Jobber of the Week

The problem isn't about our precious "image." The problem is that America has hurt people outside of combat, in a mission that was supposed to end that kind of violence by the governing force.

Hello, fine patriots. I take it that you're taking elevated precautions for a terrorist attack in your Anysville, USA, right? Do remember to take cover and have bottled water in your shelter in the event a nuclear blast goes off in your neighborhood. I have just come back in from putting an American flag in the front yard. It is armed with a tracking device, so any facist terrorist pigs who take it will be met with the full force of the Homeland Security Department, assuming I can convince them to come. *shuts off computer, runs giant magnet over hard drive, and runs away*

Third Place: San Francisco 49ers coach (forget who it was at the time, I was young) does not put Joe Montana into play during '93 Super Bowl, even though Montana was in his uniform and just about begging to go out there and pull off his usual miracles. 49ers lose the championship. Second Place: Not suprisingly after said Super Bowl, Joe Montana leaves San Francisco for... Kansas City? What the... First Place: San Francisco 49ers vs Kansas City Chiefs. Even the commercials on Channel 2 hyping the game showed some fan unable to decide between Steve Young and Joe Montana. 49ers fans want this to be the moment that proves they really don't need Montana, perhaps retribution for his departure. Of course, Chiefs win.

Actually, it's worse. I don't mind the OVW pic posted above in this thread, but right now he looks like the lovechild of Brock Lesnar and Kevin Nash. And all those promos made me notice his voice sounds almost identical to Lesnar's, too, making it even creepier.

I liked how Big Show had a brief feud with 3MW for ganging up on him during their "Eric gives you three minutes" gig, but he was a heel. It basically requied him to turn face for one segment, and then come back out in the second hour and turn heel again by running in on a face. He actually turned twice on the same program! Ah, the mishandled days of Big Show.

Extras on the Flair set were still pretty awesome. Anyway, I suspect a reason the old but not "smokey bars and noisy gyms" old stuff aren't on the discs anymore is because they're going to make proper discs for that shit, eventually.

What's dumber is when those same guys are usually wearing a generic WWE t-shirt (PPV logo, "Get The F Out", whatever) when doing a run-in.

For me it's not the jacket, it's the nametag. Tt was funny the first time, and made sense, too, since he was presumably left by himself waiting for someone to come for him. The idea that he wears it all week every week, though, is a little stupid. Dumber than Benoit always appearing in his tights.

Currently watching the west coast feed. This Coach promo is great. Has Eugene ever had a girlfriend? Of course not, he's a wrestling fan. EDIT: Rock's just dropping in to pick up his paycheck.

Keith one time mentioned in one of his mailbags that there was reduced blading due to the HIV scare, so it's not like the business goes on oblivious to it. ECW rekindled the interest in guys bleeding all over the place, and I'm sure these issues had to be addressed, certainly with Vince McMahon and the amount of money he invests in this stuff, before they went about doing it. I'd be more concerned about people who were doing this stuff in the much-loved NWA days. And I do remember seeing something about tests in the Tough Enough application they were hosting on the internet for the show's final season.

Interesting. It seems more to me like someone from Al-Qaeda or similar groups got them a hook-up with this stuff, but nobody really knows how to use it effectively. I doubt someone said "Hey, guys, let's go to Saddam's Secret Stash!"

Belgium. *Takes the award for The Most Gratuitous Use of the Word "Belgium" in a Serious Screenplay*

What kind of coalition group would be armed with such an agent? My first impression was that they stole it from US forces.

I know my grandmother used to watch old Hogan/Andre era WWF and I'd see a few matches but not really pay attention. My Dad put it down as soon as he found out I was watching and informed me it was fake. I don't remember what the hell it was other than SNME, or who was in it at the time. So, basically, the doubt was there from the moment I only had the most passive "What's on TV" interest. So I always figured that the guys on TV like Undertaker are just guys putting on an act like in the circus, but the realism of the action going on in the ring was questionable. The first match I can remember actually watching and remembering was Royal Rumble 92 (a friend with a cable box means watching PPV even if you don't care what's going on.) Even if it was fake, this guy who had won the match and was now shouting Whoo at the camera a hundred times was in there for a long time, even if it's just a performance, and really did look pretty wiped out. It was then I realized that hey, even if they're just acting it out, they're still having to put effort into it. I was only interested in the Rumble match as an attraction in itself and it didn't make me want to start regularly watching the WWF or anything. Then, in Rumble 99, which happened to be on TV when I was visitng the same friend (PPVs come on at 5PM in the afternoon on this coast). I saw the match that made me a regular viewer: Rock vs Foley in I Quit, the one where Foley's wife just about had a conniption in the front row and had to drag the kids out of the room. This match had elements that was both VERY fake (falling into "power equipment" as sparklers goes off and the room briefly dims) and VERY real (the ungodly number of chair shots.) It was that match, even though it was overly brutal, that taught me right away that there is some actual pain and suffering involved along with all the tacky theatrics. On a side note, in the summer of 99 I met online a kid aged somewhere between 10-12 that was the King Of Marks. He actually believed that Undertaker really was a dead guy brought to life. That shit that Gangrel spit on the crowd was "some sort of blood juice," etc. This was the height of Russo booking, and I wonder what happened to that kid's poor world when Russo left and booking took a turn to angles that revolved around the concept that the show was fake and everyone was performers. You know the ones. Suddently, Undertaker has a wife and she's been kidnapped. Suddently, Kane who was trapped in an asylum is talking about how he couldn't drive stickshift 10 years ago. Suddently, Hogan and Rock are shaking hands after one guy drove a mack truck into the other and the other guy no-sold it in two weeks. That poor guy is messed for life.

You mean reduce. Grouse about SUVs all you want, but oil has other uses other than taking your car to Wal-Mart, and it's doubtful we'll find alternatives for all of them.

Germany and Japan were solid targets. Random people who hate America are not. Will killing make them like us? Will it somehow cause them to hate us more than they already do? While not attacking them is just as useless towards swaying their opinion, what are the strong risks of creating a strong wave of America hate from more people that previously didn't hate us? And no, large events like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor aren't sacred ground from politics as long as you focus on the event as a whole and not on any particular person's death (i.e. someone jumping out of a window) Also, I would appreciate a warning before posting links to white lawn chairs.

Well, there's a lot more of them out there. However, Republicans tend to take a very vocal approach against celebrities endorsing political causes, so the ones who are there are rather secretive about it. You set the tone ("Shut up and perform!"), you live with the result. As far as I'm concerned, the "Hollywood liberals" have earned their fortune like anyone else. Many people on both the left and right are born or married into millions or billions of dollars. All it takes is a couple of oil barons or top-class executives to find much more deeper pockets than a pack of celebrities, anyway. The last time I can remember a Hollywood type promoting a left cause was Rosie's wedding in SF. And she really burnt a lot of bridges and lost a lot of public opinion in the last five years. And none of the left-leaning famous people are ever holding any office. All the ones who do hold office are Republicans. Reagan, Arnie, Sonny Bono. The Dems have had... John Glenn? Find any event where famous people play a tiny role. It's nearly impossible for them. Michael Jackson is a freak with a fraction of the fans he used to have but he still can't go to the supermarket without getting mobbed. He's certainly setting himself up in that position. He's still really popular as a politician: So far he's actually delivering on cutting through the bull and trying to deliver a balanced budget. There was some skepticism after all the hype died down (and he did do a number of fundraisers to special interests despite promises that he had enough money already, but anyone who thought he wouldn't was foolish), but now everyone's applauding him again. And certainly the guy who played The Terminator is more relevant to pop culture today than Rosie or Babs. Also in TV celebs, Dennis Miller drew ratings for CNBC (we'll see if they hold up), while we all remember the complete bomb Donahue was for that station's other channel. Bruce Willis talked about singing up for the military until a bunch of people (including President Bush, gee, wonder how he arragned a phone call with him?) told him he was too old. And don't forget NASCAR. You'd know Chris Matthews was a Democrat if you read his book. It's not like it's some hidden secret. Uhm, yeah. I've seen Ann Coulter appearances where's introduced as "newspaper columnist, Ann Coulter" or "political pundit, Ann Coulter." Around the time she released her book, yes, she was called a conservative, but when your title claims that liberals are being treasonous, it's kind of hard to avoid that title. Hannity, Rush, and that bunch are often called conservatives, but their show is quite loud and proud about it. G. Gordon Liddy, who doesn't jump up and down for attention like the last guys mentioned, can appear on talk shows without his political leaning being brought up. The only guy who I hear being labeled conservative more often than not when referenced is Bill O'Reilly. However, he discredits the moderate opinion by insisting to have one, so I have no love lost for that. I always thought that was the AP, which makes up a majority of the printed news read nationwide. BTW, the President of the AP is asking major media to start working together in lobbying Washington to not be so secretive. Interpret that as however you wish. Bullshit. I hold a lot of unpopular opinions. I rarely see anyone on TV speak of religion like I do. Jesse Ventura once called it a crutch for the weak-minded and got heavily slagged for it, but that's as close as it came.

Oh sure. It's a mess, but I find it an entertaining mess, that's all. Gee, I really don't know. I was thinking hard about it and everything, but I guess there really have been no conservative entertainers out there. (Hint: Despite reports to the contrary, nobody under 40 cares about Barbara Streisand anymore. Nobody under 25 really cares about Alec Baldwin either. While not everyone mentioned above necessarily has name value to that audience either, to say that most people would give a rat's ass about Barb's politics and lets that sway them is kind of a shocker. Nor do I think every country artist out there is conservative, but a big majority of them are for sure.) Now all you need is a Michael Moore to make movies filled with half-truths while calling Kerry a traitor or deserter or whatever. Thankfully, your side is armed with a large variety of windbags that appear on TV a lot thanks to the large number of think-tanks you run (which probably produce more politically active conservative minds than the college system produces politically active liberal minds, before you bring that up.) http://online.wsj.com/home That was easy. That exists only in your head, pal.

I agree with everything but Big Show. From Royal Rumble until the episode where he flipped his lid, he has been made to look like a credible threat and has had more going for him than he has had in years. Yeah, he's still fat, yeah he can't do dropkicks anymore (though I doubt they're good for you at that frame anyway) and put on what was probably his career highlight at the Rumble, channeling the whole Andre routine by pushing around a dozen guys and throwing people out until he got eliminated at the very end. Show's biggest problem was that he changed sides so much, and that he was made to look like a pussy a lot (jobbed the Jeff Hardy. Hello!) The only real pussy situation Show has been in is jobbing to Stone Cold's steely gaze with the rest of the roster in March.

Oh good lord. Violence breeds violence. I still don't know how blowing people up is going to make other people hate us less. How does blowing up EVERYONE who hate us stop other people from hating us? These questions have never been answered from the start of this conflict. I disagree with playing this all over the place, though I do agree with showing the most hideous of the prisoner photos. Why? Well, one, because we have a right as a people to see what our military is doing. But the other reason is, ironically enough, the same reason you gave slight approval of the content of those pictures. Those people are prisoners. It doesn't matter to us if releasing their pictures embarasses them or their families. This man is an American, he doesn't deserve to have his death glorified for any cause, pro-war (as you want) or anti-war (as Mr. Berg.) Unlike the people in the prison, he did nothing wrong and it's not right to make his loved ones suffer by playing the video constantly. To say that his death should be used by the public for political purposes is pretty disgusting. Fine then. Rush? Uh, LOL?

No, listen: They've been open, what, a month? Now, it could be that their boss is an idiot, it doesn't mean that there's nobody out there for it. I mean, there's other liberal talk show hosts on the air that aren't part of some big openly-partisan talk network that are doing just fine. I've even talked to some hosts and their ratings, for their region, are excellent. Why do you insist that there's nobody who is liberal and owns a radio, and wants to hear someone they agree with? Why can't you agree that AAR is simply making mistakes? Because I've seen figures that disagree with what you've been posting regarding liberal talk as a whole.

I haven't seen the whole video but I have seen the, uh, money shot (I guess) because someone linked me to an animated gif of it without telling me prior what it is. And Savage is playing the sounds? Eeww, I guess I'm going to have to listen to Hannity for the next few weeks to get my laughs.

How would you play a beheading over the radio?

LOL. You seriously don't know what you're talking about. That said, hey, it'll either sink or swim. If it sinks, the good hosts will be picked up by somebody else, hopefully. It might be that it's managed by incompetant fools, and not necessarily your idea that there's absolutely nobody out there who's liberal and owns a radio and lives in one of the AAR-covered areas.

Complaining about how shirts make you look like a wrestling fan while at the same time giving props to the "retro" WW logo makes you look like either a hypocrite, or a 'tard.