Jobber of the Week

And so if the postal service refused to put "Christmas" on their Christmas stamps I could understand. But Macy's is doing this because they want to sell to everyone. Why is it a Christmas sale, shouldn't they be reaching out to those who celebrate Huanakkah, too? Heck, Macy's wouldn't even mind someone who celebrates Festivus as long as they drop some money at the register.

Saying Brock Lesnar needs learn a proper SSP is like saying that Mick Foley needs to practice diving skullfirst into concrete because he's getting rusty at it. He did some absolutely gruesome shit during his Cactus Jack run in WCW where you can even hear the "CLOP!" sound of his skull impacting, but he only did this because he was a nobody. If you asked him to do it today, he'd laugh and tell you to fuck yourself. The only goddamn reason Lesnar did the SSP was so he could get over, and they thought it would be something special at Mania and learned from that lesson. It wasn't anything he needed to learn, he doesn't even like doing it, it was something management learned that they shouldn't count on him to do a move like that. He's over enough that he doesn't need it anymore, he's uncomfortable doing the move, he's damn well even more uncomfortable being up there now, and it's in management's best interests he doesn't start thinking he can safely fly. I think the crowd will boo the hell out of him if he comes back, and he won't ever be able to escape the "you sold out" chants. --Celtic Jobber Nobody ever really wanted to boo the guy. His promos weren't the best but he managed to get over the syndrome of people sitting on their hands when he came out and kept them there. The only reason MSG happened was enough hardcore fans (which makes sense, since if there's one demographic that really wanted into an event like WM20 it was hardcore fans) to start the heat wave and the marks just joined in because ruining the crowd reactions on live TV was kind of fun and rebellious. Average crowds in Bumfuck Alabama will not care and will still pop like Pavlov's Dogs once they hear the opening sound effect of his theme.

I don't see what's wrong with a company choosing to go the way they want? Wouldn't that be the principle you would be arguing for if it was the other way around and groups were pressuring Macy's to take signs down?

Interesting. Did Big Media mention that? I know America's source for Fair and Balanced News didn't say anything regarding that matter... http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/internat...09rumsfeld.html This comes from your least favorite newspaper, of all places. Maybe you stop watching America's #1 Choice For Fair And Balanced News and you'll get a clearer picture.

Nay. I have a big magazine that WWE published about two years ago that was a "preview" book for the 2003 year. They showed all the old titles and their lineage and the WCW lineage is actually merged into the current WWE title. The current Big Gold Belt has no lineage before Eric dragging it's corpse onto Raw one day and giving it to HHH. However, title lineages in a worked sport is one of the most ridiculous things to argue about ever, but thems the facts.

Never seen that shirt before. The first thing it made me think is "I pity the fules!" I think it's actually dumber than FOCK FEAR.

Japanese flags don't have a blue background. Perhaps with a bit of a green color, it might say something bad about Bangladesh.

Except we all saw it coming because they played a Backlash promo at WMXIX with his theme music and everything. I was the one poor guy in all of Safeco Field meekly adding "Sucks!" to the end of every "Gooooooooooooldbeeerrrrrrrrg." Who says WWF fans never watched WCW? For most impressive debut, I'll say GobbeldyGooker. I was certainly impressed with the heel heat.

Macy's is a private institution and can do what it want. Same with the store putting up Chinese New Years stuff or whatever. It's a privately owned business, and if you don't like it, you don't have to be there. Usually the cultural arguements around Christmastime stem from the use of religious symbolism on public property (i.e. city park.) This is because so many different religions have a winter holiday and if one person has the okay to celebrate theirs on taxpayer ground, it turns into everybody wanting to do the same. Born out of the situation in the above paragraph, you also have the whole athiests-with-lawsuits crapola. My own personal opinion is it's okay to have a religious display as long as you have a non-religious display as well, such as Santa and snowmen and whatnot, that anybody can enjoy regardless of faith. On the other side of the coin you have the evangelist crew, who scream bloody murder about how "Jesus is the reason for the season" and how we need to burn the reindeer and kill the jolly old fat man because he's distracting the kids from getting their yearly dose of Christ.

But when your President is saying "Hey, none of you countries who wouldn't help us fight the war are going to be able to get your companies in to help with the rebuilding!", you're denying yourself both. Yes, I know the spin then was "they didn't want to pay the bill, why should they get the riches, etc etc" but it's COMPANIES your punishing for the faults of GOVERNMENT, and it looks incredibly stupid in today's hindsight since we had no clue how big of a trainwreck the rebuilding would be.

Spin by the administration's fanbase to deflect the no-bid contracts. The answers to this claim are Bechtel and Schlumburger, at which point your average Bush Follower will scream "OMG THAT SOUNDZ SO FRENCH/GERMAN", at which point the proper retort is: 1) At this point, we'd need all the international help in Iraq that we could get. 2) Bechtel is HQ'ed in San Francisco. At this point you may hear "OMG HIPPIES IN A BLUE STATE", at which point you should walk away, having proved that they are insane.

That's not exactly accurate in light of today's politics. It's more correct to say "51% of the nation thought the current President was less of a fuck-up and/or enjoyed his sound bytes." Failed Mascot, Iraq is a mess. I don't know m/any people who still think we should have gone in over there, unless they have a political career to worry about. The least we can do in the meantime is try and leave it a better place than it was before we went in. We could just pull up stakes all over the country and pack everyone up and fly away and leave them to their own devices, but then the country will plummet into civil war and then you won't be happy again either.

I gotta say that this final choice sucks. I'm doubly pissed that they didn't bring back EVERYONE, just the people who helped screw up the show. If Ivana had come back, I would have tossed the remote into the window. The only person there who seems like the kind of person who actually understands that they're there to work instead of suck up TV time is Pamela. Why the FUCK did they bring back Stacy (who even Trump thought was worth -1 people as a team member) and leave out Bradford?

TNA's title has an identity problem, which I think is rooted in having a fanbase that is so widely smark/smart, and so little marks. Putting it on an old geezer like Hogan doesn't matter because "they're recognizable with marks" which the company correctly realizes is important, but it turns off the smarter crowd they already have. Putting it on one of their young guys does nothing. This is because marks wonder who the hell he is to have the title while smarks know the guy's good and don't need to see a belt around his waist to be sure of it. At this point, I'd say management is right about needing geezers, but they've got all the wrong geezers. Savage is not the geezer that will get marks talking. Neither is Warrior. Neither is Hall. Nash? LOL! If they do find the right fossil to dig up, that person should have the belt a respectable amount of time (three? four?) Then job it to Brown, IMO.

Since we're talking about Cosby, I suggest everyone search their favorite MP3 trading networks for Cosby's bit on skiing. Seriously great.

Let me know when you get the fair and balanced, no-spin breakdown of it all. I've got $5 on it being something about how these people need to shut up and go back to dying for Americans who won't serve, like Bill O.

I think I understand it, too. I'm probably not any more or less partisan than I used to be, but I feel like the moderate I claim to be now that I no longer have some guy on my back posting umpteen threads of vitriolic flame about every little politically-driven shady move anyone in my party has pulled, under generic titles like "This doesn't look good" or "These people need a clue", followed of course by round-robin arguement of said person saying "I can't believe you're going to defend this!" every time I point out that this is not the first time such a stunt has been pulled, and not the only party to do so. CE is so much better now. Plus, I get to beat on the INXS' and C-Bacons more often.

I'm mixed on this. I'm against it because I'm afraid to see it start some kind of a trend, but at the same time I'm for it because I hope it starts some kind of a trend.

The above post is a .8 INXS for it's inabilty to operate beyond simple, childish logic. Generally, I would not consider dropping bombs indiscriminately on people and things without good reason why to be a good thing. However, just because doing so ill-intentioned is a bad thing, that doesn't mean that there's never a time ever to bomb a place that it isn't considered wrong. Torture has it's positives and negatives. We've already discussed about how sketchy the information you'll get from it is (after all, most people would say anything to get out of torture), but just because it's bad when used as aggressively and indiscriminately as evil dictators use it, and even though it's bad in almost every situation, doesn't discount the situation where it is the right thing to do. There's a difference between some third world nation cutting off a finger for showing too much skin in the public square and, say, preventing an attack. And there is no hypocracy in that.

Only because more moderate people have resigned to the fact that such a violent philosophy will somehow improve their life. Moderate People: We'd like some clean water. Fanatics: Kill the Jews! Moderate People: I don't really care either way about the Jews, my baby is hungry and that's all I'm interested about. Fanatics: Kill the Jews! Take their food and water! Moderate People: Well, I guess that's one way to get things...

Well, fortunately we're already at war with "Islamic militants."

I think the fact is that the churches that do promote the exclusive teachings have a much larger attention hold of the public spotlight and are certainly seeing a resurgance with the latest power grab by red state America. Basically, to the networks, the Falwell crew has much sharper teeth, so coming up with an excuse for these guys and bullshitting through the minor negative press is much preferable to getting on the bad side of the other faction, which is much more heavy with activists and present on the national radar. Looking into this group, they seem a little wacky but they don't seem to stand for much other than liberal political beliefs, with not as much said about any kind of spiritual belief. As such, I really can't approve of them any more than I do the other side, as they also are attempting a unity of religious values and the voting booth, even if they are left values instead of right values.

That's honestly the best ad promoting religious participation that I've seen. Those mushy Latter-Day Saints ads are nice, but they almost exist in a fantasy world while this directly addresses reality. And while I'm not going to become a follower anytime soon, it certainly gives me confidence that there are people out there who see religion as a good thing if you don't give into the discrimination and anger it inspires in many people. Although I can see how it basically makes accusations of other churches (some of which would probably proudly agree to those accusations), I feel the ad is more inclusive than exclusive and I think it's a shame that Big Media* doesn't want to touch it. * Big Media is a trademark of KKKatchphrases Incorporated.

Again, it depends on what is at stake and what proof you have. In the case of the link you posted, I don't think that man could have any kind of information that would be considered critical enough to warrant it. And at the same time, you're making us sound much more brutal than we really are. Let me know when we're cutting off hands or doing a fraction of the shit China does, and call me and I'll get my protesting clothes out and join in. NoCalMike: Well, yeah, but that's why I think we should have a limit on how long we can hold people without charging them of something.

I think if more Arabs were raised in more western traditions and surroundings they'd be more easily adapt to the other side. I have read, years ago, of one man who was raised in Israel and today supports Jewish causes much more than most others from his birthcountry would. Lifestyle (which is the word I'll use to simply culture + environment) is as important to peace as politics are. While there are some who, like KKK suggested, believe they shouldn't stop until all the Jews are dead, if lifestyle conditions were better (in the case of the Pals, clean water to start, maybe?) more and more people would speak up against violence until their voice is louder than the fanatics. Unfortunately the "kill all jews" minority gets it's strength from people who don't completely agree with that movement, but see it as a way to get something that they feel they have no choice but to fight for.