Rebdragon

When did people become this stupid about medicine? I'd never heard of people denying the validity of vaccinations before. I mean, that's like telling Einstein he doesn't get physics. You're basically telling the doctors who developed this that you think you're smarter than them, that you know that, despite their PhD and your lack of one, you know what's best medically. I'm sorry, but can you people not breed? Thanks.

I wish I could help more, but trying to figure out a gamer girl is like trying to solve a rubiks cube. Most approaches that you'll find in this thread are for picking up random hot girls at partys and the like. The girl that you found happens to be a geek. Perhaps she is attracted to geeks? It's not impossible. Or maybe she's one of those confusing chicks that acts geeky, but actually likes tough biker types. Play it cool, and act natural for now. She liked you enough to let you hang out with her, so your not off to a bad start. Usually when people come here they've already dug themselves into a hole. As for remembering her name. If you haven't already here's an "okay" way of buying yourself time: Come up with a pet name (and for the love of god, don't call her by her screen name). Just call her "babe" or "honey" or something to that effect. Whatever you feel comfortable with. And try not to lead to situations where you'd have to mention her actual name until you KNOW you know it. Nothing is worse than fogetting a girls name and letting her know it. Keep it calm. Stay calm, cool and collected. Deep breathes if you must. Maintain yourself. And before ypu give yourself (and me at this point) a heart attack...figure out a good way to contact her. Please. I swear, if any of you allow this statement to cross your thoughts at any time I'll personally beat the [cabbage] out of you across the internet. No girl ever "let's me hangout with her." I let her. The same is true of the rest of yall. Well, some of you anyways. Also, Rpgs post gives me a bad vibe. It's like he's implying men should be weak or something.

Why did you put capitalist in quotation marks...? And a quick note. Innovation. Note where the world is moving. The Atlantic's old news, the Pacific's got all the cool nations.

Duh? Just because everyone here's a guy with girl problems doesn't mean that if girls were here they wouldn't have the same problems (but... I see where you're coming from. Girls getting "friend zoned" problem happen less because society dictates that the male make the approach).

Blatantly false. Of the previously estimated 46 million "people in America that are without insurance", over 17 million make over $50,000 a year, an estimated 3 million are young risk takers, and 12-15 million are eligible for Medicaid. Take into account illegal immigrants in the statistic and the number falls down to something like 10 million, often less by some estimates. Were essentially spending 1 trillion dollars to make people who dont want insurance get it and shift a bit of the wealth to a couple million that people that aren't even allowed to be denied at a hospital if they're in need anyways. This. Is. Ducked. Up. Not to be a jerk but I think you're five years too early for political debate rocco. Not that my points are infallible (the above numbers are rough), it's just that you're talking a lot more emotion and personal opinion than actual argument based on world events.

Zierro, if someone asked you if the earth orbits the sun, would you tell them that we arent 100% sure that's true and that we should be skeptical of that belief? If you're going to admit you don't know anything about the topic at hand, why are you even posting?

I'm going to call [cabbage] on you. You can either take it as a compliment, or not. Either way I'm just going to point out the obvious that the vast majority of people who post stats like that are 100 lb lying losers.

I'm referring to the net of all taxes for top earners, not just federal income taxes. Sorry if my reference to federal taxes muddled that point up. And yes, many do pay that much. 35% to the government and 20+% to local/state/property/etc. There's an entire tax bracket of people that pay that much.

Crud, my bad. I thought you were like seventeen. Glad to see you at least care about world events lol.

Free, don't forget that what ever kills you makes you deader.

I was one of the first to get the vaccine. [bleep] ya asthma.

Sources? I honestly don't see a problem with Universal Healthcare. Oh, but you're happy with your current healthcare? Stop being a douche. If the 85% that are happy don't want to take a little time to help the 15% that aren't happy, then those 85% have no idea what it means to be an American citizen. Stop being a douche? Stop being a douche? You, a child doesn't rely on personal income and has no idea about severe taxes, are telling people who already pay 55% of their income to the government to stop being douches and cough up even more money? Alright, fine. Have it your way. So UHC passes and taxes change. Wait, you increase their taxes any more and, hey! A lotta them top earners'll just stop working. The amount of work, risk and stress they put in won't be worth the effort of having over 60% of their money taken. But... uh, oh, big problem! The top 1% currently pay 40% of the nation's income taxes! So you just increased tax burden and the deficit's increasing even faster! But you're right, UHC is only a trillion dollars over the next decade, so no biggy. Oh, I forgot to mention: that trillion dollar cost of UHC? Ya, take one glance at Medicare and Medicaid and you'll see that in reality the cost'll be much higher than the estimates. So now our deficit's over the edge, and their ain't no goin' back because so many people rely on UHC, just like with Medicare and Medicaid! Idealism's cute. It doesn't work in the real world. Money. Does. Not. Grow. On. Trees. Do I need to repeat that? Or should I not bother to defeat the infallible idea that because we're already sending this country into fiscal ruin that we should speed up the process? How is a public option any better than a private one? Microsmic public policy examples in states like Massachusetts and New York have shown that government intervention in healthcare only increases costs over time, regardless of promises. Public option does not solve the problem of rapidly increasing cost in healthcare, it just redistributes the wealth in paying for it. Removal of state barriers for insurance. Tort reform. Removal of business healthcare offering. These kinds of things will decrease cost through lowering of such factors as doctor malpracice insurance and increasing consumer awareness when receiving care. Not UHC. haha exactly. Do you mean to tell me you're never going to get hurt, or sick, Saruman? Everyone needs health insurance. Not anymore. The bill clearly states that private insurance companies will not be allowed to deny people coverage based on preexisting conditions. I.e., no one in their right mind is going to buy health insurance until they get sick.

rocco- 1) He may have slowed down the fall of the economy, but he's sunk the deficit even deeper into the red, and he's arguably wasted it. Many economists believe that the Great Depressions was dramatically prolonged by government spending, as opposed to letting the market right itself. To your point he did save the banking sector by preventing the fall of TBTF's, but extraneous spending beyond that is arguably slowing the recovery of the economy. 2) Personal anecdote against statistics is not really a proper response. It's an appeal to emotion opposed against data. Besides, healthcare costs have increased dramatically because of the systems we have in place that eliminate the connection between a patient and their healthcare costs. The insurance companies are just keeping up with costs, not cheating the system. So, by that I don't get why government healthcare is a good idea. It's just distributing the wealth without actually solving the core problem of rising healthcare costs. 3)I... don't get the joke. Indy- On number two, not to sound like a cop-out the data goes both ways and tends to depend a lot of on how the question is asked. I've seen a huge amount of data that says that only a small minority are dissatisfied with their healthcare, but I've also seen a good amount of data that supports your point as well. Debating it will probably get nowhere. On Fox, I'd agree that it's conservative. But when you compare it to every other station, every other station being blatantly liberal, Fox is relatively fair based a couple reasons, such as it's actual use of political debate(as opposed to political circle-jerking).

Obama done nothing. 85% approve of current health care. FOX News being fair and balanced. Three 100% false statements. I would rather assume someone is trolling than they believe blatantly false information. EDIT: Plus mentioning the President's race, which is completely irrelevant. 1) What change has Obama achieved? 2) I've read plenty of unbiased data that backs that statistic up, some that go even farther. I personally believe Obama himself sees truth in that statistic, but at the same time he wishes to give affordable healthcare to the 15% who don't approve of current healthcare. I just think he's going about it a very, very wrong way. 3) I can tell you that that is the farthest from 100% false that any current media station gets, but you wouldn't believe me anyways.

What's wrong with hawks post...? Apart from the "the guys done nothing comment" (which is debatable), nothing seemed blatantly stupid/arrogant/trollish about it. She has conservative views. How does that make her a troll? I'm holding back a "oh right, everyone here's a teenage liberal", because I know the second I say that this whole thing will degrade into typical "us vs them" american politics. So let's not go down that road >_>.

You say that as if John McCain or another candidate wouldn't have done the same. Yes, your point being...?

Knowing and feeling twenty four hours a day that I'm getting stronger. Call me masochistic but I love the feeling of sore muscles after a hard workout. Not just lifting but even when I trick. A hard day of butterfly twists and every muscle in my left leg is on fire for the next twenty hours. It's a great feeling because I know that next session my primary muscles will be even stronger. Walking around, and not having that feeling, it's not something I like.

... Really?

He's running and will run this country into finanial ruin, but he'll spend so much time hiding behind 'bipartisanship' that no one will be able to fully blame him.

True dat. Wide grip is so much harder. Question: what's a great way to neutralize swinging? Crossing the legs? Or just forcing yourself to go up and down?

My best is in the twenties. Currently I can do seventeen. I'd like to up that, but I've been adding lower body mass this semester so I havnt been able to increase my max reps. Meh, hopefully pullover>squats. Lenin, when I was in middle school I was a small, skinny kid, but I could still do fifteen pullups. Once I started getting bigger that dropped down to like five. So, no offense, but what you're experiencing is ease of light weight moreso than upper body strength. I thought you were a decent age though... How much do you weigh...? At my first prime I was a little over 100 lbs, but at your age is find it hard to believe you'd be that light.

Cheaters are scum but do you really need to be a tool? Like, not to him, but simply being one. I suppose my real question is, Jesus [bleep]ing Christ, did you actually use those words in that order in a verbal sentence?

And here I thought the human race was getting better. Damnit.

Towards what? Appeasement? Religously speaking, science-relgion unity doesn't get is anywhere but delusion. Scientifically speaking, unity makes us as a race dumber. I get that you want to sing kumbaya, but I wouldn't use the word "progress."

From urban dictionary. Whoever wrote that article is so full of [cabbage] it's not even funny. The idea is correct. You can't just straight up complement hot girls, or even girls in general. It's kind of awkward and random. But sarcastic, negative comments show a bit more creativity and are definitely more interesting. But the person who wrote those articles had an infinite amount of time to write them in response to hypothetical "[bleep]-shields" (or whatever those stupid PUA writers call it), and they were awful. I'm pretty sure they weren't even "negs". If I were a girl I'd be telling him that's it's getting late.