strummer 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Today's edition of The Baltimore Sun features an interview and profile on WWE champion John Bradshaw Layfield. Among the highlights of the piece are: Why He Wrote His Book on Finances: "I had read tons of books trying to figure out what to do with money but most of those books were so boring, or you needed a degree to get through them. That's the reason I thought I could write a better book." His Theory on Buying Stocks: "I buy companies I want to own. I buy companies that make a lot of money, that don't have a lot of debt and that I can understand. If I can't explain it in a paragraph to somebody, then I don't buy the stock." The infamous Germany incident: "I did it not as an anti-Semitic thing, goodness no. I was just trying to irritate the German people, so I was trying to pick at the most sensitive issue they had. Nobody was offended in the audience. In fact, the German media came to my defense. They said, 'This guy is just portraying a role. My character at the time - it's really not anymore - was a borderline racist character. It was a cross between Pat Buchanan, J.R. Ewing and David Duke. There's no similarity between that aspect of the character and me. To me it's like Anthony Hopkins having to defend himself for being Hannibal Lecter." His comments on Smackdown after 9/11: "A few people thought I was insensitive and intolerant. "I don't make excuses for that. I wasn't tolerant. Tolerance at that point was not called for, and I don't think it's called for now." On Becoming WWE champion: Whether [wrestling] is real or fixed or whatever you want to refer to it as, the fans put a lot of emphasis on that title. It's like being promoted to CEO of a company. It's decided by a board or whatever, but it's still a tremendous honor. There's no where higher I can go in professional wrestling." Credit: PWInsider Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
humongous2002 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 The infamous Germany incident: "I did it not as an anti-Semitic thing, goodness no. I was just trying to irritate the German people, so I was trying to pick at the most sensitive issue they had. Nobody was offended in the audience. In fact, the German media came to my defense. They said, 'This guy is just portraying a role. My character at the time - it's really not anymore - was a borderline racist character. It was a cross between Pat Buchanan, J.R. Ewing and David Duke. There's no similarity between that aspect of the character and me. To me it's like Anthony Hopkins having to defend himself for being Hannibal Lecter." In other words he doesn't hang minorities anymore, he just burns crosses on their lawn. On Becoming WWE champion: Whether [wrestling] is real or fixed or whatever you want to refer to it as, the fans put a lot of emphasis on that title. It's like being promoted to CEO of a company. It's decided by a board or whatever, but it's still a tremendous honor. There's no where higher I can go in professional wrestling." Credit: PWInsider All it takes is for you to kiss the right ass and you'll be a champ too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lil' Bitch 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 His comments on Smackdown after 9/11: "A few people thought I was insensitive and intolerant. "I don't make excuses for that. I wasn't tolerant. Tolerance at that point was not called for, and I don't think it's called for now." What did he say? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dewe 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 His comments on Smackdown after 9/11: "A few people thought I was insensitive and intolerant. "I don't make excuses for that. I wasn't tolerant. Tolerance at that point was not called for, and I don't think it's called for now." What did he say? http://slashwrestling.com/smackdown/010913.html : "You know, I have heard and I have seen the cowardly acts that have happened before. The extermination of Jews by some maniac in Germany. The bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City by some maniac. And now some maniac has attacked America - attacked innocent men, women and children...husbands, fathers, parents...all because of some religious belief, or some other motive that he has, these people had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with you. We're running this show tonight because we're gonna show you that you cannot break, you cannot even bend the fiber, the backbone of the United States of America. There's gonna be some critics. There's gonna be some critics that wonder why we run this show. I wanna make this perfectly clear: go to hell. We're doin' this show because we love America. This is all we have to give you for tonight is this, is this evening. If I had to, I'd give my life, readily, for this country. I have relatives who have done that, who are buried overseas, who are buried in many different places. I would do the same thing 'cause I love this great country. George W. was one of the greatest governors of the state of Texas - it's time he become - it's time he will become a great president. You guys who are out there, we're gonna find your ass. We're gonna make whatever country's hiding you into a stinking parking lot. God bless this country - God bless this great state I live in, and God rest the sorry son of a (beep) that did this. We will find you." I thought it was stupid to say stuff like that the day after the attacks. It says a lot about Jon Layfield as a person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Downhome 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 What the hell is wrong with him saying that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheFranchise 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 What the hell is wrong with him saying that? Absolutely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dewe 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Because you don't stop terrorism by making a country into a stinking parking lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tjhe CyNick Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Because you don't stop terrorism by making a country into a stinking parking lot. I dont know, I think I read that turning countries into parking lots is the way to stop terrorism. I believe it was in the new George W Bush Platform for 2004. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dazed Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Let's not turn this into a political discussion, guys. There's CE for that (unless you're scared of Tom) (I'm scared of Tom) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Heck, I'll say it --- JBL has been a rather good heel champ. He generates tons of heat, his matches really are MUCH better than his previous work --- and if they give the title to UT at SSlam, it'll be a huge mistake. As for his comments --- it was done two days after the attacks. I heard MUCH worse. Nothing was even close to offensive. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lil' Bitch 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 Well, I hope Undertaker gets the title back. *begs for UT to use his pull Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted August 7, 2004 While I disagree with the whole "turning countries into parking lots" comment, I do understand that Bradshaw (like most all of us) was very angry and saddened after 9/11. I thought what Stephanie said was much more bizarre and offensive - comparing the attacks to the steriod scandal the WWF went through. Also, why would BRADSHAW be a lockeroom leader? Isn't he disliked because of the alleged hazing incidents? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Downhome 0 Report post Posted August 7, 2004 I don't have a problem with JBL at all right now, and I never really did. Years ago I said on this very board, and everywhere else, that he'd be a world champ one day. I didn't think it would be this soon, I figured maybe in two more years from now, but whatever. I've loved his matches so far, his character, his interviews, and I've really enjoyed his mannerisms in the ring, and out. I'll give a pass to someone if they aren't outstanding in the ring as long as they can make up for it with interviews and overall character, and Bradshaw does that for me. But like I said, I've even enjoyed his matches. I can't wait to see what he can do with Taker. If any of you have the first Before They Were Superstars DVD, they have an old Taker/Bradshaw match on there, heh. I find it odd that he's now the champ, and Taker is after him now. I hope Bradshaw beats Taker, continues to get more and more cocky with possibly a group that he becomes the leader of, and is only knocked off when not too many really expect it, by a huge babyface underdog. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Reservoir_Kitty Report post Posted August 8, 2004 Bradshaw? Insensitive? Speaks without thinking beforehand? NEVER! Personally, I'm not real hip with Bradshaw being the champion. I never really liked Bradshaw, his characters were either too boring or too over the top. I will say that he is playing this role very, very well and should be applauded for that. I really don't make it a point to watch Smackdown much anymore, but I hope that Undertaker wins and this is his last hurrah. But that's another subject entirely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JMA Report post Posted August 8, 2004 I actually DO like Bradshaw's character. If anyone recalls, the idea for Bradshaw to be an "evil rich guy" was, oddly enough, suggested by SMARKS months before the change actually happened. I remember this because I was one of the many who suggested it. My problem with Bradshaw isn't his political beliefs or his limited wrestling skills, it's the fact that he's a company man who talks down to the IWC. While one could argue that he belittles smarks for heel heat, I'm not sure I buy that theory. I think it would've made much more sense if Eddie had beat JBL at Judgment Day (after a hard-fought battle). This would've put Bradshaw over as a legitimate singles star and make him into a viable contender for the US title - starting a feud with Cena. As it is, he was pushed too far, too early. It devalues the title to have a midcarder, who has only been built up for a few months, win the title. To WWE's credit, they have built him up outside the ring instead of exposing him by putting him in many matches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lt. Al Giardello 0 Report post Posted August 8, 2004 I love Bradshaw's character, he protrays it VERY well. I do think it's was way too early to give him the belt, he should of had a US title reign before the world title. But it's starting to grow on me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twisted Intestine 0 Report post Posted August 8, 2004 I've never been against Bradshaw.. I've never liked him, but I don't hate him. I thought he made a good heel from the moment he won the title.. he's probably better than half the roster on the mic.. The point of a heel is to get people to hate you.. which would probably make him the second biggest heel next to HHH... I honestly think alot of the things they do that pissses of smarks is intentional for heel heat.. Well, besides the bad wrestling.. although I think Bradshaw and especially HHH can put on good matches.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted August 8, 2004 Wait...HHH is a heel?!? All jokes aside, I'm generally and still indifferent to JBL. Not a fan at all of his wrestling, but he makes the effort which is better than others. But it still seems way too soon to put the title on him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites