The W
Views: 179001436
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.3.17 0807
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - JBL v. The Torch's Wade Keller
This thread has 8 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
(6595 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (15 total)
Kawshen
Liverwurst
Level: 75

Posts: 896/1201
EXP: 3750700
For next: 76221

Since: 2.1.02
From: Bronx, NY

Since last post: 5402 days
Last activity: 3662 days
#1 Posted on 29.12.04 1632.49
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1635.11
http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/article_11276.shtml

    Originally posted by PWTorch.com
    WWE Champion John Layfield (a/k/a JBL) sent in the following letter from Afghanistan in response to the Keller's Take he read while online overseas earlier this week.


And Keller posted his response to JBL in that link also.

Here is said Keller's initial take: http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/article_11276.shtml

Basically JBL calls Keller a dirtsheet writer and Keller says there was too much politics and media-hating.



Promote this thread!
Sobriquet
Bauerwurst
Level: 26

Posts: 28/106
EXP: 92512
For next: 9765

Since: 25.7.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 5675 days
Last activity: 5674 days
#2 Posted on 29.12.04 1657.27
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1658.14
Hmmmm... I read and then re-read that, I don't see where JBL comes off as labelling Keller a "dirtsheet writer". By the very fact he sends a rebuttal -- however misguided it may or may not be -- he is acknowledging that Keller is at least somewhat respectable as a journalist, albeit a wrestling columnist. (I suppose I reveal a little of my own bias with that comment, but c'est la vie).

Keller did a good job in turning aside JBL's criticisms, and good on him for it. I just don't see where JBL questioned his credibility -- merely what he said.
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 145

Posts: 841/5537
EXP: 37175839
For next: 428333

Since: 12.12.01

Since last post: 1764 days
Last activity: 1416 days
#3 Posted on 29.12.04 1708.14
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1708.24
"Basically JBL calls Keller a dirtsheet writer"

I don't really agree, and I wouldn't put them in opposition as nemeses in the thread title either. Layfield's response was almost a complete 180 from the kind of stuff he wrote last May and seemed to me like a very sincere, rational, and fairly-written point of contention, even though I personally agree more with what Wade inititally wrote.
MoeGates
Boudin blanc
Level: 100

Posts: 1795/2353
EXP: 10282928
For next: 71504

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 23 days
Last activity: 1 day
#4 Posted on 29.12.04 1730.00
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1730.41
The general rule: The more often the word "respectful" or "respectfully" is used in reference to another person, the more the full of shit the writer thinks said other person is.
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 83

Posts: 1098/1498
EXP: 5223091
For next: 209153

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 2178 days
Last activity: 2166 days
#5 Posted on 29.12.04 1816.25
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1817.48
    Originally posted by MoeGates
    The general rule: The more often the word "respectful" or "respectfully" is used in reference to another person, the more the full of shit the writer thinks said other person is.


What? Who made that general rule? Come on, you guys are just trying to read something into Bradshaw's e-mail that just simply isn't there.
OMEGA
Lap cheong
Level: 88

Posts: 1332/1747
EXP: 6512120
For next: 138570

Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 5385 days
Last activity: 2990 days
#6 Posted on 29.12.04 1900.55
Reposted on: 29.12.11 1901.55
I see no problem with what JBL wrote. I, personally, thought he expressed his feelings in a very respectful and intelligent way. Even if, deep down, he was thinking to himself "This Wade Keller is a stupid piece of shit dirt-sheet writer", he still did a good job in writing his remarks in a tactful way. And to Wade's credit, he did the same in his rebuttal.

It's good to see two men arguing in a respectful way without resorting to name-calling and anger.

However, the thing I found most interesting: Bradshaw and Al Franken are friends? I don't know why, but that amuses me for some reason.

(edited by OMEGA on 29.12.04 2001)
CANADIAN BULLDOG
Andouille
Level: 92

Posts: 1566/1962
EXP: 7622825
For next: 134142

Since: 5.3.03
From: TORONTO

Since last post: 3990 days
Last activity: 1610 days
ICQ:  
#7 Posted on 29.12.04 2119.08
Reposted on: 29.12.11 2119.11
Layfield deserves a ton of credit for at least writing back and trying to explain his company's point of view. I'm sure it would have been a lot easier (and less controversial) just to leave Keller's commentary alone, because no matter what a guy like JBL says, the Internet's just going to crap on it anyways.

WWE did do a terrific thing by entertaining the troops(though I don't think there are too many people disputing that point), and if that comes with a little politicizing, so be it. I don't really think a few political comments here and there (and that's really all it was) in any way takes away from what guys like JBL accomplished there.

Is Vince McMahon doing this all for some good publicity? Very possibly, but think of how they've tried to get free PR in the past (the Billy-Chuck wedding springs to mind), and ask yourself if what McMahon said on the air is really so bad.

I have to say that like JBL or dislike him, he's a class act for (a) staying with the troops AFTER the cameras have been turned off and (b) writing that letter calmly and intelligently.

And... the "Now you can go back to bashing me as a terrible champion" sign-off at the end was cute.
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 152

Posts: 1137/6203
EXP: 44087231
For next: 214531

Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 947 days
Last activity: 327 days
#8 Posted on 29.12.04 2317.10
Reposted on: 29.12.11 2317.22

    like a very sincere, rational, and fairly-written point of contention


Luckily, he got all the irrational and insincere stuff out in his WWE.com column.
A Fan
Liverwurst
Level: 74

Posts: 1096/1164
EXP: 3578468
For next: 75093

Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 7001 days
Last activity: 7001 days
#9 Posted on 30.12.04 1049.43
Reposted on: 30.12.11 1049.44
I think JBL is the last person to critize the media since A) He was one on MSNBC until he got fired. B) If the media frenzy over the election didn't happen he probably wouldn't be champ. C) There is no C.

However, JBL wrote a very good and rational argument to support his claims. I watch Air American, Al does comment on JBL even had him on a few times and how much he disagrees with his position on the war, but never his committment to the troops. I kinda agree with the media basis with the war ie if it bleeds it leads, but to say everything fine in Iraqi is bit riddiculous to believe. I too have friends who I talk to you who hate the situation they are in and see no real leadership coming from the administration. Yet, they do beleive in the leadership of their commanders in front of them to get the job.

I just think Keller is wrong in this instance. Vince does spend a ton of money to go there, the show is free and the troops do appericate it. I know there is some money to be made on this ie advertising dollars and good PR, but ultimatly going to Iraqi is a good thing for everyone involved. I just think the internet breeds negativity, so if Keller wants hits to his site, he'll bash Vince every chance he gets, because thats what interests us. I do think this would be a nice critique of how wrestling fans and TV fans would rather have bad news than good news.
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 145

Posts: 842/5537
EXP: 37175839
For next: 428333

Since: 12.12.01

Since last post: 1764 days
Last activity: 1416 days
#10 Posted on 30.12.04 1812.30
Reposted on: 30.12.11 1812.59
Wade was more than fair about pointing out the enormous generosity in what Vince did, and Vince was perfectly deserving of criticism for politicizing an aspect of it. But the idea that it's bashing for the sake of bashing is silly.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple
Level: 147

Posts: 1486/5690
EXP: 38677825
For next: 760370

Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 327 days
Last activity: 327 days
#11 Posted on 30.12.04 1840.56
Reposted on: 30.12.11 1841.45

    B) If the media frenzy over the election didn't happen he probably wouldn't be champ.


I always thought the JBL character is how Vince would book himself were he an actual wrestler.



(edited by BigDaddyLoco on 30.12.04 1941)
HMD
Andouille
Level: 96

Posts: 1214/2131
EXP: 8778665
For next: 210154

Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 2541 days
Last activity: 2541 days
#12 Posted on 31.12.04 0240.45
Reposted on: 31.12.11 0241.27
I've never understood why everyone seems to think Vince is so right-wing. All of his ideals are decidedly liberal. He whines about freedom of expression, thinking it should allow him to parade necrophilia in front of children and then sell them toys. He is exactly what the extreme right deplore, the exact kind of liberal scum they spew their Jesus-tinged venom at, and yet everyone is like, that Vince, he such a republican! I'm sure he just votes goes red for the tax-cut, since money is his God.

Bradshaw made a fair point, but his main problem is he likes war. He really loves it. He loves knowing people are out there getting killed, it's a manhood test for him. He blinds himself to the real reasons things happen.

Vince McMahon went there for the PR. Doesn't mean he didn't do a great thing, but if it was just about the troops he wouldn't have gone all over TV talking about what a great thing he did. That why he came out first. Was it good for the troops? Absolutely. But it was still the Vince McMahon show, no doubt.
Torchslasher
Knackwurst
Level: 117

Posts: 1581/3369
EXP: 17605543
For next: 242405

Since: 17.1.02
From: South F’n Carolina

Since last post: 45 days
Last activity: 3 days
#13 Posted on 31.12.04 0720.44
Reposted on: 31.12.11 0720.58
    Originally posted by Hogan's My Dad
    I've never understood why everyone seems to think Vince is so right-wing. All of his ideals are decidedly liberal. He whines about freedom of expression, thinking it should allow him to parade necrophilia in front of children and then sell them toys. He is exactly what the extreme right deplore, the exact kind of liberal scum they spew their Jesus-tinged venom at, and yet everyone is like, that Vince, he such a republican! I'm sure he just votes goes red for the tax-cut, since money is his God.

    Bradshaw made a fair point, but his main problem is he likes war. He really loves it. He loves knowing people are out there getting killed, it's a manhood test for him. He blinds himself to the real reasons things happen.

    Vince McMahon went there for the PR. Doesn't mean he didn't do a great thing, but if it was just about the troops he wouldn't have gone all over TV talking about what a great thing he did. That why he came out first. Was it good for the troops? Absolutely. But it was still the Vince McMahon show, no doubt.


Unless you know Bradshaw personally, I absolutely think that you shouldn't make those kinds of comments about him "loving" war. You shouldn't say that Bradshaw advocates murder and death.

This is the kind of condescension that brings out the divide in this country, and this continent many times.

(edited by Torchslasher on 31.12.04 0522)
jivesoulbro
Bauerwurst
Level: 26

Posts: 81/106
EXP: 96163
For next: 6114

Since: 25.12.02

Since last post: 2766 days
Last activity: 2766 days
#14 Posted on 31.12.04 0901.27
Reposted on: 31.12.11 0903.42
If JBL thinks the reporters over there are such pussies, I wish he would at least acknowledge the journalists who died covering the war, such as Michael Kelley and David Bloom. I think there have been about two dozen others, but I'm not sure what the count is.
HMD
Andouille
Level: 96

Posts: 1217/2131
EXP: 8778665
For next: 210154

Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 2541 days
Last activity: 2541 days
#15 Posted on 31.12.04 1957.26
Reposted on: 31.12.11 1959.01
    Originally posted by Torchslasher
    Unless you know Bradshaw personally, I absolutely think that you shouldn't make those kinds of comments about him "loving" war. You shouldn't say that Bradshaw advocates murder and death.

    This is the kind of condescension that brings out the divide in this country, and this continent many times.

    (edited by Torchslasher on 31.12.04 0522)


I am taking that position based on years of statements Bradshaw has made out-of-character, which is all I need to go on. I don't have to know him personally, it's evident in numerous comments he has made.

For one, no one who brags about the success of the U.S. forces as much as Bradshaw does could possibly hate war. He appeared once before the troops and told them that the U.S. is undefeated in war, which isn't even true. His articles clearly indicate his stance. War is always the answer for Bradshaw. He loves it. He absolutely advocates murder and death, he has publicly stated that entire countries should be turned into parking lots to kill terrorism, giving no thought to the innocent or unconnected people who would die in the process. Clearly not having researched that in the entire history of terrorism it has never been defeated by force.

I don't see what's condescending about applying his own statements to the general sentiment they do nothing to obscure. He's like a lot of people in America and other parts of the world right now who love war. Of course they love it, they don't fight in them, their kids don't fight in them, so it's all glory for them.

This isn't a bias against any kind of conservatism ideology either, but two years of backlogged Bradshaw rants clearly indicate that he "loves" war.

ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: The History of the Cruiserweight Championship at WWE.com
Next thread: So when HHH replaces Vince....
Previous thread: The Great Thomas SmackDown! Report 12/30/04
(6595 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - JBL v. The Torch's Wade KellerRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2024 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.313 seconds.