Boon

"People" weren't pissed or offended about this angle until Thursday, which just goes to show that "people" are hypocritical, self-gratifying idiots. -If you're going to get on Vince for making a buck off what the troops are fighting for, get on him from the beginning, not when it's convenient. Nobody bitched when Rob Conway debuted as a heel soldier coming out of the crowd. -Most people here read the spoilers, so you knew it was coming, you saw the pictures in advance. Nobody sat there and forced you to watch the angle. You could've taken a page out of other people's book and TURNED IT OFF. -Even if you didn't read the spoilers, the warnings were plastered all over the show. People seem to be forgetting that Vince AND UPN agreed to air it, b/c they couldn't get it editted in time. -Davairi being sacrificed, or carried out as a martyr? Where the hell have you people been? Wrestling has been making religious references since the beginning! Now that it's Muslim, people are going to be upset? Where were you when Undertaker was sacrificing EVERYBODY? Where were you when the ECW crucifixion was going on? Probably marking out. Was this segment in bad taste? Maybe, but that's right on par w/ what the WWE does all the time. That's your own personal opinion. I'm really not surprised, but I'm sure if they could have editted the show, they would have seriously considered it. Was it bad timing? Yeah, but that's not Vince or UPN's fault. I'm not saying that I enjoyed the segment for its political relevance (I enjoyed seeing Undertaker get his ass kicked). I just knew what I was getting into, as most of you should have. If you're going to take a stand against WWE, why don't you do it when nobody else is, rather then waiting for something like this to come along to spark your interest. These are the same people that all of a sudden were proud of America after 9/11, then a few months later went back to bitching about it. It doesn't really matter I guess. In two weeks time, you'll go back to bitching about HHH having too much TV time and why London is getting buried.

God, I <3 Team Angle.

Jericho and Victoria would be the greatest losses so far, IMO.

Jericho just got put in a program with the WWE Champ, and Victoria was (?) just brought back to TV in a somewhat interesting angle. Seems odd that they'd ask to be released.

That's because Kurt Angle is the man. Where are Brock's gold medals?

You and about everyone in the lockerroom, I'm sure. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What are you talking about? Brock's return is announced on the same day that half the roster gets canned. I'm sure he'll receive a great reception!!

It's like a lottery game. Check back every 10 mins for another release!

I'm not seeing that on WWE.com anywhere...

Double post, sorry.

Don't be surprised if we see a "Which show gets Brock?" angle here. Could make for some interesting TV, teasing some feuds, and such.

Fresh? No. The most over team in the company? Yes.

*cough* Dudley Boys *cough*

Meh- definitely the weakest of the new episodes for me. Just the premise seemed really lame. American Dad was actually better, I thought.

Interesting. I'm a little sketchy about this choice- I'm not such a fan of his work. We'll see what he can do.

At the end, Yoda told Obi-Wan that during Obi-Wan's time watching over Luke, he had new training for him. He told him that would teach Obi-Wan to communicate with Qui-Gon who had made contact and become one with the living force. So they made reference to him, but he was never actually in it.

Boon. Oh wait.

The argument that conservatives are making is that Clinton wanted it and Bush wanted it. Clinton justified it by citing Iraq's nuclear program, Bush justified it by making ties to terrorism. Conservatives certainly aren't saying that Bush is just finishing what Clinton started for the sake of finishing it, they simply both wanted the same thing and went about it different ways. Nobody is saying "well the Clintons wanted it too, so we have to do it." What they're saying is that regime change in Iraq was on both agendas, and that it started with Clinton. What's ridiculous is saying that in 2002, wanting a regime change in Iraq was some sort of evil scheme. We knew a long time ago that regime change was on the agenda, and nobody tried to hide it.

*Sigh* Did you even read anything I said? Here: I don't know any other way to say it. Prove to me that it was a conspiracy, and I'll be frightened, admit that it is exceptionally wrong, and I'll come to Canada and buy you fucking lunch. The burden of proof is on you, chief, and it's going to take more then a shotty British memo. Thanks for the ethics lesson. I really thought that war was daisies and lollipops.

I went back and read the short conversation about what drugs people are using before the show, and all I could think of was, "Wanna buy some death sticks?" I thought buying my ticket a month in advance would earn me a spot as one of the lamest kids I know, but strangely, people are coming to me trying to figure out how they, too, can get a midnight showing and accompany myself and my friends to the show. So I began to wonder- have any of the midnight showings been sold out? What kind of crowd are we looking at here?

You can't sell what you don't have. We're not talking about how they felt about one issue, we're talking about what the main issues they voted on were. What about the majority (55% according to the poll I quoted above) of people who felt that something else was more important then Iraq or the war on terror? Don't no sell those stats by saying that 100% was an exaggeration. And I'll take those numbers over that subconscious stuff you said earlier, too.

Well I'm a people. And I'm the only people at this point in time bringing Clinton into this, since Mike is teh b4nn3d. Plus I'm self-centered and egotistical.

So, you're saying it was impossible for him to win, then? 51-48 seems awfully close. I really do think he could've pulled it off if he had paid a little more attention to the economy/deficit, as well as social security and health care. In war time, incumbent Presidents tend to do better on war/security issues, b/c people feel that if they change leadership there will be a time of weakness. If he had been a good Democrat focusing on social issues, I think he could've pulled off those missing votes.

Here's some other polls, too.

Cared about? Absolutely. Voted based solely on it? Not all of them.

... I assume you're going somewhere with that... Just wanted to back up my point that Bush's actions were 2 or 3 steps beyond what Clinton did. A point totally ignored by the people who keep dragging Clinton into this. Yeah, except for when I said this: Oh, and this: Thanks, though, for actually reading what I wrote.