Jobber of the Week

I really doubt angles = ratings. The only way you could possibly give the angles credit is if the ratings stay like this all the way to the PPV.

Oh god, there's nothing that's more irritating than guys that want to look smart by naming off guys' real names. Voted -iB-

She wasn't bad on Crossfire, but maybe that's because she had righties to bounce zingers off of.

http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadli...88_FORTUNE5.htm Yeah. Well, okay. The positive is that it mentions satellite and I'm pretty sure that Murdoch will start pulling Fox Sports & News if Comcast tries to pull this into their "let's make this a cable-only channel and share it with the other cable companies in an attempt to fight the little dish" scheme they've been running for a while. If there's a list of guys in business you don't want to piss off, Murdoch is in top 20 or so. The downside is they're likely going to gut the hell out of TechTV to cut costs and replace that stuff with their own G4 shit, which by comparison is 90% focused on console boxes and, worse, is a hair's breadth away from paid programming (every game is "good" or "great" or what have you.) This will be..... Interesting.

I'm shocked. SHOCKED.

Hi, I'd like to introduce you to Bay Area home rates. Even if you do have enough money to buy someone's home (at which rate you could comfortable go somewhere else and live there), you may not have enough to compete in the inevitable bidding war. Homeless also generally don't have a lot of mobility, so it's not like they can drive off or fly to where it's cheaper to live. Yes, Virginia, there are economic factors behind poverty.

And yet, when you do, you'll be glad it's there.

I think you did. At least once. Well, I'm sure it was sometime in the past six months.

I was going to make a crack about how young people can't afford iPods, but ah well.

I think this is just simply a gag by Vince to see if the net audience is so stupid that he could write something like this and everyone would buy it.

I don't see how Meltzer can't be worked here. All the articles just assume that Benjamin will work in a tag team and that HHH will get the belt back real soon. Uhhh?

The problem is that you're so sure of yourself that you rarely even treat a different viewpoint with anything but "I'm right, so you're wrong." If you refuse to bend any of your positions at all, what are you here for? At the worst, we'll annoy you, and at best we'll just reaffirm what you already believe. So go out there and, uh, go run for office or something. Well, remind me not to take your bait next time. It's pretty unpleasant to talk to someone who thinks you're flat-out wrong simply because you don't totally agree with him.

It's free trade. The key word is free. How is it NOT protectionist? You yourself said: So, basically, it's just industry-favored protectionism.

Voted. -=Jobber ...Who'd post his own real name here but it would totally give it away.

It's called organization, look into it. Again, if we didn't have it, every thread, no matter how removed in basis, would become about gay marriage, war in Iraq, Kerry messups, Clarke credibility, or whatever the front page story is each week. I believe what I say is better than the alternative, but I'm open to change that with enough provocation. On all sorts of issues I've actually decided to change my opinion after talking with people on subjects like taxes, guns, abortion, marriage, etc. That's the reason why debate is so stimulating for the mind. It's not meant to be some sort of pissing contest, where you scream and shout about how your positions are better than everyone else's and they're all slime unless they agree with you.

I just want to know: Is protectionism a bad thing, or is there exceptions? Is free trade a good thing, or is there exceptions?

But itsn't it still protectionism anyway?

The San Fran station still has not been named, despite their claims to have it ready for launch day. I think they're just going to do without us.

Ooh, a Locke vs Hobbes discussion. Neat-o. I know that my Dad right now, who's been working all my life, wound up with his company moving out to another country. This company is the largest employer and biggest moneymaker for this city & county, so it's going to hurt everyone slightly. To make things worse, there's guys all over with his skills trying to find work right now, so there's no job available where he's marketable. So what are we doing? We're getting this house ready to sell, effectively cashing in to move to an area with less absurd housing rates (you know you're in Northern California when you make several hundred thousand dollars a year [we don't] and can't afford a place to live.) He's seen openings for places where he can work over there, but you be a local. If it wasn't for unemployment, which is something I don't ever remember us having to depend on before, we would be so busy trying to afford food that it would take even longer to fix this house up to sell, longer to move, and longer to get another job. So yeah, if people aren't being stupid with unemployment money, it serves a good cause. Stephen Joseph: And yet, in Bush's America, offshoring is good and conductive to free trade, but medicine from Canada? Whoops. This is the problem. We're not going to get truly free trade no matter what we do.

When was the last time he ever acted so sure of himself while displaying so much ignorance? He might think Rant's a leech, I disagree because at least he has work, but Mike himself has ignored what a bonehead he is, certainly the most eager person I've ever seen to resort to partisan bickering so quickly: Dragging baggage from one thread into another, making more threads responding to a subject already contained in one large discussion. That's an issue I was hoping for moderation on a while ago, but since I've brought it up, he's calmed it down at least. Throw in the way he looks down at people for various traits that in all equals to all but a fifth of the country's popuation, and his steadfast belief that 100% of his opinions are 100% correct 100% of the time, and it's no suprise how futile it is to debate with him. With kkk, PowerPlay, and Rant (when he tries to enter a serious discussion instead of trying to elect a breakfast sausage for President or what have you), things can be argued on their merits instead of whether they're right/left. I have no idea why I keep falling for the Mike trap, but somehow I still do.

The problem was more like that Vince forgot about the dynamics of the "cool heel" and went back to the Hogan days. For more of what I mean, see here: http://www.411mania.com/black/columns/arti...php?black_id=84 That about sums it up perfectly.

Angle/Booker was great and Booker didn't even have to add much. "Crisp and clean with no caffeine, bro!"