's own self-censoring, that Flair is a company man and knows which side the bread is buttered on.

Like with Shawn Michaels, I withhold criticism of Angle since he delivers in the ring pretty reliably. While I know he can't keep up his former style, if he starts dogging it in the ring like HHH post-quad, then it's time to stoke the fires.

Ah, yes. I forgot that Selig wants to tear down the Coluseium. And San Francisco is a traffic NIGHTMARE. While the park is gorgeous, I wouldn't want to host MY big event there.

When I first saw the movie and saw the pipline, the first thing that went through my mind is "Oh, this is one of those things that will be labeled false online again and again whenever anyone brings up one of the other themes from the movie", and sure enough.

There's a difference between what I said and what you think I said. I meant that what happened happened, went the way it did, was completely legal, and wasn't "stolen." The Supreme Court didn't screw anybody over, so get over that. However, Gore did win more votes. That's a fact and I'm not going to let that one slide away. Mikey Moore, however, and his "Daddy's friends on the Supreme Court" line, can go suck one. Gore got more votes, got the popular vote, but didn't become President on a technicality. And that's what really happened. Just because he didn't get the office in 2000 didn't mean he didn't get more votes.