Anyone Watch WWE? (1 Viewer)

Spitfrnd said:
I do remember G.L.O.W. There actually were some very attractive "ladies" that did show some athletic talent, including former title holder Tina Ferrari. The place at the Riviera Hotel where they filmed those matches were rather pitiful looking however.
3.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks for the picture, look at all that 1980's hair, 400 cans of aqua net per hairdo.

And this thread with all the political talk will be locked in 3, 2, 1...........
 
Considering that parties happened in this country pretty darn early among the property owners it's unlikely we'll see the end of them.
 
Warrior said:
Wait; professional wrestling is fake?

Really?

Wow, you learn something new everyday.........;)
Click to expand...

I think they actually had to come out and admit that WWF/WWE is actually "entertainment" and not a "sport" because of gambling laws/regulations in New Jersey years ago. (Like, back in the 1980's or 1990's maybe?)
 
Agree with Bill, Louis, dissolve the politcal parties and the career politicians, dishonest losers, not a good one in the bunch. They all have bodies buried somewhere along the line.

Today's voting choices are lesser of 2 evils, which one will screw up least. Unfortunately, I am not convinced that it matters who you vote for, they all stink in my book. Hence the reason I like it when someone non political runs for office. Bring back Jesse The Mind Ventura.

TD
 
I see voting for the firemen over the arsonists. Usually at fires arsonists don't hang around stepping on the hoses and insulting the firemen.

Or so my parable goes.
 
Okay, I'll throw in a contrary view:
SOME "career" politicians are GOOD, while others are closer to self-serving scum of the earth. Experience CAN be helpful to a politician (and the voters!) if it allows said politician to act to the benefit of the people he/she serves.

SOMETIMES, a non-experienced political candidate can bring a new point of view and change to the system. Other times, their lack of experience can also cause a lot of loss and delays that wind up hurting the people they're suppose to serve.

Politicians who know when and how to compromise and work with others (especially with people in other parties) to get the best results they can for their constituents are what we REALLY need, not the bozos who won't vote for anything if it's not proposec by their own party.
 
I get tired of the off hand remarks that all elected officials are bad. Their own constituents must approve of them as they get reelected. Successful and knowledgeable people that we'd like to see serve seem to be too busy or don't want the hassle. I don't think anyone with a new idea or who's an atheist can get elected in this country right now.
 
Scott said:
I get tired of the off hand remarks that all elected officials are bad. Their own constituents must approve of them as they get reelected. Successful and knowledgeable people that we'd like to see serve seem to be too busy or don't want the hassle. I don't think anyone with a new idea or who's an atheist can get elected in this country right now.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone here said they were all bad but the fact is that many, if not most, can be shown as such by impartial measurements. Election or re-election is not necessarily one of those measurements. Certainly just having new ideas or a particular religious orientation (or lack of one) should not be the major criterion for election.

I think the more frequent observation is that the system is not producing the best choices and that two party polarization is unhealthy and producing bad results. Oddly enough, I fine tiresome the offhanded remarks that any one party is bad or good; the fact is that both are neither; they are the some of their parts, which goes back to the basic problems.
 
I watched the WWF back in the 80's then gave it up for about 10yrs.
Started watching WCW in the mid 90's when Ted Turner owned it thought it was much better then WWF/WWE at the time plus the Nitro Girls were HOT :cool:.
Cant handle watching it now :eek:.
 
Spitfrnd said:
I don't think anyone here said they were all bad but the fact is that many, if not most, can be shown as such by impartial measurements. Election or re-election is not necessarily one of those measurements. Certainly just having new ideas or a particular religious orientation (or lack of one) should not be the major criterion for election.

I think the more frequent observation is that the system is not producing the best choices and that two party polarization is unhealthy and producing bad results. Oddly enough, I fine tiresome the offhanded remarks that any one party is bad or good; the fact is that both are neither; they are the some of their parts, which goes back to the basic problems.
Click to expand...

Maybe the best post I have read on this subject in some time, here here, toast to you Bill!

Our system doesn't work to the best of its ability at present. If it did, approval ratings would be through the roof, they are at the floor for nearly all individual members of government (elected). Not all of them, but most. Blaming one party all the time is just the other party's way of getting headlines, it is OLD, boring and tiresome and both parties are guilty as sin at it.. We need independent thinking and compromise that puts our Country and citizens first and overrides the reelection desires and pocket lining that goes on. IT IS A JOB and a PRIVILEGE, if you do good at it, you will be reelected.

Tom
 
Nope. I'm right on this one. Getting people to boo and cheer for wrestlers is one thing. Distracting voters with 'shiny keys' is another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top