Y2HH

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 31, 2009 -> 08:05 AM) That was great. That was quite enjoyable, hah.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 31, 2009 -> 08:05 AM) Exactly. They don't see a problem with bleeding the system dry, as a matter of a fact, they see it as their duty. Nevermind whose money is actually is. That's why you're paying your neighbors mortgage. Because what do they care, it's not their money being spent.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 31, 2009 -> 07:48 AM) I don't mind the loans as a part of controled program to get rid of costs. They have been negotiating for years to try to do this, and they haven't gotten anywhere meaningful, as they are still on the verge of liquidation. It is going to take a 3rd party to go in there and make the real choices, and fix things. That third party is a bankruptcy court. The automotive business model as we know it is history. Its gone to the same place as the old Steel Mills. Any money thrown at the auto industry without really changing the cost structure is wasted. Hit the proverbial nail on the head. There is no way for our automotive industry to sustain these high costs while being in direct competition with non-union foreign auto on our own soil. It's an unsustainable equation and in the end, we all knew this would happen. It results in higher priced products in order to cover the exorbitant costs, and what that does is drive consumers to the cheaper (but equal quality) competition. And in the end, this is the mess we end up with. Unions can be a good idea, if controlled and implemented properly, but they can also be what ends up destroying the company/industry from the inside out. This is the case of the union nibbling away at the hand that feeds it...and what we have left is a bloody stump. The unions are arrogant and corrupt. What they don't seem to understand, and I think they're finally starting to realize, is that 100% of ZERO is ZERO.

For a #4/#5, Colon is going to be fine.

QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Mar 31, 2009 -> 01:17 AM) How does intaking more fat result in muscle gain? Does more fat along with more protein work better than less fat andw more protein? I thought fat was just bad. There are different types of fat, for example mono/poly unsaturated fats (found in nuts, canola/olive/peanut oils, etc.) are good, while saturated animal fat/trans fat is bad. Omega3 Fat, commonly found in salmon, is also good. Now keep in mind, intake of saturated fat is only bad if you overdo it, just like anything, and it also depends on your specific circumstance. I wouldn't recommend a overweight person increase fat intake, but I would recommend it to a person who cannot keep weight on, but again, in moderation. Now, when I recommend things to people when it comes to fitness/diet it's based on what I know of that specific person, this is why generalized diets never work long term. Since everyone is different every diet should be slightly different in order to be optimal for that person. In addition to that, you have to take into account what they're trying to accomplish, such as body fat loss, muscle gain, etc. I assumed a few things in my recommendation above. First, I'm assuming he's a ecto-frame, meaning he has very little body fat, slender muscular structure, and more of a wirey type of build. These types tend to burn more calories than they intake, so their body fat stores remain low. He wants to put on muscle so the idea here is to load up on carbs/protein AND fat, considering his metabolism is going to burn 95% of it -- so the goal here is for that other 5% to linger, because it's whats going to add that mass he's looking for. Where for myself, I'd recommend 6 egg whites for protein supplementation, for him I'd say 4 egg whites + 2 whole eggs (with yolk), because the added fat will do him good in trying to add mass.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 01:05 PM) I'm wondering why anyone would subject themselves to hours of Olberman. For the very reason that I like to know, first hand, what the other side said/did. For the very reason that article was written. Besides, Olbermann rules (when played by Ben Affleck) : http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/vid...bermann/805561/ That skit makes me LMAO.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 12:48 PM) The problem with that "challenge" is that the writer seems to assume that when other people perceive things differently from him, and therefore their reality/opinion varies from his, that they are ignorant and/or insulated. The exact same thing he accuses liberals of doing. And round, and round, and round we go, this is just another part of how political discussions go in this country. This same logic gets used after debates, that Candidate A "won" over Candidate B not because of their technical performance, but because Candidate A said more things that you agree with than Canidate B (regardless of how valid Candidate B's points may/may not have been). To be fair, he explains that he has watched/listened to NBC/CBS, NY Times, etc. He's speaking of those who have never listened to Limbaugh who claim they "have heard him", when they haven't. He's not telling liberals who actually have listened to Limbaugh to take the challenge, he's asking those who never even bother, yet believe everything told to them to take the challenge. Which they won't do. For example, I'm a O'Reilly guy, and liberals hate him -- but at the same time have never seen him other than mostly out of context clips. I, on the other hand, have watched hours of Olberman, who is basically the same guy, but on the other side of the spectrum. I don't agree with Olberman very often (I have on very few occasions), but at least I give him his chance rather than just taking someone's word for it because they played some incomplete clip or out of context clip.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 29, 2009 -> 09:53 PM) If you dont want to buy the protein, your best bet is to supplement your 3 meals a day with about 3 other servings of maybe a dozen egg whites or so. Given his size/weight and tendency to burn calories fast he needs to intake more than just lean protein, he needs to increase his fat intake, too, or he's never going to see much size increase.

A lot of this depends on body type, too. I, for example, would work out with my friends and put in far less work than them and put on 2x the muscle in 1/2 the time they did. To a point, it's genetics, and it's a lot lot lot of work for people to overcome that. It sounds like you have an ectomorph frame, and if that's the case, good luck putting on muscle. Eat way more than you are, run way less and lift way longer. Edit: I read your height/weight and yes, you're an ectomorph. I won't lie to you, it's a bad bodytype for wanting to add muscle mass. :/ It's possible, but it's very hard. Ectomorph body = || Endomorph body = ( ) Mesomorph body = \ / Guess who puts on muscle the easiest?

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 11:13 AM) Then my business trip becomes a vacation. Cool for me. Can't work, customs stole my crap. While you wouldn't care, and customs probably wouldn't care -- I'm betting whatever company you worked for would care.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 11:06 AM) Well they have to know that I have an encrypted virtual machine on my system. And that is easy enough to hide. Well, now that *I* know you have that encrypted and hidden virtual machine on your system, and as the customs agent you will undoubtedly run into, I'm confiscating your iPOD, laptop, cell phone and any other technology you carry. TYVM.

Those are good.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 10:42 AM) Really, I haven't found anywhere that says any of these tinfoil hat scenarios is actually going to happen officially. Pure speculation so far - to include the video in the OP - and it seems like legions of lemmings are following into panic mode for no reason. The government doesn't have so much power where they can just arbitrarily and unilaterally do something like this without it being made into national law, or without being struck down by the SCOTUS. I agree, sounds like a lot of conspiracy theory to me, and if it ever did come to light, the supreme court would probably strike it down.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 10:36 AM) This is a republic, not a direct democracy. The will of the people does matter in terms of the big picture, but that's not how decisions get made. If it did, oh my god would our government be making some horrible decisions. Yea, I know...I'm just not sure I like the guys who have basically failed our country as a business making "sound" decisions on how to run a publicly traded company. As a company, these "leaders" have amassed massive debt to the US taxpayers, without a plan to ever be able to pay it off, and then increasing that debt 10 fold, planning future deficits for years to come...and these are the geniuses that are going to tell a company how to run itself?! It's failure teaching failure.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 10:34 AM) This just adds a few more steps to my travel. 1.) Wipe IPOD 2.) Get past security checkgate. 3.) Bring up encrypted virtual machine on laptop. 4.) Load itunes and retransfer my data to the ipod. 5.) Enjoy music on my 12 hour flight. 6.) See rule 1 before going through customs. I think the problem with that is they've "illegalized" encryption in these cases. I know that's a made up word, but it is what it is. Under the guise of "national security" they can force you to give up your encrypted passwords, and if you refuse they can outright confiscate said device(s) for an unspecified amount of time. Welcome to 1984 in 2009.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:19 AM) You take billions in government money, you fail to run your business (which we the taxpayers now own) well enough to make things work... you get booted. The taxpayers are now the board, for companies receiving huge bailout dollars. I like it. I'd like it better if it was part of a bankruptcy or bankruptcy-like reorganization, though, and if all the high level execs (and high level union leaders for that matter) went with him. They need a serious re-boot to have a shot at being viable. I like the idea on paper, but the fact is, the "taxpayers" didn't make these decisions, Obama's administration did. Electing someone into office doesn't mean, "now you do whatever you want without asking the people". While I'm sure a lot of people are happy with this type of thing considering how angry they are about the economy and these types of leaders ruining companies, I'm not sure government control is the right way to go. These guys can't run a country without a trillion+ dollar deficit and they're going to tell a business how to run itself now?! LOL.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 29, 2009 -> 09:19 PM) Who the heck trusts weather forecasts 7 days out? Exactly, they can barely get it right 1 day out.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:16 AM) I do fail, at seeing how the ability to carry a document has anything to do with anything. This is why/how confidential information leaks onto the Internet/media, because the people trusted with handling these documents are handing them off to "interns" who have nothing to lose by leaking it, and why?! Because they can't do it themselves. Also points out a harsh reality of how much of a game politics in Washington has become that these bills require 1800 pages of "sneaky crap" and twisted double talk words in order to confuse people enough to pass them without ever reading more than the first page. :P :P You suck, and this entire process sucks, this story sucks, and 1800 page documents suck.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:14 AM) I'm not sure anyone in Congress is performing at 100% at any given time. That has layers. I was just playing devils advocate anyway. But you win with this one.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:10 AM) Then I guess we should fire all interns and staffers for people in Congress, and only elect people like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Some of these bills are thousands of pages long, you know. Can't have little old ladies carrying that around, and I guess we can't have anyone else carry them other than the elected member. Wow that was a great attempt at rationalization! Far reaching, but I give you an A for effort anyway. Because, you know...you're right, you need to be as big and strong as Arnold to carry around an 1800 page book/document! It's not like it can be on a laptop, or a cart with wheels you push. You fail.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:07 AM) Meh, her constituents didn't elect her based on her ability to carry her own papers. IMO there is a difference between physical capacity and mental capacity, as someone said in this thread. She was elected based on the latter and she didn't allow her physical shortcomings, however temporarily crippling, to affect her on the job. She has my admiration. I've never had any ailment close to this -- and I can tell you that just having a bad case of the flu affects my ability to do my job properly, as my concentration cannot be 100% (or even near 100%) on what I'm doing -- so I know for a fact there is no way she could have, either. While it makes a great fluff piece, which is what it is, I'm not buying anyone under that kind of duress could "perform at 100%", and if you do, then you are all fools. That said, I'm glad this little hero story made you feel better about the world.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 09:04 AM) You seriously think that carrying around papers is a necessary job function for someone in Congress? They ALL have a bazillion little interns do that crap for them anyway. Who gives a crap if they had to do a little more to help her out, especially since they all obviously believed in her and wanted to help. Yes, I do, actually. I sure as hell hope the people running this country can do simple things like carry around "papers" that has who knows what printed on them, classified or not, falling into the wrong hands because you have someone else doing that part of your job for you. So yes, I do.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 08:55 AM) Everything she needed to be able to do, she did. To those who believe, no explanation is necessary, to those who do not, no explanation will do. IMO, needing someone else to carry things like "papers" means you cannot do everything you need to do, it means others were doing them.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 30, 2009 -> 08:40 AM) He took a leave of absence in January after about 5 years of very serious illness rumors, but we know about pancratic cancer. Considering those diagnoses, and how confident this woman was of her recovery, I think it was an extreme example of a reason someone in control of their mind doesn't have to step down. He hid his pancreatic cancer for 9 mo. From the article, there was many things she couldn't even do, such as holding things -- Jobs never had these issues where he couldn't perform his duties, he simply stepped down because he couldn't concentrate on both at the same time anymore...sounds like she should have done the same. Also, shes works for the taxpayers, Jobs does not.

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 28, 2009 -> 02:54 PM) Steve Jobs should've stepped down from Apple, too. He did.