NoCalMike

WOW, Vince's ideas suck again? Suprise, Suprise.......ugh

well I think they are looking at the big picture though. Webber at 100% for the playoffs or at least from the 2nd round on, is worth 5-7 more regular season losses, IMO. Of course NO ONE will beat the Lakers in LA if tonight is any indication of the favortism they are going to recieve come playoff time.

my gawd, this outright bias laker-friendly officiating is fucking sickening. How is Gary Payton allowed to curse in the officials face and the ref "walks it off" yet Webber gets two words out and is T'd up. Or the fact that Bryant is basically allowed to plow down Bibby.....eh fuck it, it is regular season.

Well it would certainly make sense, however I have to ask, how will he assemble his roster? Will ECW be looked at as a "renegade" roster or just a third roster? I really hope Heyman can get a decent roster, not meaning stars, just workers, because he can book pretty damn good.

My old highschool english teacher had movie posters for Resevoir Dogs & Dead Man Walking in his class room. He told me there is a great big poster outlet store in Berkeley(downtown). So if you live close, give it a shot.

Both in some ways, I guess. It kinda left it all up to the viewer to decide, which was great. I agree with "Both" being a good answer. Happy, because I think when they said, "fine" they were deciding to forget the more petty stuff and just realize that they would try and work it out. Add to the fact that Clementine getting the memory eraser the first time around was basically a quick jerk reaction to the near breakup because she was a "compulsive" person. Her knowing that after the fact(at the end of the movie) would prevent her likely from doing the same thing again, and maybe in the future they could work out their problems anyway. I don't think when they originally broke up, that they would have lasted apart very long had Clementine not done the brain erase. I think they would have eventually worked out their problems which was really petty in the first place. On the other hand the ending was also sad, because your relationship could never be the same or as pure as it was, AFTER THE FACT of knowing all these things from the past because of a tape recording, rather then your own memory. The ending was conflict basically, pure conflict. I mean I left the theater feeling the hurt and pain of BOTH characters, and even while thinking they could POSSIBLY get back together and live happily etc......they would still probably ALWAYS carry with them a certain level of hurt because of what they now know happened in the past.

Oh how I miss Gertner......

Well we could compile our own list here of who we think would be good. I would love for RVD to go with Heyman, but RVD is in that unique spot/status in WWE, where he is too popular not to have on the big shows, however he will never get pushed so he is screwed either way. Add to that, the fact that ECW + Heyman + RVD, could eventually grow on people over time and even draw in decent ratings. Now depending on whether Vince wants ECW to be a C-brand show, or if he doesn't mind drawing attention away from Raw/Smackdown. Time will tell.

my understanding of the Redskins/Vikings interest in Brock Lesnar is that both teams gave him a workout over 2 years ago, and neither team showed interest afterwards.

well then you present me some clear cut decisive evidence or proof that Iraq was ready, willing and able to attack america. Since there isn't any to my knowledge, why should I just believe Iraq had these imaginary weapons that in the president's own words, "would end in a mushroom cloud"

Like I said though before, this would be different if Clarke was a one and done advisor, but the fact that he has worked under a wide variety of presidents and was retained each time, must speak somewhat of him being credible and trustworthy.

Does John Kerry's National Security advisor Rand Beers ring a bell. No...well Beers works with Clarke at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. you have got to be kidding me, right?

the "new ecw" better not just be WWE Hardcore Matches for 60 mins.

He caught the guy doing it, and he's rotting in jail. That's not effective? Again he treated it like a law enforcement issue, the actual perpetrator was jailed but the larger group of those just like him remained at large and planning larger attacks. We need to stay on offense and destroy the whole infrastructure of terroism, not just cherry pick after the fact. As opposed to Bush's plan of attacking a country that is not responsible for the attacks against the U.S.? I'd rather attack first than sit back and wait for it, yes. wait for something that was never going to happen?

He caught the guy doing it, and he's rotting in jail. That's not effective? Again he treated it like a law enforcement issue, the actual perpetrator was jailed but the larger group of those just like him remained at large and planning larger attacks. We need to stay on offense and destroy the whole infrastructure of terroism, not just cherry pick after the fact. As opposed to Bush's plan of attacking a country that is not responsible for the attacks against the U.S.?

I don't know how it contridicts anything. Sensing the 9/11 warning signs, including papers that showed up after the attack. Intelligence agencies fail. Coming up with legitimate proof of WMDs. Intelligence agencies fail. I think we can take the "boobs in borrowed suits" answer on both cases, the question here is whether the second one happened because of pressure from the White House to eagerly get into Iraq no matter how thin the evidence. More and more reports are gathering together that Dubya had his heart completely set on going into Iraq from the first minute after he took the oath. I'm not exactly sure why, as the only thing I can come up with is to extract revenge over the Daddy assassination plans, but that would be the stupidest rationale for the use of the United States military in.... Well, ever. Well now, he is a "cowboy" right.........right?

Unfortunately for you my friend, Clinton is not on the ballot this time, so there is really no reason to bring him up when talking about how the current president handled the situation.

Who said that, ever? All Clarke said is that the President and his staff were presented with evidence of something, and they gave a lukewarm response. He never said had they acted more interested, 9/11 wouldn't have taken place. Plus he made it seem pretty obvious that Bush and his team had other plans beforehand anyway.

So, how high up does an anti-terrorist dude have to be before you'll actually believe what he says? And if he wanted a sandwich on whole wheat at the CIA cafeteria, and one day someone served it on rye and he wanted his money back, does that make him disgruntled? Just give up, no one new will be convinced. It is rather pointless now. I am not saying conservatives en mass should stand up and denounce Bush, but if this Clarke interview/comments doesn't even make people do a double take and at least try to examine things closer, then what will? Mike, if he came out and praised Bush --- would YOU have cared? -=Mike I never said this interview alone should be enough to sway one's opinion, however in my mind, this is just one of the many things being piled on a long list of reasons not to like this president. Also this guy seems to have some sort of cred. He has worked under both sides, doesn't seem to be interested in getting any certain candidate elected and is not just "some liberal coming out of the woodwork to bash bush"

So, how high up does an anti-terrorist dude have to be before you'll actually believe what he says? And if he wanted a sandwich on whole wheat at the CIA cafeteria, and one day someone served it on rye and he wanted his money back, does that make him disgruntled? Just give up, no one new will be convinced. It is rather pointless now. I am not saying conservatives en mass should stand up and denounce Bush, but if this Clarke interview/comments doesn't even make people do a double take and at least try to examine things closer, then what will?

You mean like YOU did? -=Mike Or did you not say "It is all unraveling. Hopefully americans will fire the liar in november." Yeah I did, but it didn't take this interview to get me started. I have been making comments like those for almost the duration of Bush's tenure, just so we're clear And I never excluded myself anyway.

I got the general idea though that the ONLY DEAD FOLKS COMING BACK TO LIFE, were people with the "dead virus" which is kind of WHACK. I mean in that case there would be an origin of the virus, unlike in most zombie movies where "it's just happening." Oh well it was fun.

This season is really good so far methinks. I like the power struggle between Paulie and that one guy. Buschemi's role is kind of small so far, but rightfully so.

am I the only one depessed that Jamie Lynn (22) is married to some smooth 33 year old fuck? I mean come on, like this fucking thing will last. What is it with young rich hollywood chicks fawning over men 10 years their senior. I have no doubt she will be single again, but she will be damaged goods.

was it Jaws 2 or 3 that ended with those teens on the little island/rocks and Jaws jumped up and bit into some random electric pole and was electrocuted to death?