LowerCaseRepublican

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Aug 1, 2006 -> 10:48 PM) http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/01/horowitz...fies/index.html So what say you now Mr. Horowitz? Got any pointers for the defense team? How dare he try to make sure people get the Constitutional protections of a defense! So correct. Let's have no more defense attorneys. Let's just have the state charge people and make them disappear sans real trials. I saw that ideology in some old black and white newsreels. Unfortunately I couldn't understand the narration since it was in Russian.

QUOTE(MHizzle85 @ Aug 1, 2006 -> 11:34 PM) Looks like I actually missed a good ECW show, looks like i'll have to get the torrent Big Show has become the epitome of hyperbole. Thanks to Vince fed lines, Big Show now has a "medicine ball" head, "skillet-like" hands "arms like peoples' legs" and "legs the size of people". During the main event, the crowd started in with some really harsh chants that got acknowledged by Tazz and Styles, which surprised the Hell out of me that they'd acknowledge them From "You can't wrestle" to "You both suck!" to my personal favorite -- "Change the channel!" During the "Change the Channel" chant, Tazz said: "Why? We love it here on Sci Fi..." and then went silent as he figured out what the chant meant. They also let loose with some boring chants that Styles and Tazz had to cover over saying "This is anything but boring." The main event was crap and Dave sucked major league. The bright spot of the main event (outside of the crowd's negative chants which were difficult to hear due to the low sounding mics at the Hammerstein, kthx WWE) was the Sabu run-in and the multiple top rope chair shots Show took before taking a table spot to end the show. Punk did well with chain wrestling against Credible and Credible did pretty damn well himself -- the old school wrestling of picking out a body part and dissecting it with moves. Angle's squash was expected. The Dreamer/Sandman vs Knox/Test match was pretty good with a nice blade job by Dreamer and worked well to get everybody over a bit in the building of the feud. Outside of the main event, they did pretty good getting over most everybody and constructively built on some long term feuds.

This week's ECW was actually pretty good. Hilarious that the mikes were so inaudible tonight because that crowd at the Hammerstein was hot. I'm starting to like this gimmick of the hardcore icons vs Heyman's (read: Vince's) vision for ECW. The finish was booked pretty well to get extra heat for Heyman, put over Dreamer despite the job + make Test seem a little extreme via using the barb wire. It could get real good. CM Punk getting a win tonight was pretty cool. Although it would have been great to see him do the Pepsi Plunge (basically a pedigree from off the turnbuckle) Angle got a nice "welcome back" from the fans and put on a nice MMA style squash. I'm also getting into this Sabu vs Show feud. Instead of giving us the match real fast, they're making there be anticipation for it and the crowd is clearly marking for Sabu every time he interferes with a chair and gets the better of Show like he did. It made Show look vulnerable and Sabu came out looking pretty strong. All around, a pretty solid wrestling show. Although some of the chants during the Batista/Show match were comical (i.e. "You both suck!" etc.) Dave was really out of his element tonight. Granted he knew it was Tuesday, but it wasn't a SmackDown! audience.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 1, 2006 -> 09:55 AM) I really, really wish they had gone for a story that HASN'T already been done in the Batman franchise. Doing a Joker movie means competing with the original Batman film, and that's just plain stupid. Better to go with a villain not already done. If they go with a story like the one found in "Batman: The Killing Joke", it should be a solid film and different from the first Batman movie (which I still consider the best one) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_The_Killing_Joke -- SPOILERS FOR THE COMIC WITHIN And Heath Ledger as Joker should be interesting. I was pulling for Johnny Depp but I'm not quite sure anybody could top Nicholson's Joker performance. He was so fantastic in the role.

QUOTE(Brian @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 07:23 PM) I want to go to an ROH show sometime when they come to Chicago. I believe they'll be in Chicago Ridge on Aug. 26. Tickets on sale at www.rohwrestling.com

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 09:53 PM) It is difficul to use the term "war crime" here when the instigator is a terrorist organization that doesn't play by the rules of war. Does blowing up a bus full of Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv fall under the "war crimes" definition as well? At least the Israelis told the Lebanese to get out of the region before they attacked. And if you're going to accuse Israel of "ethnic cleansing"... wow... I can't imagine what you'd accuse Iran, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda of. I agree with some of what you say and Israel sure as hell hasn't handled this situation perfectly. But what are they supposed to do? Nearly the entire Arab world wants them all dead... because they're Jews. Just like Hitler and Stalin murdered tens of millions of them in the not-too-distant past... because they're Jews. What the hell would you do if you were in their shoes? Would you try to appease the terrorists who want you dead or would you go after them aggressively to ensure your survival? It isn't a religious cleansing that they want. It's pragmatic in dealing with everyday life. Random checkpoints where you can be detained for no reason (hey, if it amuses the guards, they can keep you there all day), massive concrete apartheid walls -- oh, excuse me "security fences" that keep Joe Q. Palestinian from getting to their farm and a system that keeps unemployment rates at over 30% in Palestinian areas...it's no wonder that so much of Palestine is in trouble and wanting to retaliate. After the 1967 war, Palestinian refugees had a helluva time dealing with the Israeli government (wrote my senior thesis on the mental and physical impact of the 1967 war on Palestinians and how these experiences led to the development of militant nationalism). The Israeli government tried to expel all Arabs from the area and included forced bus expulsions, moving people out in the middle of the night, destroying homes/villages to force people out. There was a clear policy set forth by many generals in the IDF during that time that Israel was meant for Jews only and nobody else. Apartheid much? Much like the Jews after the Holocaust, there is such a thing called learned helplessness -- hence many of the Jews living in squalor in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust and not immediately going out and picking up their lives and starting over. The same thing happened to many Palestinians as a result of the '67 war and it has been documented as a legitimate psychological effect of those as a result of experiencing being displaced by war. Just like the state of Israel eventually seized the nationalist tendencies of a land for Jews only (again going to the previous stuff regarding the 1967 war) And before we get into a debate about the 1967 war, from Norman Finkelstein: "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict" he writes: "At any rate, there was not one civilian casualty on Israel's northern border due to Syrian shelling for the six-month period leading up to the June 1967 war." And Yitzhak Rabin: "I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the Sinai on 14 May would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." (Le Monde, Feb 29, 1968). Israeli General Peled: "To pretend that the Egyptian forces massed on our frontiers were in a position to threaten the existence of Israel constitutes an insult not only to the intelligence of anyone capable of analyzing this sort of situation, but above all an insult to the Zahal (Israeli army)" (Ha'aretz, Mar 19, 1972) Prime Minister Menachem Begin: "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him" (Jerusalem Post, Aug 20, 1982) If former Prime Ministers and high ranking Israeli officials don't buy the "OMG! Everybody wants to get rid of us!" paranoia, why should anybody buy it? How does that just justify an Israeli war machine? It's overzealous rhetoric that is a product of the development of militant nationalism and a coping mechanism for people who have lost everything. (A lot of the research I checked out for my thesis was pretty interesting about this topic -- that they didn't necessarily care for the militarism but the ideas of nationalism, pride in the country and hitting the people that had put them in such dire straits was appealing because they didn't have a whole lot else going for them at all) I'm not condoning what they do -- but there is a sociological and psychological basis for it. Why make a business and have a successful household when it can be "accidentally" obliterated in a bombing campaign and you lose it all? No amount of "Oops" from the government is going to bring back their lives before the campaign. State terrorism is the same as "traditional terrorism". If they bomb and kill civilians who are (and I'll take WCSox's statement that Hizbollah is hiding among civilians despite my reading of a few journalists on the ground who have seen the exact opposite) hiding among civilians and this is just seen as "tragic but not preventable" then the same standard should hold for suicide bombings and rocket attacks in Israel. With the forced military service, one could argue that their tactics are meant to attack legitimate military targets (i.e. soldiers eligibile to serve and have/are serving) and that civilian deaths are "tragic but not preventable". If the state's argument is taken to its logical extension, it leads to a place of morality that they do not appreciate. And Nuke -- explain to me how rocket attacks are terrorist, yet shooting missiles out of helicopter gunships is "civilized"...Crown me with a Godwin award for bringing a Nazi reference in but...Israel has toyed with approving the equivalent to the Lidice strategy http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1832147,00.html ""Another suggestion was that Israel would 'wipe out' any Lebanese village from which Hezbollah rockets are fired."

Salon.com with an interesting article about the myth of Hezbollah hiding among civilians. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/...h/index_np.html Now, to play Devil's Advocate here: Israel’s response is the usual “oops, sorry” followed by the rationalization that tragedies such as this are “inevitable” because Hezbollah are operating within civilian populations, using said civilians as “human shields”. Let’s remember where this kind of rationalization for death and destruction leaves us, especially considering that every Jewish Israeli over the age of 18 must serve in the military, effectively rendering every single person in Israel a “human shield” for the Israeli war machine. Accordingly, will the deaths of bystanding grandmothers and children in Israel also be considered simply “inevitable” when Hezbollah’s equally stupid and brutal rockets reach populated areas? And why is it okay for the Israelis to call the Canadian prime minister and say "Oops!" for killing those Canadians? Are they just to assume its all cool because they apologized for it half-assedly? Hell, why didn't Hezbollah think of that and get on the blower with Ehud Olmert when their missiles flew into Haifa? Or Al Qaeda calling Georgie to say "My bad about those buildings!"

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 06:14 PM) Pot is essentially alcohol that can be more-readily grown at home and doesn't have the negative physical side-effects. The result is that it's very easy to abuse... and would likely be very widely-abused if it were legalized. At the very least, a surge in the number of traffic-related deaths from driving under the influence would occur. Using the example of the Dutch, they experienced a brief spike after instituting their drug policy but the rates went down soon after. There wouldn't be a surge in traffic related deaths for DUI any more than the traditional ones with alcohol. Morons will always get behind the wheel after using a substance (both legal and illegal). The majority should not be punished for the acts of a small sliver minority. Despite the legalization of soft drugs, use of cannabis in the Netherlands is not higher than most other countries in Western Europe: 9.7% of young males consume cannabis at least once a month, which rates the Netherlands 7th in the EU after Cyprus (23.3%), Spain (16.4%), United Kingdom (15.8%), France (13.2%), Italy (10.9%) and Germany (9.9%). Some critics say that the legalization of soft drugs often leads to quicker consuming of hard drugs. Yet, the percentage of the population which ever consumed cocaine in the Netherlands is still lower than that of the United Kingdom, Spain and Italy. The situation is similar for other hard drugs. We've seen what prohibition does. It fails to work and leads to an upsurge in criminal enterprises (see the growth of the mob during the time alcohol was prohibited) Drug usage should be allowed for personal use as long as that person is not hurting anybody else and they know the risks/benefits of their choice. The US has gotten pretty hypocritical when it comes to certain drugs being okay and certain drugs being banned. Currently, it is difficult for drug users to ask for help or seek treatment because of the criminal status of drugs; drug abuse should be considered an illness. Peter J. Riga believes "it is shameful and irrational that users of cocaine and heroin are labeled criminals and go to jail—with almost no hope of therapy or rehabilitation—while the users of the powerful drug alcohol are considered sick and given therapy." http://www.leap.cc/ -- Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 04:18 PM) So if I die before 2011, my wife is rich! After that, my family gets screwed. Well then, you know what you need to do. Soaked in green! I kid because I care™

QUOTE(knightni @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 01:31 PM) I still have WCW Monday Nitro for my PS1. Fun stuff! WCW Monday Nitro -- that game is... > I'm still ancy for SD vs Raw 2007. They're supposed to have fixed a lot of the glitches in the game and really allowed for good create-a-wrestler mode.

Look what I found...the Punjabi Prison Match! Ask for that top rate five star wonderful, technically sound, spot-fest match Critic and you shall receive! Part 1: Part 2: Part 3: Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZanCMqDoILM...american%20bash If nothing else the commentary between JBL and Cole is something quite funny to behold. They work well together.

Hahahaha... This is funny like the priest that was officiating my grandmother's funeral. The guy was such a rear canal the whole time (telling us when the service was going to be and basically treating the relatives like total magic) A few days after the service, he got busted for embezzling church funds -- seems he was helping himself to some of the profits from the offering and the spaghetti dinners. Couldn't have happened to a finer guy.

QUOTE(T R U @ Jul 31, 2006 -> 12:02 AM) Where do you get those hacks from? and how exactly do you apply them to the game? http://realwrestlecrap.proboards89.com/ind...6796&page=1 Should have all the info you'd need.

QUOTE(MHizzle85 @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 11:54 PM) How long has CZW been established? I believe they started in 1999. They've had a lot of homegrown stars like the H8 Club (Justice Pain and Nick Gage), Lobo, Nick Mondo etc. plus bringing in some indy guys like Strong, Shelley, Dutt to round out a pretty strong roster. They've been working a feud with ROH as well which is turning out to be pretty interesting. It's got the "purist, hand shake before the match, no cheap shots" ROH vs the "Chairs, thumbtacks, tables and anything that isn't nailed down" CZW. But they both can go technically in the ring and make highly entertaining matches.

Have your PC, download a N64 emulator, WWE No Mercy and then get the hacks for TNA wrestlers, current roster for WWE, the 6 sided iMPACT! ring et al. As for PS2 sports games, go for SmackDown vs Raw 2007. Almost all wrestling games have a ton of replay value. Hell, I'm still playing the old WCW vs nWo for N64.

QUOTE(Brian @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 10:34 PM) I thought this was a wrestling thread. This stuff sound horrible. It's got a strong niche. CZW (Combat Zone Wrestling) brings a bit of the "ultraviolent" to the wrestling sphere. A lot of their matches are very good technically with quality moves and ring psychology plus the big spots that come in. Their feud with ROH is pretty damn good as well. The annual Tournament of Death is the showcase of just how hardcore they can get (not to mention the Cage of Death in December with team rules). It's like a Japanese King of the Deathmatch tournament. If we're going to get soft and fuzzy for Foley and Funk putting their bodies on the line in a poorly heated, poorly attended and poor sized paycheck match for them, the same should be said for these guys. But the wrestlers can obviously get it on very well in the ring with and without weapons or the notably judgmental Philly fans wouldn't have given it such a cult following. From the technical standpoint, you may like their Best of the Best show more than the ToD. Some of the CZW alumni are Justin Credible, Alex Shelley, Roderick Strong, Jay Lethal, Petey Williams, Sonjay Dutt and Homicide so they can do some good technical wrestling as well as put on a hardcore spot-fest show. The final spot of ToD 5 (spoilers!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyFaTvODOTM...nt%20of%20death

QUOTE(MHizzle85 @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 10:26 PM) LCR, I've heard alot about this guy...is the hype true? He was pretty solid in the matches I've seen and had a penchant for taking truly insane bumps like this: And then continuing the match. He had to retire in the wake of that spot because his back had gotten a puncture wound in it and he was already wrestling that match with a broken hand. Plus, he was ready to go back to school and knew he could probably never top that spot with John Zandig, so he retired as a result of the injuries and getting back to school. I really enjoyed what he did in the ring. If you can find the 200 lighttubes match between he and Wifebeater. It was the finals of the 2002 Tournament of Death -- actually it's right here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suc-DSxDtYo...ch=nick%20mondo Here's a few clips: Assault Driver off a moving truck through tables/light tubes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjbXNa9bFQU...ch=nick%20mondo Zandig vs Sick Nick Mondo - 2 of 3 falls (the match with that roof spot) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0FaD-7NEak...ch=nick%20mondo Sick Nick Mondo vs Messiah (Messiah legit had been attacked in his home weeks before the show and had his thumb cut off by some thugs...yet still wrestled the match) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgCjXYzNiYY...ch=nick%20mondo Sick Nick Mondo Tribute Vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVbgCD59O5k...ch=nick%20mondo

WWE's current product is meh. I still watch their offerings on TV but I'm a bigger fan of TNA and CZW.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 07:36 PM) Actually there is truth to that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana Nuke, you forgot the last part of that research where it said "causality has not been established". That kinda puts a gaping hole in the point.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jul 28, 2006 -> 10:01 PM) I've had a $10 gift certificate for Cold Stone Creamery for about a year now. I had avoided it slightly due to an older thread on these boards, and the severe dividing line of "love" and "hate", and nothing in between. Steff really scared me from the place. Well, thanks to the heat I finally caved. The family and I went there. I decided to take the full plunge and did the Candy Land. Oh...my...god... Tasty? Yes. For about three bites. After that? I'm still sweating from the thing. No ice cream should be that strong...that heavy, that...I don't know...sweet! Good Lord...do people eat that stuff on a regular basis? Steff commented on how it was way too sweet. That seemed odd to me. How could ice cream be "too sweet". I had no idea...but now...I will have nightmares. Did you have diabetes before eating the ice cream? No? Well, you do now.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 07:13 PM) So tell me........what does his deputies killing a prisoner have to do with austere conditions in prison? Point 2. People who have been most successful at effecting changes in the laws did it by working within the system. Explain to me how going on marches, freedom-rides etc etc is breaking the law when its constitutionally protected by the 1st amendment? Seems to me that you are very bitter about your inability to get high legally. I find your reasoning, blaming racism, corporate interests etc.......etc....... almost as dubious as your assertion that 41% of Americans want to de-criminalize pot. Point 1 -- I was pointing out many of the lawsuits have merit and that his conditions are so poor that it is causing more lawsuits (i.e. from poor/no treatment for those who need immediate medical assistance) Not only do many of them have merit, but they also are costing the county lots of money. Plus, he's been nailed for misappropriating funds, etc. as I discussed. Point 2 -- Freedom rides and the marches were often illegal because they were not able to get the permits (hence the police presence often times to force them to disperse). The sit-ins at restaurants were also illegal because the law clearly dictated separation of the races. Why do you think Rosa Parks got arrested when she refused to move from the seat? It was illegal for her to sit there according to the law. That's the point I was getting at -- numerous people throughout the history of the US have worked outside of the system of law to create substantive change. It isn't about bitterness of not being able to get high legally. It's about personal choice and the fundamental right of a person to have the self-determination to put what they want to into their body as long as they don't harm another person. Drugs were banned because of very overt racism (take some of these Hearst headlines) 1930: “Marihuana is responsible for the raping of white women by crazed negroes.” 1935: “Marihuana influenced negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows, and look at a white woman twice.” Hearst had lots of reasons to help. First, he hated Mexicans. Second, he had invested heavily in the timber industry to support his newspaper chain and didn't want to see the development of hemp paper in competition. Third, he had lost 800,000 acres of timberland to Pancho Villa, so he hated Mexicans. Fourth, telling lurid lies about Mexicans (and the devil marijuana weed causing violence) sold newspapers, making him rich. Some samples from the San Francisco Examiner: "Marihuana makes fiends of boys in thirty days -- Hashish goads users to bloodlust." "By the tons it is coming into this country -- the deadly, dreadful poison that racks and tears not only the body, but the very heart and soul of every human being who once becomes a slave to it in any of its cruel and devastating forms.... Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum. Smoke marihuana cigarettes for a month and what was once your brain will be nothing but a storehouse of horrid specters. Hasheesh makes a murderer who kills for the love of killing out of the mildest mannered man who ever laughed at the idea that any habit could ever get him...." And other nationwide columns... "Users of marijuana become STIMULATED as they inhale the drug and are LIKELY TO DO ANYTHING. Most crimes of violence in this section, especially in country districts are laid to users of that drug." "Was it marijuana, the new Mexican drug, that nerved the murderous arm of Clara Phillips when she hammered out her victim's life in Los Angeles?... THREE-FOURTHS OF THE CRIMES of violence in this country today are committed by DOPE SLAVES -- that is a matter of cold record." -- Racism and cheap tawdy journalism along with the fact that DuPont, Kimberly Clark and pharma companies wanted cannabis banned was the reason that it was banned. They were going to get their asses kicked on a free market with the products that hemp would be able to produce. I mean, if the US government through cannabis was so evil, why would they produce a film with this title during World War II? As for the increasing amount of the public growing to want decrim of marijuana -- talk to USA Today and not me about that. I merely cited their poll.

QUOTE(MHizzle85 @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 07:04 PM) must. find. torrent. YouTube's got some of the old ToD matches. I highly suggest the Zandig vs Sick Nick Mondo match from ToD 2. It's the match that cut Mondo's career short after he took a Mother F'n Bomb off a roof through tables and a few light tube log cabins (well actually, Zandig went through most of the tables so Mondo had little to nothing to break his fall) Of course, after the spot, they continued the match. Their Cage of Death shows are also really crazy and really entertaining.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 06:31 PM) It's not Arpaio who is driving up costs in Maricopa county but leftists like you who disagree with his methods and file frivolus lawsuit after frivolus lawsuit to try to effect change. I want to pay special attention now to this statement of yours. Who are you to decide what "real crime" is and what it is not anyway? The people who decide that are the legislators when they criminalize and de-criminalize behavior as they see fit. You can wrangle about how it should be punished all you want ( I do somewhat agree that a first offense for posession of a small amount of ganja can be handled with a heavy fine ) but you are falling into the typical leftist trap of some laws being more important than others. Respect for the law is what holds our society together. When we as people try to make decisions about which laws are worth following and which aren't then none of them mean anything and anarchy results. If the public wanted Marijuana legalized it would have been done by now. You who favor legalization of narcotics are a tiny minority and always will be. It isn't frivilous. Why would they settle for nearly $9 million with Scott Norberg's family if they were innocent (and there's little proof that a trial would cost that much) In 1996, the state auditor found that Arpaio had misused more than $122,000 of taxpayers' money from the jail-enhancement fund. Arpaio used the money to pay for a private attorney in a constitutionalist lawsuit against the county and for videotapes of his own television appearances, among other things. Since 1996, more than 2,600 lawsuits have been filed against Arpaio, including more than 850 by inmates. Payouts have totaled in excess of $16 million, while more than $35 million in wrongful-termination suits are pending. The death of Scott Norberg, who was choked to death by detention officers, cost the county $1 million in private-attorney fees, plus $8.25 million in settlement costs. In June, an appeals court upheld the payment of $1.5 million to Timothy Griffin, who suffered a ruptured ulcer after being refused treatment by jail medical staff. Also, he's given himself numerous pay raises. In 1996, a Department of Justice investigation found that Maricopa County inmates regularly were subjected to excessive force and received negligent medical care. Arpaio bragged later that he had changed nothing in the jails after the federal probe. Inmates at the Madison Street Jail are often locked up for two or three months before they receive medical screenings. In doing so, the department has been violating a court order from a 1983 lawsuit, which requires that inmates receive a medical screening within 14 days of their arrival at the jail. Deputies and detention officers say that such lax medical screening puts them, as well as other inmates, in danger of contracting diseases, and provides even more fodder for lawsuits. He relies on cheap, tawdry publicity stunts that make for effective TV news sound bites and talking heads blathering material rather than effective crime prevention. As for "real crime" and the respect of laws, numerous times in history people have stood up in opposition of certain laws (the Boston Tea Party, the American Revolution and Jim Crow and the civil rights movement of the 1950s) that were legal. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion, then these people should have respected the laws on the books and not gone on marches, freedom rides, sit-ins, etc. I'm not saying you're racist or anything of the such -- I'm simply taking the "We must respect all laws as laws" argument to its extension and application. Quick history of cannabis sativa criminalization: 1930s: Numerous Mexican immigrants are using the product. Xenophobic fears and feelings prompt anti-marijuana legislation in certain states with the very overt idea of attacking Mexicans Hearst newspapers join Harry Anslinger and other major corporations (such as Kimberly Clark, DuPont, etc.) in criminalizing cannabis through Hearst's completely insane, fake news stories. Clark and DuPont didn't like that cannabis sativa plants can create numerous industrial products (oils, paper products, clothing et al.) with easy replenishment -- and it is one of the strongest fabrics on the planet. These companies had timber holdings/plastic interests that would lose money on the free market if they had to face cannabis and hemp on a free market. 1937: Cannabis is criminalized by the US government with such compelling arguments on the floor of Congress such as "it causes people to fall under the influence of listening to jazz" and that "a black man may look at a white woman twice" among other bold faced lies and overtly racist propaganda (i.e. Anslinger believing that marijuana made "darkies" [his word"] feel almost equal to white people) During Nixon's administration, he commissioned a report on the drug war. When the government report said that marijuana prohibition was a low priority goal and not really worth the efforts, he refused to read it and let it sit on his desk. Due to racist propaganda, overly lying and sensationalistic xenophobic newspapers and companies that wanted to short circuit a free market, we have cannabis being prohibited. It's a really glossed over part of our history. I'm certain that if people knew the true facts rather the "This is your brain...This is your brain on drugs" commercials being crammed down their throats, they'd be more in favor of making cannabis and other drugs legal. You and I both know that most Congressmen are owned by special interests and corporate cash rather than facts, logic, reason and their constituency. Plus, the amount of people believing it should be legalized is growing from 15% in 1972 to 41% in 2003. So it isn't a small minority that will always stay that way. It's a growing movement. Quick Edit: The statistics on decrim support are from USA Today.

QUOTE(MHizzle85 @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 06:14 PM) please, do tell... I haven't been able to see the matches, but I did find out that (highlight to see winner) Nick Gage won the whole thing. It was a few three way dances in the beginning and then set up for the final four way match in the finals. Some of the spots included: *light tube shots and barbed wire ropes *suplexes into a barb wire spider web *an eyebrow ring being cut out via scissors *hip toss off a moving truck through four tables *2 wheedwhacker shots (the string part) to the gut *cannonball senton off of a moving truck onto two other wrestlers through plate glass and tables http://realwrestlecrap.proboards89.com/ind...read=1154142081 has a bunch of info and videos of past matches.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 30, 2006 -> 06:06 PM) You say that just because Arpaio is popular doesn't make him morally right. Well, in the leftist world everything is relative, especially whats morally right, and its a tasty morsel of irony that I get to apply it here to you. Prison should be austere, it should be hard, it should inflict punishment on someone not coddle them under the false pretense of rehabilitation. Measures like making them live outside, eat bologna sandwiches and watch the weather channel accomplish all of that and cut down on costs as well. His methods should serve as a model for all sheriffs to follow in how prisoners are treated. I also had a good chuckle from your last paragraph where you try to equate use of illegal drugs with "personal freedoms". Those are the words of an anarchist and its hardly surprising to hear them coming from you. Just because someone is engaged in illegal activity in the privacy of their own home does not make it any less illegal. Actually Arpaio blows through tons of taxpayer money (lawsuits, having to settle for millions multiple times out of court etc.) so his idea that he is cutting costs is pretty laughable. Not to mention also but the costs (financial, manpower, et al.) are monumental to pay to go after some guy with a bloody nose and some south of the border limpness because he chose to do some blow while watching SNL in the privacy of his own home. Wouldn't police resources be better spent actually stopping real crime rather than John Q. Public lighting up a doob on his back porch? Why should it matter to anybody else if a person decides to use a drug and use it in a responsible fashion without harming anyone else? I'll again forward you the idea of reading "Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed" by Judge James Gray (a conservative former Republican who joined the Libertarian party) And taken from the noted socialist, commie loving liberal William F. Buckley, Jr. "Marijuana never kicks down your door in the middle of the night. Marijuana never locks up sick and dying people, does not suppress medical research, does not peek in bedroom windows. Even if one takes every reefer madness allegation of the prohibitionists at face value, marijuana prohibition has done far more harm to far more people than marijuana ever could."