longshot7

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 10:55 AM) Is it wrong of me to root for an Erstad injury? It will happen anyway, with him in the outfield. Don't worry.

If Erstad starts, we are in big trouble. Everyone that is overrating him without seeing him play day-to-day over the past 6-7 years needs to stop. He will hit .262 with a OBP of right around .300 - not #2 hitter or starter numbers.

QUOTE(Capn12 @ Mar 17, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) Heh, BA had approximately 0% chance of being in Chicago to start the season even if he had hit for 2 cycles today, sadly. Yay for Pods/Erstad/Dye outfields!! Shows what u know. Sox fans seem to have no clue how bad Erstad is at this point in his career. If he starts, we will be sorry.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 10:45 AM) BTW: Ono - Yes, I'm A Witch: easily one of the best albums of the first quarter of 07. Really? Have one of her albums from the 90s and virtually none of her Lennon-era stuff. I'll have to dl some of it. Can you elucidate - what makes it so good?

QUOTE(shipps @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 12:34 AM) I dont know why,but it bothers me to hear anyone say they didnt like it.What do you expect from this movie?Would you have rather had the Spartans to win the war?Should they have had guns?Should the queen have been Beyonce? See Letters from Iwo Jima. More or less, the same story. But done well. Very well. Agree w/ everyone about Sin City. HORRIBLE movie. I walked out.

I actually think it'll be Orton, as I think they're going to try to build him up this year close to what he was a few years ago. The Carlito/Flair match was very good, and you can't fault him for losing to Lashley - Bobby is a champ, and in the most touted match on the WM card. Orton will move into a feud w/ Edge, turn babyface, and if this all succeeds, will challenge for the belt around Survivor Series time. Unless he really catches fire, and they can stretch it to next Mania, which I doubt. Either that or Kennedy, but I think he needs a little more seasoning. For the record, I'll be rooting for Punk.

Destination X was pretty good. The stupidity was kept to a minimum for a change. Christian/Joe was terrific, and Sabin/Lynn was great despite the crowd. Senshi/Starr was great too. A couple others but I can't think right now. What happened to MNM last night? Why aren't they on the WM23 card?

Saw it last night - fairly underwhelming. Looked beautiful for sure - but as for the story, there wasn't a whole lot to it. Small group fights bigger group, small group wins for a while, bad-looking creature sells them out, and then bigger group wins. There virtually no tension in this film, which is a bad thing. If Letters to Iwo Jima (a film that is plot-wise, pretty similar) can create tension with a suicide mission, why can't 300? I didn't hate it. It just left me cold.

I'm not sure I get the conservative argument here. Valarie Plame's CIA status was revealed to the world, endangering her, and all of her contacts', life. How is covering this up and lying to investigators to protect your boss, not a crime? How was this not a revenge scenario when Joe Wilson revealed that there was no correlation between Iraq and Niger, one of themajor cases for going to war? If this is the only way to nail the administration for taking us to war under false pretenses, what's the problem?

at an airport, waiting for my plane, I read the introduction to her book Godless - I got so mad, I really wanted to punch her in the face right then & there. She, quite simply, is an asshole.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 08:06 PM) Here's what I don't get about this whole thing. "I don't remember"... that is all this man had to say. Period. I mean, hey, it worked for both Clintons for years! But seriously, why did Scooter go through all the trouble of trying to remember what really happened and then why did he choose to air it all out? As I get older, I mix up stuff all the time, and no, not on purpose. I remember details a lot less clearly then I did 10 years ago. So, "I don't remember" is plausible, and there's no trial. So what the hell REALLY happened here? Of course, you Dems will defend Joe Wilson because he's a HERO to you all, but that's the scumbag that needs to be drilled, but oh well. What did Joe Wilson do?

I wish I knew. I picked him towin ROTY last year. Ha! shows what I know.

1. As for Cheney, I'll believe it when I see it. 2. As a left-leaning independent, I have no problem with Condi. 3. If this happens, I wouldn't be surprised if we have a Ford redux. Don't forget about the curse.

watched the majority of the doc (the Koppel thing is on the Tivo for later) - and pretty much most of my fears were true. The assumptions the filmmakers made were inexcusable - you can't assume that there was a Matthew in Maria's family tree because the Bible says that there is. You can't assume Joseph (Jesus' father) and Maria were both decendants of David because the Bible says so. Newsflash: The Bible is NOT a reliable text, especially in assertions about Jesus' lineage. 1st century, and other ancient texts, should only be trusted if corroborating sources can be found. I found the argument about Jose, Jesus' supposed brother to be compelling, but I'm not sure if it's enough for a skeptic to believe. Maybe this tomb will end up being the Shroud of Turin for non-believers.

It's official at WM23 - from wwe.com: RVD/Sandman/Sabu/Dreamer v Burke/Striker/Thorne/CorVon (8-Man Tag Match) also Randy Orton v Carlito v Flair on RAW monday for the final MITB slot.

yeah, it's just the one episode - but they've got them already shot, so why not air them - it's not like anything on that channel gets ratings anyway. as for RAW last night - Khali disrupted the final MITB qualifier between Carlito & Ric Flair. I'm expecting a big reveal that Orton was behind this somehow, leading him to grab the last MITB spot. also, Johnny Nitro (in a last minute switch) took on Cena. Mercury & Melina were there at ringside. It wouldn't surprise me for MNM to get a tag title shot next week on RAW, win the belts, and then defend them at Mania. Who against I have no idea, but I'm hoping they do a title unification bout vs London & Kendrick.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 01:14 PM) The old Clarence Darrow/Carl Sagan stumper! If William Jennings Bryan was as up on his OT as he should have been, he would have noted that cain, Abel, and Seth were merely the first generation of children born to Adam and Eve. Without listing them by name, genesis clearly states that Adam and Eve had lots of children both male and female after that first set of named kids. Cain's wife was obviously one of his sisters, if we are to adhere tothe Christian tenet that all people are descended from the first man and woman. 800+ years and Eve was still pushing them out. That's some longevity. Yes, but I think the larger point this hints at is that the story is clearly creation mythology, not literal truth. In a sense, who cares who Cain's wife was when the point of the story probably something else. Both sides (believers and not) are guilty of focusing so hard on extraneous details that they miss the message being delivered.

Wanted to add an addendum to my earlier post without editing it. I didn't mean to infer that people who do believe in the resurrection have no common sense. I meant that to skeptics, evidence is not necessary to disprove the resurrection as it should seem obvious to them already. Just like to Christians, the truth of the resurrection would also be obvious to someone who has faith. And don't get me started on the Old Testament, jokesters. Who was Cain's wife?

I too am VERY skeptical about this - and I'm about as far from a Christian as one can get. The things I've read have said that the inscriptions are incredibly hard to decipher - and the coincidence of the names just seems too easy for me. To whoever questioned the middle class tomb - there is no evidence on either side that can prove how rich or poor Jesus' family was. Take everything in the Bible with a grain of salt unless it can be confirmed in other secular 1st Century sources. The thing that makes me the most mad about this whole thing - is how desperate the filmmakers & some non-Christians seem to disprove Christianity. Since when did someone need EVIDENCE to disprove that someone didn't rise from the dead? Common sense should dictate this. I don't see it changing anyone's minds. Good Christians will have their faith, regardless of what anyone says. Why is either side so desperate for validation? Just respect others' beliefs - why do this just to piss the other side off? What good does that serve?

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 01:15 PM) I remember this movie, it was called Sugar and Spice GREAT movie. A favorite. Completely silly and fun.

My only disappointment is the other episode I attended never aired. I want more airtime!!!

He's a good meat-n-potatoes North Dakota kind of guy, and definitely a good teammate. As long as we don't expect too much of him - he's not a very good hitter at this point in his career - he'll be fine.

Kennedy qualifies for MITB last night on ECW, beating Sabu in an Extreme Rules match. ECW was better last night than in most weeks (when it's completely unwatchable). The ending to the Lashley/Holly match was a classic in the mold of the Austin/McMahon cage match. SPOILERS On SD, Matt Hardy beat Joey Mercury to qualify for MITB and Finlay won a triple-threat MITB qualifier with Chris Benoit & MVP. So the MITB looks like this: Edge/Jeff Hardy/CM Punk/King Booker/Mr. Kennedy/Matt Hardy/Finlay with one spot remaining - Randy Orton? and sadly MNM looks like they're out (tag title match with London & Kendrick?)

let's hope we can respect each other and not let this devolve into name-calling... Has anyone heard about this documentary set to air on Discovery/History channel in which they purport to find the tombs of Jesus, Mary, Mary Magdalene, Jesus' son Judah, etc? It was produced by James Cameron, of Terminator & titanic fame. Yesterday they had a press conference outlining their discoveries and their conclusions. Without paraphrasing important details and getting it wrong, I would recommend checking out the New York Times' article on it. There is understandedly a lot of outrage over this in Christian circles, and their research and conclusions have come under fire by several important archaelogists. Is there a conclusion that the filmmakers can draw that will not raise ire? Are they jumping to a conclusion before having all the facts? Are they letting personal beliefs influence what should be a purely scientific investigation? Thoughts?

Right. Chief Blackhawk was an actual person, and as long as the logo isn't a racist caricature (like the Jndians), it's okay. I have never heard one person complain about the Hawks for that reason. Interesting to note that the current Atlanta Hawks started as a Blackhawks franchise named after the same person. He is still held in high regard by the residents of the Quad Cities, where they named a college after him among other things. From Wikipedia: The franchise was formed in 1946 as the Tri-Cities Blackhawks (named after Tri-City native Black Hawk) of the National Basketball League; it was based in the tri-city area between Moline, Illinois, Rock Island, Illinois, and Davenport, Iowa (now called the Quad Cities). 1951, the franchise relocated to Milwaukee, Wisconsin and became the Hawks. In 1955, it moved to St. Louis and then in 1968, finally Atlanta.