Y2HH

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 08:51 AM) Well like I said, we have literally years worth of their campaigning now and 24/7 access to their campaign and surrogates' websites. A grand total of 4-1/2 hours weeks from the election really shouldn't matter much given the amount of information out there. The vast majority of voters don't vote based on information, they vote based which party they arbitrarily relate themselves too...in many regards it's inherited. Look at Bridgeport (Chicago), where I grew up. Primarily blue collar democratic...and *still* surprisingly racist/bigoted (something people generally relate to republicans). And most kids that grew up there? Democratic, because their parents were.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 08:44 AM) I guess I never expect anything substantive out of these debates to begin with. They're purely entertainment and I actually find it a little depressing that people can be swayed so heavily by 90 minutes instead of what these two candidates have said and done over the past 18+ months. People have always engaged in ridicule and political discourse has rarely been civil. ...and that was the basic point in that rant. They're not supposed to be entertainment. We've simply accepted them as such. Like I said, while we laugh with them, they're laughing at us. Because we allow it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 08:30 AM) I'll just say that people were talking about Big Bird because that's the only policy specific Romney has actually offered, and it was a dumb one. These debates are largely devoid of substance anyway. Additionally, ridicule and satire have long been powerful political and social tools, and people rushing out to make tumblrs and facebook groups and whatnot shows an active and engaged citizenry. They're not active and engaged for the right reasons. They're not engaged because they want to have civil political discourse, they engaged because they want people to look at them. They want "likes" or "retweets", or hastags used by people that links credit back to them...but they don't actually care about the substance of the matters at hand. ...and there's a difference.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 21, 2012 -> 02:36 PM) I have muscles that I didn't know I had that are sore. If you want to truly feel muscles you didn't know you had, jump in a pool and swim for few miles. It will make anything else you do look like playtime in comparison. IMO, there is no better/harder workout than swimming, especially when you take into account it's zero impact.

[rant] Yesterdays waste of time debate highlights exactly what is wrong with everything political in this country, from the politicians themselves to the media, to the people, and in doing that, highlights why we are where we are as a nation. A nation of consumers, for consumers, by consumers. Beg, borrow, and declare bankruptcy...and then do it all over again. Nobody takes anything seriously anymore. Not even the politicians we elect. It's a joke to them, and while we laugh along with them at home, or on blogs, or Twitter, or Facebook, or by the water cooler, the reality is they're not laughing with us, they're laughing at us. After all, they're all millionaires we keep electing to fix the problems that affect the middle class/poor. Only they never fix them. But all the while they never fix them, this much is true: Every. Last. One. Of. Them. Gets. Richer. All these debates were to 99.999999999998% of the people/media -- including most of us here -- were reality TV events to laugh at. Point 1) What do we all talk about from the first debate? Big Bird. Point 2) What do we all talk about from the second debate? Binders. Point 3) What will do we all talk about from the third debate? Bayonets. In other words, 99.9999999998% of rest of the debates are forgotten or outright dismissed, because these three key points are all that matter...and they're all anyone talks about. Because, I don't know, they funny? But if you actually stop to think about it for a second, they're not funny...they're sad. It's sad we have politicians on a pedestal and these are the types of things that come out of their mouths. And we allow it. People making domain names for bayonets, binders, big bird, trend similar hashtags on the Twitterverse, etc...it's so honestly and profoundly sad to me that we all watch our nation crumble around us and all we can do is laugh at the morons that are hammering at the foundation with sledgehammers.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Oct 22, 2012 -> 12:25 PM) Lets get out the vote for Obama.. How about we get the vote out for neither Obama or Romney, and let the two major parties know that the people aren't getting what they want from either side, instead.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 05:28 PM) Not really. Something close to geometric shapes based on population, redone every 10 years as people move around. I think his point is someone still has to program it. Population can be manipulated, and the computer wouldn't know if it is or not. Just because a computer is involved doesn't mean it's unbiased/legit. Someone programmed the program itself, and then someone created the data set it used to come to it's conclusion, not to mention, what constitutes population? Only people living there? What about the people that work there on a daily basis but don't live there? I.E., trust me, it CAN be controlled and/or manipulated. And it would be.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 12:35 PM) I have to question why you found that so fast and also give you props for finding that so fast. Hey, keep in mind I'm an Apple user, so I can't even use it...I only knew about it because a friend of mine posted it on IRC weeks ago and we found it hilarious. What you said merely cause my brain to fire a synapse to activate that memory as it was an appropriate response, at lest in my opinion it was.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) Did he draw jizz shots on Castro's face? https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?...rator&hl=en

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 10:55 AM) I don't know how you drank in your early 20's, there's still payback after I get rowdy. I drank like mad and also abused X quite a few times in those days, too (though that was a monthly thing, I always kept things like that in check)...and after pulling all nighters I was fine after an hour or two of sleep and going into work the next morning -- only to rinse/repeat that same thing a few more times that week.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 11:34 AM) yet everybody love their own congressman. I do not.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 10:42 AM) Yeah, its not that scientific. Weight loss, overall productivity etc. Like most of the people on here, when we drink we go all out and are worthless the next day so we are counting negative points for laying in bed past noon/missing workouts etc. Its very loose, but a fun challenge nonetheless. Hahah, yes, I remember those types of days... Since turning 35 (now 37), I don't drink like that anymore. I've learned how to turn it into a very casual 'hold the line' without getting drunk experience these days. I can have a few drinks and stop and that's it. Back in the day I never stopped ... and paid the next day. Remember your early 20's? When you could do that and there was no pay back the next day regardless? heh

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 10:05 AM) Continuing this off topic discussion: I'm on a 60 day challenge right now with a friend. I am going to abstain from alcohol and he's going to stop smoking pot and we are going to come back and weigh ourselves to see which one really had a negative effect on our health. Obviously blood tests etc would be better but for now this is the bet. The hard part isnt not binge drinking, but not being able to have that casual one or two beers after work. These are hard experiments to perform outside of a very controlled environment. The only way you'd be able to tell if it did anything is if you don't change anything outside of stopping these things. You have to do everything else the exact same, such as eating, etc. Most likely, for both of you, the negative health effects will come from the environments you find yourselves in when doing those things (drinkers/weed smokers tend to eat more when they do those things). You also have to avoid offsetting these habits with something else. For example, if you stop drinking, but now you spend that extra time working out...the results may not be because you stopped drinking, but because you're working out more than usual. If you are going strictly by weight loss as the decider of this working or not, it will obviously work for both of you, as you will no longer be in those environments which tend to lead to eating more than normal.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 09:27 AM) Good. Him and the Green candidate are both getting a few % points on some polls, they should be included. Agreed. As a matter of fact, they should be included on ALL the debates.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 09:00 AM) I can't see anyone voting for a person who supported the Vietnam War but decided to be a draft dodger. I can't see how people vote for 90% of the these morons that somehow get into congress/senate/governor/city council positions, etc...but somehow they get there. What's more astounding is they often get re-elected without trying, despite how stupid they've shown they are while in power.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 12:05 AM) He's gotten out of hand. He's been trending that direction for a while now, makes Ed Schultz look like a p****. Maddow is the only one I truly care for on MSNBC, but I don't mind Chris Matthews either. Wow, seriously? Maddow and Matthews? In some way I can understand Maddow, but not really...but Matthews is a f***ing knob.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 03:28 PM) My son threw a ball at my cat. I said DON'T MESS WITH THE CAT AGAIN. Somehow he didn't need me to explain that I was referring to him throwing the ball at the cat. I wonder why. Does my 5 year old son have superior comprehension ability to the entire conservative base? Your son probably has superior comprehension ability and than the entire base of either party.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 10:01 PM) Hehehe, this is awesome.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 01:59 PM) It was, albeit messy at times. But some people are so embittered (with good reason) at the current state of things, that they will call everything awful as a knee-jerk reaction. Happens in PHT on here too, with the Sox, fans see some bad things, all of a sudden everything is the end of the world. I don't figure a debate to be a good debate when neither candidate truly answers any questions -- or actually debates anything -- but merely regurgitates party line talking points over and over in response to the others talking points. That's not a debate. It's a political infomercial for two parties, at best. A debate is when two individuals discuss a subject, and "debate" the pros and cons of their ideas/policies. That's not what happened last night. The Bill O'Reilly/Jon Stewart debate was more or less what I consider a good debate, even if injected with comedy at times. At least there were times that both admitted they agreed with each other, and when they didn't they discussed why instead of just changing the subject which resorted in them restating some various talking point that was memorized off a cheat sheet of some sort.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 11:27 AM) ...in your opinion.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 11:22 AM) Im not sure many disagree. Ive commented numerous times about how its not really a debate and its more just repeating talking points. Its useless to attack the format as its not going to change, at least not for this election. So might as well just discuss what did happen because that is all we are going to get. These debates do not do much for me, as neither candidate is likely going to convince me to change my opinion. But there are a certain percentage of the population who can be influenced by repeating phrases etc, so we get to watch 2 people pander to that group. That's the problem, there isn't much to discuss other than the failed debates/failed formats since all they did was repeat party platform talking points, over and over, whether questions related to those talking points were posed to them or not. I really want to be involved...so I watch, and I truly try to care about the political future of this country, but all watching does is reenforce the fact that politics/civil political discourse in this country is completely dead and it's become pointless to try to find any substance from these debates. The only outcome after these debates is to repeat the same questions they were asked during the debates...since they don't bother answering them.

WTF? Seriously MexSox? If you have nothing to say, how about don't say anything. Of couse it's my opinion, everything everyone has posted here is their opinion. You're response was totally unnecessary...but thanks for pointing out the extremely obvious for everyone here that didn't realize these posts were opinions.

Why do I seem to be the only person here that thinks these debates have done nothing to answer any questions? As is typical of a modern debate, they only answered questions in a round about way, and often changed the subject on the fly, or spun some tall tale that went from starting to answer the specific question asked of them, to answering a question that was never asked at all... Not to mention, most of these questions were so broad/generalized, that even if they tried to answer them (which they won't), they would have needed 5 minutes, at minimum, to do so. I think this speaks volumes about these tired/failed debate formats.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 10:14 AM) 1. Obama won, almost as handily as Romney won the first one. 2. Candy Crowley was clearly in the bag for Obama and Romney did in fact get screwed by the moderator multiple times. Although really, Obama would have won anyway. 3. This town hall format is obviously much better for Obama than Romney. 4. For all the general perception that Romney is a results-oriented business guy and Obama is a big talker... Obama provided a heck of a lot more specifics for policy in the debate than Romney has. Mitt needs to add a lot more details to his plans if he plans to make a better case. 5. Neither candidate provided a real or useful answer to the questions about Benghazi. Obama got angry at the end, for good reason I suppose, but that didn't answer the original question whatsoever. Obama didn't answer to the failure in the agency's decision making, and Romney did nothing more than try to make it seem like Obama didn't care. Those are both loser arguments. Neither of them won, and the American people lost. To call either of them a winner in that debacle is a joke.

Gawd...listening to these two guys makes me want to punch myself in the face. "I never said that." "Yes you did!" "Oh yea, well you said this!" "No I didn't, I said this!" "No you did not, you said this!" "Oh yeah, well you said this!" It's like two school children fighting. I'm sick of the political discourse in this country, because this it's the apex of what it's become: He said/He said...and odds are, everything they said has a small kernel of truth to it...but for the most part, it's a complete fabrication of reality or facts.