WWE Strikes Back

October 15, 2010 -

World Wrestling Entertainment is tired of getting bad press at the hands of politicians in Connecticut. The company pointed out in a press release today that both Democrats and Republicans liked the organization just fine during the 2008 presidential election campaign and during its long-running SmackDown the Vote campaigns. In 2008 when the candidates Barack Obama, John McCain and Hillary Clinton wanted to court voters via the Monday Night RAW show no one had a problem with the WWE’s image. Now that its former CEO Linda McMahon, is running for political office (the Senate seat vacated by Chris Dodd), the WWE is some kind of evil empire.

The company provided quotes from 2008:

President Obama said: "Hey, WWE fans. I hope you are all enjoying the program tonight. You know, this is a historic time for America. It’s not just that the reign of Randy Orton is coming to an end, it is at this moment in this election, we have a chance to finally end business as usual in Washington. For a long time now, we’ve had a politics where our leaders go after each other like they’re competing to become King of the Ring instead of coming together to provide universal health care, fix our economy, solve our other problems. That’s what I’m running for President to change. So to the special interests, who have been setting the agenda in Washington for too long, to all the forces of division and distraction that have stopped us from making progress; for the American people, I have one question: ‘do you smell what Barack is cooking’?"

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said: "Hi, I’m Hillary Clinton, but tonight, in honor of the WWE, you can call me Hill-Rod. This election is starting to feel a lot like King of the Ring. The only difference: the last man standing may just be a woman. The truth is this election is so important. The next President will face a stack full of difficult challenges right from the opening bell: to fix the economy, to bring our troops home from Iraq, and make college more affordable. You need a President who will go to the mat for you, and that’s exactly what I’ll do. I’ve been knocked down, but I’ve always gotten back up. And I know how to take a hit for the American people. And if things get a little tough, I may even have to deliver the People’s Elbow because this country is worth fighting for. Now I promise to stick to the political arena. So don’t worry Randy Orton. You’re safe, for now. When it comes to standing up for the American people, though, I am ready to rumble."

Senator John McCain said: "How are ya South Carolina? Finally the Mac has come back to Greenville. Looks like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama want to settle their differences in the ring. Well, that’s fine with me, but let me tell ya, if ya wanna be the man, ya have to beat the man. Come November, it’ll be game over. And whatcha gonna do when John McCain and all his ‘McCainiacs’ run wild on you? You want to pull out of Iraq? Well I say no surrender. America can win the war against terror. I’m gonna introduce Osama bin Laden to the Undertaker. Wanna raise taxes? Well I want a smaller government and bigger individuals. You see my friends, I believe that America is the greatest nation in the world, and Americans don’t watch wrestling because we’re bitter. We watch WWE because wrestling is about celebrating our freedom. It’s about fighting to be the very best. So can you smell what the Mac is cookin? Let me give you a little straight talk WWE fans. You might need a ticket to the Fatal Four next weekend, but you don’t need a ticket to the cage match in November. All you have to do is get out there and vote. YOU decide the champion. YOU make the difference. And that’s the bottom line, because John McCain said so."

No doubt, some politicians would like to forget that the WWE helped them indirectly garner votes from the 18 – 30 year old demographic. You can read the rest at Politico. You can also check out video of McCain, Pelosi, Obama and Clinton singing the praises of the WWE at WWE.com.


Comments

Re: WWE Strikes Back

I personally remember the Hill-rod statement from Hillary and immediately reintroducing my palm to my face, however, the one thing I really remember from that night is the McCainiacs statement delivered in John McCain's signature monotonous style and cringing upon hearing it. But hey, at least Barack delivered on the "Do you smell what Barack is cookin'?" joke.

Honestly, Linda McMahon is the better candidate in the Connecticut race and considering her present competition, I hope she does win because the other guy is basically running on "I'm angry, but I have no stand-points with which to base my campaign on other than attack you".

The thing about American politics, though, and the reason that these tactics tend to work - and quite successfully at that usually - is a lot of people have very-very short memory spans with regards to politics.

----
Papa Midnight
http://www.thesupersoldiers.com

----
Papa Midnight

Re: WWE Strikes Back

An age old tactic, bring up pld irrelevant facts about your opponent to make them soem kind of monster

Re: WWE Strikes Back

"You liked me enough to want me to help you get votes, but now I'm running for office and you're saying I'm evil" is irrelevant? Making your opposition look like liars and hypocrites is irrelevant?

Not saying I want Linda to win, just saying.

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

Re: WWE Strikes Back

I think that hellfire meant that about what the politicos were doing to the WWE, not what WWE struck back with.

As to the larger point...I'm sure I'm not the first to say this, but attacking Mrs. McMahon based on her affiliation with WWE is a little dangerous. You risk looking elitist or classist. And the WWE is right - politicos have rarely had a problem using the WWE to drum up votes in the past.

That said, I think it should be patently obvious that the three presidential contenders were reading scripts provided to them. Then-Senator Obama was dropping references to Randy Orton, King of the Ring, and the Rock. Then-Senator Clinton was dropping references to King of the Ring, the Rock, and Randy Orton as well. And Senator McCain's little speech referenced the Rock, Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, the Undertaker, and "Stone Cold" Steve Austin. Looking back on it now, arguably McCain's bit was the best of the three...perhaps the WWE was trying to make him look better than his Democratic rivals.

And let's face it...'ring psychology' dictates that you attack your opponent at their weakest places. Watch some WWE programming and you'll see what I mean - one wrestler will constantly attack their opponent's knee, ankle, back, or neck. The wrestler will especially target something that is known to be injured or have been injured in the past. They will also target parts that are vital to their opponent's finishing moves. So it only makes sense for Mr. Blumenthal, the DNC, DSCC, etc, to target Mrs. McMahon's long-standing affiliation with - and ownership of - the WWE, particularly given the long list of injuries and tragic deaths for which most folks hold the WWE responsible.

Spekkio, Master of war

Re: WWE Strikes Back

I am damn tired of that list being thrown around like everyone on it was shot in the head by the McMahons. Some folks on there died in accidents or of natural causes, others NEVER got a WWE paycheck in their careers. Giant Gonzales died of complications due to him having diabetes, how the fuck is that WWE's fault?

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

Re: WWE Strikes Back

Gonzalez might not be accurate but defending WWF/E is very hard to do.

* This is the company that thought the necrophilia was a good idea. HHH must be proud of that moment. When that skid was done about a third of the stadium left in digust.

* This is the company that had steriods galore on the dressing rooms during the 90's with the Vince McMahon himself using them. Not to mention that their so called "wellness" policy is literaly a joke.

* This is the company that let Shawn Michaels wrestle with a serious head injury causing him to drop like a stone on a live event. (Look for Shawn Michaels VS Owen Heart on YouTube)

* Speaking of Owen Heart didn't he died due to a faulty line and drop over 50 feet to his death. Oh yeah I saw that first hand. Amazingle OSHA didn't do much on the matter.

* Oh let's not forget about Eddie Guerreo. When he passed away there was a so called moment of grieving and then WHAM! Let's piss all over his legacy by dragging his memrory through the mud for nearly a year.

* And what about Benoit the wife killer?? don't get me started with that crap.

I have been a wrestling fan for over 27 years and the WWE single handedly has turned wrestling into a royal joke. I understand their point of view and they are damn right but for you to try to remotely defend this shithole of a company and make them look like they have never done something wrong is simply a laughable attempt to humanize them.

Re: WWE Strikes Back

I'm not defending the whole fucking company. I'm saying, if you're going to rip into WWE for causing some people to die young, make sure you have your facts straight.

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.

I'm Charlie Owens, good night, and good luck.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will we ever get Half-Life 3?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, No problem. In juicy conversations, key points of discussion get pushed off quickly.10/02/2014 - 11:36am
NeenekoA rather scary censorship. I have known too many people and small companies destroyed by such pressure, so this unnerves me at a pretty personal level.10/02/2014 - 11:36am
NeenekoMy bad, I always have trouble working out what is going on in shoutbox10/02/2014 - 11:34am
Papa MidnightTo a point stated earlier, it very much is a form of indirect censorship. Rather than engage in rhetoric and debate, one side has instead chosen to cut-off opposing viewpoints at the knees and silence them via destroying their means of income.10/02/2014 - 11:28am
Papa MidnightNeeneko: the topic of Intel's dropping of Gamasutra is indeed part of this very ongoing conversation.10/02/2014 - 11:26am
NeenekoThis can't be good... http://games.slashdot.org/story/14/10/02/1558213/intel-drops-gamasutra-sponsorship-over-controversial-editorials10/02/2014 - 11:25am
Andrew EisenAnd there's also the consideration that the fact that a former IGN editor was one of the people who worked on the game's localization may be unknown (although in this specific case, probably not. Drakes been very visible at events IGN covers).10/02/2014 - 11:24am
Papa MidnightAlso, let's face it: people seem to believe that a conflict of interest can yield only positive coverage. Who is to say that Audrey Drake did not leave on bad terms with IGN (with several bridges burned in their wake)? That could yield negative coverage.10/02/2014 - 11:23am
Papa MidnightThat's a fair question, and it's where things get difficult. While Jose Otero may not have any cause to show favor, Jose's editor may, as may the senior editor (and anyone else involved in the process before it reaches publication).10/02/2014 - 11:21am
Andrew EisenWould such disclosure still be required if Fantasy Life were reviewed by Jose Otero, who wasn't hired by IGN until sometime after Drake left?10/02/2014 - 11:19am
Papa MidnightIn that case, a disclosure might be in order. The problem, of course, is applying it on a case-by-case basis; As EZK said, what's the cut-off?10/02/2014 - 11:19am
E. Zachary KnightAndrew, a disclosure would probably be in order as she likely still has a strong relationship with IGN staff. My follow up question would be "What is the statute of limitations on such a requirement?"10/02/2014 - 11:09am
E. Zachary KnightSleaker, my hyperbole was intended to illustrate the difference and similarity between direct censorship and indirect censorship.10/02/2014 - 11:07am
Andrew EisenOpen Question: Former IGN Nintendo editor Audrey Drake now works in the Nintendo Treehouse. Do you think it's important for IGN to disclose this fact in the review of Fantasy Life, a game she worked on? Should IGN recuse itself from reviewing the game?10/02/2014 - 11:07am
E. Zachary KnightSleaker, My thoughts on disclosure: http://gamepolitics.com/2014/09/25/what-your-gamergate-wish-list#comment-29598710/02/2014 - 11:02am
Sleaker@EZK - using hyperbole is a bit silly. I'm asking a serious question. Where's the line on disclosure as relates to journalistic involvement in the culture they report on?10/02/2014 - 10:59am
E. Zachary KnightSo a journalist reporting on general gaming news mentions a specific developer and their game involved in said news, and it is suddenly some nefarious conspiracy to hide a conflict of interest. I think someone is reaching for validation.10/02/2014 - 10:53am
Andrew EisenYes, imagine anyone insisting that two utterences of the phrase "Depression Quest creator Zoe Quinn" wasn't influenced by something happening in the future!10/02/2014 - 10:52am
Sleaker@Pap Midnight - So wouldn't it be any journalist writing about general gaming culture would need to disclose any and all links/ties to said general gaming culture to be ethical? Also @EZK to use you're own methodology, I'm still curious on the question10/02/2014 - 10:49am
KronoSure none of those are reviews, but it is positive exposure, which as illustrated by The Fine Young Capitalists, is pretty damn important for getting people to check out your work.10/02/2014 - 10:32am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician