Education time for idiots;
What bs did I say about the presidents? I gave reasons why they were on Mt. Rushmore, reasons that are what MADE them the greatest presidents and lead to their being the ones chosen for the monument. Go read a history book or search listverse . com or cracked . com and read up on how awesome and badass Teddy Rosevelt was and tell me I made up the shit I wrote about him. Crack open a book and read about Lincoln and the Civil War and his emancipation proclaimation. Jefferson is one of the creators and authors of declaration of Independance and Washington was the first officially recognised president of the United States so what did I bullshit about?
Taker wasn't the top guy? He never needed to be the top guy. He was the guy the top guy had to be able to beat to become the top guy. None of the guys idiots like you bring up would have amounted to jack shit without Taker being there standing in their way. He carried the company on his back and did everything that was required of him. Feuds with him are what made careers for Rock, Austin, Foley. Even HBK and Bret would likely have struggled as the top guy if they didn't have someone with the skill and durability of Taker to face off against. He not only could match any of them in the ring, but as any wrestler who was there at the time would tell he, he helped keep the locker room together and make sure that people knew their roles and performed without the kind of drama that infected the mid 90's prior to the Screwjob. You say I hate on the rock and to stop? Yet you turn around and dismiss a 20+ year veteran who's been held up against the best and beaten all of them on the biggest stage of them all.
Impact over loyalty?
Taker was the bridge between Era's. he took the role of the big man and redifined it from slow, lumbering brute and made it possible for larger performers to show that they too could compete in terms of both technical skillsets and flashy, spot strewn matches. Before him, the standard was guys like Andre and Big John Studd. Massive men who were not exactly known for climbing the ropes (or even running the ropes) but for standing in the middle of the ring and just overpowering anyone put in front of them with minimal effort or selling on their part. Without Taker, guys in his size range like Kane, Batista, Lesnar, and so many others would not have been shown the confidence to let them do the high risk moves as conventional wisdom prior to taker was to keep anyone over 6'6" on their feet and moving methodically while showcasing their power and size. Kane would never have leapt from the top for a clothesline without guys like Taker and LOD doing it first. Big show would never have done dropkicks or spears. Lesnar would certainly never have been allowed to try shit like the shooting star press if Taker hadn't proven that larger athletes could be just as agile and aerially talented as the lighter roster fillers.
So yeah I think Taker deserves a spot on any WWE or even Wrestling Mt Rushmore because he redefined what it meant to be a big man in this business. And that more then even his streak earns him a spot on the Mountain top.
As for your comments about me. I'm 34 years old and have been watching wrestling for 30 years now. I've watched Mark Calloway matches for oh, somthing like 26-27 years, from the time he was in the territories wrestling as Master of Pain to his time as Mean Mark Callous in wcw as the replacement member in the under rated and often forgotten team of SkyScrappers to his debut at the survivor series. From the first time he stepped foot in the ring at that PPV, I've tried to watch every one of his matches. I've watched the world of wrestling evolve around him and still he remained at the center of the WWE. He, like Andre before him, was bigger then the Championship. He held it when needed, but honestly, by the time guys like Rock and Austin really hit it big, he had grown beyond the belt. He was an event in and of himself.
The only nonsense is the shit you spouted. Bret was a fantastic in ring preformer, and a legend of the sport, but he had far less impact on others and therefore doesn't deserve a spot. As for HBK, the guy was a primadonna ass who let's face it, took over from Bret during the lean years of 93 to 96. And it was the combined efforts of Bret, HBK, and Taker who allowed the company to stay affloat during those years with the next group of Yoko, Nash, and others. HBK was unlike Bret not a great Technician, but he was a spot monkey of the time and could sell like no one else. But this love and reverence people have of him now is insane. He was the face of the company at a time when the company almost went out of business. It took guys like Austin and Rock breaking out and the turn to more hardcore style with Foley and a huge bit of luck and VINCE's capatalising on it to allow WWE to first save themselves and then explode into the surviving company. None of which over all was done by HBK. Great in ring performer, but backstage issues and attitude, as well as weak competition and unwillingess to work well with others made him a disaster as the face of the company.
yeah sure 
