*beg Do it for the seniors!

Well, you're on the internet right now, you should try googling the things he's talking about, here's merely one article of.. thousands:

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/13457-feds-let-mexican-cartel-hit-men-kill-in-us-senior-lawman-told-stratfor

The CIA has had a direct hand in the drug trade for decades now. That's another topic you can google.

Edit: Also looked up this link for you:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB2/nsaebb2.htm Very enlightening.

Si Senior..., you want to buy my sister...?
She is a virgin...
Or, at least, she one was one...

Kudos to him for pulling that off, I couldn't have pulled it off after the first hour without confessing

The reality is unfairly that testosterone does give males a huge athletic advantage when it kicks in. Similarly, most professional level sports are extremely dependent on athletic ability. Speed is included in that. There is a reason that the male world records for every sprint are faster than those for females. That reason is genetics and it doesn't care about political correctness or being fair.

In HS our senior girls basketball team had much better game sense, court awareness and overall basketball IQ, than the boys junior team. Those of us on the senior guys team were getting tired of the lack of respect the junior guys were showing for the senior girls and so we arranged a game between them. Knowing how much smarter and aware the girls were on the court we figured it'd be very humbling for the young guys to get beat. We were unpleasantly surprised to watch the younger guys simply running circles around the girls from one end of the floor to the other. They were just plain faster, a lot faster, and all the smarts in the world just didn't make up that difference.

It may not be fair, but that's the way it is. If smarts could make the difference, Michael Jordon would still be getting better every year, but realistically as age cuts into his athleticism smarts just aren't enough anymore and the torch is passed on to those in their prime.


>> ^Sepacore:

>> ^Stu:
>> ^Sepacore:
There is no reason a female couldn't achieve the same at teen or pro level. Speed and balance (and timing) is all it takes to be highly competitive.

There's a huge reason. If a female were to play in college or some how make it to the professional level. She may have tons of skill and balance like you say, she might even be the next Barry Sanders, but even he got hit. you put a 140 pound-150 pound girl in at running back, she will get injuries that would end the career as soon as it starts. Quickness is a lot, but men's natural ability to have that extra muscle and padding is why they keep men and women in different leagues.

If we were focusing entirely on brute-force forms of football, I agree. Except I wasn't, I was thinking more in the direction of how she could continue to utilize her honed skills.
I'm not disputing that males have a significant muscle advantage for handing out and taking impacts, but nor was I forgetting there are multiple versions of football, given that I loosely referenced such as a precursor to my point. My statement was an alternative to the 'testosterone wins everything' view.
To clarify, I specifically had Touch Football in mind when stating there would be no reason females couldn't effectively play with men post-puberty.

That fella who cooked that candy bar in his pocket standing too close to the magnetron???...That wasn't the only candy that got cooked in his trousers!!-His claim to fame?? Senior VP of Raytheon when he died in 1970.

@bareboards2

I'm also glad that we can discuss these issues like reasonable people. I apologize if I've come off as unreasonable in the past. The truth is that I'm always willing to talk things out.

I've heard the rhetoric about death panels from both sides; I just haven't put in the effort to separate fact from fiction. Now that I've looked into it, this is what I've found. What you're describing (end of life consultations) is not the same thing as what are now being called death panels in Obamacare. Yes, it is true that the provision you are speaking about was demonized by republicans and ultimately removed from Medicare. I'm actually not sure how I feel about it, because it is a form of assisted suicide, and it could be abused. Some seniors may feel pressured into forgoing care, just as you hear of some people receiving substandard care because they are organ donors.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/dad-rescues-brain-dead-son-from-doctors-wishing-to-harvest-his-organs-boy-r

In any case, the conversation has evolved, and we are no longer talking about these end of life consultations when we are talking about death panels. The death panel in Obamacare is an unelected board of 15 "health care experts" (the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB) who will make critical decisions on what services within Medicare are financially viable, and which aren't. Here is a quote from President Obama in the first debate acknowledging this:

"It — when Gov. Romney talks about this board, for example, unelected board that we’ve created, what this is, is a group of health care experts, doctors, et cetera, to figure out, how can we reduce the cost of care in the system overall?” Obama said.

“Now, so what this board does is basically identifies best practices and says, let’s use the purchasing power of Medicare and Medicaid to help to institutionalize all these good things that we do,” Obama added.

This is also acknowledged by a senior adviser to Obama:

"WE need death panels. Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/opinion/health-care-reform-beyond-obamacare.html?_r=2

So call it death panels, or rationing, the principle is still the same. The recommendations this board makes will become law unless it is overridden by a 2/3's majority vote in congress. Here is a good example of how this type of legislative oversight is making health care "better" (penalizing hospitals for readmitting patients within 30 days):

"Beginning Monday, the hospitals will receive lower reimbursements on Medicare claims filed with the government for each admitted patient. Over the year, the total amount of those reductions will vary from $1.2 million for MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Northwest Washington, the region’s largest private hospital, to about $12,000 for Reston Hospital Center in Virginia. Of 16 hospitals in the District and Northern Virginia, all but three will get paid less."

"Some of the hardest-hit facilities are inner-city hospitals that tend to treat sicker, poorer patients. These patients sometimes end up being readmitted because they have a harder time getting medication and follow-up doctors’ appointments, often because they lack transportation, hospital officials said.

“Not only do we have the very sick patients, they also have very significant social needs,” said Kamaljit Sethi, who heads quality and safety at Providence Hospital in Northeast, where officials estimate they will lose about $320,000 in the coming year."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/hospitals-in-dc-va-to-lose-millions-from-medicare/2012/09/30/2fe0f96c-08ca-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83b
f_story.html

What this means is that patients with the greatest needs will lose the most services, because the hospitals will no longer be able to serve them because of this penalty. This outcome could turn out to be deadly for thousands of people, ultimately, all in the name of efficiency. This is a perfect illustration as to why Government should have as little power over your health care as possible. Here is testimony from the front lines:

" Today while working my shift in the emergency room, an old lady was brought in very sick and in fact near death. I did my usual workup and evaluation and attempted to administer life saving treatment. It was my plan to admit this woman to the hospital. I found out a little later that this same woman had been a patient here just slightly more than 2 weeks ago with a DIFFERENT DIAGNOSIS. I was told that if this woman was admitted, the hospital would not be paid.

The new Medicare rule now is that if the same Medicare patient is re-admitted to the hospital within 30 days, the hospital will not be paid. When they first started this nonsense they said this only applied to patients with the same diagnosis. Now they have "expanded" the rule to include re-admissions for any reason. So if you're in the hospital for pneumonia, and 3 weeks later, you break your leg.......too bad. Medicare will not pay the hospital to fix your leg."

http://grouchatrighttruth.blogspot.com/2012/10/death-panels-are-here.html

This is completely outrageous, I think you will be forced to agree. Personally, I think we need to have a national conversation about this issue, and both sides need to come together to hammer out this issue. Obamacare is clearly not ready for primetime, and as it stands it is going to hurt people.

As far as your other comments, I'm not limiting myself to any particular news source. I am a political independent and I will share with you that I won't be voting for either candidate this year. I will still participate in the local elections but I cannot vote for either candidate in good conscience. While I am socially and fiscally conservative on many issues, I am liberal on others, such as helping the poor, the environment (within reason), and immigration. I don't fit into a polical cookie cutter and I don't automatically support a candidate because they give God lip service.

>> ^bmacs27:

@JiggaJonson, you still haven't gotten why they were cheering losing their own quarterback. It had nothing to do with cheering a hit. It had to do with being happy their shitty QB wouldn't be starting anymore. It's not bloodthirstiness. It's a roster issue.
@Yogi, people die from playing all sports every year. That's my point. Soccer is often considered the worst for concussions (as repeated low level concussions are more problematic than single big ones given time to heal) and cardiac arrest concerns (talk about over exertion) and basketball is often considered the worst for overall injuries (e.g. joints). I don't think football is unique in this regard, and at least they are trying to make rule changes to do something about it. If you want to stop concussions, don't allow headers in soccer, or make them all wear helmets and padding. Go ahead and see how that flies with their fans.
Finally, why is this guy wrong to criticize fans for cheering an injured human being? Because of your stereotyping of football fans? That's a specious argument to say the least.


He's wrong because they're the customer. If he doesn't like the customers demands he should pack it in. The point is he's saying this isn't the Roman Colosseum when it clearly is, because the fans decide what they cheer and they've been cheering big injuries for awhile now. They're the blood thirsty mob, if you don't like it than don't participate. I didn't play my senior year of High School Football, largely because I was congratulated by half the defense after injuring the other teams QB so badly he needed to be Airlifted off the field in case of paralyzation. He got up luckily, we got to see a Helicopter land and take off on our field.

High School coaches have always taught kids how to hurt the opponent, you've done a good thing if you put their star player out of the game. This is the sport, this is how it works.

>> ^PlayhousePals:

>> ^ant:
>> ^PlayhousePals:
Those must be some heavy duty foundation garments she was wearing =oD

We should put YOU in a drifting car to see how you handle it.
As for me, I would pass out.

As long as you don't film it [and I take a couple of valium first] =o/
[Stop pickin' on me!]


Then, how do we know how you do in a drifting car? It's fun to pick on people. You guys pick me on me too.

>> ^ant:

>> ^PlayhousePals:
Those must be some heavy duty foundation garments she was wearing =oD

We should put YOU in a drifting car to see how you handle it.
As for me, I would pass out.


As long as you don't film it [and I take a couple of valium first] =o/

[Stop pickin' on me!]

I think the news media business has evolved with the times. Not every mundane piece of event coverage is politically slanted, although it's pretty obvious when it is. And clearly by what's details are discussed or not, you can provide slant without flat out lying. Take CNN coverage of the AARP conference in New Orleans:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/21/paul-ryan-booed-during-aarp-remarks/

The fact is Paul Ryan was booed during his speech. He addressed the boos with this:

"Inaction today will mean sharp cuts tomorrow. Time and again this President has ducked the tough issues, he has put his own job security over your retirement security," continued Ryan, despite a smattering of boos coming from the audience. "Of course, he said he would be willing to work with Republicans but he has not moved an inch closer to common ground."

In addition to repealing The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often referred to as Obamacare, Ryan said the Republican team is proposing a plan that "empowers future seniors to choose the coverage that works best for them from a list of plans that are required to offer at least the same level of benefits as traditional Medicare."



I call this responsible reporting. The controversy is brought up without any rebuttal or qualifying statements that would influence the reader one way or the other. What did Fox do with this story? They provided a transcript of Ryan's speech but otherwise ignored the story. Go look for yourself.

Again, complete horseshit.

Noone has to have a photo ID to live in this country. Show me the law where this is true. You do have to have a social security card, and that's the only requirement to being a US citizen.

Millions and millions of people in this country can barely afford to pay their bills, and while $20 may seem like nothing to you, it is to millions and millions of people. Many who are disabled and many who are senior citizens. So I guess you just hate disabled people and seniors. Nice. (oh, and poor people. And poor, disabled senior citizens.)


>> ^bobknight33:

Please the next time you pollute the air with your garbage - Don't.
An ID is something everyone has to have in today society. If you cant afford the $20 bucks for an ID then you have bigger issues in you life than voting.

>> ^volumptuous:
Winger doesn't know what a poll tax is and why it was already deemed unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.
Dude, seriously, you need to educate yourself. You drive yourself crazy over things that are entirely made up, or dead concepts killed over 100 years ago for very good reasons. I'd personally be embarassed if I were you, and would probably start shutting my mouth until I took some rudimentary political science and political history classes.>> ^bobknight33:
Voter Id should be mandatory because it matters. If some one really desires to vote they will get the id, which they most likely already own.

Season pass for a senior is only $70 though.>> ^PHJF:

Well it costs $40 or so to get into Cedar Point and since these toys are no doubt made in China... I think the business has no problem absorbing any "loss".

Gotta go with Deathcow. Sorry, but there's all sorts of senior citizen in this.

And before you downvote this comment, please pause at *any* Arnie facial close-up. The movie might be superb when it's released, but this trailer's scenes really needed some work before they hit the internet.

I'm still cringing from viewing the last Indiana Jones film.

My parents watched Bela Legusi do it. They watched Marlon Brando do it. They saw Paul Newman and Robert Redford do it.

I saw Harrison Ford do it, as well as Clint Eastwood, Sean Connery and countless others, but there’s something that shakes me about seeing Arnold Schwarzenegger enter the era of his senior-career.

The fact aside that the concept of age and mortality will not stop fucking with me the older I get, I am super stoked he's making films again.